Lady Jet Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Wow! The bashing of Chad is in full steam, and yes, it's understandable, however I'd like to attempt to temper it a bit. (puts on helmet for incoming fire... ) OK, first off, I want to make it clear that I do not see Chad as the future leader for this team, or the QB who will lead the Jets to the promised land. However, I do not think he played as bad as some of you believe. In fact, he played better than I expected. I fully expected to see more of the scared Chad, (deer-in-the-headlights, lots of three and outs) that we've been accustomed to when he plays tough defenses like this. But the funny thing is, he never quite got that scared look, and he actually led the Jets on a few long drives. Yeah, he threw some crappy picks and killed the drives, but the fact that he was actually able to drive the team against the Chicago defense was a bit surprising to me. He doesn't have the game experience, due to injuries, that he should have at this point in his career. But it seemed to me that he has actually learned something about playing these types of defenses, and has actually taken a few steps forward. Again, I don't think he is the future for the Jets, but I'm not ready to call the season quits and bench him just yet. As far as Clemons, I'd like to see what he can offer as well too, but it's much too early to hand his the reigns. Perhaps we'll get a chance to see him before the season is over, and if not, I'm sure he'll get every opportunity to take over the starting job next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJ Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 However, I do not think he played as bad as some of you believe. In fact, he played better than I expected. Gotta disagree with you Lady J. What he threw was off anywhere from a little to a load. He didn't see guys that were open - not even open deep. And he had a ton of time from the O line in most instances. His running of the offense was it's usual quality performance, but he also needs to hit his receivers or we lose. And lose we did after the D played their hearts out and held the NFL's most potent offense (on paper) to a TD and a FG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selection7 Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Last week Eli Manning had one of the worst games of his career against the Bears D. 14/32 121yds 0 TDs 2 INTs It happens. But Pennington still did better than Eli. And I'm not a big Jets fan but I thought Chad looked ok all things considered. You could see he's capable and I imagine he's not hit his ceiling yet. zxc EDIT: Hmmm, after checking, I didn't realize he had been in the league quite that long. I might have to take some of that "not hit his ceiling" part back. Who knows. Anyhoo.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmike1 Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Good for you LJ. Nice to see another vioce of reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoachTsurfing Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 LJ, after waking up this morning and letting things cool down a bit. I have come to the following conclusion. Chad let his team down and the fans down. Should we bench him? I still say yes. Here is my reasoning. If he isn't the answer why waste the remaining of the season to possibly get into the playoffs only to lose in the first round. Play Clemens now. Our D is finally playing well, the line is blocking fantastic, and the remaining teams are very beatable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faba Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 The thing about Chad this year-he always had the rep to not make mistakes and manage the game- this year especially he is throwing into coverage and turning the ball over killing drives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4HCrew Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 the pick in the endzone changed the entire game. The second was downright embarassing, that is a rookie play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Give it up, LJ. These tools think it's Pennington's fault that we're not undefeated. I suppose that idiotic onsides kick to open the second half was his fault, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Give it up, LJ. These tools think it's Pennington's fault that we're not undefeated. I suppose that idiotic onsides kick to open the second half was his fault, too. But for Pennington not even looking at his wide-open primary WR in the endzone, choosing to lock in on a covered Chris Baker instead, with Urlacher spying him in the middle of the field, we would not have attempted it. Clearly Mangini thought we needed a spark - if Chad was getting the job done it never would've happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4HCrew Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 I am not saying the whole game was Chad's fault but he did his fair share of contributing to it. It is part of being a qb in the NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetsMan57 Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 But for Pennington not even looking at his wide-open primary WR in the endzone, choosing to lock in on a covered Chris Baker instead, with Urlacher spying him in the middle of the field, we would not have attempted it. Clearly Mangini thought we needed a spark - if Chad was getting the job done it never would've happened. I dont understand why people keep saying Coles was wide open on that play. HE WAS NOT OPEN. He was open for a split second and the replay showed that hte CB fell back into his zone and had coles covered underneath, Chad would have had to make a lob pass into the corner of the end zone over the defender to complete the pass to coles. Sure, it was a better option than forcing it to baker, but coles was not wide open on the play. People keep harping on this as if it was an easy six points. It wasnt.