Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Biggs said:

He was the cornerstone player on two AFC Finals.  The Jets have been to 5 of them in our history.  He was the single best player we ever drafted.  He absolutely was a Jets "hero" in the sense that he made the Jets a much better team and competitive for a championship.

It's pro-football, guys are playing for money.  They are drafted onto teams with no bargaining power on where they go and in most cases there salaries are slotted.

I have no issue with Revis demanding full value.  I have no issue with Robbie or Adams wanting to get paid.  I have no issue with our management making decisions on what's best for the team.   Revis was fantastic, our defense was built around him.  We had one of the great defenses in the modern era because of him.  He was not good he was flat out great.   

Robbie outplayed his contract and deserved every penny he got. Adana shot himself out of town and still hasn’t got paid. Revis held out and cane beck out of shake. Then cane back and stoned cold robbed the Jets. But him and Jamal held out for what they were worth. Cool story bro. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 133
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Outside of Joe Namath, Wilson is by far the most talented qb we have ever had. What an exciting time to be a jet fan.

Maybe he should play a game first? First off Namath was slightly above average and he isn't  more talented than Favre. 

Yea professional deep dive on Zach Wilson....  Sweet Listen ... Teaser his coach  thinks he is more talwnted than Rogers..  

Posted Images

Just now, The Crusher said:

Robbie outplayed his contract and deserved every penny he got. Adana shot himself out of town and still hasn’t got paid. Revis held out and cane beck out of shake. Then cane back and stoned cold robbed the Jets. But him and Jamal held out for what they were worth. Cool story bro. 

Revis was out of football shape which was completely understandable. When he got in football shape he was better in 2010 than 2009. Don't compare the greatest player in Jets history to these other guys

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, The Crusher said:

Robbie outplayed his contract and deserved every penny he got. Adana shot himself out of town and still hasn’t got paid. Revis held out and cane beck out of shake. Then cane back and stoned cold robbed the Jets. But him and Jamal held out for what they were worth. Cool story bro. 

Thanks bro!

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Biggs said:

We had a 3 year window with Joe.  The first year 67 both Snell and Boozer went down and we had no running game.  In 68 we won the SB.   We lost in the AFC Finals to a great KC team in 69 under terrible conditions.   Namath was hurt in 1970,  Maynard was hurt in 1970 and went into sharp decline.  Philbin played 7 games in 1970, Verlon Biggs left after 1970 and Namath was constantly injured and pretty much done.  He had one good year in 1972 with a team that was not anywhere close to staked.   A championship and an AFC finals with a really good team that was healthy.  We simply weren't that good or healthy in any other year. 

The way I see it:

In 66 the Jets started 4-0-1 . But then Namath was feeling himself and wanted to sling the ball around because he had to be the hero. They then went 2-6-1 to finish at 6-6-2 in third place. Two games stick out. In each Namath threw 5 Int's. A tie with the Raiders and a 10 point loss to the Bills. Make those wins and the Jets win the division and play KC in the AFL Championship for the right to go to the SB. OK., they probably lose to KC, but now they've taken the first step and made the playoffs and are ready to takeoff on 67.

In 67 they finish 8-5-1 one game back of division winner Houston. They tied Houston 28-28 that season. In the game, after opening a 17-0 lead in the first half Namath threw 6 Ints  for a total of 214 return yards- 2 were pick 6's for 94 of those yards. If Namath keeps it in his pants for that game, the Jets would have won the division and faced the Raiders in the playoffs. In the second to last game of the regular season the Jets lost 39-28 to the Raiders in Oakland after having a 14-10 lead at halftime. The game was close and the Jets outgained the the Raiders. There is no doubt in my mind that if that Jet team got to go back out to Oakland 2 weeks later they would have won and went to the SB -- and very likely have lost.

