Rex Ryan opens up on Mark Sanchez & Geno Smith, discusses Jets current QBs (hold on to your butts JN, here comes a 100-pager)

[nyjunc]

2 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Blah blah blah, if if if

Lost in all this is that we were still losing. Forever you've acted like scoring a long, game-winning TD drive in just a couple of minutes, had the offense gotten the ball back yet again, was a mere formality and a foregone conclusion. Perhaps if the offense scored more than 10 net points on the game it wouldn't have come to that, and we'd be talking about our Superbowl victory or loss.

The offense scored 10 net points. The defense gave 15 net points. The special teams surrendered 0 points.

You can spin out of that all you want but in the end, while neither had its best game, one side did its job more than the other.

actually I have never said winning was a guarantee, I have always said I just wished our O had a shot and being in that stadium that day that crowd was scared to death if we got the ball back.  Unfortunately the O never even got a chance.

stop w/ the net points BS.  The D set the tone from play one that day, the O brought us back w/in a score w/ an eternity to play and the D allowed the clock to be run out.

2 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

To the other ridiculous attempts to distract:

The Giants scored enough points to win each game, one of which was played in GB as the 3rd-coldest game in history, with a windchill that reached -32 degrees -- downright balmy compared to our championship game in Pittsburgh, but one you'd undoubtedly be using as yet another excuse why we lost. That is, if you weren't still harping on how the offense did its job to score late, but in the 4th quarter Tynes missed both a 43 yarder and then a 36 yarder to win in regulation. 

Not to mention the elephant in the room: Eli didn't put a full TD on the board for the opposition in either championship game.

How is it relevant how the Broncos scored, so long as it wasn't the Ravens' offense on the field when it happened? Talk about intellectual dishonesty -- 35 points is the amount the Ravens' offense had to score just to reach OT. Had they not overcome it, their fans would have instead tried to seek satisfaction in discussions about how it isn't the offense's fault.

Reverse roles with the Ravens and instead of relishing our SB victory, we'd be reading 5 years of excuses about how it isn't the fault of poor Mark and the offense. That goes without saying, since we're hearing your relative satisfaction with their lousy job of scoring 17 points for the us and 7 points for the other freaking team.

I didn't realize you weren't allowed to score in the cold?  By the way, another thing I forgot to mention was that in both of the NFC title games the D or STs created a turnover to leave Eli in FG range to set up the K. 

again, that TD(I'm still not sure it was a fumble but it was called one unlike the obvious fumble by the giants at the end of the 2011 title game where they blew the whistle) puts us down 24-3 at half, if they don't get it we likely go down 20-0 at the half.  almost the same difference. The jets had a shot late, the D blew it.  When NYG had a shot late their D and STs stepped up.

the Ravens offense scored 28 in regulation, that's a fact. if we had the Raven D we'd have been to 2 SBs and maybe won one.  Instead we are forced to rehash what if's thanks to the D coming up small.

[nyjunc]

2 hours ago, Smashmouth said:

A Jet Fan making excuses for the Giants but not the Jets ? Impossible !!

The Giants won 2 SB's because their defense shut down every QB they played when their pass rush got insanely hot. The Jets who were known for playing tough defense sh*t the bed in both playoff runs (AFCCG's). Once by giving up a large lead to the Colts while our Idiot coach decided to get conservative and once by getting steam rolled early in the Pitt game and could not get the ball back to our offense for most of the first half while getting steam rolled. Then when we needed the ball at the end said defense game up the back breaking first down's to run out the clock.

Brady Manning and Manning all brought their teams back when their QB's finally got hot in the second half Just like Sanchez did. The only difference is the Jets defense could not get their team the ball back in the Pitt game to give their hot QB a chance to win. Funny how Brady and Manning ALWAYS got those shots but Sanchez didn't. Over all Mark was not a very good QB but he played well enough in the playoff's to get us wins and our vaunted defense sh*t the bed.

Eli Manning has never won a playoff game where his D allowed more than 20 points, his D shut down some of the greatest offenses of all time in both of those runs and outside of those 2 defense led runs Eli has never won another playoff game.  If we had the NYG D/STs we'd have won a SB or 2.  if Eli had the NYJ D/STs he would be ringless and there wouldn't be any fool spouting off how Eli should be a HOFer.

[Smashmouth]

1 hour ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Hey, eff the Giants, but they don't need excuses as to why they lost because they won the games. Excuses are the Lombardi Trophies of losers.

The Giants would have lost those close games if the offense scored 17 for the offense while Eli scored 7 points for the other team.

