Todd Bowles on why Jets didn't make playoffs in 2015

[ljr]

5 hours ago, maury77 said:

lol, I had no idea Ivory led the AFC in rushing last year, some fan I am. 

I'm sure Cimini & Mehta must have pointed it out when he went to another team

[Big Blocker]

19 hours ago, JiF said:

They were 5-1.  85% of teams make the playoffs that start 5-1.  Acting like they found out who they were in the 3rd quarter of the season is crazy talk.  Statistics say they were playoff bound after 6 games.  

I have no idea what Fitz has to do with any of this.

Bowles was wrong and is wrong.  It should have been apparent come week 7 that this team was playoff bound.  And if his b.s. about finding themselves too late was real, that's wrong too because they werent too late.  All they needed was one more win.  What I heard, was an excuse for choking away a golden opportunity.  

You did not address the point about winning six in a row down the stretch.  I don't know what your issue is with Bowles, who I happen to be a fan of.  It was not crazy talk.

[JiFtheOracle]

4 minutes ago, Big Blocker said:

You did not address the point about winning six in a row down the stretch.  I don't know what your issue is with Bowles, who I happen to be a fan of.  It was not crazy talk.

What is there to address?  They choked in the game they needed to win.  I like Bowles, I just think that was a very misguided comment.  To say a team that started 5-1, didnt realize who they were till the 3rd quarter of the season is silly talk.  85% of teams that start 5-1 make the playoffs.  He should have known after game 6 what kind of opportunity they had.  And saying it was too late, is just bs.  They werent too late.  It was well timed.   They got hot at the perfect time and they just took a sh*t when it mattered most and at the end of the day, that's on Bowles.  To come out flat vs. a below .500 team in a win and in game...that's on the Head Coach.  And that's fine.  He was a rookie.  He's learning.  All good...but I find it strange that a HC would make that comment.  He of all people should know that you want everything coming together in Nov/Dec so you can carry that momentum into the postseason. 

Again, was it too late for KC?  Why were they able to win 11 straight but it was too much to ask of the Jets to win 6?

It's really not a big deal.  I just found that to be a strange comment coming from a Head Coach.

[johnnyjet]

If the jets beat Oakland.......

[Big Blocker]

1 hour ago, JiF said:

What is there to address?  They choked in the game they needed to win.  I like Bowles, I just think that was a very misguided comment.  To say a team that started 5-1, didnt realize who they were till the 3rd quarter of the season is silly talk.  85% of teams that start 5-1 make the playoffs.  He should have known after game 6 what kind of opportunity they had.  And saying it was too late, is just bs.  They werent too late.  It was well timed.   They got hot at the perfect time and they just took a sh*t when it mattered most and at the end of the day, that's on Bowles.  To come out flat vs. a below .500 team in a win and in game...that's on the Head Coach.  And that's fine.  He was a rookie.  He's learning.  All good...but I find it strange that a HC would make that comment.  He of all people should know that you want everything coming together in Nov/Dec so you can carry that momentum into the postseason. 

Again, was it too late for KC?  Why were they able to win 11 straight but it was too much to ask of the Jets to win 6?

It's really not a big deal.  I just found that to be a strange comment coming from a Head Coach.

Feeling as strongly as you do, it would have helped if you got your facts straight.  The Jets did not start 5-1, they were 4-2 after six, having lost again to the Pats.  Not only that, but there goes your 85% argument.

For myself I enjoyed those four wins, but wins such as against Cleveland and a truly inept fish team in London did not tell me the Jets looked like a playoff team.  Letting the Eagles go up 24 without Murray was another troubling sign, and of course there was Fitz getting hurt in week 8 and Smith coming in - surely your fair minded fan would not look at THAT as inspiring to one's playoff hopes. 

But let's assume you want to fall back and say at 4-1 the Jets should have considered themselves a playoff team.  With wins against the Browns, fish and Skins?  Really?  And what was considered an upset win against Indy, who went on to prove they were overrated in pre-season predictions, and a loss to the Eagles who had a new and rusty Qb and an HC losing control.   Well it's a good thing to not lose to the weak sisters of the league, but winning early games you should win and then facing a tougher middle schedule is not the kind of situation where most fans would think it a slam dunk to make the playoffs.

