Real problems vs. reactionary narratives

[Integrity28]

1 hour ago, LWC611 said:

if Fitzpatrick has to throw 18 interceptions in 4 games before he gets benched this organization has huge problems. I believe he has earned his seat on the bench right now....I know he is going to the guy against the Steelers.  One more game like the last two and he should sit. 

This.

Even if he's benched for a week. He needs a timeout more than my daughter after a weekend of no naps. If Geno plays well, then we win, that's great. We need wins. If it creates a QB controversy, then so be it. Don't chicken out from doing what's best in the moment because of the fear of being grilled by the media... they're going to do that regardless.

It seems to me we've gone from 

Herm: cluelessness was his brand
Mangini: paranoia was his brand
Rex: narcissistic personality disorder was his brand
Bowles: meakness is his brand

Which is surprising, give that Bowles had Parcells and Arians as influencers. You'd think he'd have more of a "do it my way" sack. I just don't see it. Not yet at least. Hope he can grow out of this. Arians did through his career, he wasn't super-ballsy from the start.

[Integrity28]

5 minutes ago, Matt39 said:

I'm firmly on the get a coach in here who's been a HC before bandwagon. If I'm Woody im in contact with Tom Herman's people already....enough with the coordinators.

 

And I like Todd Bowles. I just dont think he's ready to be a HC.

I'm on the fence, I do believe that coaches - like almost anything - aren't going to be great from the start. 

Honestly, are we even having this conversation if Fitz doesn't suck this year and the money Mac threw at Revis and Cro last year didn't appear to be a waste? Mac has done a ton of good for this roster, but those are 3 transactions that arguable set the direction for this year.

• Cro was always a 1-year investment, but he hurt us last year. We barely missed the playoffs, Cro is one of the culprits there.
• This year, because Cro was always a 1-year deal, we've got Skrine playing out of position. So, as a slot corner he's really good, but as an outside corner he's meh. Essentially it weakens TWO corner positions by moving him outside.
• Revis is trash this year. Absolute trash.
• Defensive secondary is a mess, forces team to lean on Fitz. He's not a QB you want to lean on. He's not good enough.

These things are all interconnected, and it all comes back to the 2 contracts for Revis and Cro last year, and Fitz this year.

[drsamuel84]

I'm not trying to give our defense an excuse but you really can't discount the turnovers as part of the reason our D hasn't been good.  It's putting the defense in a spot where they're constantly on the field and in bad field position.  I know, good defenses find a way to compensate but 9 turnovers in two weeks is just a killer not only for our offense but our defense.  Factor in the Offense not scoring points and the D is in a position where they just can't afford any mistakes. 

[SAR I]

1 hour ago, LWC611 said:

if Fitzpatrick has to throw 18 interceptions in 4 games before he gets benched this organization has huge problems. I believe he has earned his seat on the bench right now....I know he is going to the guy against the Steelers.  One more game like the last two and he should sit. 

Just stop with the interceptions already.  The number isn't a reflection of reality or game situations. 

He had a bad game in Kansas City.  Lots of quarterbacks do. 

Almost all of his interceptions were in the 4th quarter in garbage time desperately trying to mount a comeback.  Fitzpatrick is playing decently, he's not the problem.

SAR I

[Integrity28]

11 hours ago, bostonmajet said:

Okay, fair point. Then why do we have 4, yes 4 TEs on the roster? And, they suck. I get the ASJ, but the others. If Q is our guy, can't we fill the roster with better players?

This is the single-most alarming thing we've got going on.

We have 8 roster spots dedicated to players who can't propel us forward. 8.

I get the Fitz signing. I do. However, 4 TEs? Look at our secondary... maybe roster 2 TEs and use the other 2 roster spots for CBs?

It's somewhere between stubborn, arrogant and oblivious that we're carrying all these extra players... unless the idea was literally to bag this season, and the Fitz 1-year deal was literally for positive press via false hope. But, as much as I think this organization is stupid, I don't think they are evil enough to function like that. Their torture is of the unintentional variety.

[Integrity28]

5 minutes ago, drsamuel84 said:

I'm not trying to give our defense an excuse but you really can't discount the turnovers as part of the reason our D hasn't been good.  It's putting the defense in a spot where they're constantly on the field and in bad field position.  I know, good defenses find a way to compensate but 9 turnovers in two weeks is just a killer not only for our offense but our defense.  Factor in the Offense not scoring points and the D is in a position where they just can't afford any mistakes. 

