Reliving Dec. 30th, 2007 -- Kansas City Chiefs at New York Jets

[nyjunc]

3 minutes ago, Bleedin Green said:

11 good games is completely inaccurate.  11 not completely awful games?  Perhaps.  When you are trying to qualify some games as "good" when he threw 0 TDs, others where his comp % was under 50, others still where he had as many, or more, INTs than TDs, it once again proves what complete nonsense that is.

As far as 2003, the point was quite simply that his play was on a decline after his 2002 season.  Never did anyone say that not one single game for the rest of his NFL career was ever any good, so no, trying to pull a subset of 3 games from a poor season does not prove anything positive at all.  If anything, if you used the same logic you are attempting to use to for Sanchez right here, it would suggest that Pennington's 2003 season was far more bad than good, and therefore ultimately proving correct the point you're trying to dispute.

All you do is cherry pick stats in a way with no legitimacy to it whatsoever, in order to justify a determination you made in advance.  Forget even a matter of subjective opinions, from a purely statistical manner, what you are saying has no validity.

you can say 11 not awful games.

sometimes you can play well throwing 0 TDs though and sometimes you can play poorly throwing 3 TDs.

 

it was in such decline he was among the league leaders again in 2004 before his shoulder injury and would lead 3 more teams to the playoffs.  Oak didn't write any book on how to beat him, we got beat on both lines that game- that was the book on how to beat the Jets at that time.

 

Chad was fine in 2003, he was excellent the first month then when D's took away Moss his #s went down, he walked into an impossible situation w/ the team basically out of the hunt.  he brought us back in 2002, you can't do that every year.

 

cherry pick or put into context? you just throw blind #s out as if they tell us everything, I try to find out what they actually mean.  Peyton and Brady have similar postseason #s, they aren't close in postseason.  #s tell us PART of the story.

[#27TheDominator]

Just now, nyjunc said:

 

"the rest of the half was nothing but 3 and outs"- they had ONE possession the rest of the half and they gained 8 yds not 11.

 

This is pretty tiresome, but I figured I would point out that this was factually incorrect.  I remember these games, but of course I looked them up to see if my memory was correct.  These were the drive charts for the first half against the Pats:

#	Quarter	Time	LOS	Plays	Length	Yds	Result
1	1	13:32	NYJ 24	5	2:47	11	Punt
2	1	7:24	NYJ 34	4	1:37	12	Interception
3	1	5:47	NYJ 9	3	1:31	8	Punt
4	2	15:00	NYJ 20	3	1:05	-8	Punt
5	2	10:19	NYJ 41	3	1:00	2	Interception
6	2	4:14	NYJ 35	3	2:05	4	Punt
7	2	0:10	NYJ 30	1	0:10	5	End of Half

8+ -8 + 2 + 4 + 5 = 11.  It was not one drive, it was 5. 

 

[nyjunc]

10 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

This is pretty tiresome, but I figured I would point out that this was factually incorrect.  I remember these games, but of course I looked them up to see if my memory was correct.  These were the drive charts for the first half against the Pats:

#	Quarter	Time	LOS	Plays	Length	Yds	Result
1	1	13:32	NYJ 24	5	2:47	11	Punt
2	1	7:24	NYJ 34	4	1:37	12	Interception
3	1	5:47	NYJ 9	3	1:31	8	Punt
4	2	15:00	NYJ 20	3	1:05	-8	Punt
5	2	10:19	NYJ 41	3	1:00	2	Interception
6	2	4:14	NYJ 35	3	2:05	4	Punt
7	2	0:10	NYJ 30	1	0:10	5	End of Half

8+ -8 + 2 + 4 + 5 = 11.  It was not one drive, it was 5. 

 

my mistake, I looked at end of qtr and thought it was end of half.

