Zach is the problem, not Penalties.

[Fantasy Island]

5 hours ago, doitny said:

i know, another Zach thread right....

so we lost yesterday and Zach played ok. it was the penalties and drops right? 

well would it surprise you that we are the 4th least team in defensive penalties with 44? we are 2 short of leading the league in least penalties. Dallas, Buffalo have 56. SF 57, the Eagles have 61.

on offense it was lower but now were 17th with 60. the same as KC and Buffalo. SF has 62. 

and we are 9th least in yards with 443. Buffalo 476, KC 500, Det 502, Balt 532, Dall 544, SF 565. so when your complaining that we keep getting pushed back. there are a hell of a lot more teams getting pushed back even farther than us. including some of the best in the NFL.

wow look at all those penalties from SF and Buffalo. what undisciplined teams. someone should fire there HCs.

point is, everyone gets them. some of the best teams get the same or alot more than us. whats the difference? they have a QB and we have the 30th worst in the NFL. 

with Zach we have to be perfect. no penalties, no drops. defense pitching a near shutout every week. nobody can play a mistake free game.

so next time you want to complain about penalties dont, we commit less for less yards then some of the best teams around. but they can make it up with there QBs, and we cant. its the QB AND the HC.

Fixed

Bobby is an enabler.  

[TheNuuFaaolaExperience]

All of these things can simultaneously be true:

Zach sucks

The OL sucks

The offensive coordinator sucks

We lack talent behind Garrett Wilson

One of them outweighs all of the others. A better QB masks a bad OL. A better QB masks a bad OC. A better QB masks a bad WR room. That better QB is on the roster. Zach was NEVER supposed to be on the field, and he still shouldn't. 

[More Cowbell]

9 hours ago, GreekJetinPatLand said:

The biggest problem with the offense is the running game is broken. It’s hard to run an offense without any semblance of a running attack. 

Every time we hand off, we are facing a loaded box. How is that running game supposed to get going when you are alwasy facing 8 or 9 defenders at the LOS

[shawn306]

9 hours ago, doitny said:

i know, another Zach thread right....

so we lost yesterday and Zach played ok. it was the penalties and drops right? 

well would it surprise you that we are the 4th least team in defensive penalties with 44? we are 2 short of leading the league in least penalties. Dallas, Buffalo have 56. SF 57, the Eagles have 61.

on offense it was lower but now were 17th with 60. the same as KC and Buffalo. SF has 62. 

and we are 9th least in yards with 443. Buffalo 476, KC 500, Det 502, Balt 532, Dall 544, SF 565. so when your complaining that we keep getting pushed back. there are a hell of a lot more teams getting pushed back even farther than us. including some of the best in the NFL.

wow look at all those penalties from SF and Buffalo. what undisciplined teams. someone should fire there HCs.

point is, everyone gets them. some of the best teams get the same or alot more than us. whats the difference? they have a QB and we have the 30th worst in the NFL. 

with Zach we have to be perfect. no penalties, no drops. defense pitching a near shutout every week. nobody can play a mistake free game.

so next time you want to complain about penalties dont, we commit less for less yards then some of the best teams around. but they can make it up with there QBs, and we cant. its the QB, not the HC.

What is it like 42 Penalties the last 4 weeks ? 

You can't have that. Not when you have such a small margin of error when the offense is bad

[Claymation]

9 hours ago, Jet_Engine1 said:

Yep. Me and every defensive coordinator in the league. Flawed logic...

 

And yet the Giants don't have an issue with running the ball with Devito at QB.