I know in my case, I've considered it.

Reality is, we're still giving up over 300 yards passing per game, and haven't been able to make clutch stops going all the way back to Rex's tenure. So, I'll afford them some slack for getting burned by all the turnovers, but reality is, they still aren't really good, let alone the great defense that has had the overwhelming majority of assets devoted to it for better than a decade.

[SAR I]

5 minutes ago, drsamuel84 said:

I'm not trying to give our defense an excuse but you really can't discount the turnovers as part of the reason our D hasn't been good.  It's putting the defense in a spot where they're constantly on the field and in bad field position.  I know, good defenses find a way to compensate but 9 turnovers in two weeks is just a killer not only for our offense but our defense.  Factor in the Offense not scoring points and the D is in a position where they just can't afford any mistakes. 

Forget the Kansas City game, that was an anomaly, it's not reflective of Fitzpatrick or the offense, just a terrible game in a tough arena.

Bengals:  1 INT in desperation time trying to make something happen because the D blew the lead with under 2 minutes left.

Bills:  0 INT's.  AFC Offensive Player Of The Week.

Seahawks:  1 INT his fault.  1 INT Anderson's fault.  1 INT desperation time.

In 3 games where we beat a division opponent on the road in a short week and lost to 12-win caliber playoff teams, Ryan Fitzpatrick has thrown 1 interception that hurt us.  And if our D is going to allow a team to go 61 yards in 4 plays in under two minutes to let them seal the game, then Ryan Fitzpatrick is actually the least of our concerns.

SAR I

[Big Blocker]

12 hours ago, Matt39 said:

Williams is the only guy in the secondary that has a nose for the football. He has to play.

Williams can make plays facing the Qb, which is why he can get int's in zone coverages.  But he can't play man effectively.  His increased snap count means he's playing on plays when he has to turn his back to the Qb.  So far he has not shown this year that he can be effective with a larger snap count, playing with a larger variety of schemes.

[Matt39]

Just now, Big Blocker said:

Williams can make plays facing the Qb, which is why he can get int's in zone coverages.  But he can't play man effectively.  His increased snap count means he's playing on plays when he has to turn his back to the Qb.  So far he has not shown this year that he can be effective with a larger snap count, playing with a larger variety of schemes.

I mean you have to take the good with the bad. Sherman gave up plays last week but he's also going to create the big turnover....willing to concede yards if you're turning the ball over too.

[SAR I]

5 minutes ago, Integrity28 said:

I know in my case, I've considered it.

Reality is, we're still giving up over 300 yards passing per game, and haven't been able to make clutch stops going all the way back to Rex's tenure. So, I'll afford them some slack for getting burned by all the turnovers, but reality is, they still aren't really good, let alone the great defense that has had the overwhelming majority of assets devoted to it for better than a decade.

If you take the KC disaster out of it, none of Ryan Fitzpatrick's interceptions have cost this team or put his defense in grave field position.  The only interception in the Bengals, Bills, or Seahawks games that did not occur in desperation garbage time put the Seahawks on their own 39 yard line, hardly putting huge pressure on our D.  And then they let them go 61 yards in under two minutes on 4 pass plays.

The D is brutal, has very little to do with turnovers.

SAR I

[Integrity28]

7 minutes ago, SAR I said:

our D is going to allow a team to go 61 yards in 4 plays in under two minutes to let them seal the game

This is it.

This is the "can't close" issue I've been talking about forever... It's why I had a problem with Rex very early in his tenure, and why I've already grown weary of Bowles. They are both players coaches, make no mistake. Bowles blind loyalty is similar in fault to Rex's praising guys after they fail. Both seem to reward struggling players with votes of confidence, in their own style. The difference, I hope, is that Bowles has the capacity to grown into a "whole team coach", and to out-grow some of the over-loyal nonsense as he learns how it can burn him. Rex never had that capacity, as much as we all hoped for it. It was never, ever there or going to happen.

Ultimately, it's more of the same. Another unproven coach who has to learn on the job... and our time as fans.

