Mehta: Fitz reacts to poor QB ranking

[Integrity28]

10 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

2009 was a success first b/c we got into the playoffs, that alone made it much better than 2008.  the 2 playoff wins made it even better obviously.

9-7 isn't 9-7, not every 9-7 is created the same.  

double digit wins are meaningless w/o the playoffs.  I'd rather go 8-8 and make the playoffs like we did in 1991 than 10-6 and miss the playoffs like last year.  it's all about the playoffs and having a chance to advance.

 

yes, it was a long one

 

 

Yea, you can keep reciting whatever you want. I just said, I'm giving a different point of view. You have to sometimes accept that the context you put things in, to determine how you view them, is not the universal truth. It's how you view it. I shared how I view it. 

Arguing over it is pointless. You aren't going to change your view, and like I said, I can appreciate that. Just as I'd expect anyone else to appreciate the different view I'm sharing, which is all I'm doing, sharing. Not asking, or expecting, you to suddenly abandon everything you've been saying and change. 

[slats]

50 minutes ago, Integrity28 said:

also 9-7 in 2009 is better than 9-7 in 2008

It's true. Finishing 3-2 and making the playoffs was better than finishing 1-4 and missing them. One season was a disappointment after starting 8-3 with a HoF QB, the other was a pleasant surprise with a rookie QB. 

But saying 9-7 = 9-7 is a nice simple construct in which to live, and I wouldn't want to deny you that. 

[Integrity28]

37 minutes ago, slats said:

It's true. Finishing 3-2 and making the playoffs was better than finishing 1-4 and missing them. One season was a disappointment after starting 8-3 with a HoF QB, the other was a pleasant surprise with a rookie QB. 

But saying 9-7 = 9-7 is a nice simple construct in which to live, and I wouldn't want to deny you that. 

It's okay to not understand what I'm saying.

[Warfish]

1 hour ago, nyjunc said:

what did 10-6 get us last year?

6 wins more than we had the year before.

An enjoyable, competitive-to-the-last whistle season.

A foundation upon which to build in 2016.

Winning seasons in the NFL are far from "meaningless", which is a shallow and immature analysis of a more complex reality.

[nyjunc]

12 minutes ago, Warfish said:

6 wins more than we had the year before.

An enjoyable, competitive-to-the-last whistle season.

A foundation upon which to build in 2016.

Winning seasons in the NFL are far from "meaningless", which is a shallow and immature analysis of a more complex reality.

a foundation w/ mostly older vets who won't be around if we are winning in 2-3 years.

 

winning seasons mean absolutely nothing w/o a chance to compete for championships.  maybe if we had gone a decade w/o a winning season and had a younf team I'd agree with you.  But we were in title games not that long ago and we were an older, veteran team.  

 

I didn't enjoy losing in Buffalo, I enjoyed other parts of the season where we feasted on bad teams but overall w/o that last win it was meaningless.

[Warfish]

24 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

a foundation w/ mostly older vets who won't be around if we are winning in 2-3 years.

We're built to win now.  

What we'll be in 2020 will be determined by how we do this year and next, and how the young QB's develop.

24 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

winning seasons mean absolutely nothing w/o a chance to compete for championships.

Agree to disagree, but I think this may be the dumbest thing I've read all day.

24 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

maybe if we had gone a decade w/o a winning season and had a younf team I'd agree with you.

8-8

6-10

8-8

4-12

That's our record since 2010 going into last year.

24 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

But we were in title games not that long ago and we were an older, veteran team.

2010 and three QB's ago.  An Ice Age ago in NFL Time.

24 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

I didn't enjoy losing in Buffalo, I enjoyed other parts of the season where we feasted on bad teams but overall w/o that last win it was meaningless.

No one enjoyed losing in Buffalo.

But I'd wager we all enjoyed winning those other ten games alot more than losing 12 games in 2014.

And players feel that as well.  You do not build a champion overnight, and constant, consistent success is of massive value to a franchise.

All or nothing arguments are, again, rather feeble.

