Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, nyjunc said:

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.:lol:

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.

I just gave you an example. Repeating "he" has more wins than blah blah blah is crediting this one person with the wins, as you've done countless times, while blaming anyone you can point your finger at for the losses (the OC, the defense, the boogeyman, etc.). The difference between that, and saying he led the team is simply a matter of mincing words. 

Only your hand-picked favorites are absolved for the lack of scoring a TD before the safety, and eating up all that 4th quarter clock while they were down 2 TDs, leaving the D with so little room for error, where merely shutting out the opposition, as well as causing a turnover on the very first play of Pittsburgh's possession, is still considered a failure to some. Some, like yourself.

It's meaningless to you; the offense can eat up the last minute of the 3rd quarter and the first 12 minutes of the 4th quarter to score a single TD while they were down by two TDs. It's all the fault of the other side of the ball, so you can relish in propping up your favorite bad QB. Even when the offense stalls on the 1 and the defense puts points on the board themselves as well as gets the offense the ball back in 1 play. Meaningless. Like it was some foregone conclusion we were going to score what would have been an 80+ yard drive in about 2 minutes, without the opportunity to mix things up or dumpoff their way down the field like on the 2 prior possessions with Pittsburgh allowing a lot of stuff underneath. 

Even at 17-0, if the offense scored a TD to close out the half  instead of fumble-scoring a TD for Pittsburgh, then we open the 2nd half with the football, down 17-7. It's a normal ballgame not a longshot comeback from a blowout. Instead, the score was 24-0 before a late FG. A 24-point lead that would ultimately prove too large to overcome with offense eating up roughly a quarter of late clock to score 1 TD.

The entire team didn't play its very best, and they needed to. But nobody actually expects the defense, on the road in the playoffs, to overcome the offense scoring 17 while spotting the other team 7 (net 10 points). But it's not unreasonable to expect a win if the defense lets up 17 and scores 2 on a safety (net 15 points). The points surrendered by the D was about as good as one could reasonably hope to get as we entered the game.

I can only imagine the assessment if they truly had a horrible game and gave up 24, 31, 45, whatever. Surrendering 17 while scoring 2? Meh.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 257
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Rex certainly had his flaws as a HC.  There were many.  But, nothing he's quoted as saying in this article is inaccurate.

When Rex Ryan speaks about QB's, you better listen. He is like a modern day Bill Walsh with the QB position

LOL. Yeah, Rex, you knew all along and nothing's ever your fault. You tattooed him next to your wife's feet. c-l-o-w-n

Posted Images

Sanchez was not a good qb. One of my favorite Jets early in his career (he flashed at times & had a lot of fun on the field). But he was not good.

A lot of jets fans have a hard time with this. Or want to say, but he wasn’t “terrible.” He wasn’t good either. He didn’t lead squat

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I just gave you an example. Repeating "he" has more wins than blah blah blah is crediting this one person with the wins, as you've done countless times, while blaming anyone you can point your finger at for the losses (the OC, the defense, the boogeyman, etc.). The difference between that, and saying he led the team is simply a matter of mincing words. 

Only your hand-picked favorites are absolved for the lack of scoring a TD before the safety, and eating up all that 4th quarter clock while they were down 2 TDs, leaving the D with so little room for error, where merely shutting out the opposition, as well as causing a turnover on the very first play of Pittsburgh's possession, is still considered a failure to some. Some, like yourself.

It's meaningless to you; the offense can eat up the last minute of the 3rd quarter and the first 12 minutes of the 4th quarter to score a single TD while they were down by two TDs. It's all the fault of the other side of the ball, so you can relish in propping up your favorite bad QB. Even when the offense stalls on the 1 and the defense puts points on the board themselves as well as gets the offense the ball back in 1 play. Meaningless. Like it was some foregone conclusion we were going to score what would have been an 80+ yard drive in about 2 minutes, without the opportunity to mix things up or dumpoff their way down the field like on the 2 prior possessions with Pittsburgh allowing a lot of stuff underneath. 

Even at 17-0, if the offense scored a TD to close out the half  instead of fumble-scoring a TD for Pittsburgh, then we open the 2nd half with the football, down 17-7. It's a normal ballgame not a longshot comeback from a blowout. Instead, the score was 24-0 before a late FG. A 24-point lead that would ultimately prove too large to overcome with offense eating up roughly a quarter of late clock to score 1 TD.

The entire team didn't play its very best, and they needed to. But nobody actually expects the defense, on the road in the playoffs, to overcome the offense scoring 17 while spotting the other team 7 (net 10 points). But it's not unreasonable to expect a win if the defense lets up 17 and scores 2 on a safety (net 15 points). The points surrendered by the D was about as good as one could reasonably hope to get as we entered the game.

I can only imagine the assessment if they truly had a horrible game and gave up 24, 31, 45, whatever. Surrendering 17 while scoring 2? Meh.