[Integrity28]

2 minutes ago, SAR I said:

If you take the KC disaster out of it, none of Ryan Fitzpatrick's interceptions have cost this team or put his defense in grave field position.  The only interception in the Bengals, Bills, or Seahawks games that did not occur in desperation garbage time put the Seahawks on their own 39 yard line, hardly putting huge pressure on our D.  And then they let them go 61 yards in under two minutes on 4 pass plays.

The D is brutal, has very little to do with turnovers.

SAR I

I get it. As said yesterday, it's not one or the other. He's still throwing them. Defense still sucks. 

See my post about the Revis, Cro, Fitz deals and their impact on this season.

[Big Blocker]

23 minutes ago, Integrity28 said:

I'm on the fence, I do believe that coaches - like almost anything - aren't going to be great from the start. 

Honestly, are we even having this conversation if Fitz doesn't suck this year and the money Mac threw at Revis and Cro last year didn't appear to be a waste? Mac has done a ton of good for this roster, but those are 3 transactions that arguable set the direction for this year.

• Cro was always a 1-year investment, but he hurt us last year. We barely missed the playoffs, Cro is one of the culprits there.
• This year, because Cro was always a 1-year deal, we've got Skrine playing out of position. So, as a slot corner he's really good, but as an outside corner he's meh. Essentially it weakens TWO corner positions by moving him outside.
• Revis is trash this year. Absolute trash.
• Defensive secondary is a mess, forces team to lean on Fitz. He's not a QB you want to lean on. He's not good enough.

These things are all interconnected, and it all comes back to the 2 contracts for Revis and Cro last year, and Fitz this year.

Very good post, but to clarify in your last sentence you mean Fitz's PERFORMANCE this year, not his contract.   His contract is not what is the problem for the Jets, unless one means that indirectly as in someone else should have been signed with that money, but then who?

[Integrity28]

1 minute ago, Big Blocker said:

Very good post, but to clarify in your last sentence you mean Fitz's PERFORMANCE this year, not his contract.   His contract is not what is the problem for the Jets, unless one means that indirectly as in someone else should have been signed with that money, but then who?

Yea, I mean giving him another deal to bring him back. 

[Big Blocker]

17 minutes ago, Integrity28 said:

I know in my case, I've considered it.

Reality is, we're still giving up over 300 yards passing per game, and haven't been able to make clutch stops going all the way back to Rex's tenure. So, I'll afford them some slack for getting burned by all the turnovers, but reality is, they still aren't really good, let alone the great defense that has had the overwhelming majority of assets devoted to it for better than a decade.

I heard from SNY that, as great as Wilson's rep is, and deservedly so, his overall passing yardage has not been so high.  Wilson passed for 309 yards against the Jets.  In 67 total games before last Sunday he had passed for over 300 yards only 5 times.  They didn't list the 5 times that he previously did that.  But I would bet it was not against the strongest pass defenses of the league.  Maybe one or two.  Probalby not.

And of course this past Sunday he was playing with bad legs, was not a threat to run, did not run, and they did not have Marshawn Lynch.

Point being, the Jet secondary is pretty bad right now.

[Warfish]

A hobbled, hurt and generally immobile Wilson destroyed the Jets Pass D, and was not rattled at all by our supposedly historic front 4.

Through 4 games, the Jets Pass D is ranked:

22nd in Defensive Snaps

29th in Yards Allowed per Play

30th in Overall Turnovers

We've seen the 5th FEWEST Passing Plays against us, yet we are....

26th in Passing TD's Allowed

27th in INT's

32nd in Opponent Yards After the Catch

33rd in Opponent Completion %

33rd in Opponent Passing Yards Per Attempt.

We;re horrific in the LB's and Secondary at Pass Defense thus  far.

The line is doing ok, 6th in Sacks, 3rd fewest rushing yards allowed......but why would anyone bother to run on us when it's so easy and productive to pass all over us?

 

 

[SAR I]

17 minutes ago, Integrity28 said:

I get it. As said yesterday, it's not one or the other. He's still throwing them. Defense still sucks. 

See my post about the Revis, Cro, Fitz deals and their impact on this season.

You get it, but so many others don't, so many just see 10 interceptions and think it's some eureka moment and they've found the secret sauce as to what our problem is and how to fix it.  I wish it were that simple.  If you dig deeper, the interceptions aren't the problem.