 

after INT then went 3 and out then D allowed 76 yard TD drive to make it 14-0.

then 3 and out, he was sacked on 3rd down and we had a holding penalty declined then NE had 59 yd TD drive and it was 21-0.

then INT, D allows FG.  24-0

you can blame him for the pick 6 and maybe the FG(though they started on NE side of field) but not the rest.  it was a team loss, Mark was terrible but so was defense.  give me any excuse you want they were terrible.

[#27TheDominator]

6 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

my mistake, I looked at end of qtr and thought it was end of half.

 

after INT then went 3 and out then D allowed 76 yard TD drive to make it 14-0.

then 3 and out, he was sacked on 3rd down and we had a holding penalty declined then NE had 59 yd TD drive and it was 21-0.

then INT, D allows FG.  24-0

you can blame him for the pick 6 and maybe the FG(though they started on NE side of field) but not the rest.  it was a team loss, Mark was terrible but so was defense.  give me any excuse you want they were terrible.

I can blame him because he didn't do a ******* single positive thing in the half.  I can, and I do.

[Bleedin Green]

20 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

you can say 11 not awful games.

sometimes you can play well throwing 0 TDs though and sometimes you can play poorly throwing 3 TDs.

 

it was in such decline he was among the league leaders again in 2004 before his shoulder injury and would lead 3 more teams to the playoffs.  Oak didn't write any book on how to beat him, we got beat on both lines that game- that was the book on how to beat the Jets at that time.

 

Chad was fine in 2003, he was excellent the first month then when D's took away Moss his #s went down, he walked into an impossible situation w/ the team basically out of the hunt.  he brought us back in 2002, you can't do that every year.

 

cherry pick or put into context? you just throw blind #s out as if they tell us everything, I try to find out what they actually mean.  Peyton and Brady have similar postseason #s, they aren't close in postseason.  #s tell us PART of the story.

Again, you harp on 3 good games for Chad and dismiss 7 poor ones, while dismissing 4 absolutely awful games for Sanchez and praise for 11 not-awful ones.  These concepts contradict each other with the sole exception of both being designed to push an agenda.

And no, only selecting individual items that happen to go along with your predetermined conclusion is not putting anything into context.  It's not a matter of what they mean, it's a matter of you baselessly ignoring any bad numbers because you say they don't count, with no justifiable reasoning for why.

[Warfish]

People still being trolled by nyjunc and his "alternate facts" version of the Buttfumble Era?  

Lol, dudes, really.  Just stop.  This is even sillier than still arguing Fitz vs. Geno at this point.

[nyjunc]

4 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

I can blame him because he didn't do a ******* single positive thing in the half.  I can, and I do.

he deserves his share of the blame, he was bad but it wan't all on him.

1 minute ago, Bleedin Green said:

Again, you harp on 3 good games for Chad and dismiss 7 poor ones, while dismissing 4 absolutely awful games for Sanchez and praise for 11 not-awful ones.  These concepts contradict each other with the sole exception of both being designed to push an agenda.

And no, only selecting individual items that happen to go along with your predetermined conclusion is not putting anything into context.  It's not a matter of what they mean, it's a matter of you baselessly ignoring any bad numbers because you say they don't count, with no justifiable reasoning for why.

it was actually 5 good games, 2 bad games, 2 mediocre games

 

there is nothing contradictory b/c the arguments are separate arguments.  we aren't arguoing the same things, i am not saying ignore anything.  The Chad thing was in response to you guys saying Oak gave the blueprint yet his first 5 games in 2003 he threw 12 TDs w/ 5 INts. Prorate those #s over 16 games and it's 48 TDs and 16 INTs.  that doesn't look like the blueprint was out yet.

[nyjunc]

1 minute ago, Warfish said:

People still being trolled by nyjunc and his "alternate facts" version of the Buttfumble Era?  

Lol, dudes, really.  Just stop.

another guy who can't keep up in debates just hurling insults.

 

and another grown man using "lol".  what has happened to men?

[Bleedin Green]

9 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

my mistake, I looked at end of qtr and thought it was end of half.