That is not an example at all, that is just a fact.  Again, I have always said the D led us there but Mark was vital.

did they have 3 mins and 3 TOs?

it was 3rd and 17, the biggest mistake was dropping back to pass near our EZ in that situation but you wanted us to convert 3rd and 17 then go down and score a TD.  yeah if that happens we have a much better chance but there was a better chance of Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny meeting at midfield at halftime.

nobody expects the D to overcome the O scoring 17, amazingly the Giants scored 17 in regulation on the road a year later and won. Using your logic I guess the O was why we beat NE?  The D allowed 21 points, how often do "great" D's allow 21 pts in a playoff game?

it's not just about points, I have talked about the 2010 opener where we lost 10-9 and the D was atrocious. they allowed Pitt to control the game, they set the tone from the first play and Pitt got conservative w/ the big lead but when they needed to make a play they did and our D could not.

It was a team loss but the D was the biggest reason we lost.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, nyjunc said:

That is not an example at all, that is just a fact.  Again, I have always said the D led us there but Mark was vital.

did they have 3 mins and 3 TOs?

it was 3rd and 17, the biggest mistake was dropping back to pass near our EZ in that situation but you wanted us to convert 3rd and 17 then go down and score a TD.  yeah if that happens we have a much better chance but there was a better chance of Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny meeting at midfield at halftime.

nobody expects the D to overcome the O scoring 17, amazingly the Giants scored 17 in regulation on the road a year later and won. Using your logic I guess the O was why we beat NE?  The D allowed 21 points, how often do "great" D's allow 21 pts in a playoff game?

it's not just about points, I have talked about the 2010 opener where we lost 10-9 and the D was atrocious. they allowed Pitt to control the game, they set the tone from the first play and Pitt got conservative w/ the big lead but when they needed to make a play they did and our D could not.

It was a team loss but the D was the biggest reason we lost.

Yawn. The amount of net positive points the offense needed to overcome, for the entire game, was 15.

It is beyond reason to suggest 10 net points is adequate enough in a road playoff game. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rex Ryan is great because he got us to two afc title games

Mark Sanchez is great because he got us to two afc title games.

Tom Coughlin is garbage because his two super bowl wins were fluky.

Eli Manning is garbage because his two super bowl wins were fluky.

Phillip Rivers, Brett Favre and Peyton Manning are all overated schmucks and Mark Sanchez is soooo totally underrated.

So sayeth the twisted logic of nyjuc, the finest assessor of Qb and coaching talent this league or any other league has seen.

  • Upvote 2
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Beerfish said:

Rex Ryan is great because he got us to two afc title games

Mark Sanchez is great because he got us to two afc title games.

Tom Coughlin is garbage because his two super bowl wins were fluky.

Eli Manning is garbage because his two super bowl wins were fluky.

Phillip Rivers, Brett Favre and Peyton Manning are all overated schmucks and Mark Sanchez is soooo totally underrated.

So sayeth the twisted logic of nyjuc, the finest assessor of Qb and coaching talent this league or any other league has seen.

Please ....  get with the program. facts and super bowls don't matter. Only opinion that can't be proven right and wrong.   The fact that REX and Mark, other than 2 years, have absolutely shlt the bed professionally and have absolutely contributed to their teams well below 500 record means nothing.  😀

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Beerfish said:

Rex Ryan is great because he got us to two afc title games

Mark Sanchez is great because he got us to two afc title games.

Tom Coughlin is garbage because his two super bowl wins were fluky.

Eli Manning is garbage because his two super bowl wins were fluky.

Phillip Rivers, Brett Favre and Peyton Manning are all overated schmucks and Mark Sanchez is soooo totally underrated.

So sayeth the twisted logic of nyjuc, the finest assessor of Qb and coaching talent this league or any other league has seen.

all this tells me is that you haven't read a single one of my posts and if you have it's frightening how poor your reading comprehension is.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, southparkcpa said:

Please ....  get with the program. facts and super bowls don't matter. Only opinion that can't be proven right and wrong.   The fact that REX and Mark, other than 2 years, have absolutely shlt the bed professionally and have absolutely contributed to their teams well below 500 record means nothing.  😀

do you ever add anything of substance to this board?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Beerfish said:

Rex Ryan is great because he got us to two afc title games

Mark Sanchez is great because he got us to two afc title games.

Tom Coughlin is garbage because his two super bowl wins were fluky.

Eli Manning is garbage because his two super bowl wins were fluky.

Phillip Rivers, Brett Favre and Peyton Manning are all overated schmucks and Mark Sanchez is soooo totally underrated.

So sayeth the twisted logic of nyjuc, the finest assessor of Qb and coaching talent this league or any other league has seen.

Don't forget that Belichick is nothing and that UNC basketball does everything the right way.

  • Upvote 1
  • Post of the Week 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎11‎/‎10‎/‎2017 at 5:10 PM, southparkcpa said:

YES.....   agreeing with the almost all posters that you are full of shlt.😀

and yet not one of you can counter my arguments in a rational, intelligent way. I would just love for any of you guys to actually counter an argument, it would be more fun that way rather than shaking my head knowing you never actually read my posts.  It's your perception of what I am posting and that perception is wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...