[Larz]

How is this still a thing ? You guys need to let it go and just enjoy the fact that football is back

[nyjunc]

8 minutes ago, Warfish said:

We're built to win now.  

What we'll be in 2020 will be determined by how we do this year and next, and how the young QB's develop.

Agree to disagree, but I think this may be the dumbest thing I've read all day.

8-8

6-10

8-8

4-12

That's our record since 2010 going into last year.

2010 and three QB's ago.  An Ice Age ago in NFL Time.

No one enjoyed losing in Buffalo.

But I'd wager we all enjoyed winning those other ten games alot more than losing 12 games in 2014.

And players feel that as well.  You do not build a champion overnight, and constant, consistent success is of massive value to a franchise.

All or nothing arguments are, again, rather feeble.

built to win now and failed to win now so how is that a success?

the dumbest thing you see all day would be someone pumping up a winning record w/o a playoff app for an old, veteran team.

only 2 losing seasons

only 6 years ago, it's not like 1997 when BP came here and it had been 11 years since last playoff win, we had one playoff app from 1987-1996 and that was at 8-8 and we won 10 games TOTAL the 3 previous years. So 9-7 and missing the playoffs that year was still a success, 2015 was not.

the roster was night and day compared to 2014, sure it was nice competing but we came up short w/ an older team built to win now.  it was a total failure.

 

 

[Big Blocker]

3 hours ago, Integrity28 said:

No, 9-7 is the same no matter what. I can appreciate the circumstances that you bring up, but they are irrelevant to the fact that the same win/loss record in consecutive years led to one coach being fired, while another went on an improbable playoff run and become unaccountable for the litany of failures later in his career.

2009 was a success, arguably, because of the playoff wins. Both 2008 and 2009 were "okay" regular seasons. If we lose in the first round of the playoffs in 2009, then it becomes "Jets lucked their way into the playoffs only 1 game over .500, and were outclassed in the wildcard round". Because we won a couple games, it becomes "greatest run of Jets football in decades". 

Reality is, 9-7 is 9-7. It's ridiculous to argue one version of 9-7 is better than the other. I think contextualizing it the way you have helps understand what went on that season, and whether you can look at 9-7 as a upswing or downswing... but, ultimately it's a win/loss record. It speaks for itself, it doesn't require context. Just an understanding of whether it was enough that specific year to get in. Easy schedule or not. Tom Brady or not. 

Also, to me, you have to de-couple the regular season success from the playoff success, because you never know how many wins it'll take to get in. You can have a good regular season, and watch the playoffs from home. If that good regular season shows sings of organizational change, that can be built upon, then celebrate it. I think last year did do that for us. In a version of the NFL that saw so many teams look like sh*t, the Jets didn't - and it was only year 1 of a rebuild after our talent bottomed out under Idzik. See, that's me contextualizing it, because I saw it as an upswing. Ultimately, all that matters is the record. 10 wins was great, but not enough to get in. Was it a failure? Yes and no. Yes, because we blew a shot at a playoff berth. No, because we're back. 

Last year was only the 9th time since I've been born that they've had double-digit wins. If we're going to count a pair of playoff wins in 2009 as "great moments", then we should consider a double-digit win season a success too. We don't see many of them rooting for this Godforsaken franchise. 

Anyway, I can appreciate the way you view it - don't need to argue about it - just offering a different perspective. I honestly can't believe I just took the time to write all this. LOL

Excellent points.   I would merely add that the comparison is regular seasons for a single team comparing one year to another.  When you get into whether a team makes the playoffs compared to another year not making it, too much depends on the performance of other teams, both in the division and the conference.  Like last year, if Pitt had lost one more game, what would that have had to do with comparing the Jets regular season in 2015 to say 2009?  Nothing.

[Big Blocker]

1 hour ago, Warfish said:

6 wins more than we had the year before.

An enjoyable, competitive-to-the-last whistle season.

A foundation upon which to build in 2016.

Winning seasons in the NFL are far from "meaningless", which is a shallow and immature analysis of a more complex reality.