 

after INT then went 3 and out then D allowed 76 yard TD drive to make it 14-0.

then 3 and out, he was sacked on 3rd down and we had a holding penalty declined then NE had 59 yd TD drive and it was 21-0.

then INT, D allows FG.  24-0

you can blame him for the pick 6 and maybe the FG(though they started on NE side of field) but not the rest.  it was a team loss, Mark was terrible but so was defense.  give me any excuse you want they were terrible.

Once again, the hypocritical nature of your arguments lives on.  Losses are to be blamed on the team whenever possible, but wins, or even losses that were close in spite of the QB, are still credited to the QB.

By this logic of designating something as a "team loss" even when the QB is major (and greatest) liability, then the only time you could ever credit a QB for a win is when he has a completely mistake-free game and receives absolutely no positive contributions from anyone else on the team.

[Bleedin Green]

2 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

he deserves his share of the blame, he was bad but it wan't all on him.

it was actually 5 good games, 2 bad games, 2 mediocre games

 

there is nothing contradictory b/c the arguments are separate arguments.  we aren't arguoing the same things, i am not saying ignore anything.  The Chad thing was in response to you guys saying Oak gave the blueprint yet his first 5 games in 2003 he threw 12 TDs w/ 5 INts. Prorate those #s over 16 games and it's 48 TDs and 16 INTs.  that doesn't look like the blueprint was out yet.

Prorate over 16 game?  Are you serious with this crap?  With each post you manage to come up with an even more laughably ridiculously, completely nonsensical point that has literally no merit to it.  Hell, in his other 5 games he had 1 TD and 7 INTs.  Would you like to prorate that to what would apparently be his 3 TD 22 INT season?

And I really don't care whether or not the topics are different, ultimately you are trying to make conclusions about the quality of a player, and making two different arguments at the same time that are completely contradictory.  The excuses you want to use are completely irrelevant, the question is whether or not they respectively had "good" seasons, and in both instances if you used the same logic for one player as you used for the other, you would ultimately prove yourself wrong.

[#27TheDominator]

17 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

another guy who can't keep up in debates just hurling insults.

 

and another grown man using "lol".  what has happened to men?

We aren't allowed to punch you

[Warfish]

20 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

another guy who can't keep up in debates just hurling insults.

 

and another grown man using "lol".  what has happened to men?

Speaking of manhood, perhaps you should stop slurping on Sanchez's, eh?

[nyjunc]

29 minutes ago, Bleedin Green said:

Once again, the hypocritical nature of your arguments lives on.  Losses are to be blamed on the team whenever possible, but wins, or even losses that were close in spite of the QB, are still credited to the QB.

By this logic of designating something as a "team loss" even when the QB is major (and greatest) liability, then the only time you could ever credit a QB for a win is when he has a completely mistake-free game and receives absolutely no positive contributions from anyone else on the team.

show me where I am just crediting every win to the QB?  

15 minutes ago, Bleedin Green said:

Prorate over 16 game?  Are you serious with this crap?  With each post you manage to come up with an even more laughably ridiculously, completely nonsensical point that has literally no merit to it.  Hell, in his other 5 games he had 1 TD and 7 INTs.  Would you like to prorate that to what would apparently be his 3 TD 22 INT season?

And I really don't care whether or not the topics are different, ultimately you are trying to make conclusions about the quality of a player, and making two different arguments at the same time that are completely contradictory.  The excuses you want to use are completely irrelevant, the question is whether or not they respectively had "good" seasons, and in both instances if you used the same logic for one player as you used for the other, you would ultimately prove yourself wrong.

I don't know how much more I can dumb this down for you.  The argument was about the asinine assertion that Oak gave everyone the blueprint on how to defend Chad.

 

you don't care b/c you either A- don't understand or B-realize you have nothing to you will try to combine to deflect from reality.

[Integrity28]

5 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

I don't know how much more I can dumb this down

We all know you've got lots more dumb in you, you can do it!