SAR I

[Kevin L]

30 minutes ago, SAR I said:

Forget the Kansas City game, that was an anomaly, it's not reflective of Fitzpatrick or the offense, just a terrible game in a tough arena.

Bengals:  1 INT in desperation time trying to make something happen because the D blew the lead with under 2 minutes left.

Bills:  0 INT's.  AFC Offensive Player Of The Week.

Seahawks:  1 INT his fault.  1 INT Anderson's fault.  1 INT desperation time.

In 3 games where we beat a division opponent on the road in a short week and lost to 12-win caliber playoff teams, Ryan Fitzpatrick has thrown 1 interception that hurt us.  And if our D is going to allow a team to go 61 yards in 4 plays in under two minutes to let them seal the game, then Ryan Fitzpatrick is actually the least of our concerns.

SAR I

The Jets D has given up 41 points off turnovers this year, 2nd worst behind Carolina.

Who's generating those turnovers? Fitzpatrick.

Please keep telling us how it's all on the D.

[bostonmajet]

39 minutes ago, Integrity28 said:

This is the single-most alarming thing we've got going on.

We have 8 roster spots dedicated to players who can't propel us forward. 8.

I get the Fitz signing. I do. However, 4 TEs? Look at our secondary... maybe roster 2 TEs and use the other 2 roster spots for CBs?

It's somewhere between stubborn, arrogant and oblivious that we're carrying all these extra players... unless the idea was literally to bag this season, and the Fitz 1-year deal was literally for positive press via false hope. But, as much as I think this organization is stupid, I don't think they are evil enough to function like that. Their torture is of the unintentional variety.

I don't get it. We went with 2 TE sets against Seattle and it didn't do anything for us. Everyone knows we aren't throwing to these guys so they just stack the box. This isn't the OL we had 3-4 years ago. If we want to run, we should go 4 wide and run; only time you go 2TE is for 3-1 or Goal Line IMO.

I am reasonably happy with the way Mac has been building the team, but I don't get this one. Okay, take a flyer on ASJ, but it isn't like any of the other 3 are the future of this team. Pick one that (or 2) that are going to be here this year and move on

[SAR I]

5 minutes ago, Kevin L said:

The Jets D has given up 41 points off turnovers this year, 2nd worst behind Carolina.

Who's generating those turnovers? Fitzpatrick.

Please keep telling us how it's all on the D.

If you look at the body of work from Ryan Fitzpatrick in the 19 games he has started here, that KC game is an anomaly, it's not going to happen again.

If you look at the rest of the Fitzpatrick turnovers, the 4 remaining interceptions in the Bengals, Bills, and Seahawks games:

Bengals:  1 INT in desperation time trying to make something happen because the D blew the lead with under 2 minutes left.
Bills:  0 INT's.  AFC Offensive Player Of The Week.
Seahawks:  1 INT his fault.  1 INT Anderson's fault.  1 INT desperation time.

Only 1 INT happened while the game was still within reach and that 1 INT put the defense on their own 39 yard line, hardly the example for "the Jets D giving up huge points off of turnovers this year".  I have news for you-  the defense gives up huge points all the time, on any drive, doesn't matter if there was a turnover or not.  The D let the Seahawks go 61 yards in 4 plays in a matter of seconds, it's a joke.

These Myhero Metrics® only work against the weak minded, Kevin.  Some of us actually know what's going on.

SAR I

[Kevin L]

I get it. You want to paint the majority of Fitzpatrick's turnovers as somehow irrelevant, while at the same time blasting the D for giving up those points that are directly related to those turnovers.

 

[Warfish]

15 minutes ago, Kevin L said:

I get it. You want to paint the majority of Fitzpatrick's turnovers as somehow irrelevant, while at the same time blasting the D for giving up those points that are directly related to those turnovers.

This kind of dishonesty serves no one.

Example:  A Fitz INT on the opponent 10 yard Line is a REALLY bad thing.

But if, after that turnover, the Defense allows the opponent to go 75 yards to score a TD, that TD is on the Defense, not the INT.

No one is debating that Fitz has been horrific this year, has been the one thing he could not be, a turnover machine.  Most of us are perfectly fine with benching him for his play thus far (although not for Geno, nothing gained by that).