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Wow! The bashing of Chad is in full steam, and yes, it's understandable, however I'd like to attempt to temper it a bit. (puts on helmet for incoming fire... ) OK, first off, I want to make it clear that I do not see Chad as the future leader for this team, or the QB who will lead the Jets to the promised land. However, I do not think he played as bad as some of you believe. In fact, he played better than I expected. I fully expected to see more of the scared Chad, (deer-in-the-headlights, lots of three and outs) that we've been accustomed to when he plays tough defenses like this. But the funny thing is, he never quite got that scared look, and he actually led the Jets on a few long drives. Yeah, he threw some crappy picks and killed the drives, but the fact that he was actually able to drive the team against the Chicago defense was a bit surprising to me. He doesn't have the game experience, due to injuries, that he should have at this point in his career. But it seemed to me that he has actually learned something about playing these types of defenses, and has actually taken a few steps forward. Again, I don't think he is the future for the Jets, but I'm not ready to call the season quits and bench him just yet. As far as Clemons, I'd like to see what he can offer as well too, but it's much too early to hand his the reigns. Perhaps we'll get a chance to see him before the season is over, and if not, I'm sure he'll get every opportunity to take over the starting job next year. Good post and 100% accurate. I'm no Chad fan, but he was better yesterday then he's been in the past against a defense like this. Up until the second pick atleast... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 I dont understand why people keep saying Coles was wide open on that play. HE WAS NOT OPEN. He was open for a split second and the replay showed that hte CB fell back into his zone and had coles covered underneath, Chad would have had to make a lob pass into the corner of the end zone over the defender to complete the pass to coles. Sure, it was a better option than forcing it to baker, but coles was not wide open on the play. People keep harping on this as if it was an easy six points. It wasnt.. They showed it over & over. And Coles gave Chad an earfull after the int. He was a hell of a lot more open than Baker was. And the most disturbing part is that Chad's eyes were locked in on Baker, never looked away, and threw it right in the area of where Urlacher was spying him. Chad just doesn't seem to see the field. It's almost like he's reverting back to what Hackett turned him into: stare down your hot target; if he's not open look for the 3-yd dumpoff within 1 second. We need someone the coaches have confidence in attempting a pass with 20 yds of air underneath it more frequently than once every 3 games or so. And it wasn't even with the trademark Meadowlands wind. What's our offense going to look like when THAT kicks in? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetsMan57 Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 They showed it over & over. And Coles gave Chad an earfull after the int. He was a hell of a lot more open than Baker was. And the most disturbing part is that Chad's eyes were locked in on Baker, never looked away, and threw it right in the area of where Urlacher was spying him. Chad just doesn't seem to see the field. It's almost like he's reverting back to what Hackett turned him into: stare down your hot target; if he's not open look for the 3-yd dumpoff within 1 second. We need someone the coaches have confidence in attempting a pass with 20 yds of air underneath it more frequently than once every 3 games or so. And it wasn't even with the trademark Meadowlands wind. What's our offense going to look like when THAT kicks in? I completely agree that it was a better option than to throw to baker, but it wasnt a gimme six points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatsFanTX Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 However, I do not think he played as bad as some of you believe. In fact, he played better than I expected. With all due respect, PennyBoy was absolutely pathetic once again. He was 19/35, 162 yards, 0 TD's, 2 Crucial INT's and a QB rating of 42.8 and led the Jets offense to 0 points. PennyBoy now has a QB rating of 45 or less in 3 out of his last 6 games. How can you with a straight face say he "played better than you expected"? The guy was horrible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatsFanTX Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 I suppose that idiotic onsides kick to open the second half was his fault, too. What was so idiotic about the onsides kick? The Jets defense was playing great, the game was tied and even if the Bears scored, Mangini would have thought the Jets offense could put some points on the board. I thought it was a good risk at that point in the game. BTW, if that kick is recovered by the Jets and they go in for a score, you guys would have Mangini enshrined in Canton by noon today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 I completely agree that it was a better option than to throw to baker, but it wasnt a gimme six points. Fine. So Chad can only hit paydirt when it's a gimme 6-points? And how many of those passes that went for first downs were the result of receivers breaking tackles or dragging defenders? It's like we've conceded that Chad should not be throwing the ball past the first-down marker b/c the defenders, just sitting there, have an eternity to pounce on his floaters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetsMan57 Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Fine. So Chad can only hit paydirt when it's a gimme 6-points? And how many of those passes that went for first downs were the result of receivers breaking tackles or dragging defenders? It's like we've conceded that Chad should not be throwing the ball past the first-down marker b/c the defenders, just sitting there, have an eternity to pounce on his floaters. You probably think I am defending Chad's performance yesterday. I am not and I am growing tired with the Vinny'eqe INTs and Chad deserves all the hammering he is receiving considering he lost us a very winnable game I am just defending that one play where everybody is acting liek Coles was standing all alone for a gift six points. Just pointing out that it wasnt the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barton Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 I dont understand why people keep saying Coles was wide open on that play. HE WAS NOT OPEN. He was open for a split second and the replay showed that hte CB fell back into his zone and had coles covered underneath, Chad would have had to make a lob pass into the corner of the end zone over the defender to