[nyjunc]

here comes the teddy bear lover to chime in.  I lose IQ points just seeing some of these usernames on my screen.

[Integrity28]

6 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

here comes the teddy bear lover to chime in.  I lose IQ points just seeing some of these usernames on my screen.

You lose IQ points by drawing breath.

[nyjunc]

[jetophile]

Kansas City. Kansas City. Let's re-live Kansas City. There I was in a busted down rusted out Buick, tank goin' on E, the mutt I donned Poquito by my side.  I found him wandering on the road in the blistering heat of South Dakota, the law on my tail. Poquito, Poquito, little Poquito.  I traveled across land and sea and three continents, hoping to make the game. I had $3 in my T-Shirt pocket, a pack of Marlboro Reds in my turned up sleeve. I was ready to fight, pen-knife behind my ear, switchblade in my boot. There I was on I-35, not sure if I was in Kansas or Mizzoura when I crossed the brink of Hell.  I turned on the tinny radio, praying for reception. The Jets lost.  There just wasn't enough time. I kissed Poquito's head and assured him that we both live the life of a dog. 

You're welcome. 

[jetophile]

25 minutes ago, jetophile said:

Geez, this place is harder to navigate than the BQE. 

The fakk, I'm quoting myself?  I was just trying to edit my magnum opus. Laughing like hell right now. Go Jets!

[Bugg]

This thread-looking back at the legion of  disasters of the past-defines a dysfunctional franchise and a damaged fan base. And it's all we got; Shonn Green getting hurt in Indy, Martin sheeting the bed in Denver, Favre wanking his shoulder into spaghetti, Victor Cruz going 99 yards, Gastineau getting a pointless RTP on a game-ending 4th down stop, Herm Edwards moving Doug Brien back 2 yards intentionally, IT'S ALL WE GOT. 

[#27TheDominator]

^

Not true.  We also have the tarp in Miami. 

[nyjunc]

18 minutes ago, Bugg said:

This thread-looking back at the legion of  disasters of the past-defines a dysfunctional franchise and a damaged fan base. And it's all we got; Shonn Green getting hurt in Indy, Martin sheeting the bed in Denver, Favre wanking his shoulder into spaghetti, Victor Cruz going 99 yards, Gastineau getting a pointless RTP on a game-ending 4th down stop, Herm Edwards moving Doug Brien back 2 yards intentionally, IT'S ALL WE GOT. 

Curtis did nothing in Denver but our D blew a 10 pt 3rd wtr lead and we had a million drops that game.

Brien missed by inches from 47, he should have been fine from 43.  

 

[nyjunc]

8 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

^

Not true.  We also have the tarp in Miami. 

that was a terrible excuse for the Jets, Miami beat us 3 times that year on good and bad fields.  the bigger issue was the fumble recovered by gastineau on Miami's only offensive TD drive where they gave the ball back to Miami.

[Bleedin Green]

2 hours ago, nyjunc said:

show me where I am just crediting every win to the QB?  

I don't know how much more I can dumb this down for you.  The argument was about the asinine assertion that Oak gave everyone the blueprint on how to defend Chad.

 

you don't care b/c you either A- don't understand or B-realize you have nothing to you will try to combine to deflect from reality.

Or C: that still does absolutely nothing to justify you using completely contradictory arguments in regards to the quality of a QB's performance.  The "why" is completely irrelevant, all that does is prove that you are not actually looking for a valid result, but rather going out of your way to "prove" (and I use that word loosely) the point you had already decided upon independent of any and all facts.

Regardless of what argument you are trying to make, good is still good and bad is still bad, and you are contradicting yourself.  There is literally nothing to justify making the complete opposite argument in favor of two different players.  You have ultimately made it a complete point of fact that have to be wrong about at least one of these two evaluations.

[nyjunc]

4 minutes ago, Bleedin Green said:

Or C: that still does absolutely nothing to justify you using completely contradictory arguments in regards to the quality of a QB's performance.  The "why" is completely irrelevant, all that does is prove that you are not actually looking for a valid result, but rather going out of your way to "prove" (and I use that word loosely) the point you had already decided upon independent of any and all facts.