Totally agree here.  People who focus entirely on whether the team made the playoffs, for that matter won the SB or not, ignore the actual experience of being a fan.  The sport is played one game at a time.  If a fan can't enjoy watching a game and seeing their team win it, I don't; know what to say.

[Jetsfan80]

1 hour ago, Warfish said:

6 wins more than we had the year before.

An enjoyable, competitive-to-the-last whistle season.

A foundation upon which to build in 2016.

Winning seasons in the NFL are far from "meaningless", which is a shallow and immature analysis of a more complex reality.

 

4 minutes ago, Big Blocker said:

Totally agree here.  People who focus entirely on whether the team made the playoffs, for that matter won the SB or not, ignore the actual experience of being a fan.  The sport is played one game at a time.  If a fan can't enjoy watching a game and seeing their team win it, I don't; know what to say.

 

It's also nearly impossible to become a Super Bowl contender without stringing together at least a couple successful seasons first.  Nobody goes from 4-12 to the Super Bowl.  It never happens.  Nearly every Super Bowl winner this century was at least 9-7 the year before.  Those who would have preferred we tanked than going 10-6 are misguided; Bowles' successful first season is something that can set the tone and build a foundation towards becoming a perennial contender.

[Big Blocker]

3 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

 

 

It's also nearly impossible to become a Super Bowl contender without stringing together at least a couple successful seasons first.  Nobody goes from 4-12 to the Super Bowl.  It never happens.  Nearly every Super Bowl winner this century was at least 9-7 the year before.  Those who would have preferred we tanked than going 10-6 are misguided; Bowles' successful first season is something that can set the tone and build a foundation towards becoming a perennial contender.

Totally agree here, too.  Tanking is an overrated strategy.  Imo it's almost always more important to build a winning attitude and outlook as a foundation than to get some slightly better draft position.  It's like life in general.  You can't just turn off a successful approach to pretty much anything and then think you can just turn it back on without losing something.

[Jetsfan80]

9 minutes ago, Big Blocker said:

Totally agree here, too.  Tanking is an overrated strategy.  Imo it's almost always more important to build a winning attitude and outlook as a foundation than to get some slightly better draft position.  It's like life in general.  You can't just turn off a successful approach to pretty much anything and then think you can just turn it back on without losing something.

Not to mention it IS possible to draft a franchise QB without having an early 1st round pick.  We had opportunities to draft Russell Wilson and Derek Carr outside of the 1st round, but passed.  Macc might not get a "hit" with his Petty or Hackenberg picks, but I'm willing to continue to trust that he will find us a franchise QB one way or the other.  Hopefully Woody has patience with him.

[Warfish]

1 hour ago, nyjunc said:

built to win now and failed to win now so how is that a success?

Built to improve in 2015, we did, by 6 wins. 

Built to win in 2016, result pending, disappointment expected.

Quote

the dumbest thing you see all day would be someone pumping up a winning record w/o a playoff app for an old, veteran team.

No, as I said, the dumbest thing is someone who thinks 10 wins is meaningless, and that winning 4 games is just as good.

Quote

only 2 losing seasons

4 non-winning season.

Pointless debate is pointless, if you think we accomplished nothing last year, and it was meaningless, and no different than winning 4 games the year before, ok.  Good luck with that mindset.  4 wins-a-year inconsistent teams don't win Super Bowls.  

 

[nyjunc]

5 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Built to improve in 2015, we did, by 6 wins. 

Built to win in 2016, result pending, disappointment expected.

No, as I said, the dumbest thing is someone who thinks 10 wins is meaningless, and that winning 4 games is just as good.

4 non-winning season.

Pointless debate is pointless, if you think we accomplished nothing last year, and it was meaningless, and no different than winning 4 games the year before, ok.  Good luck with that mindset.  4 wins-a-year inconsistent teams don't win Super Bowls.  

 

built to win in 2015, improvement was guaranteed w/ the hundreds of millions we spent in free agency.

 

what does 10 wins get you exactly?  you know the Browns won 10 in 2007 and missed the playoffs and thqat is a terrible franchise(since coming back into the league).  you think they celebrate that 10 win season?