In 68 - they win the SB. By the way, the Jets had 3 regular season losses. A 2 point loss to the Bills where Namath threw 5 Ints - 3 pick 6's for 198 return yards!  An 8 point loss to the Broncos - 5 interceptions by Namath. The final loss was the Heidi game - improbable and not Namath's fault. He played great. But, I often think of how much more that game would sting if it was the only loss for the Jets that season

In 69 Jets win their division and lost to KC 13-6 in the first round. They blew 2 red zone chances in the 4th quarter and lost 13-6. Namath? He went 14-40-164 with 3 Ints. The D played great. Namath threw the ball 40 times! Why? Snell and Boozer had 15 rushes for 75 yards.  Why did Namath continue to call his own number when he was having a bad day? Because that is what Namath does. Why let his teammates win when he can try to be the hero instead. This team, when allowed to use its dominant run attack (which Namath hated) was unstoppable. If Namath called all games like he did the SB, they would have beaten KC, Oakland and Minnesota to win their second straight SB.

Then Namath was beset by injuries and the era of Championship football is over. As speculative and irrational as some might think I am being (and I respect that if you do) as far as I am concerned, if Namath called every game like he did SB III, the Jets go to 3 straight SBs and win 2. The Jets team of the late 60s was THAT good. The D was ferocious, the O line dominant, Maynard took the lid off the D and Boozer and Snell were the best tandem backfield in professional football. If only Namath had just relied on them instead of putting his dick on display every game... 

  • Post of the Week 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Sonny Werblin said:

The way I see it:

In 66 the Jets started 4-0-1 . But then Namath was feeling himself and wanted to sling the ball around because he had to be the hero. They then went 2-6-1 to finish at 6-6-2 in third place. Two games stick out. In each Namath threw 5 Int's. A tie with the Raiders and a 10 point loss to the Bills. Make those wins and the Jets win the division and play KC in the AFL Championship for the right to go to the SB. OK., they probably lose to KC, but now they've taken the first step and made the playoffs and are ready to takeoff on 67.

In 67 they finish 8-5-1 one game back of division winner Houston. They tied Houston 28-28 that season. In the game, after opening a 17-0 lead in the first half Namath threw 6 Ints  for a total of 214 return yards- 2 were pick 6's for 94 of those yards. If Namath keeps it in his pants for that game, the Jets would have won the division and faced the Raiders in the playoffs. In the second to last game of the regular season the Jets lost 39-28 to the Raiders in Oakland after having a 14-10 lead at halftime. The game was close and the Jets outgained the the Raiders. There is no doubt in my mind that if that Jet team got to go back out to Oakland 2 weeks later they would have won and went to the SB -- and very likely have lost.

In 68 - they win the SB. By the way, the Jets had 3 regular season losses. A 2 point loss to the Bills where Namath threw 5 Ints - 3 pick 6's for 198 return yards!  An 8 point loss to the Broncos - 5 interceptions by Namath. The final loss was the Heidi game - improbable and not Namath's fault. He played great. But, I often think of how much more that game would sting if it was the only loss for the Jets that season

In 69 Jets win their division and lost to KC 13-6 in the first round. They blew 2 red zone chances in the 4th quarter and lost 13-6. Namath? He went 14-40-164 with 3 Ints. The D played great. Namath threw the ball 40 times! Why? Snell and Boozer had 15 rushes for 75 yards.  Why did Namath continue to call his own number when he was having a bad day? Because that is what Namath does. Why let his teammates win when he can try to be the hero instead. This team, when allowed to use its dominant run attack (which Namath hated) was unstoppable. If Namath called all games like he did the SB, they would have beaten KC, Oakland and Minnesota to win their second straight SB.

Then Namath was beset by injuries and the era of Championship football is over. As speculative and irrational as some might think I am being (and I respect that if you do) as far as I am concerned, if Namath called every game like he did SB III, the Jets go to 3 straight SBs and win 2. The Jets team of the late 60s was THAT good. The D was ferocious, the O line dominant, Maynard took the lid off the D and Boozer and Snell were the best tandem backfield in professional football. If only Namath had just relied on them instead of putting his dick on display every game... 

This seems like a lot of energy to try to dislike a player who got us to the promised land for the only time in our history, is probably the most famous living player from the pre-merger, and is still himself a vocal and passionate fan of the Jets to this day.

Even though this demonstrates exactly what I've been preaching, this is even too much for me lol.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, jgb said:

This seems like a lot of energy to try to dislike a player who got us to the promised land for the only time in our history, is probably the most famous living player from the pre-merger, and is still himself a vocal and passionate fan of the Jets to this day.