What are you talking about Sanchez didn't have those chances? Trailing by 14 points, an 8 minute, clock-eating drive died on the 1 instead of ending with a TD pass. The awful D gave him the ball back immediately, with a bonus of 2 points on the scoreboard, and the next drive took yet another 4 min off the clock to go 58 yards. We all would prefer they caused a 3 & out, but it's not even like the D gave up any points after the first half ended. They gave up zero and scored 2.

Those famous Brady/Manning drives you love were mostly running a hurry up offense when you'd see them march right down the field in a minute or two without any timeouts. Mark led two 4th quarter drives, eating up 11 minutes while trailing by 2 TDs, and came away with 7 points.

Eff them all, but stop with your own endless excuses for this bust.

obviously you forgot the horrible calls made by sh*tenhiemer on that 8 minute drive at the 1 and the total lack of urgency displayed by the offense and coaches by not going into hurry up mode causing the drive to go 8 minutes but I guess that was Sanchez fault as well ? Even though on the next posession he drove us up the field to get us within a score

Also you mean when Sanchez drove us up the field in 52 seconds for the game winner vs the Colts ?

Im not making excuses for Sanchez suckage Im pointing out the fact he played well in the playoffs and the much vaunted Rex Ryan defense sh*t the bed twice

[Sperm Edwards]

1 hour ago, nyjunc said:

actually I have never said winning was a guarantee, I have always said I just wished our O had a shot and being in that stadium that day that crowd was scared to death if we got the ball back.  Unfortunately the O never even got a chance.

stop w/ the net points BS.  The D set the tone from play one that day, the O brought us back w/in a score w/ an eternity to play and the D allowed the clock to be run out.

I didn't realize you weren't allowed to score in the cold?  By the way, another thing I forgot to mention was that in both of the NFC title games the D or STs created a turnover to leave Eli in FG range to set up the K. 

again, that TD(I'm still not sure it was a fumble but it was called one unlike the obvious fumble by the giants at the end of the 2011 title game where they blew the whistle) puts us down 24-3 at half, if they don't get it we likely go down 20-0 at the half.  almost the same difference. The jets had a shot late, the D blew it.  When NYG had a shot late their D and STs stepped up.

the Ravens offense scored 28 in regulation, that's a fact. if we had the Raven D we'd have been to 2 SBs and maybe won one.  Instead we are forced to rehash what if's thanks to the D coming up small.

The Ravens offense scored 28 in regulation. The Giants scored 20 in regulation, even with the two 4th quarter FGs their kicker missed (the latter from only 36 yds out). So if the kicker makes one or both of them, then going by your logic it means their offense is better.

The Jets offense scored net 10 in regulation. The defense and special teams combined let up 15 net points in regulation. To you, the latter was more instrumental in the loss.

[Sperm Edwards]

1 hour ago, Smashmouth said:

obviously you forgot the horrible calls made by sh*tenhiemer on that 8 minute drive at the 1 and the total lack of urgency displayed by the offense and coaches by not going into hurry up mode causing the drive to go 8 minutes but I guess that was Sanchez fault as well ? Even though on the next posession he drove us up the field to get us within a score

Also you mean when Sanchez drove us up the field in 52 seconds for the game winner vs the Colts ?

Im not making excuses for Sanchez suckage Im pointing out the fact he played well in the playoffs and the much vaunted Rex Ryan defense sh*t the bed twice

Actually you are precisely making excuses for him by blaming the OC. That is exactly what excuse-making looks like.

[nyjunc]

3 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

The Ravens offense scored 28 in regulation. The Giants scored 20 in regulation, even with the two 4th quarter FGs their kicker missed (the latter from only 36 yds out). So if the kicker makes one or both of them, then going by your logic it means their offense is better.

The Jets offense scored net 10 in regulation. The defense and special teams combined let up 15 net points in regulation. To you, the latter was more instrumental in the loss.

28 in regulation in div rd at Denver, same amount marl led our O to at NE in 2010.

NYG scored 20 at GB in regulation, 17 at SF. 

stop w/ the net points BS.  by this silly notion I guess Kurt Warner was responsible for AZ losing SB XLIII when in reality he was most responsible for them being there and having a late lead which the D blew.

[Sperm Edwards]

20 hours ago, nyjunc said:

28 in regulation in div rd at Denver, same amount marl led our O to at NE in 2010.

NYG scored 20 at GB in regulation, 17 at SF. 

stop w/ the net points BS.  by this silly notion I guess Kurt Warner was responsible for AZ losing SB XLIII when in reality he was most responsible for them being there and having a late lead which the D blew.