 

2 losing seasons

 

I didn't say we accomplished nothing, there were accomplishments but as far as team goals winning 10 games and missing the playoffs means nothing.  ask the players, ask the coaches.

 

you are making things up again, I never said 2015 was like 2014.  of course it's more fun to win more and be in the race.  the bigger the game, the more painful the loss but we still didn't accomplish anything by missing the playoffs.

[Smashmouth]

7 hours ago, Matt39 said:

link?

      11 hours ago, johnnysd said:

 Chan's offense is that it is a single read offense

 

link?

Just more bullsh*t people are making up. Single read my ass

[cant wait]

40 minutes ago, Smashmouth said:

      11 hours ago, johnnysd said:

 Chan's offense is that it is a single read offense

 

link?

Just more bullsh*t people are making up. Single read my ass

If you don't know that fitz is a one-read QB, you really have no idea what you're watching

[jetstream23]

On August 10, 2016 at 11:09 AM, NYPaperAirplanes said:

To be fair, Fitz never had a team like Mark did.

 

I agree with this 100%, but it's not like Fitz is carrying an offense of schleps!  Sanchez benefited from an absolutely elite OLine.  Damien Woody and Brandon Moore at OG, Brick and Mangold in their primes, etc.  He was also throwing to a revitalized Braylon Edwards and an excellent Santonio Holmes.  Dustin Keller was above average at TE and the running game was simply great...not good, but great.  I could even argue that the MVP on offense was FB Tony Richardson who was completely underrated by fans and led Thomas Jones and Shonn Greene to daylight in those 2009, 2010 seasons.

Fitz doesn't quite have that kind of offense around him but let's be real, Marshall and Decker are one of the top WR duos in the league and they bailed out Fitz on several bad passes/jump balls last season.

Right now, Fitz is perfect for this offense in the absence of a true franchise QB.  You pay $25M for elite/franchise guys, $20M for very good and about $12-15M for average, which is what Fitz seems to be.  If we were paying a QB some Aaron Rodgers type money we wouldn't be able to keep guys like Wilkerson around so that's the trade off.  I think the Jets know how they have to win.  It's the same way they won in 2009 and 2010, with a stud defense, an above average running game and a good QB who can do just enough when needed.

[nyjunc]

22 minutes ago, jetstream23 said:

I agree with this 100%, but it's not like Fitz is carrying an offense of schleps!  Sanchez benefited from an absolutely elite OLine.  Damien Woody and Brandon Moore at OG, Brick and Mangold in their primes, etc.  He was also throwing to a revitalized Braylon Edwards and an excellent Santonio Holmes.  Dustin Keller was above average at TE and the running game was simply great...not good, but great.  I could even argue that the MVP on offense was FB Tony Richardson who was completely underrated by fans and led Thomas Jones and Shonn Greene to daylight in those 2009, 2010 seasons.

Fitz doesn't quite have that kind of offense around him but let's be real, Marshall and Decker are one of the top WR duos in the league and they bailed out Fitz on several bad passes/jump balls last season.

Right now, Fitz is perfect for this offense in the absence of a true franchise QB.  You pay $25M for elite/franchise guys, $20M for very good and about $12-15M for average, which is what Fitz seems to be.  If we were paying a QB some Aaron Rodgers type money we wouldn't be able to keep guys like Wilkerson around so that's the trade off.  I think the Jets know how they have to win.  It's the same way they won in 2009 and 2010, with a stud defense, an above average running game and a good QB who can do just enough when needed.

he got Braylon after 4 games in 2009, he wasn't revitalized.  he wa mediocre most of that season.  In 2010 Braylon was really good and in 2010 they got Holmes who also missed 4 games and Cotch missed games and wasn't healthy.  Not to mention damien Woody was hurt later in the year and Wayne Hunter was starting, Hunter started the NE game in the playoffs which was the biggest win in franchise history outside of 1968.

 

what Fitz has is MUCH better than what mark had.  Our Ol was a little better in those years but RBs were just as good, igf not better, last year and WRs were the best i have ever seen in all my years watching the Jets.