I've been accused of dwelling on the negative and even though this demonstrates exactly what I've been preaching, this is even too much for me lol.

Hey, we all gotta have at least one obsession, right? 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, The Crusher said:

Robbie outplayed his contract and deserved every penny he got. Adana shot himself out of town and still hasn’t got paid. Revis held out and cane beck out of shake. Then cane back and stoned cold robbed the Jets. But him and Jamal held out for what they were worth. Cool story bro. 

Shame on who?

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sonny Werblin said:

Hey, we all gotta have at least one obsession, right? 

How do you feel about Greg Dortch?

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jgb said:

How do you feel about Greg Dortch?

I don't know? Has he ever thrown 5 Interceptions for 2 pick 6s and over 200 return yards in a crucial winnable game?  If he has, I can make some room for him on my board.

 

 

Inkedtumblr_o16n2kBlpX1ta3qyvo1_1280_LI.jpg

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/15/2021 at 10:51 PM, More Cowbell said:

Namath was totally a hero Jet but the numbers don't  say he was a great QB.

He was a great quarterback in his era, both in college and in the AFL.

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

The way I see it:

In 66 the Jets started 4-0-1 . But then Namath was feeling himself and wanted to sling the ball around because he had to be the hero. They then went 2-6-1 to finish at 6-6-2 in third place. Two games stick out. In each Namath threw 5 Int's. A tie with the Raiders and a 10 point loss to the Bills. Make those wins and the Jets win the division and play KC in the AFL Championship for the right to go to the SB. OK., they probably lose to KC, but now they've taken the first step and made the playoffs and are ready to takeoff on 67.

In 67 they finish 8-5-1 one game back of division winner Houston. They tied Houston 28-28 that season. In the game, after opening a 17-0 lead in the first half Namath threw 6 Ints  for a total of 214 return yards- 2 were pick 6's for 94 of those yards. If Namath keeps it in his pants for that game, the Jets would have won the division and faced the Raiders in the playoffs. In the second to last game of the regular season the Jets lost 39-28 to the Raiders in Oakland after having a 14-10 lead at halftime. The game was close and the Jets outgained the the Raiders. There is no doubt in my mind that if that Jet team got to go back out to Oakland 2 weeks later they would have won and went to the SB -- and very likely have lost.

In 68 - they win the SB. By the way, the Jets had 3 regular season losses. A 2 point loss to the Bills where Namath threw 5 Ints - 3 pick 6's for 198 return yards!  An 8 point loss to the Broncos - 5 interceptions by Namath. The final loss was the Heidi game - improbable and not Namath's fault. He played great. But, I often think of how much more that game would sting if it was the only loss for the Jets that season

In 69 Jets win their division and lost to KC 13-6 in the first round. They blew 2 red zone chances in the 4th quarter and lost 13-6. Namath? He went 14-40-164 with 3 Ints. The D played great. Namath threw the ball 40 times! Why? Snell and Boozer had 15 rushes for 75 yards.  Why did Namath continue to call his own number when he was having a bad day? Because that is what Namath does. Why let his teammates win when he can try to be the hero instead. This team, when allowed to use its dominant run attack (which Namath hated) was unstoppable. If Namath called all games like he did the SB, they would have beaten KC, Oakland and Minnesota to win their second straight SB.

Then Namath was beset by injuries and the era of Championship football is over. As speculative and irrational as some might think I am being (and I respect that if you do) as far as I am concerned, if Namath called every game like he did SB III, the Jets go to 3 straight SBs and win 2. The Jets team of the late 60s was THAT good. The D was ferocious, the O line dominant, Maynard took the lid off the D and Boozer and Snell were the best tandem backfield in professional football. If only Namath had just relied on them instead of putting his dick on display every game... 

This post is one hell of a flex.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, ryu79 said:

This post is one hell of a flex.

In just 4 games in the the 66 and 67 seasons he had 21 interceptions, 6 pick 6's and over 500 yards in interception return yards. C'mon Man! You are Joe freaking Namath! How can you be so so stupid and mind-bogglingly habitually careless with the ball! 