 

[Larz]

Merge 

[JetsFanatic]

10 hours ago, doitny said:

i know, another Zach thread right....

so we lost yesterday and Zach played ok. it was the penalties and drops right? 

well would it surprise you that we are the 4th least team in defensive penalties with 44? we are 2 short of leading the league in least penalties. Dallas, Buffalo have 56. SF 57, the Eagles have 61.

on offense it was lower but now were 17th with 60. the same as KC and Buffalo. SF has 62. 

and we are 9th least in yards with 443. Buffalo 476, KC 500, Det 502, Balt 532, Dall 544, SF 565. so when your complaining that we keep getting pushed back. there are a hell of a lot more teams getting pushed back even farther than us. including some of the best in the NFL.

wow look at all those penalties from SF and Buffalo. what undisciplined teams. someone should fire there HCs.

point is, everyone gets them. some of the best teams get the same or alot more than us. whats the difference? they have a QB and we have the 30th worst in the NFL. 

with Zach we have to be perfect. no penalties, no drops. defense pitching a near shutout every week. nobody can play a mistake free game.

so next time you want to complain about penalties dont, we commit less for less yards then some of the best teams around. but they can make it up with there QBs, and we cant. its the QB, not the HC.

Ridiculous!! The Jets lead the league in penalties over the last 5 weeks. Eliminate the penalties and we would have won on Sunday. 

[TuscanyTile2]

1 minute ago, JetsFanatic said:

Ridiculous!! The Jets lead the league in penalties over the last 5 weeks. Eliminate the penalties and we win on Sunday. 

I'd be interested to see where this team stands in terms of passes dropped.  I feel like every week our WRs have a surprising amount of drops.  My guess is we're among the NFL's worst in that category.

[JetsFanatic]

1 minute ago, TuscanyTile2 said:

I'd be interested to see where this team stands in terms of passes dropped.  I feel like every week our WRs have a surprising amount of drops.  My guess is we're among the NFL's worst in that category.

I don’t know about the drops, but over the last 5 weeks the Jets have had a sharp increase in penalties. It’s idiotic to say that the penalties didn’t cost us the game this past Sunday against the Raiders.

[Kleckineau]

10 hours ago, GreekJetinPatLand said:

Zach is effectively the 3rd best player on the offense. He’s one of the only reasons the Jets scored anything yesterday. He’s an asset not a liability. Is he perfect? No, but he’s going to be a good player in this league one day. 

Max please do your boss thing here really please.

[Jimmy 2 Times]

Zach sucks, but we win the last two weeks without the stupid penalties. 

[Augustiniak]

1 hour ago, shawn306 said:

What is it like 42 Penalties the last 4 weeks ? 

You can't have that. Not when you have such a small margin of error when the offense is bad

The penalties are killer and they’re on both sides of the ball.  Stems from frustration from the qb IMO.

[Flea Flicking Frank]

If you really think about it, penalties are actually, good

[Biggs]

Russel Wilson with Hacket calling plays 84.4 QBR.  With Payton calling plays 104.0,  10 Years in Seattle 100.4

[Flea Flicking Frank]

Just now, Biggs said:

Russel Wilson with Hacket calling plays 84.4 QBR.  With Payton calling plays 104.0,  10 Years in Seattle 100.4

I am pretty sure this is Zach Wilsons fault, I read it on the forum somewhere

[Biggs]

1 minute ago, Flea Flicking Frank said:

I am pretty sure this is Zach Wilsons fault, I read it on the forum somewhere

Zach's lack of feel for the game is Zach's problem. The lack of talent around him and an OC who has no business being an NFL OC isn't helping him.

[shawn306]

7 minutes ago, Augustiniak said:

The penalties are killer and they’re on both sides of the ball.  Stems from frustration from the qb IMO.

So Uzomah holds on the Breece TD because he is frustrated with Zach ?

Huff roughs the passer because leading to a FG at the half because he is frustrated with Zach ? 

C'mon man. I mean I know is not good but that is a bit over the top.

[faba]

The penalties take in account when they happen -for the Jets they are just killing us so look not just at amount of penalties

[Augustiniak]

4 minutes ago, shawn306 said:

So Uzomah holds on the Breece TD because he is frustrated with Zach ?

Huff roughs the passer because leading to a FG at the half because he is frustrated with Zach ? 