But being willfully dishonest about how horrible our pass D has been does no one any good.  It's easy to blame one person, but as Integrity and SAR have so clearly shown, this franchises problems are materially about the QB......but not ALL about the QB by any means.  

[Kevin L]

3 minutes ago, Warfish said:

This kind of dishonesty serves no one.

Example:  A Fitz INT on the opponent 10 yard Line is a REALLY bad thing.

But if, after that turnover, the Defense allows the opponent to go 75 yards to score a TD, that TD is on the Defense, not the INT.

No one is debating that Fitz has been horrific this year, has been the one thing he could not be, a turnover machine.  Most of us are perfectly fine with benching him for his play thus far (although not for Geno, nothing gained by that).

But being willfully dishonest about how horrible our pass D has been does no one any good.  It's easy to blame one person, but as Integrity and SAR have so clearly shown, this franchises problems are materially about the QB......but not ALL about the QB by any means.  

I'm not giving the D a pass by any means. But to say that Fitzpatrick's turnovers don't directly impact the D is ridiculous. 

10 points per game off turnovers so far. But Fitz's turnovers are irrelevant. Give me a break.

[Warfish]

6 minutes ago, Kevin L said:

I'm not giving the D a pass by any means. But to say that Fitzpatrick's turnovers don't directly impact the D is ridiculous. 

10 points per game off turnovers so far. But Fitz's turnovers are irrelevant. Give me a break.

How many of those 10 points per game off turnovers were directly linked to Fitz turnovers in a spot where it would be unrealistic to expect our Defense to make a stop?

Remember, we've also had turnovers for opponent TD's from Specials and our Running Backs as well.

Point being, Fitz has alot of turnovers, but those turnovers were mostly on the other side of the field (where a stop should be reasonably expected).

Teams have feasted on the Jets overall on turnovers, and some by other players have been directly costly, as in gave the oppoent the ball ins coring position to start or a score happened on the turnover.

Not a defense for Fitz's horrible play, but appropriate responsibility for that 10-points-per-game off turnovers is needed.

[SAR I]

6 minutes ago, Kevin L said:

I get it. You want to paint the majority of Fitzpatrick's turnovers as somehow irrelevant, while at the same time blasting the D for giving up those points that are directly related to those turnovers.

 

No, I don't.  I am not a Fitzpatrick fan, the fact that he is on this team is nothing more than an indictment of our FO and our lack of drafting acumen.

Take the KC game out of it, no one is arguing that game wasn't an unmitigated disaster.  We have a body of work of 19 games now, KC is an anomaly.

In the other 3 games, show me the interceptions that led to points because of a short field.  Hint:  You can't.

SAR I

[Kevin L]

21 minutes ago, SAR I said:

No, I don't.  I am not a Fitzpatrick fan, the fact that he is on this team is nothing more than an indictment of our FO and our lack of drafting acumen.

Take the KC game out of it, no one is arguing that game wasn't an unmitigated disaster.  We have a body of work of 19 games now, KC is an anomaly.

In the other 3 games, show me the interceptions that led to points because of a short field.  Hint:  You can't.

SAR I

1 in the KC game and 1 in the Seahawks game. Fitz's first INT vs. KC on his own 35 led to a TD. And Fitz's INT on his own 20 in the Seahawks game. I didn't count the others where the opponent started near midfield on their own side since you'd just dismiss them as irrelevant, but there are several of those.

[Big Blocker]

1 hour ago, Matt39 said:

I mean you have to take the good with the bad. Sherman gave up plays last week but he's also going to create the big turnover....willing to concede yards if you're turning the ball over too.

Sherman WAS getting beat by Marshall.  I don't know what happened as the game went on but it is possible Marshall was feeling the injury to his knee more.  But the main point is Sherman giving up plays to a great receiver like Marshall is not the same as M Wiliams giving up plays to JAG's.

[Big Blocker]

1 hour ago, SAR I said:

If you look at the body of work from Ryan Fitzpatrick in the 19 games he has started here, that KC game is an anomaly, it's not going to happen again.

If you look at the rest of the Fitzpatrick turnovers, the 4 remaining interceptions in the Bengals, Bills, and Seahawks games:

Bengals:  1 INT in desperation time trying to make something happen because the D blew the lead with under 2 minutes left.
Bills:  0 INT's.  AFC Offensive Player Of The Week.
Seahawks:  1 INT his fault.  1 INT Anderson's fault.  1 INT desperation time.