Seriously, I would put those games up against the worst 4 games of any QB in the history of pro football. And the tragedy isn't that Namath was bad. The tragedy is that he had those games because his brain could never overcome his penchant for loving to show off that miraculous arm.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, More Cowbell said:

I can't  believe we are actually looking for ways to make a T/O acceptable 

Hes right.

 

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

From Zach’s Instagram....ahh 😊  

F0442031-AA5E-4D94-A7C1-D96D3F4796D7.png

F9F630DC-D3E8-4D9E-B539-E9BDB5D03813.png

Love that he seemed to be the last guy on the practice field when he took that one. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, More Cowbell said:

I know,  they are great things. I hope Zack throws one on every deep pass so we don’t  have to punt. 

Yeah, way to keep driving home that youre lost here

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Sonny Werblin said:

The way I see it:

In 66 the Jets started 4-0-1 . But then Namath was feeling himself and wanted to sling the ball around because he had to be the hero. They then went 2-6-1 to finish at 6-6-2 in third place. Two games stick out. In each Namath threw 5 Int's. A tie with the Raiders and a 10 point loss to the Bills. Make those wins and the Jets win the division and play KC in the AFL Championship for the right to go to the SB. OK., they probably lose to KC, but now they've taken the first step and made the playoffs and are ready to takeoff on 67.

In 67 they finish 8-5-1 one game back of division winner Houston. They tied Houston 28-28 that season. In the game, after opening a 17-0 lead in the first half Namath threw 6 Ints  for a total of 214 return yards- 2 were pick 6's for 94 of those yards. If Namath keeps it in his pants for that game, the Jets would have won the division and faced the Raiders in the playoffs. In the second to last game of the regular season the Jets lost 39-28 to the Raiders in Oakland after having a 14-10 lead at halftime. The game was close and the Jets outgained the the Raiders. There is no doubt in my mind that if that Jet team got to go back out to Oakland 2 weeks later they would have won and went to the SB -- and very likely have lost.

In 68 - they win the SB. By the way, the Jets had 3 regular season losses. A 2 point loss to the Bills where Namath threw 5 Ints - 3 pick 6's for 198 return yards!  An 8 point loss to the Broncos - 5 interceptions by Namath. The final loss was the Heidi game - improbable and not Namath's fault. He played great. But, I often think of how much more that game would sting if it was the only loss for the Jets that season

In 69 Jets win their division and lost to KC 13-6 in the first round. They blew 2 red zone chances in the 4th quarter and lost 13-6. Namath? He went 14-40-164 with 3 Ints. The D played great. Namath threw the ball 40 times! Why? Snell and Boozer had 15 rushes for 75 yards.  Why did Namath continue to call his own number when he was having a bad day? Because that is what Namath does. Why let his teammates win when he can try to be the hero instead. This team, when allowed to use its dominant run attack (which Namath hated) was unstoppable. If Namath called all games like he did the SB, they would have beaten KC, Oakland and Minnesota to win their second straight SB.

Then Namath was beset by injuries and the era of Championship football is over. As speculative and irrational as some might think I am being (and I respect that if you do) as far as I am concerned, if Namath called every game like he did SB III, the Jets go to 3 straight SBs and win 2. The Jets team of the late 60s was THAT good. The D was ferocious, the O line dominant, Maynard took the lid off the D and Boozer and Snell were the best tandem backfield in professional football. If only Namath had just relied on them instead of putting his dick on display every game... 

In 1967, Namath's 3rd year starting in the AFL, the average completion percentage in the passing game was 47.6, Namath was at 52.5.  The average INT percentage was 5.9, Namath was at 5.7.  The average TD percentage was 4.9, Namath was at 5.3.  The average Y/A was 6.7, Namath was at 8.2. The average adjusted yards per attempt was 5.0, Namath was 6.3

In 1967 the Jets had one of the worst running games in the AFL.  They were tied for second worst with 3.4 per attempt.  Out of 9 teams only 3 had a YPA under 4.1.  The Jets were under 3.5.  That's despite the pass heavy attack.  

Namath was destroying the averages despite the rule book and the other teams knowing they had to stop him to beat the NY Jets.  