C'mon man. I mean I know is not good but that is a bit over the top.

Defense commits personal fouls out of frustration when they can’t sack the qb b/c they know they can’t afford to give up tds b/c the offense can’t score.

offense holds b/c they know they need to cheat to score.  

That’s what I’m saying.  Players are cutting corners.

[Warfish]

There is an excellent and available way to test the "QB vs. Penalties vs. O-line vs. Bad WR" theories.

Replace the QB, see what happens.

It's literally the only available move to test this theory.

You cannot replace your entire O-line.

You cannot replace all the WR's.

You can coach for less penalties, of course, but it's not a sure thing.

Only replacing the QB can truly test if the other three issues are the main issues, or if the QB was the main issue.

If a horrid nobody like Boyle does meaningfully better, or if Seimien, a JAG journeyman at best, does meaningfully better, then we would know it was, in fact, the QB.

Which, honestly, is likely why JD and Saleh won't make that change.  They don't want to expose Zach, who they plan to have back for year 4 as their backup again, as the problem.  

Ultimately, Zach is currently going down in history as one of the biggest bust QB's of all time.  In part because the Jets brass has continued to roll him out there, despite clearly not being capable or able to do so productively.

[slimjasi]

It’s not an either/or. It’s both and all of the above. 

the QB is bad, the WRs outside of GW are bad, the running game is bad, and the penalties have been crippling. Even in the Giants and Eagles games, we had penalties that could have easily cost us those games. 

[PepPep]

10 hours ago, doitny said:

i know, another Zach thread right....

so we lost yesterday and Zach played ok. it was the penalties and drops right? 

well would it surprise you that we are the 4th least team in defensive penalties with 44? we are 2 short of leading the league in least penalties. Dallas, Buffalo have 56. SF 57, the Eagles have 61.

on offense it was lower but now were 17th with 60. the same as KC and Buffalo. SF has 62. 

and we are 9th least in yards with 443. Buffalo 476, KC 500, Det 502, Balt 532, Dall 544, SF 565. so when your complaining that we keep getting pushed back. there are a hell of a lot more teams getting pushed back even farther than us. including some of the best in the NFL.

wow look at all those penalties from SF and Buffalo. what undisciplined teams. someone should fire there HCs.

point is, everyone gets them. some of the best teams get the same or alot more than us. whats the difference? they have a QB and we have the 30th worst in the NFL. 

with Zach we have to be perfect. no penalties, no drops. defense pitching a near shutout every week. nobody can play a mistake free game.

so next time you want to complain about penalties dont, we commit less for less yards then some of the best teams around. but they can make it up with there QBs, and we cant. its the QB, not the HC.

Dude. GIVE. IT. A . REST. 

Zach is a backup QB and we all know he is not a good backup QB. To win games the offense cannot drop balls and commit penalties. Yes, its because our backup is bad. But you can't commit penalties and drop ball and expect to win regardless of who your QB is. Especially against good teams. Everyone knows that! I don't care about the stats, if you have watched THE GAMES its clear as day that as soon as we get something going on offense- a big play, a first down, as soon as we matriculate the ball down field, the drive is stunted by a penalty or a drop or even fumble as we saw in the Chargers game. 

More than one thing can be true at the same time. Zach can be bad, the oline can be horrendous, the play-calling can be bad and the players (especially on offense) can be undisciplined and commit terrible penalties, drop the ball and be loose with the ball.  

So yes, its another stupid Zach thread. 

[ChuckkieB]

The Jets offense has been putrid and there's plenty of blame to go around, but at the top of the list is Wilson. Good QB's elevate the players around them and find ways to get the ball into the end zone consistently. Bad one's like Zack make everyone on offense worse with terrible decision making, bad throws, and a lack of football instincts. A few good plays here and there over 2-1/2 have carried this bum but his body of work speaks for itself.  He's not worthy of being the QB1 in the NFL, CFL, Arena Football, or even my flag football league.