complete the pass to coles. Sure, it was a better option than forcing it to baker, but coles was not wide open on the play. People keep harping on this as if it was an easy six points. It wasnt.. It was in the redzone. How long do you expect a WR to be open for? 3 or 4 seconds? That doesnt happen in the red zone. Coles was wide open as it gets in the endzone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoFlaJets Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 is we came out of this 2 game toughest stretch of our schedule 1 and 1.A lot of us were predicting us to lose both-we split-now it's time to look ahead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoFlaJets Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 is we came out of this 2 game toughest stretch of our schedule 1 and 1.A lot of us were predicting us to lose both-we split-now it's time to look ahead. I wanted this to be a new thread-what happened to the new thread thingy at the bottom of the page? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetsfanbkny Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 What was so idiotic about the onsides kick? The Jets defense was playing great, the game was tied and even if the Bears scored, Mangini would have thought the Jets offense could put some points on the board. I thought it was a good risk at that point in the game. BTW, if that kick is recovered by the Jets and they go in for a score, you guys would have Mangini enshrined in Canton by noon today. you have to be smoking crack..for you to say that was a good call for the onside kick for a game that was clearly a field position game to give them the ball on the 40..patfantx please stfu... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 You probably think I am defending Chad's performance yesterday. I am not and I am growing tired with the Vinny'eqe INTs and Chad deserves all the hammering he is receiving considering he lost us a very winnable game I am just defending that one play where everybody is acting liek Coles was standing all alone for a gift six points. Just pointing out that it wasnt the case. Fair enough, but as Barton points out, that's about as open as someone - particularly your primary WR - gets in the back/corner of the endzone with a fast defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Fair enough, but as Barton points out, that's about as open as someone - particularly your primary WR - gets in the back/corner of the endzone with a fast defense. That's true, but Coles wasn't primary on that play, you have to be open when it's your turn in the progression. Still a horrendous pick, but if Urlacher ran like Mo Lewis it probably would have been a td. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatsFanTX Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 you have to be smoking crack..for you to say that was a good call for the onside kick for a game that was clearly a field position game to give them the ball on the 40..patfantx please stfu... Again, it was a good call at the time. There was still 30 minutes of football to be played. Not my problem that the Jets have a QB who makes mistakes in the red zone and can't put any points on the board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joewilly Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 you have to be smoking crack..for you to say that was a good call for the onside kick for a game that was clearly a field position game to give them the ball on the 40..patfantx please stfu... I happened to be smokin crack at the start of the 2nd half & still didn't like the call. I could barely inhale Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L.I.MikeBleedsGreen Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Again, it was a good call at the time. There was still 30 minutes of football to be played. Not my problem that the Jets have a QB who makes mistakes in the red zone and can't put any points on the board. TX ,We were the only team to get close to 300 yds against the bears this year ,yes us the jets ,so lets see how the Pats do this up coming week OK!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatsFanTX Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 TX ,We were the only team to get close to 300 yds against the bears this year ,yes us the jets ,so lets see how the Pats do this up coming week OK!! If the Pats offense plays like it did yesterday, they'll hang 30 on the Bears very easily. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 If the Pats offense plays like it did yesterday, they'll hang 30 on the Bears very easily. Right, because everybody knows that the Packers and the Bears defenses are very similar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatsFanTX Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Right, because everybody knows that the Packers and the Bears defenses are very similar. Has nothing to do with that. Yesterday was the first time since the Cincy game that the Pats offense looked in sync. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Has nothing to do with that. Yesterday was the first time since the Cincy game that the Pats offense looked in sync. What about the minnesota game? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxman Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Has nothing to do with that. Yesterday was the first time since the Cincy game that the Pats offense looked in sync. Oh man. Tx has hit a new low. The Jets offense looked in synch all week against the scout team. Then the real Bears took the field and things changed a bit. A new low. Even by PatsFanTx standards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatsFanTX Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 What about the minnesota game? Brady missed too many wide open receivers in that game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Has nothing to do with that. Yesterday was the first time since the Cincy game that the Pats offense looked in sync. Yes, it's very difficult to be "in sync" against the worst pass defense in football. Especially when you keep gettting the ball back because Favre is out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoFlaJets Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 I happened to be smokin crack at the start of the 2nd half & still didn't like the call. I could barely inhale LOL........POTW nom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.