To your assertion that the Jets win multiple championships with Namath playing like he did in the SB I disagree.  Had the Jets gone into that SB game with a run heavy attack on film the Colts might well have killed us.  They were completely intent on stopping Namath and that's why it worked.  The Colts and their HC were essentially psyched out by Namath.  He baited them into stopping him.

The modern NFL passing game that we have today evolved.  Much of that evolution took place in the 1960's.  Guys like Namath, Jurgensen, Hadl, Lamonica, Tarkenton and Unitas were starting to throw the ball down the field.  The rules and lack of coaching in the passing game vastly favored running the football.  Namath and the AFL were part of that evolution.  I watched a clip in an interview with Sonny Jurgensen recently.  He was one of the greatest passers in the game.  He said the only HC he had that he got any coaching from and had any understanding of the passing game was Vince Lombardi.   Namath didn't have Lombardi or Stram, he had an old school HC.  He came into the league as a running QB who couldn't run.  He lifted the Jets, the league and was instrumental in developing the modern passing game that we have today.   Without context looking at his INT's as if they were part of the modern passing game seems absurd to me.  

The Jets had great teams but they also had injuries and were not particularly deep teams.  Boozer, Snell and Philbin all broke down in that era.  Namath broke down after the 69 season.  Biggs left in 1970.  Sauer simply quit.   It was a great run but the Jets simply didn't have the depth to win with a pound the ball and play defense mantra and win multiple championships. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Biggs said:

In 1967, Namath's 3rd year starting in the AFL, the average completion percentage in the passing game was 47.6, Namath was at 52.5.  The average INT percentage was 5.9, Namath was at 5.7.  The average TD percentage was 4.9, Namath was at 5.3.  The average Y/A was 6.7, Namath was at 8.2. The average adjusted yards per attempt was 5.0, Namath was 6.3

In 1967 the Jets had one of the worst running games in the AFL.  They were tied for second worst with 3.4 per attempt.  Out of 9 teams only 3 had a YPA under 4.1.  The Jets were under 3.5.  That's despite the pass heavy attack.  

Namath was destroying the averages despite the rule book and the other teams knowing they had to stop him to beat the NY Jets.  

To your assertion that the Jets win multiple championships with Namath playing like he did in the SB I disagree.  Had the Jets gone into that SB game with a run heavy attack on film the Colts might well have killed us.  They were completely intent on stopping Namath and that's why it worked.  The Colts and their HC were essentially psyched out by Namath.  He baited them into stopping him.

The modern NFL passing game that we have today evolved.  Much of that evolution took place in the 1960's.  Guys like Namath, Jurgensen, Hadl, Lamonica, Tarkenton and Unitas were starting to throw the ball down the field.  The rules and lack of coaching in the passing game vastly favored running the football.  Namath and the AFL were part of that evolution.  I watched a clip in an interview with Sonny Jurgensen recently.  He was one of the greatest passers in the game.  He said the only HC he had that he got any coaching from and had any understanding of the passing game was Vince Lombardi.   Namath didn't have Lombardi or Stram, he had an old school HC.  He came into the league as a running QB who couldn't run.  He lifted the Jets, the league and was instrumental in developing the modern passing game that we have today.   Without context looking at his INT's as if they were part of the modern passing game seems absurd to me.  

The Jets had great teams but they also had injuries and were not particularly deep teams.  Boozer, Snell and Philbin all broke down in that era.  Namath broke down after the 69 season.  Biggs left in 1970.  Sauer simply quit.   It was a great run but the Jets simply didn't have the depth to win with a pound the ball and play defense mantra and win multiple championships. 

Rudy Clap GIFs | Tenor

But people who "hate" on Darnold -- the worst passer in the NFL for 3 years -- are self-hating SOJF nincompoops.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Biggs said:

In 1967, Namath's 3rd year starting in the AFL, the average completion percentage in the passing game was 47.6, Namath was at 52.5.  The average INT percentage was 5.9, Namath was at 5.7.  The average TD percentage was 4.9, Namath was at 5.3.  The average Y/A was 6.7, Namath was at 8.2. The average adjusted yards per attempt was 5.0, Namath was 6.3

In 1967 the Jets had one of the worst running games in the AFL.  They were tied for second worst with 3.4 per attempt.  Out of 9 teams only 3 had a YPA under 4.1.  The Jets were under 3.5.  That's despite the pass heavy attack.  