And a team should only score 20 points once in a playoff run and still expect to get to and win a SB. Of course Mark didn’t lead us to 28, since he didn’t throw a pass on that last TD drive (nor the drive before that), but you knew that anyway.

We didn’t have an all-world defense, so the offense needed to contribute as well. They came up small, in the amount of 10 net points, and you think he did his job.

The team would have been better off signing Jeff Garcia and keeping our draft picks and cap money to use on good football players.

[Smashmouth]

10 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Actually you are precisely making excuses for him by blaming the OC. That is exactly what excuse-making looks like.

well you know the QB does not make the call as to when to go to hurry up and he does not make the idiotic calls at the goal line either

[nyjunc]

10 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

And a team should only score 20 points once in a playoff run and still expect to get to and win a SB. Of course Mark didn’t lead us to 28, since he didn’t throw a pass on that last TD drive (or the drive before that), but you knew that anyway.

We didn’t have an all-world defense, so the offense needed to contribute as well. They came up small, in the amount of 10 net points, and you think he did his job.

The team would have been better off signing Jeff Garcia and keeping our draft picks and cap money to use on good football players.

oh so now he doesn't get credit for the last TD but Eli gets credit for 2 conf title game winning drives when turnovers gave him the ball in FG position to win. 

The offense did contribute, gave the D a double digit lead in the '09 title game, brought us back to w/in a score in the '10 title game.  do they deserve some blame too? of course, all phases deserve their share just like all phases deserved their share of the playoff win credit but the D was our biggest strength, they deserve most of the credit for the wins and most of the blame for the losses.

the funny thing is so many sup[posed better QBs w/ better teams around them didn't win 4 playoff games(4 road playoff games too).  SD was MUCH better than us w/ the great Philip Rivers- how did we do against them?  Indy was much better than us in 2010 w/ Peyton- how did they do? NE was MUCH, MUCH better than us w/ greatest QB of all time- how did they do?  Mark wasn't a great QB but he was a perfect fit for those teams and w/o him we don't win 4 playoff games in 2 years.  I would think 7 years later looking for our first playoff app since then we'd have a greater appreciation.

[nyjunc]

7 hours ago, Smashmouth said:

well you know the QB does not make the call as to when to go to hurry up and he does not make the idiotic calls at the goal line either

and we were supposed to have a great OL and great run game, why couldn't we get in from the 1?  we had an all time great short yardage back in LT and couldn't score but somehow that's the fault of the QB.  Must have been his cadence or the way he handed the ball off?

[Kleckineau]

1 hour ago, nyjunc said:

and we were supposed to have a great OL and great run game, why couldn't we get in from the 1?  we had an all time great short yardage back in LT and couldn't score but somehow that's the fault of the QB.  Must have been his cadence or the way he handed the ball off?

Lol so now LT was a  great goal line back like a Larry Csonka or Christian Okoye. How do you come up with this stuff?

 

[nyjunc]

4 hours ago, Kleckineau said:

Lol so now LT was a  great goal line back like a Larry Csonka or Christian Okoye. How do you come up with this stuff?

 

did you watch football in the 00s? you know he is #2 all time in rush TDs, right?  I'm sure you also know Christian Okoye and Larry Csonka each had 10 or more rush TDs one time in their careers, right?

 

3 or fewer yard TDs:

LT 74

Csonka 45

Okoye 26

 

the real question is how do you come up w/ your stuff?

[southparkcpa]

Get the thread back... Rex is a blowhard below 500 coach who never gave two hoots about offense.

[Sperm Edwards]

6 hours ago, nyjunc said:

oh so now he doesn't get credit for the last TD but Eli gets credit for 2 conf title game winning drives when turnovers gave him the ball in FG position to win. 

The offense did contribute, gave the D a double digit lead in the '09 title game, brought us back to w/in a score in the '10 title game.  do they deserve some blame too? of course, all phases deserve their share just like all phases deserved their share of the playoff win credit but the D was our biggest strength, they deserve most of the credit for the wins and most of the blame for the losses.

the funny thing is so many sup[posed better QBs w/ better teams around them didn't win 4 playoff games(4 road playoff games too).  SD was MUCH better than us w/ the great Philip Rivers- how did we do against them?  Indy was much better than us in 2010 w/ Peyton- how did they do? NE was MUCH, MUCH better than us w/ greatest QB of all time- how did they do?  Mark wasn't a great QB but he was a perfect fit for those teams and w/o him we don't win 4 playoff games in 2 years.  I would think 7 years later looking for our first playoff app since then we'd have a greater appreciation.

Then you think wrong. I see it as a missed opportunity, not a predestined ceiling that could only be circumvented by shutouts.