[BurntDice]

Everything doesn’t have to be in absolutes. 
 

does Zach suck? Sure he does

however that doesn’t make it impossible for other parts of the team to suck as well. 
 

hackett is a problem. Penalties have been a major problem since the bye. The OL and WRs are a problem. 
 

things don’t always have to be pinned on 1 person

[PepPep]

37 minutes ago, Warfish said:

There is an excellent and available way to test the "QB vs. Penalties vs. O-line vs. Bad WR" theories.

Replace the QB, see what happens.

It's literally the only available move to test this theory.

You cannot replace your entire O-line.

You cannot replace all the WR's.

You can coach for less penalties, of course, but it's not a sure thing.

Only replacing the QB can truly test if the other three issues are the main issues, or if the QB was the main issue.

If a horrid nobody like Boyle does meaningfully better, or if Seimien, a JAG journeyman at best, does meaningfully better, then we would know it was, in fact, the QB.

Which, honestly, is likely why JD and Saleh won't make that change.  They don't want to expose Zach, who they plan to have back for year 4 as their backup again, as the problem.  

Ultimately, Zach is currently going down in history as one of the biggest bust QB's of all time.  In part because the Jets brass has continued to roll him out there, despite clearly not being capable or able to do so productively.

I don't really agree.

I don't think coaches view penalties and catches that receivers should make as something you can change by dropping in a new QB. Especially when your options are so terrible.  

Benching Zach at this point and trotting out a stiff like Siemian or an absolute joke like Boyle means one thing and one ting only. The season is done. You may as well start resting the starters. IMO - THAT is why the Jets have not done it yet. I know most Jet fans view it the OTHER way around - as in, benching Zach means there is still some fight in this team. But no. Not with Siemian and Boyle as the guys who will be filling in. These guys are god-awful and will signify the end of the season.

I know, in theory, it seems like this is the logical way to test if the QB is the real problem. But I personally think every coach knows that you can't possibly blame penalties, drops, poor play-calling and fumbles on the QB. There is a ton of blame on Zach. But it seems like you are suggesting that all of these other issues with offense will be mitigated if you just drop Seimian or Boyle in at QB and simply don't agree with that.

Both of those guys will be complete disasters if other things on the offensive side of the ball are not fixed FIRST.  

[Warfish]

1 minute ago, PepPep said:

I don't really agree.

I don't think coaches view penalties and catches that receivers should make as something you can change by dropping in a new QB. Especially when your options are so terrible.  

Benching Zach at this point and trotting out a still like Siemian or an absolute joke like Boyle means one thing and one ting only. The season is done.

You think the season isn't done now?

Interesting.  Not sure where you're obtaining that kind of optimism at this point.

1 minute ago, PepPep said:

You may as well start resting the starters.

Changing QB's due to a lack of production and benching all your starters are not the same thing.

1 minute ago, PepPep said:

IMO - THAT is why the Jets have not done it yet. I know most Jet fans view it the OTHER way around - as in, benching Zach means there is still some fight in this team. But no. Not with Siemian and Boyle as the guys who will be filling in. These guys are god-awful and will signify the end of the season.

I don't believe there is any meaningful QB metric for which Seimien is not superior to Zach Wilson.

So if Seimien is "awful" and playing him signifies "ending the season", what does continuing to play Zach mean?

1 minute ago, PepPep said:

I know, in theory, it seems like this is the logical way to test if the QB is the real problem. But I personally think every coach knows that you can't possibly blame penalties, drops, poor play-calling and fumbles on the QB. There is a ton of blame on Zach. But it seems like you are suggesting that all of these other issues with offense will be mitigated if you just drop Seimian or Boyle in at QB and simply don't agree with that.

I'd like to see the Jets play with a different QB, and see what those results look like, yes.