Namath was destroying the averages despite the rule book and the other teams knowing they had to stop him to beat the NY Jets.  

To your assertion that the Jets win multiple championships with Namath playing like he did in the SB I disagree.  Had the Jets gone into that SB game with a run heavy attack on film the Colts might well have killed us.  They were completely intent on stopping Namath and that's why it worked.  The Colts and their HC were essentially psyched out by Namath.  He baited them into stopping him.

The modern NFL passing game that we have today evolved.  Much of that evolution took place in the 1960's.  Guys like Namath, Jurgensen, Hadl, Lamonica, Tarkenton and Unitas were starting to throw the ball down the field.  The rules and lack of coaching in the passing game vastly favored running the football.  Namath and the AFL were part of that evolution.  I watched a clip in an interview with Sonny Jurgensen recently.  He was one of the greatest passers in the game.  He said the only HC he had that he got any coaching from and had any understanding of the passing game was Vince Lombardi.   Namath didn't have Lombardi or Stram, he had an old school HC.  He came into the league as a running QB who couldn't run.  He lifted the Jets, the league and was instrumental in developing the modern passing game that we have today.   Without context looking at his INT's as if they were part of the modern passing game seems absurd to me.  

The Jets had great teams but they also had injuries and were not particularly deep teams.  Boozer, Snell and Philbin all broke down in that era.  Namath broke down after the 69 season.  Biggs left in 1970.  Sauer simply quit.   It was a great run but the Jets simply didn't have the depth to win with a pound the ball and play defense mantra and win multiple championships. 

I will not allow your logic to diminish my disdain for "Myway Joe". He was never a team guy. Weeb had to force the players to vote him captain. He cared only for himself and his stat line. I could care less what he did off the field, but he never took practice seriously and did not care one iota for his teammates. He was sublimely talented and rode that talent alone. He considered himself a solo act. He was no leader or field general. The only thing he had other than his ridiculous level of talent for throwing the ball was his toughness. At one point he also had athleticism, but that ship sailed after he blew out his knee in the Orange Bowl vs Texas.

This is an excellent book to gain an understanding into Namath. I highly recommend it. And, make no mistake about it, while I hate Namath for what he left on the table because of his selfishness, I also love him for everything else. But hate trumps love in this instance.

2LttIGhZtWIC?fife=w200-h300

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Jet Nut said:

Yeah, way to keep driving home that youre lost here

I gotta say, i don't  know what has gotten into you. It's  almost like you are looking to pick a fight every chance you get. 

Here is something you and the guy that thought a deep pick is not so bad are not considering, picks get run back. So a deep pick can turn into a negative yardage play. A pick is never acceptable. 

Add that to the fact that you are giving away a drive you have a chance to score on and giving the the opponent an additional drive on O and putting your D on the field for a longer period of time, it is just a wonderful situation.

I mean a pick is so bad, they actually have a TD to int ratio to measure how good a QB is. 

Got anymore things you would like to add that picks are acceptable? 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, More Cowbell said:

I gotta say, i don't  know what has gotten into you. It's  almost like you are looking to pick a fight every chance you get. 

Here is something you and the guy that thought a deep pick is not so bad are not considering, picks get run back. So a deep pick can turn into a negative yardage play. A pick is never acceptable. 

The "INT is like a punt" philosophy is really only valid when it's a hail mary situation. Turning over the ball on 3rd (or 1st or 2nd) down is never equivalent to punting on 4th. Even running for 4 yards on 3rd-and-impossible and then punting from there is better than chucking an INT on 3rd. And like you've said, long picks can turn into long returns if the intended target isn't able to bring the inteceptor down since on deep plays the offense is very spread out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Sonny Werblin said:

I will not allow your logic to diminish my disdain for "Myway Joe". He was never a team guy. Weeb had to force the players to vote him captain. He cared only for himself and his stat line. I could care less what he did off the field, but he never took practice seriously and did not care one iota for his teammates. He was sublimely talented and rode that talent alone. He considered himself a solo act. He was no leader or field general. The only thing he had other than his ridiculous level of talent for throwing the ball was his toughness. At one point he also had athleticism, but that ship sailed after he blew out his knee in the Orange Bowl vs Texas.