[Sperm Edwards]

14 hours ago, Smashmouth said:

well you know the QB does not make the call as to when to go to hurry up and he does not make the idiotic calls at the goal line either

Schottenheimer was no offensive genius, but he neither drew up plays for errant/off-target passes, nor did he choose to throw it to a particular receiver even if he was covered, nor did he gameplan the intention of the QB staring at his target to the point where he may as well paint the receiver's helmet red and give him a neon jersey with lights on it.

[ZachEY]

26 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Schottenheimer was no offensive genius, but he neither drew up plays for errant/off-target passes, nor did he choose to throw it to a particular receiver even if he was covered, nor did he gameplan the intention of the QB staring at his target to the point where he may as well paint the receiver's helmet red and give him a neon jersey with lights on it.

All this... You can make plenty of arguments that Schotty was not a good OC for the Jets.  But the length people go to to try and blame him, you'd assume he couldn't tie his shoes without help.  My favorite is the .gif that goes around with the curl routes against the Pats.  In order to actually blame Schotty for the failure of that play, you have to assume that he is actually unaware of how 1st downs work... which is a funny joke to make, but patently absurd in any conversation attempting to be based in reality.

[Kleckineau]

1 hour ago, nyjunc said:

did you watch football in the 00s? you know he is #2 all time in rush TDs, right?  I'm sure you also know Christian Okoye and Larry Csonka each had 10 or more rush TDs one time in their careers, right?

 

3 or fewer yard TDs:

LT 74

Csonka 45

Okoye 26

 

the real question is how do you come up w/ your stuff?

He was great, one of the best ever no doubt but because he had so many more opportunities than most players ever get to score while part of a very high powered SD offense doesnt translate to one of the all time great short yardage backs of all time. Can you cite any expert opinion that puts him # 1-2 or 3  even #10 as the best short yardage back? If you can please do. Sometimes you are funny I will give you that............

 

[Jetsfan80]

15 hours ago, Smashmouth said:

well you know the QB does not make the call as to when to go to hurry up and he does not make the idiotic calls at the goal line either

There's this thing called an "audible" that QB's can do if the call isn't good.  Not sure if Sanchez knew that. 

Why was Peyton Manning so great?  He did most of the work before the snap even occurred, and had the defense right where he wanted them.  Not saying Sanchez deserves to be criticized because he wasn't Peyton, but I am saying is he sucked hard at one of the most important jobs of a QB:  Seeing the field, reading the defense, and making adjustments.

[Jetsfan80]

59 minutes ago, gEYno said:

All this... You can make plenty of arguments that Schotty was not a good OC for the Jets.  But the length people go to to try and blame him, you'd assume he couldn't tie his shoes without help.  My favorite is the .gif that goes around with the curl routes against the Pats.  In order to actually blame Schotty for the failure of that play, you have to assume that he is actually unaware of how 1st downs work... which is a funny joke to make, but patently absurd in any conversation attempting to be based in reality.

 

It's also been pointed out countless times in that gif that Sanchez made the wrong read, and could easily have gotten the first down by making the correct one.

No OC could have worked well with Mark Sanchez.  Not one. 

[nyjunc]

3 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Schottenheimer was no offensive genius, but he neither drew up plays for errant/off-target passes, nor did he choose to throw it to a particular receiver even if he was covered, nor did he gameplan the intention of the QB staring at his target to the point where he may as well paint the receiver's helmet red and give him a neon jersey with lights on it.

actually Brian was a good OC. Mark's career went downhill after Brian left. I think you guys expected perfection out of Mark.  He was a good starter, he was never going to be great.  when he had decent talent around him he did well, when they let that talent go and didn't replace it his career changed. m all of that has nothing to do w/ the defense screwing up[ in the 2 biggest games of the era.

 

One thing I forgot w/ all the "he only scored in one qtr" stuff and the kicker missing kicks in GB excuse, our K missed FGs in the 1st and 3rd qtrs. of the 2009 AFC Championship Game- in a dome, in perfect conditions unlike the 2007 NFC title game.

1 hour ago, Kleckineau said:

He was great, one of the best ever no doubt but because he had so many more opportunities than most players ever get to score while part of a very high powered SD offense doesnt translate to one of the all time great short yardage backs of all time. Can you cite any expert opinion that puts him # 1-2 or 3  even #10 as the best short yardage back? If you can please do. Sometimes you are funny I will give you that............

 

LT was known for his dive over the top, he was known for scoring TDs not for getting stopped.  he wasn't a bruising back in the style of Csonka or Okoye but he was a great goalline back.

