Scott Dierking Posted September 10, 2007 Share Posted September 10, 2007 Its the chicken and the egg argumenent, joebaby. Good offensive lines block, PERIOD. There is no excuse for allowing blitzers to come clean through, which is what happened. It does not matter who your quarterback is, or how strong his arm is. The Jets were beat 5 on 5 on the line often yesterday. That has nothing to do with whi si quarterbacking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetCane Posted September 10, 2007 Share Posted September 10, 2007 Its the chicken and the egg argumenent, joebaby. Bullsh1t. You just refuse to give up your agenda and objectively analyze what happened on the field yesterday. It all starts up front. Chicken and egg my ass /walks away grumbling, damn college students/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joebabyny Posted September 10, 2007 Share Posted September 10, 2007 Its the chicken and the egg argumenent, joebaby. Except if you don't have a line, your qb gets scrambled like an egg. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joebabyny Posted September 10, 2007 Share Posted September 10, 2007 Good offensive lines block, PERIOD. There is no excuse for allowing blitzers to come clean through, which is what happened. It does not matter who your quarterback is, or how strong his arm is. The Jets were beat 5 on 5 on the line often yesterday. That has nothing to do with whi si quarterbacking. exactly, trying to say that getting a better qb will make the oline better is just nonsense from someone with an agenda against our qb. It is also just digging your hole deeper and exposing you as such because you will probably get your wish next week with Clemens starting, and he will have to sit behind that crumbly piece of sh$t as well and get hammered. At least Penny doesnt play scared, Clemens will be sh%tting his pants and whipping the ball at mangolds back to avoid getting planted into the field like Jimmy Hoffa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barton Posted September 10, 2007 Share Posted September 10, 2007 Bullsh1t. You just refuse to give up your agenda and objectively analyze what happened on the field yesterday. It all starts up front. Chicken and egg my ass /walks away grumbling, damn college students/ Likewise, Jetcane. Likewise. exactly, trying to say that getting a better qb will make the oline better is just nonsense from someone with an agenda against our qb. It is also just digging your hole deeper and exposing you as such because you will probably get your wish next week with Clemens starting, and he will have to sit behind that crumbly piece of sh$t as well and get hammered. At least Penny doesnt play scared, Clemens will be sh%tting his pants and whipping the ball at mangolds back to avoid getting planted into the field like Jimmy Hoffa. I agree I'm sure Clemens will struggle this sunday, he's never started an actual game and the Ravens are very tough. And I never said Clemens would improve the Oline. But If he pans out and becomes a good QB, he surely will help the Oline look better because he has an actual arm and ability to move around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted September 10, 2007 Share Posted September 10, 2007 exactly, trying to say that getting a better qb will make the oline better is just nonsense from someone with an agenda against our qb. It is also just digging your hole deeper and exposing you as such because you will probably get your wish next week with Clemens starting, and he will have to sit behind that crumbly piece of sh$t as well and get hammered. At least Penny doesnt play scared, Clemens will be sh%tting his pants and whipping the ball at mangolds back to avoid getting planted into the field like Jimmy Hoffa. It would make the line look better on paper, as better QB's can get rid of the ball into a receiver's hands more effectively, or maybe scramble/roll out a little, than Chad. He's not really good at feeling pressure nor does he have such great field vision. But I agree, it wouldn't have the effect of making these 4 scrubs/busts actually look good no matter who was lining up behind center. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted September 10, 2007 Share Posted September 10, 2007 It would make the line look better on paper, as better QB's can get rid of the ball into a receiver's hands more effectively, or maybe scramble/roll out a little, than Chad. He's not really good at feeling pressure nor does he have such great field vision. But I agree, it wouldn't have the effect of making these 4 scrubs/busts actually look good no matter who was lining up behind center. Sperm-I actually saw Chad goingt through progressions downfield yesterday. He was looking off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted September 10, 2007 Share Posted September 10, 2007 Sperm-I actually saw Chad goingt through progressions downfield yesterday. He was looking off. Did you notice which receivers he looked at, whether they were open? How many receivers were kind of open enough, but not open for his type of passes? Or they're open for a second & he doesn't react quickly enough? Or by the time his passes reach the receiver he wouldn't be open anymore? Or he looks off 1-on-1 receivers as though they were in double-coverage. Or any myriad of things that make his presence a disadvantage in this regard. I was there with a nice birds-eye view. There were plenty of passing plays (or it doesn't matter really since he can audible out of a run), where there was 1 safety back (and not even FAR back at that), and we didn't take advantage of it. I'm not suggesting he was the reason we lost; that's absurd. But people suggesting he did "great" are being equally absurd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted September 10, 2007 Share Posted September 10, 2007 Did you notice which receivers he looked at, whether they were open? How many receivers were kind of open enough, but not open for his type of passes? Or they're open for a second & he doesn't react quickly enough? Or by the time his passes reach the receiver he wouldn't be open anymore? Or he looks off 1-on-1 receivers as though they were in double-coverage. Or any myriad of things that make his presence a disadvantage in this regard. I was there with a nice birds-eye view. There were plenty of passing plays (or it doesn't matter really since he can audible out of a run), where there was 1 safety back (and not even FAR back at that), and we didn't take advantage of it. I'm not suggesting he was the reason we lost; that's absurd. But people suggesting he did "great" are being equally absurd. No, I did not have that vantage point. It was reported on this board before (I don't believe it was you), that Chad would stare down his primary. Again, from my vantage point (TV!), his head appeared to be on a swivel. As far as passing lanes to his liking, I find that believable. He was also late on som passes which were there and then became tighter, But, that is the MO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetCane Posted September 10, 2007 Share Posted September 10, 2007 Except if you don't have a line, your qb gets scrambled like an egg. Yeah, that was some snappy comeback he had for excusing the poor OL play. Chicken and egg my ass. Where's the beef? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted September 10, 2007 Share Posted September 10, 2007 No, I did not have that vantage point. It was reported on this board before (I don't believe it was you), that Chad would stare down his primary. Again, from my vantage point (TV!), his head appeared to be on a swivel. As far as passing lanes to his liking, I find that believable. He was also late on som passes which were there and then became tighter, But, that is the MO. Well now his knee looks like it's on a swivel. Seriously though. Despite all my little comments, he's not the worst piece of garbage in the league. But for us to get to the next level with anything remotely similar to the sorry squad we fielded yesterday, we're going to need more than someone who can complete 75% of his 3-yard passes & takes advantage of tiny seams in his passing lanes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Posted September 10, 2007 Share Posted September 10, 2007 I think Brick is going to get better, it's just going to take time. I just wish we drafted Blalock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cmart28Coles87 Posted September 11, 2007 Share Posted September 11, 2007 Some of you guys have to step back and listen to yourselves. Your turning D'Brick into Chad of the the Oline saying "We gave up 4 sacks because of Ferguson" bull****. He gave up one sack yesterday to Green and most of Thomas Jones yards he got in the 2nd half yesterday came off him so stop talking sh*t and calling him a bust. You expect him to come in and be the next Jonathan Odgen right off the bat. Give him some damn time. He played well last year as a rookie. He had 2 really bad games and he owned jason taylor. JASON F*CKIN TAYLOR DID NOTHING AGAINST US BOTH TIMES WE PLAYED MIAMI NEXT YEAR. He also handled Dwight Freeny and many other good DE's last year including seymour. Im tired of some posters and their knee jerk reactions after losses. It pisses me off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.