This is an excellent book to gain an understanding into Namath. I highly recommend it. And, make no mistake about it, while I hate Namath for what he left on the table because of his selfishness, I also love him for everything else. But hate trumps love in this instance.

2LttIGhZtWIC?fife=w200-h300

I read it good read.  Practice?  The guy could barely walk without pain.  He was medicated on booze and pain killers his entire career.  He was a drug addict no different than Mantle and many other athletes at the time.  

Football, particularly in that era was the modern day version of the Gladiators.  You drank, you injected pain killers and you got your ass on the field.  Namath was the emobdement of the gladiator.  He was surviving he wasn't part of the team.  He wasn't signed to be a member of the team.  He was signed to save the league financially.  

He was a highly flawed guy and he was exploited by Werblin, the Jets and the league, all of them.  I loved watching that team and loved watching him.  I love football but I understand a lot of football players, great ones were not great guys or team guys.  Maybe at the time we don't get that?  LT is probably the greatest NY football player.  Not a great guy and certainly a guy who put his drug addiction ahead of team.   Not everyone was Winston Hill.  I still love LT the football player.  Revis was a mercenary, he was also a great player who lifted the team.  Namath lifted the team in spite of everything.  We don't sniff a championship without him.  

I get that your heart was broken by what could have been.   I thiink it's niave to think it could have been different. 

If Werblin had any decency at all he would never have allowed Namath on the field.  Sony's greatest achievment was signing him and getting him on the field.  It made the AFL and helped shape the modern game we still love today.   There's a ton of grey in sports.  It's not all games and big plays.  

I always enjoy a discussion about that era with guys who saw it even if we disagree.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Biggs said:

I read it good read.  Practice?  The guy could barely walk without pain.  He was medicated on booze and pain killers his entire career.  He was a drug addict no different than Mantle and many other athletes at the time.  

Football, particularly in that era was the modern day version of the Gladiators.  You drank, you injected pain killers and you got your ass on the field.  Namath was the emobdement of the gladiator.  He was surviving he wasn't part of the team.  He wasn't signed to be a member of the team.  He was signed to save the league financially.  

He was a highly flawed guy and he was exploited by Werblin, the Jets and the league, all of them.  I loved watching that team and loved watching him.  I love football but I understand a lot of football players, great ones were not great guys or team guys.  Maybe at the time we don't get that?  LT is probably the greatest NY football player.  Not a great guy and certainly a guy who put his drug addiction ahead of team.   Not everyone was Winston Hill.  I still love LT the football player.  Revis was a mercenary, he was also a great player who lifted the team.  Namath lifted the team in spite of everything.  We don't sniff a championship without him.  

I get that your heart was broken by what could have been.   I thiink it's niave to think it could have been different. 

If Werblin had any decency at all he would never have allowed Namath on the field.  Sony's greatest achievment was signing him and getting him on the field.  It made the AFL and helped shape the modern game we still love today.   There's a ton of grey in sports.  It's not all games and big plays.  

I always enjoy a discussion about that era with guys who saw it even if we disagree.  

You're on a roll! If Mussolini could read a defense and throw a tight spiral I'd take him as QB of the NYJs.

Good players > good guys. Good players win football games. Sure if it's a push, I'll take the player who is also a good person (although in today's PR-curated social media world, it's hard to know what is real) as long as team performance isn't impacted negatively. I'm not scouting the Jets looking for potential husbands for my daughters.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, jgb said:

The "INT is like a punt" philosophy is really only valid when it's a hail mary situation. Turning over the ball on 3rd (or 1st or 2nd) down is never equivalent to punting on 4th. Even running for 4 yards on 3rd-and-impossible and then punting from there is better than chucking an INT on 3rd. And like you've said, long picks can turn into long returns if the intended target isn't able to bring the inteceptor down since on deep plays the offense is very spread out.