I believe the season, as a competitive endeavor, is long over at this point.  The idea this team is going to make the playoffs is laughable to me.  I'd love to be wrong, but I think the next two weeks, vs. Buffalo in Buffalo and vs. Miami, will seal the deal on the end of this year.  4-7 looking at a likely 6-11 finish with things as they are now, and maybe your view will start to change, maybe not.

1 minute ago, PepPep said:

Both of those guys will be complete disasters if other things on the offensive side of the ball are not fixed FIRST.  

Lets prove it by playing one of them, preferably Seimien (ugh, just saying that makes me want to vomit, lol). 

Then we'll know for sure. 

I'd wager it won't be as low production as the last three weeks have been.

But no, I do not expect this organization to make the switch, I fully expect to see Zach Wilson start the rest of this season even if we don't score another TD all year on offense, and that he will be back as our backup next year too.  I have no idea why (and I don't buy the Jet Blue conspiracy), but it just seems that's the way JD wants it.  Maybe, like some here at JN, he is simply a true believer that Zach has elite potential and is improving on his way to greatness, who knows.

[Flea Flicking Frank]

53 minutes ago, Warfish said:

There is an excellent and available way to test the "QB vs. Penalties vs. O-line vs. Bad WR" theories.

Replace the QB, see what happens.

It's literally the only available move to test this theory.

You cannot replace your entire O-line.

You cannot replace all the WR's.

You can coach for less penalties, of course, but it's not a sure thing.

Only replacing the QB can truly test if the other three issues are the main issues, or if the QB was the main issue.

If a horrid nobody like Boyle does meaningfully better, or if Seimien, a JAG journeyman at best, does meaningfully better, then we would know it was, in fact, the QB.

Which, honestly, is likely why JD and Saleh won't make that change.  They don't want to expose Zach, who they plan to have back for year 4 as their backup again, as the problem.  

Ultimately, Zach is currently going down in history as one of the biggest bust QB's of all time.  In part because the Jets brass has continued to roll him out there, despite clearly not being capable or able to do so productively.

I agree with most of this, but the part I am not so sure about is the idea of exposing ZW. I actually think they have a built in excuse with ZW, that they like. If the offense sucks as bad if not worse with Boyle or Simien, which is not impossible at all, they take the blame and not ZW but either way, 100% agreement this is without a doubt the move that has to be made this week against the Bills, a different QB to start testing what the **** is actually going on here

[SomebodytoAnybody47]

58 minutes ago, Warfish said:

There is an excellent and available way to test the "QB vs. Penalties vs. O-line vs. Bad WR" theories.

Replace the QB, see what happens.

It's literally the only available move to test this theory.

You cannot replace your entire O-line.

You cannot replace all the WR's.

You can coach for less penalties, of course, but it's not a sure thing.

Only replacing the QB can truly test if the other three issues are the main issues, or if the QB was the main issue.

If a horrid nobody like Boyle does meaningfully better, or if Seimien, a JAG journeyman at best, does meaningfully better, then we would know it was, in fact, the QB.

Which, honestly, is likely why JD and Saleh won't make that change.  They don't want to expose Zach, who they plan to have back for year 4 as their backup again, as the problem.  

Ultimately, Zach is currently going down in history as one of the biggest bust QB's of all time.  In part because the Jets brass has continued to roll him out there, despite clearly not being capable or able to do so productively.

It'd be pretty wild if replacing the QB made guys stop holding on running plays lol.

[Warfish]

1 minute ago, Flea Flicking Frank said:

I agree with most of this, but the part I am not so sure about is the idea of exposing ZW. I actually think they have a built in excuse with ZW, that they like. If the offense sucks as bad if not worse with Boyle or Simien, which is not impossible at all, they take the blame and not ZW but either way, 100% agreement this is without a doubt the move that has to be made this week against the Bills, a different QB to start testing what the **** is actually going on here

The move won't be made, that seems clear.  So we'll just have to see how Zach and Co. do against the flailing bills up in Buffalo, and vs. that powerhouse Miami Offense the following week.