Only 1 INT happened while the game was still within reach and that 1 INT put the defense on their own 39 yard line, hardly the example for "the Jets D giving up huge points off of turnovers this year".  I have news for you-  the defense gives up huge points all the time, on any drive, doesn't matter if there was a turnover or not.  The D let the Seahawks go 61 yards in 4 plays in a matter of seconds, it's a joke.

These Myhero Metrics® only work against the weak minded, Kevin.  Some of us actually know what's going on.

SAR I

Excellent post.  Only problem is it does not fit the preferred narrative of Smith Fans who somehow think (despite the obvious consideration that the FO and CS Hate Smith) that if they bleat enough about Fitz, they will see Smith behind center, and he will suddenly blossom into a great Qb.

Pass the kool ade.

[August]

1 minute ago, Big Blocker said:

Excellent post.  Only problem is it does not fit the preferred narrative of Smith Fans who somehow think (despite the obvious consideration that the FO and CS Hate Smith) that if they bleat enough about Fitz, they will see Smith behind center, and he will suddenly blossom into a great Qb.

Pass the kool ade.

What would you be saying if Geno was playing the way Fitzpatrick has for 3 out of 4 games this year? 

[Big Blocker]

58 minutes ago, Warfish said:

This kind of dishonesty serves no one.

Example:  A Fitz INT on the opponent 10 yard Line is a REALLY bad thing.

But if, after that turnover, the Defense allows the opponent to go 75 yards to score a TD, that TD is on the Defense, not the INT.

No one is debating that Fitz has been horrific this year, has been the one thing he could not be, a turnover machine.  Most of us are perfectly fine with benching him for his play thus far (although not for Geno, nothing gained by that).

But being willfully dishonest about how horrible our pass D has been does no one any good.  It's easy to blame one person, but as Integrity and SAR have so clearly shown, this franchises problems are materially about the QB......but not ALL about the QB by any means.  

What compounds the difficulty (as you know and many here do as well) is that it is precisely the shortcomings of the D that accentuate Fitz's weaknesses.  If a Qb comes on the field with his team down on the score in the fourth quarter, the running game is not producing, is he supposed to not take any risks and avoid interceptions at all costs?

Of course not.

Sure you don't want him throwing interceptions, and in that kind of situation Fitzpatrick shows his limitations.  But I also do not recall another Jet qb in quite some time who consistently brought the team back from being behind in the fourth quarter.

EVERYBODY HERE knew that this team was built on D going into this season.  So far the D has not shown up (even in the Buffalo game, which told us something despite the glow of winning that one).

[August]

1 minute ago, Big Blocker said:

What compounds the difficulty (as you know and many here do as well) is that it is precisely the shortcomings of the D that accentuate Fitz's weaknesses.  If a Qb comes on the field with his team down on the score in the fourth quarter, the running game is not producing, is he supposed to not take any risks and avoid interceptions at all costs?

Of course not.

Sure you don't want him throwing interceptions, and in that kind of situation Fitzpatrick shows his limitations.  But I also do not recall another Jet qb in quite some time who consistently brought the team back from being behind in the fourth quarter.

EVERYBODY HERE knew that this team was built on D going into this season.  So far the D has not shown up (even in the Buffalo game, which told us something despite the glow of winning that one).

So why is he being paid 12 million dollars? He was brought back because the Jets "need" Ryan Fitzpatrick in order to win games. Yet he throws 10 picks in 4 games (for some that's a seasons worth of INT's) and you guys are giving him passes while funneling blame to the defense in an effort to absolve Fitzpatrick.  

[Ex-Rex]

On 10/4/2016 at 10:53 AM, Integrity28 said:

Real problem #1: Our coach is slow to adjust — This seems very real. Whether it is in-game (in terms of not adjusting during half-time to stop the one offensive player that is ripping his defense), or across a series of games (when a veteran is grossly underperforming and needs some bench time to figure sh*t out).