 

this was a tough play to stop:

 

do a search, there are a million of these types of photos of him.

[Sperm Edwards]

4 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

actually Brian was a good OC. Mark's career went downhill after Brian left. I think you guys expected perfection out of Mark.  He was a good starter, he was never going to be great.  when he had decent talent around him he did well, when they let that talent go and didn't replace it his career changed. m all of that has nothing to do w/ the defense screwing up[ in the 2 biggest games of the era.

Yes, the only possible step up from Mark Sanchez was perfection. 

[Jetsfan80]

According to Junc, Tannenbaum, Rex, Schottenheimer and Sanchez were all, actually, good.

Soooooo what happened in 2011 and '12 then, exactly?

[Kleckineau]

1 hour ago, nyjunc said:

 

LT was known for his dive over the top, he was known for scoring TDs not for getting stopped.  he wasn't a bruising back in the style of Csonka or Okoye but he was a great goalline back.

 

do a search, there are a million of these types of photos of him.

Sorry you cant differentiate what an all time great short yardage back is and what LT was.

Anyway, I cant do the search you suggest because I am the best short yardage fisherman in the world and I am very busy padding my stats by shooting fish in a barrel .. 

[nyjunc]

14 hours ago, Jetsfan80 said:

According to Junc, Tannenbaum, Rex, Schottenheimer and Sanchez were all, actually, good.

Soooooo what happened in 2011 and '12 then, exactly?

yes they were actually good, it's how we made back to back AFC Championship Games and won 4 road playoff games in the THREE years those guys were together.

2009-2011 w/ those people you mentioned:

28-20 record in reg season

4-2 record in postseason

2 WC wins

2 div rd wins

2 trips to the AFC Championship Game

beat NE 3 times(last 3 yr stretch we beat NE 3 times?  2000 and 2001 before Tom Brady became starting QB)

 

but yeah they sucked and we should bash them all, I was pure luck.  the league just handed us playoff spots and playoff wins.  Thanks NFL!

 

14 hours ago, Kleckineau said:

Sorry you cant differentiate what an all time great short yardage back is and what LT was.

Anyway, I cant do the search you suggest because I am the best short yardage fisherman in the world and I am very busy padding my stats by shooting fish in a barrel .. 

LT was one of the greatest GL backs in pro football history, there's not many guys you'd want if you could choose.  You really should watch football, a guy doesn't become 2nd all time in TDs w/o being a great GL back. Either way we know it's all Mark Sanchez's fault they didn't score there.  He was to blame for every loss and we carried him to every win, right?

14 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Yes, the only possible step up from Mark Sanchez was perfection. 

you are asking for perfection, when Eli leads his team to 17 pts in regulation and wins he's great, when mark does it and loses he cost us the game. mark was vital to both runs but both runs were led by our D, the D that failed to step up in our biggest games those 2 years.

[Sperm Edwards]

3 hours ago, nyjunc said:

you are asking for perfection, when Eli leads his team to 17 pts in regulation and wins he's great, when mark does it and loses he cost us the game. mark was vital to both runs but both runs were led by our D, the D that failed to step up in our biggest games those 2 years.

Kinda cute the way you like to put words into peoples’ mouths, and then find holes in the logic of stances people never took. But if that’s all you’ve got, then that’s all you’ve got. Nobody’s saying Eli is or was great, let alone perfect. Just like your absurd inference that only “perfection” would be better than what Mark provided en route to a 24-0 deficit. 

You merely accept that the 10 net points Mark “led” us to is acceptable, and the 15-net points surrendered by the defense is unacceptable.

And he led us to 10 net points. That’s 10, not 17. TEN. A net of 17 points would have been enough to win the ballgame had Mark not “led” Pittsburgh to a touchdown with both our defense and special teams on the sideline.

I further love how Pittsburgh’s opening drive is magnified into supposedly “setting the tone” for the whole game. Then the very next Steelers possession, even after our own offense punted as usual, but with the score still only 7-0, Bryan Thomas picks off Roethisberger. #toneofthegame That was a clear momentum-transfer, and potential turning point of the game, with Pittsburgh going for the kill on 4th & short instead of trying a 49-yd FG. It’s basically gotten long forgotten, thrown in the garbage as though it never happened, and essentially doesn’t count because our entire offense was too inept to capitalize on it. Instead they went through another one of their 3-and-out possessions, followed by one of Weatherford’s ****ty punts, and a deflated defense had to go right back onto the field. 

But yeah, Pittsburgh getting out to a 24-0 lead was all the defense’s fault. 