If we continue to fail to score on Offense, and continue sitting around dead last in the league in QB production, perhaps they may consider making a move, although I doubt it.  If we're 4-7, but with weaker teams Atlanta and Houston up next, I get a feeling JD and Co. would still want to retain Zach as starter to see if he does better against those lower-tier teams.

Ultimately, I think Zach plays all 17 this year, barring injury of course.  I'd love to hear JD answer as to why, honestly, but he doesn't answer to me, or the press, for that matter.  I think @bitonti nailed it, they're all safe (Zach included), they're all secure, and they'll be back again next year, so there is no stress if an slowly improving Zach keeps on slowly improving while the season burns away in loss after loss.

[Warfish]

Just now, Zachtomims47 said:

It'd be pretty wild if replacing the QB made guys stop holding on running plays lol.

Not really.  If you think about it. 

Improved QB play opens up things, like the running game.  A less-stacked box, means less need to hold (or desperately try and make a play), on each run play.  Improved passing effectiveness opens the field, broadens holes and gaps, and generally gives more opportunity everywhere for successful offensive production.  Same can be said for drops.  Lazard, for example, was a 2% and 6% drop guy in GB with Rodgers.  He's well over 10% now with Zach.  Did he just forget to catch in the offseason?  I doubt it.

But you have to have a QB who can do this, and we likely do not, even if we try Seimien (who I do not like at all) instead of Zach.

JD has made sure we have no real compelling option other than Zach once Rodgers became unavailable.  This is how he built it, and so that is how it will be.

[shawn306]

3 hours ago, More Cowbell said:

Every time we hand off, we are facing a loaded box. How is that running game supposed to get going when you are alwasy facing 8 or 9 defenders at the LOS

You run 3TE's and force the issue and turn the game into a street fight.

3rd and 1 and running out 3WR's and handing the ball off makes no sense.

[More Cowbell]

1 hour ago, shawn306 said:

You run 3TE's and force the issue and turn the game into a street fight.

3rd and 1 and running out 3WR's and handing the ball off makes no sense.

There is nothing wrong with running out of a 3 wide set. It soreads the D out. Both can work but when there are 2 S cheating up, there is a lot less room

[Plen T]

terrible post

good to see everyone outside of JetNation has this exact opposite sentiment though

[Plen T]

9 hours ago, fusionCA said:

every team has penalties

the Jets dont have the QB to get over it.

after the holding call on Hall TD run it was first and goal from the 13 yard line , every team get those and overcome it to score a TD, its not a big deal.

yet every Jets fan, coach and player know there is no way Wilson will be able to score  TD , he just doesnt have it 

lol no, other teams do not have 8 penalties for 90 yards and every huge play brought back by penalties

[TuscanyTile2]

2 hours ago, Warfish said:

There is an excellent and available way to test the "QB vs. Penalties vs. O-line vs. Bad WR" theories.

Replace the QB, see what happens.

It's literally the only available move to test this theory.

You cannot replace your entire O-line.

You cannot replace all the WR's.

You can coach for less penalties, of course, but it's not a sure thing.

Only replacing the QB can truly test if the other three issues are the main issues, or if the QB was the main issue.

If a horrid nobody like Boyle does meaningfully better, or if Seimien, a JAG journeyman at best, does meaningfully better, then we would know it was, in fact, the QB.

Which, honestly, is likely why JD and Saleh won't make that change.  They don't want to expose Zach, who they plan to have back for year 4 as their backup again, as the problem.  

Ultimately, Zach is currently going down in history as one of the biggest bust QB's of all time.  In part because the Jets brass has continued to roll him out there, despite clearly not being capable or able to do so productively.

I think they're not making the QB change because they still want to evaluate Zach's potential future with the team plus they still have an outside shot at the playoffs.  Siemian would get killed behind this OL and nobody takes Boyle seriously.