Exactly. I can't  believe that I actually have to convince someone a pick is almost always a bad thing. 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, More Cowbell said:

Exactly. I can't  believe that I actually have to convince someone a pick is almost always a bad thing. 

Love Namath -- no doubt about that -- but his INT numbers were pretty bad and definitely a bit of a stain on his legacy. But I still think people take it too far for "hating"/"disdaining" (words used by his critics in this very thread, not ones I'm imposing) him because of this flaw.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Sonny Werblin said:

In just 4 games in the the 66 and 67 seasons he had 21 interceptions, 6 pick 6's and over 500 yards in interception return yards. C'mon Man! You are Joe freaking Namath! How can you be so so stupid and mind-bogglingly habitually careless with the ball! 

Seriously, I would put those games up against the worst 4 games of any QB in the history of pro football. And the tragedy isn't that Namath was bad. The tragedy is that he had those games because his brain could never overcome his penchant for loving to show off that miraculous arm.

In just one game in 1972 against Jonhny U and the Colts he had 496 yards and 6 TD's on 15 completions. 

FYI I believe the Oakland Raiders in 1960 and 61 were the only other team to play in an open ended stadium on the water with intense swirling winds.  Candelstick was enclossed before the SF Football team played their in the 70's.  In 60 and 61 the Raiders played there.  There QB's on way less attempts had 28 INT's both seasons. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, jgb said:

Love Namath -- no doubt about that -- but his INT numbers were pretty bad and definitely a bit of a stain on his legacy. But I still think people take it too far for "hating"/"disdaining" (words used by his critics in this very thread, not ones I'm imposing) him because of this flaw.

I actually like Namath. Even when he was drunk off his butt trying to kiss Suzy Kolber (i though that was hysterical) 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, More Cowbell said:

I actually like Namath. Even when he was drunk off his butt trying to kiss Suzy Kolber (i though that was hysterical) 

He takes a lot of heat for that while Kevin Hart -- who was blasted off his ass at the Philly SB post game-- doesn't. I guess it was the come on to Suzy which made it worse. I also thought it was funny at first in a "drunk uncle at a wedding weakly hitting on a bridesmaid" kinda way but then I realized it was really the manifestation of a disease -- he was there for an official purpose and knew he'd be on camera at some point but wasn't able to dial it back for one night. Glad he got help.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/15/2021 at 9:02 PM, Joe W. Namath said:

Outside of Joe Namath, Wilson is by far the most talented qb we have ever had.

What an exciting time to be a jet fan.

Don't you want to at least wait to see how he looks on the field against a professional team before you crown him ???

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, THE BARON said:

Don't you want to at least wait to see how he looks on the field against a professional team before you crown him ???

The short answer is: No. No he does not.

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

I read it good read.  Practice?  The guy could barely walk without pain.  He was medicated on booze and pain killers his entire career.  He was a drug addict no different than Mantle and many other athletes at the time.  

Football, particularly in that era was the modern day version of the Gladiators.  You drank, you injected pain killers and you got your ass on the field.  Namath was the emobdement of the gladiator.  He was surviving he wasn't part of the team.  He wasn't signed to be a member of the team.  He was signed to save the league financially.  

He was a highly flawed guy and he was exploited by Werblin, the Jets and the league, all of them.  I loved watching that team and loved watching him.  I love football but I understand a lot of football players, great ones were not great guys or team guys.  Maybe at the time we don't get that?  LT is probably the greatest NY football player.  Not a great guy and certainly a guy who put his drug addiction ahead of team.   Not everyone was Winston Hill.  I still love LT the football player.  Revis was a mercenary, he was also a great player who lifted the team.  Namath lifted the team in spite of everything.  We don't sniff a championship without him.  

I get that your heart was broken by what could have been.   I thiink it's niave to think it could have been different. 

If Werblin had any decency at all he would never have allowed Namath on the field.  Sony's greatest achievment was signing him and getting him on the field.  It made the AFL and helped shape the modern game we still love today.   There's a ton of grey in sports.  It's not all games and big plays.  

I always enjoy a discussion about that era with guys who saw it even if we disagree.  

Do you ever feel that Namath's fame caused many great players on the late 60s Jets to be overshadowed and never get the acclaim they deserved? 

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...