Calvin Pryor and Gilchrist BOTH fall into that category. I disagree with your analysis of Revis. He was the ONLY solid DB in the game against Seattle. Gilchrist continues to make mental mistakes and Pryor is a complete bust. I mean Vernon Gholston level bust, Kyle Wilson level, Kyle Brady and Blair Thomas bust. He needs to be shown the door, never mind the bench. He is not going to get any better, because he was never any good in the first place. Another Rex/Idzik dumb a$$ pick. Bowles needs to quit thinking of his team as a 'family' and needs to bring the hammer to underachievers and let them go bye bye.

[August]

3 minutes ago, Ex-Rex said:

Calvin Pryor and Gilchrist BOTH fall into that category. I disagree with your analysis of Revis. He was the ONLY solid DB in the game against Seattle. Gilchrist continues to make mental mistakes and Pryor is a complete bust. I mean Vernon Gholston level bust, Kyle Wilson level, Kyle Brady and Blair Thomas bust. He needs to be shown the door, never mind the bench. He is not going to get any better, because he was never any good in the first place. Another Rex/Idzik dumb a$$ pick. Bowles needs to quit thinking of his team as a 'family' and needs to bring the hammer to underachievers and let them go bye bye.

Pryor is being asked to do something he's not capable of. Keep him in the box to cover the intermediate area, he should not be in coverage consistently. Richardson should not be playing OLB, and dropping into coverage. These players are too talented it's the coaching and schemes that's the issue right now. 

[Ex-Rex]

1 minute ago, August said:

So why is he being paid 12 million dollars? He was brought back because the Jets "need" Ryan Fitzpatrick in order to win games. Yet he throws 10 picks in 4 games (for some that's a seasons worth of INT's) and you guys are giving him passes while funneling blame to the defense in an effort to absolve Fitzpatrick.  

I don't give Fitzy a pass at all. As much as I despise Geno Smith if Fitzy has one more bad half of football, I will be calling for Smith. He certainly can't do any worse (I think) and could give the team a spark. Bowles won't go for Petty until the Jets are 3-7 - which is what their record will be at the bye - because he has to keep up appearances that he is trying to win. Going with Petty at 3-7 is not so much throwing up the white flag as it is seeing what we may have next year.

[Warfish]

A review of the Jets (And Fitz's) Turnovers in 2016 Thus Far, and their Costs:

Game #1 vs. Cincinnati

Fitzpatrick INT:  0:46 left in the 4th, Jets Down by 1, From the Jets 25 Yard Line.  We debated this for a week if this cost us the game, or if the drop by Marshall deep on 1st down was worse.  General agreement that the missed FG hurt.  Did not result in Cincy scoring.

Game #2 vs. Buffalo

J.Marshall Fumble:  rookie fumble returned for a TD by Buffalo (Cost 7 Points)

Game #3 vs. Kansas City

Fitzpatrick INT #1:  Interception by Peters at NYJ 35 Yard Line.  Resulted in 4 play, 35 Yard TD Drive by K.C.  (Cost 7 Points)

Powell Fumble:  Fumble by Bilal Powell at NYJ 49 Yard Line.  Resulted in 14 Play, 44 Yard Drive for a KC FG (Cost 3 Points)

J.Marshall Fumble:  rookie fumbled on the kickoff return, returned by K.C. for a Touchdown (Cost 7 Points).  Jets are now down 17-0.

Fitzpatrick INT #2:  Interception in KC Endzone, Touchback.  Resulted in no score by K.C.

Fitzpatrick INT #3:  Interception in KC Endzone, Touchback.  Resulted in no score by K.C.

Fitzpatrick INT #4:  Interception at K.C. 22 yard line.  Resulted in no score by K.C.  Almost every NFL Coach would pull their QB at this point.

Fitzpatrick INT #5:  Interception at K.C. 45 yard Line, returned 55 yards for K.C. TD.  (Cost 7 Points, score now 3-24 K.C.)

Fitzpatrick INT #6:  Interception at K.C. Endzone, Touchback.  End of Game (No Score)

Game #4 vs. Seattle

Fitzpatrick INT #1:  At 14:30 in the 4^th, Interception at Seattle 39 Yard Line.  Seattle TD afterwards in on the Defense, as Seattle had to go 60 yards.

Fitzpatrick INT #2:  Interception at Jets 20 Yard Line.  Seattle kicked a FG (Cost 3 Points)

Fitzpatrick INT #3:  Interception at Jets 49 Yard Line.  End of Game (No Score)