[JiFtheOracle]

2 minutes ago, Big Blocker said:

Feeling as strongly as you do, it would have helped if you got your facts straight.  The Jets did not start 5-1, they were 4-2 after six, having lost again to the Pats.  Not only that, but there goes your 85% argument.

For myself I enjoyed those four wins, but wins such as against Cleveland and a truly inept fish team in London did not tell me the Jets looked like a playoff team.  Letting the Eagles go up 24 without Murray was another troubling sign, and of course there was Fitz getting hurt in week 8 and Smith coming in - surely your fair minded fan would not look at THAT as inspiring to one's playoff hopes. 

But let's assume you want to fall back and say at 4-1 the Jets should have considered themselves a playoff team.  With wins against the Browns, fish and Skins?  Really?  And what was considered an upset win against Indy, who went on to prove they were overrated in pre-season predictions, and a loss to the Eagles who had a new and rusty Qb and an HC losing control.   Well it's a good thing to not lose to the weak sisters of the league, but winning early games you should win and then facing a tougher middle schedule is not the kind of situation where most fans would think it a slam dunk to make the playoffs.

Yep.  You're right.  Its 85% of team that start 4-1 make the playoffs.  Had my facts wrong but my entire positoin and point still remains and it's accurate. 

[Big Blocker]

9 minutes ago, JiF said:

Yep.  You're right.  Its 85% of team that start 4-1 make the playoffs.  Had my facts wrong but my entire positoin and point still remains and it's accurate. 

according to the chart on this link, based on records from 1990 to 2013 (couldn't find a different or better chart), the actual number is 77%, so you are wrong again unless you post a link showing that the numbers are that different with a different time period.  Here's the link:

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/skeptical-football-go-go-andrew-luck-and-a-must-win-for-the-pats/

And of course you did not address why wins over the Browns, fish and Skins as confidence inspiring.  I must say I feel you have a pretty weak argument for taking issue with Bowles, but it doesn't seem like you are prepared to reconsider, so feel free to respond, of course, but I think I've had enough of this discussion.

[JiFtheOracle]

1 minute ago, Big Blocker said:

according to the chart on this link, based on records from 1990 to 2013 (couldn't find a different or better chart), the actual number is 77%, so you are wrong again unless you post a link showing that the numbers are that different with a different time period.  Here's the link:

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/skeptical-football-go-go-andrew-luck-and-a-must-win-for-the-pats/

And of course you did not address why wins over the Browns, fish and Skins as confidence inspiring.  I must say I feel you have a pretty weak argument for taking issue with Bowles, but it doesn't seem like you are prepared to reconsider, so feel free to respond, of course, but I think I've had enough of this discussion.

Damn that 8%...and your chart only goes to 2013, honey.  

[jgb]

44 minutes ago, Big Blocker said:

Feeling as strongly as you do, it would have helped if you got your facts straight.  The Jets did not start 5-1, they were 4-2 after six, having lost again to the Pats.  Not only that, but there goes your 85% argument.

For myself I enjoyed those four wins, but wins such as against Cleveland and a truly inept fish team in London did not tell me the Jets looked like a playoff team.  Letting the Eagles go up 24 without Murray was another troubling sign, and of course there was Fitz getting hurt in week 8 and Smith coming in - surely your fair minded fan would not look at THAT as inspiring to one's playoff hopes. 

But let's assume you want to fall back and say at 4-1 the Jets should have considered themselves a playoff team.  With wins against the Browns, fish and Skins?  Really?  And what was considered an upset win against Indy, who went on to prove they were overrated in pre-season predictions, and a loss to the Eagles who had a new and rusty Qb and an HC losing control.   Well it's a good thing to not lose to the weak sisters of the league, but winning early games you should win and then facing a tougher middle schedule is not the kind of situation where most fans would think it a slam dunk to make the playoffs.

This bored feels like a math class lately.