Regardless of what argument you are trying to make, good is still good and bad is still bad, and you are contradicting yourself.  There is literally nothing to justify making the complete opposite argument in favor of two different players.  You have ultimately made it a complete point of fact that have to be wrong about at least one of these two evaluations.

there's no point w/ someone who is clueless.  Thanks for your participation, please try harder next time.

[Bleedin Green]

2 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

there's no point w/ someone who is clueless.

That is most certainly one thing you successfully prove again and again.  Congratulations, that is the first thing of value you have contributed!  Way to go!

[jetophile]

It was a cold December night in the year 2007, the year of our Lord. I thought of, 'In drear Nighted December' by Keats, but words were leaving me as I slowly began to lose consciousness. Aye, wood was scarce. The coffers were teetering on empty.  I walked in my mind in Elysian fields.  Butter was frozen, the cow was half-starved. Somehow Old Nellie kicked a FG and later ran it in. There 'twas a man named Brodie Croyle, and it's always been told he was a fearsome man that stood 6'9". This will always be disputed until we shove rusty nails in our temples for relief. Aye, shove away. Shove away. 

[nyjunc]

coincidentally I was reading the Post this morning and a picture of Jay Feely after missing a kick in that Falcon game appeared- one of three miscues on FG attempts that cost us 9 pts in 3 pt loss but it was all Mark's fault.

 

[SAR I]

On 1/25/2017 at 11:35 AM, Warfish said:

Fail, no mention of "fair chances".

Sanchez had plenty of fair chances in '09 and '10 where the Jets threw together a patchwork aging free agent offense around him.  When they forgot to replace the likes of Braylon Edwards, Plaxico Burress, Ladanian Tomlinson, Dustin Keller, Leon Washington, Damien Woody, and Tony Richardson in '11 and '12 it's when the wheels fell off.  Those guys were massive contributors to the AFC Finalist teams, all gone or injured by 2012.

Mark's trajectory could have headed upwards with better weapons, with a little more time he might have turned into an above-average quarterback who stayed healthy, had comeback ability, and was money in the postseason, all traits we desperately needed before and after his arrival.

SAR I

[SAR I]

4 hours ago, nyjunc said:

coincidentally I was reading the Post this morning and a picture of Jay Feely after missing a kick in that Falcon game appeared- one of three miscues on FG attempts that cost us 9 pts in 3 pt loss but it was all Mark's fault.

Chokers like Jay Feely and Chad Pennington are welcomed back by the Jets front office, they make autograph appearances, they crank the air raid siren.

Using this criteria, Mark Sanchez deserves a place in the Ring Of Honor.  He'd better get it.

SAR I

[nyjunc]

23 minutes ago, SAR I said:

Sanchez had plenty of fair chances in '09 and '10 where the Jets threw together a patchwork aging free agent offense around him.  When they forgot to replace the likes of Braylon Edwards, Plaxico Burress, Ladanian Tomlinson, Dustin Keller, Leon Washington, Damien Woody, and Tony Richardson in '11 and '12 it's when the wheels fell off.  Those guys were massive contributors to the AFC Finalist teams, all gone or injured by 2012.

Mark's trajectory could have headed upwards with better weapons, with a little more time he might have turned into an above-average quarterback who stayed healthy, had comeback ability, and was money in the postseason, all traits we desperately needed before and after his arrival.

SAR I

minus Plax, he wasn't on the '09/'10 team and we replaced Braylon(who was Mark's favorite along w/ Cotch) w/ Plax fresh out of jail.

15 minutes ago, SAR I said:

Chokers like Jay Feely and Chad Pennington are welcomed back by the Jets front office, they make autograph appearances, they crank the air raid siren.

Using this criteria, Mark Sanchez deserves a place in the Ring Of Honor.  He'd better get it.