[Sperm Edwards]

Look what you dragged me into. I haven’t reminisced this awful memory in detail for literally years.

Thanks for reminding me why the team was stupid to waste a SB-caliber team on that scrub and no other options, a year after drafting Vernon Gholston (whom I’m sure Rex would now also claim he wouldn’t have wanted on draft day). 

• 2008 #6 overall pick on Gholston
• 2008 traded #36 (Jordy Nelson ) and a 4th rounder to move up to #30 for Dustin Keller
• 2009 traded 1st round pick #17 and 2nd round pick #52, plus starter Kenyon Coleman, Abe Elam, and preseason stud Brett Ratliff (laugh all you want, he actually had some trade value back then), to move up to #5 for Mark Sanchez

Also there’s the money we couldn’t use on others.

• Back before the current CBA a #5 pick QB also got a $50m contract with ~$30m in guarantees (compared to the ~$10m in guarantees the #17 overall pick would’ve gotten), the cheap contract for a 2nd rounder, K.Coleman on a reasonable $4m/yr contract (or his trade value, which it seems he had some).
• Gholston’s contract was another with $21m in initial guarantees (some of which he stupidly parlayed 2 years later, and $9m of which he didn’t get because he never attained the $9m escalator for getting just 1 career sack, fumble-cause, fumble-recovery, or interception). But still, the trade value alone for that pick was plenty high with him as the last supposed blue-chip prospect on the board, plus they had to construct the roster such that they figured he’d hit that incentive even by accident.

Then Jenkins was supposed to be the defense’s cornerstone in both 2009 and 2010.

Plus beyond that there was the part that actually wasn’t their fault. The stupid rule that we could only add as much in UFA dollars as they lost, for both the 2010 and 2011 offseasons, because we finished in the final 4. 

Such an opportunity lost. So happy to relive it all. Gracias.

[nyjunc]

1 hour ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Kinda cute the way you like to put words into peoples’ mouths, and then find holes in the logic of stances people never took. But if that’s all you’ve got, then that’s all you’ve got. Nobody’s saying Eli is or was great, let alone perfect. Just like your absurd inference that only “perfection” would be better than what Mark provided en route to a 24-0 deficit. 

You merely accept that the 10 net points Mark “led” us to is acceptable, and the 15-net points surrendered by the defense is unacceptable.

And he led us to 10 net points. That’s 10, not 17. TEN. A net of 17 points would have been enough to win the ballgame had Mark not “led” Pittsburgh to a touchdown with both our defense and special teams on the sideline.

I further love how Pittsburgh’s opening drive is magnified into supposedly “setting the tone” for the whole game. Then the very next Steelers possession, even after our own offense punted as usual, but with the score still only 7-0, Bryan Thomas picks off Roethisberger. #toneofthegame That was a clear momentum-transfer, and potential turning point of the game, with Pittsburgh going for the kill on 4th & short instead of trying a 49-yd FG. It’s basically gotten long forgotten, thrown in the garbage as though it never happened, and essentially doesn’t count because our entire offense was too inept to capitalize on it. Instead they went through another one of their 3-and-out possessions, followed by one of Weatherford’s ****ty punts, and a deflated defense had to go right back onto the field. 

But yeah, Pittsburgh getting out to a 24-0 lead was all the defense’s fault. 

oh net points, now that's cute!  again, I Kurt Warner was responsible for Pitt winning SB XLIII as he only led Ari to 14 net points. 

we have discussed this over and over, let's say Mark just gets sacked there and doesn't fumble.  we are punting from our EZ w/ a bad punter(for us in postseason) and Pitt would have started around midfield w/ plenty of time to score.  at best we hold them to a FG and are down 20-0 which obviously is so much worse than being down 21 at the half like we were.

The bottom line is that we got back w/in 5 points w/ 3 mins to play and 3 TOs and our D couldn't get a stop.

going back to the Bryan Thomas "pick" of Ben.  You do know that was a 4th and 1 at our 32, right? and it was essentially Ben throwing it away.  This was after Pitt took over at their own 13 and drove to our 32 but I'm sure that was the fault of the QB, right? Then the possession after the "huge INT" we tried an end around on 1st down and lost 4 yards so it was 2nd and 14.  what happened next? false start so it was 2nd and 19, obviously it's Mark's fault we didn't get a 1st down on 2nd and 19, right? then our Punter(the same guy who would have been punting had Mark not fumbled) shanks a 29 yarder setting up Pitt at their 38 and they drive all the way down to our 2 before settling for 3.

and talk about putting words into someone's mouth, never have I said the loss or the deficit was all on our D.  I said the D set the tone w/ a near 10 min TD drive to start the game and that's just a fact.  The O couldn't get it going but we got a couple of 1st downs on the 1st drive before penalties set us back, penalties set us back again on the 2nd drive.  It wasn't until the 3rd drive where any blame could be placed on Mark as he has 2 tries w/ 2nd and 7.