SAR I

Feely actually wasn't a bad K but he had a tough day against Atlanta, only one of the 3 were his fault.  the other 2 were botched snap/holds.

[JustInFudge]

Jay Feely wore gloves and he was a place kicker. 

[#27TheDominator]

What a load of horsesh*t.  Burress was the replacement for Edwards.  By the way, Edwards was on the 2012 team anyway.  The dude only caught 23 passes for teams other than the Jets from end of the 2010 season. Tomlinson was on the 2011 team.  He was the #2 back in 2010 and 2011.  They drafted Powell to replace him and added Kerley at WR.  In addition to Kerley, they added Derrick Mason who almost immediately ran to the coach to complain about Mark sucking.  Keller was there in 2011 and 2012.  He didn't get hurt until halfway through 2012.  Holmes was the best WR on the 2010 team and they were sure to retain him.  Sanchez did as much to stunt the growth of Stephen Hill as vice versa.  Leon broke his leg halfway through 2009 and they traded him before the 2010 season started.  They replaced Richardson with Conner, who was fine.  

The only guy on that list that wasn't adequately replaced was Damien Woody.  They tried with Hunter who had been top backup that started down the stretch in 2010 and Ducasse who has turned out to be nothing but a career NFL backup/spot starter at G.  For 2012 they got Austin Howard.  Howard's performance at RT for the Jets earned him 5/$30M from the Raiders.  The difference wasn't the supporting cast, it was Mark stepping back when they tried to open the offense up.  

[nyjunc]

16 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

What a load of horsesh*t.  Burress was the replacement for Edwards.  By the way, Edwards was on the 2012 team anyway.  The dude only caught 23 passes for teams other than the Jets from end of the 2010 season. Tomlinson was on the 2011 team.  He was the #2 back in 2010 and 2011.  They drafted Powell to replace him and added Kerley at WR.  In addition to Kerley, they added Derrick Mason who almost immediately ran to the coach to complain about Mark sucking.  Keller was there in 2011 and 2012.  He didn't get hurt until halfway through 2012.  Holmes was the best WR on the 2010 team and they were sure to retain him.  Sanchez did as much to stunt the growth of Stephen Hill as vice versa.  Leon broke his leg halfway through 2009 and they traded him before the 2010 season started.  They replaced Richardson with Conner, who was fine.  

The only guy on that list that wasn't adequately replaced was Damien Woody.  They tried with Hunter who had been top backup that started down the stretch in 2010 and Ducasse who has turned out to be nothing but a career NFL backup/spot starter at G.  For 2012 they got Austin Howard.  Howard's performance at RT for the Jets earned him 5/$30M from the Raiders.  The difference wasn't the supporting cast, it was Mark stepping back when they tried to open the offense up.  

yes, we replaced one of Mark's favorite WRs(and I think his most productive one) w/ a guy who had been in jail for 2 years.

 

we got Braylon back late in 2012 and he was a shell of himself after his injury.

 

drafting Powell doesn't look so bad now, does it?

 

yep, we added Derrick Mason late in camp after we had dumped Cotch.  so to recap: we brought in plax out of jail and a malcontent in Mason to replace Mark's 2 favorite WRs and 2 real pros.

 

Conner was terrible.

mark made a title game w/ Wayne Hunter as his starting RT

 

Mark stepped back when they took all his talent away.  In 2011 as I mentioned we brought in a guy out of jail and a malcontent.  3 of his top 5 weapons entering 2011 would be out of football in 2012 yet Mark was supposed to get better.  actually by the #s he got better when he set Jets records for total TDs but he wasn't nearly as good as 2010 in reality.

 

in 2012 he had 2 legit weapons both of which got hurt early in 2012.  Let us not forget we were 2-1 after 3 weeks in 2012 but he never had a healthy Keller and lost Holmes a week later so his main weapons became Chaz Schilens, Stephen Hill and Clyde Gates yet he was supposed to get better.

[SAR I]

SAR I