 

keep trying though.

[nyjunc]

1 hour ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Look what you dragged me into. I haven’t reminisced this awful memory in detail for literally years.

Thanks for reminding me why the team was stupid to waste a SB-caliber team on that scrub and no other options, a year after drafting Vernon Gholston (whom I’m sure Rex would now also claim he wouldn’t have wanted on draft day). 

• 2008 #6 overall pick on Gholston
• 2008 traded #36 (Jordy Nelson ) and a 4th rounder to move up to #30 for Dustin Keller
• 2009 traded 1st round pick #17 and 2nd round pick #52, plus starter Kenyon Coleman, Abe Elam, and preseason stud Brett Ratliff (laugh all you want, he actually had some trade value back then), to move up to #5 for Mark Sanchez

Also there’s the money we couldn’t use on others.

• Back before the current CBA a #5 pick QB also got a $50m contract with ~$30m in guarantees (compared to the ~$10m in guarantees the #17 overall pick would’ve gotten), the cheap contract for a 2nd rounder, K.Coleman on a reasonable $4m/yr contract (or his trade value, which it seems he had some).
• Gholston’s contract was another with $21m in initial guarantees (some of which he stupidly parlayed 2 years later, and $9m of which he didn’t get because he never attained the $9m escalator for getting just 1 career sack, fumble-cause, fumble-recovery, or interception). But still, the trade value alone for that pick was plenty high with him as the last supposed blue-chip prospect on the board, plus they had to construct the roster such that they figured he’d hit that incentive even by accident.

Then Jenkins was supposed to be the defense’s cornerstone in both 2009 and 2010.

Plus beyond that there was the part that actually wasn’t their fault. The stupid rule that we could only add as much in UFA dollars as they lost, for both the 2010 and 2011 offseasons, because we finished in the final 4. 

Such an opportunity lost. So happy to relive it all. Gracias.

2008 we blew the pick but we did have Mangenous running our draft I thought?

the 2008 pick may not have been Jordy Nelson for us and last I checked we don't have Aaron Rodgers so Jordy wouldn't have turned into Jordy here.

the 2009 trade was a steal, a potential franchise QB for basically nothing.  we gave away backups for our franchise leader in playoff wins.

Jenkins did get hurt, didn't he? and yet we made title games in 2009 and 2010 w/o him.

the final 4 years in 2009/2010 definitely hurt us.  that was beyond our control though.

at least it was an opportunity.  we basically had a 4 year run, Favre ruined one of them and then we got hurt w/ the final 4 rules to ruin the last one where we had to let go of guys the QB was comfortable w/ for aging name players who couldn't play anymore.

[Sperm Edwards]

1 hour ago, nyjunc said:

oh net points, now that's cute!  again, I Kurt Warner was responsible for Pitt winning SB XLIII as he only led Ari to 14 net points. 

we have discussed this over and over, let's say Mark just gets sacked there and doesn't fumble.  we are punting from our EZ w/ a bad punter(for us in postseason) and Pitt would have started around midfield w/ plenty of time to score.  at best we hold them to a FG and are down 20-0 which obviously is so much worse than being down 21 at the half like we were.

The bottom line is that we got back w/in 5 points w/ 3 mins to play and 3 TOs and our D couldn't get a stop.

going back to the Bryan Thomas "pick" of Ben.  You do know that was a 4th and 1 at our 32, right? and it was essentially Ben throwing it away.  This was after Pitt took over at their own 13 and drove to our 32 but I'm sure that was the fault of the QB, right? Then the possession after the "huge INT" we tried an end around on 1st down and lost 4 yards so it was 2nd and 14.  what happened next? false start so it was 2nd and 19, obviously it's Mark's fault we didn't get a 1st down on 2nd and 19, right? then our Punter(the same guy who would have been punting had Mark not fumbled) shanks a 29 yarder setting up Pitt at their 38 and they drive all the way down to our 2 before settling for 3.

and talk about putting words into someone's mouth, never have I said the loss or the deficit was all on our D.  I said the D set the tone w/ a near 10 min TD drive to start the game and that's just a fact.  The O couldn't get it going but we got a couple of 1st downs on the 1st drive before penalties set us back, penalties set us back again on the 2nd drive.  It wasn't until the 3rd drive where any blame could be placed on Mark as he has 2 tries w/ 2nd and 7.

 

keep trying though.

Actually Warner's pick 6 is a big reason for that loss.

You can play what-ifs all you want, like what if he didn't fumble. But he did. And it made the deficit out of reach, even with the D shutting out the Steelers for the rest of the game.

[Sperm Edwards]

1 hour ago, nyjunc said:

2008 we blew the pick but we did have Mangenous running our draft I thought?

the 2008 pick may not have been Jordy Nelson for us and last I checked we don't have Aaron Rodgers so Jordy wouldn't have turned into Jordy here.

the 2009 trade was a steal, a potential franchise QB for basically nothing.  we gave away backups for our franchise leader in playoff wins.

Jenkins did get hurt, didn't he? and yet we made title games in 2009 and 2010 w/o him.

the final 4 years in 2009/2010 definitely hurt us.  that was beyond our control though.

at least it was an opportunity.  we basically had a 4 year run, Favre ruined one of them and then we got hurt w/ the final 4 rules to ruin the last one where we had to let go of guys the QB was comfortable w/ for aging name players who couldn't play anymore.

lol

you are probably the only person I know of who talks like he would again trade up for Mark Sanchez if given the opportunity, throwing around terms like he "led" us to this or that, rather than typically being the weak link in the chain that Jets fans knew him to be.

But you've got your soft spot for him, so carry on.

[nyjunc]

2 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Actually Warner's pick 6 is a big reason for that loss.

You can play what-ifs all you want, like what if he didn't fumble. But he did. And it made the deficit out of reach, even with the D shutting out the Steelers for the rest of the game.

no, the reason for the loss is the D blew it late. 

2 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

lol

you are probably the only person I know of who talks like he would again trade up for Mark Sanchez if given the opportunity, throwing around terms like he "led" us to this or that, rather than typically being the weak link in the chain that Jets fans knew him to be.

But you've got your soft spot for him, so carry on.

that trade was an absolute steal.  where did IK say he "led" us?  I said he is the franchise leader in playoff wins, again the D led us to the title games but Mark was a vital part of those teams.  w/o him we don't make either.  we beat better teams and QBs in that run not only b/c our D played well but b/c our QB played better than their QBs.

[Scott Dierking]

On 11/7/2017 at 1:20 PM, gEYno said:

All this... You can make plenty of arguments that Schotty was not a good OC for the Jets.  But the length people go to to try and blame him, you'd assume he couldn't tie his shoes without help.  My favorite is the .gif that goes around with the curl routes against the Pats.  In order to actually blame Schotty for the failure of that play, you have to assume that he is actually unaware of how 1st downs work... which is a funny joke to make, but patently absurd in any conversation attempting to be based in reality.

If we were to deal in a world of realism on this board, approximately 80% of the posts would need to be removed because people either don't know  what is involved, or because they are working off agenda based biases.

Let's just say objectivity and the search for actual fact-based truths are not requisite.

Part of the fun

[Sperm Edwards]

17 hours ago, nyjunc said:

no, the reason for the loss is the D blew it late. 

that trade was an absolute steal.  where did IK say he "led" us?  I said he is the franchise leader in playoff wins, again the D led us to the title games but Mark was a vital part of those teams.  w/o him we don't make either.  we beat better teams and QBs in that run not only b/c our D played well but b/c our QB played better than their QBs.

I have lost count how many times you have said he "led" us to this or that. If you want to split hairs over the words that mean the same thing - crediting him rather than the team with playoff wins - you can go ahead and have fun with it.

The reason for the loss is the offense didn't score enough early, and added to the deficit by putting points on the board for the other team. Lousy start as the D got out to, it wouldn't have meant much if the offense didn't keep giving the ball back on every possession without scoring (until they scored a TD for the other team, of course). 

[UnitedWhofans]

Why isn’t this at 100 pages yet?

[nyjunc]

6 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I have lost count how many times you have said he "led" us to this or that. If you want to split hairs over the words that mean the same thing - crediting him rather than the team with playoff wins - you can go ahead and have fun with it.

The reason for the loss is the offense didn't score enough early, and added to the deficit by putting points on the board for the other team. Lousy start as the D got out to, it wouldn't have meant much if the offense didn't keep giving the ball back on every possession without scoring (until they scored a TD for the other team, of course). 

can you please show examples? if I do it all the time it should be easy. 

I have always said the D led us but Mark was vital to both runs. 

yep, the OP was down 10 mins into the game before they got on the field but obviously it was their fault.

let's ignore the game being as one score game w/ 3 mins and 3 TOs as the D allowed Pitt to run out the clock, it was all our O's fault.