Re: Tough win... tough players... bad coaching...
cd
> On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 19:36:16 -0500, buRford <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote:
> >Great win. Maybe a bit too much for my heart.
> >Sanchez played great... Wayne Hunter, Braylon... the players really stepped up.
>
> >But the decisions by the coaches, on both sides of the ball, in the last coupla minutes...
> >yow.
>
> >Rex was just too conservative. Ya have to at least rush 4. With no rush, Ben just waited
> >for the open receiver. Once in the Red Zone, then that D made sense, and coverage was
> >great.
>
> >On O, they were rushing nicely after the safety, then he decided to pass... dumb.
> >Even if the rush didn't work, it kills time. Dumb.
>
> >Great win.
>
> Forgot one thing... Weatherford redeemed himself today. Just a great job pinning Pitts
> deep.
Nothing cute by Schottenheimer today, they lined up and went to work.
Even LT looked good, so it means that if Schottenheimer concentrates
on the play calling rather than the cute plays, the Jets have a
chance. The clock management is a concern and I think how removed
Ryan is from the Offense has a lot to do with it; that is my hope and
not that he is this inept.
MuahMan
> Great win. Maybe a bit too much for my heart.
> Sanchez played great... Wayne Hunter, Braylon... the players really stepped up.
>
> But the decisions by the coaches, on both sides of the ball, in the last coupla minutes...
> yow.
>
> Rex was just too conservative. Ya have to at least rush 4. With no rush, Ben just waited
> for the open receiver. Once in the Red Zone, then that D made sense, and coverage was
> great.
>
> On O, they were rushing nicely after the safety, then he decided to pass... dumb.
> Even if the rush didn't work, it kills time. Dumb.
>
> Great win.
Jets are lucky the officials refused to call PI on that last
Pittsburgh drive.
Michael
for one.... FOR ONCE... the other team gets a break vs. the
steelers...
papa.carl44
"buRford" <buR...@buR.ford.com> wrote in message
news:i78tg69jdk3i37h58...@4ax.com...
> Great win. Maybe a bit too much for my heart.
> Sanchez played great... Wayne Hunter, Braylon... the players really
> stepped up.
>
> But the decisions by the coaches, on both sides of the ball, in the last
> coupla minutes...
> yow.
>
> Rex was just too conservative. Ya have to at least rush 4. With no rush,
> Ben just waited
> for the open receiver. Once in the Red Zone, then that D made sense, and
> coverage was
> great.
>
> On O, they were rushing nicely after the safety, then he decided to
> pass... dumb.
> Even if the rush didn't work, it kills time. Dumb.
>
> Great win.
Now I have to go watch the rest of it I taped....had to go to an obligatory
thing...a must do deal to preserve the peace...now I get to watch the rest
of the game. I'm very happy for The Jets.
Tutor
LOL at the fan of the team* that gets as many ridiculous favorable
calls as the Steelers.
MuahMan
Another miracle win in the last minute for the most over-rated team in
NFL history.
45-3
Thanks to for Woodhead again. He leads the NFL in yards a play.
Keith Keller
>
> Jets are lucky the officials refused to call PI on that last
> Pittsburgh drive.
...or unlucky that the officials gave the Steelers a first down when
they were a yard short, or gave them a spot a whole yard more than they
earned to give them another first down.
Anyway, I'm not sure how I feel about the win. On one hand, it's a
great bounceback after an extremely poor showing last week. On the
other hand, the defense really got pushed around, especially in the
first half and the last drive.
The Jets need one more win to clinch a playoff spot. Considering the
other teams in the race, it seems unlikely that they can do any better
than the six seed. The only way they get a different seed is with
complete collapses by either Baltimore or New England.
One item of note: the Jets are now 6-1 on the road, so their chances if
they make the playoffs are actually decent. On the down side, they'll
almost certainly have to go back to Foxboro if they win their first
playoff game. Redemption or more humiliation?
--keith
--
kkeller...@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us
(try just my userid to email me)
AOLSFAQ=http://www.therockgarden.ca/aolsfaq.txt
see X- headers for PGP signature information
Harlan Lachman
buRford <buR...@buR.ford.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 19:36:16 -0500, buRford <buR...@buR.ford.com> wrote:
>
> >Great win. Maybe a bit too much for my heart.
> >Sanchez played great... Wayne Hunter, Braylon... the players really stepped
> >up.
> >
> >But the decisions by the coaches, on both sides of the ball, in the last
> >coupla minutes...
> >yow.
> >
> >Rex was just too conservative. Ya have to at least rush 4. With no rush,
> >Ben just waited
> >for the open receiver. Once in the Red Zone, then that D made sense, and
> >coverage was
> >great.
> >
> >On O, they were rushing nicely after the safety, then he decided to pass...
> >dumb.
> >Even if the rush didn't work, it kills time. Dumb.
> >
> >Great win.
>
> Forgot one thing... Weatherford redeemed himself today. Just a great job
> pinning Pitts
> deep.
And McKnight and I think Cole both made beautiful plays on downing the
punts.
BTW, did anyone besides me think the officials gave the Steelers an
extra yard, starting them at the 4 instead of the three or two on
McKnight's downing.
h
Tutor
>
> - Show quoted text -
Pats looked like shit tonight. Almost beat by a rookie QB with zero
experience. Green Bay lost because its coaching staff didn't have a
set of plays ready for the kid on the last drive. No doubt some form
of cheating played a role.. after all it *is* New England. Pats could
easily be one and done in the playoffs.
MuahMan
Flynn has played one game and he's already much better than Dirty
Sanchez. The NY Trippers will get humiliated in the playoffs like
always.
45-3
Tutor
>
> - Show quoted text -
you mean like the Patriots did last year. Which team went farther in
the playoofs Bwian? Which teams QB played better in last years
playoffs? The Pats got lucky last night in that hey faced a rookie QB
whose coaches let him down not having given him a play set to follow
on the final drive. Put Rogers in instead of Flynn and the game is
not even close. So you, who makes a big deal over close "lucky" wins,
are now the classic pot calling the kettle black. Even a child could
argue better than you.
MuahMan
Yeah. The Patriots were lucky to beat the #1 Defense in the NFL by
scoring 31 points against a team that averages 13 points a game
allowed. How many points did the Jets score against them again? Does
it bother you that GB's backup QB is way better than Sanchez?
Rotalius Jephersun
Tutor <dcat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> The Pats got lucky last night in that hey faced a rookie QB
> whose coaches let him down not having given him a play set to follow
> on the final drive. Put Rogers in instead of Flynn and the game is
> not even close. So you, who makes a big deal over close "lucky" wins,
> are now the classic pot calling the kettle black. Even a child could
> argue better than you.
Wrong, the Pats often have trouble with new QB's because they
haven't schemed for 'em. like Fitgerald earlier in the season
against Buffalo and a couple more examples I can't think of from
seasons back.
rj
Tutor
> In article <831e6ec7-c0a2-4674-a375-9b6907509...@o4g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
>
> Tutor <dcat4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > The Pats got lucky last night in that hey faced a rookie QB
> > whose coaches let him down not having given him a play set to follow
> > on the final drive. Put Rogers in instead of Flynn and the game is
> > not even close. So you, who makes a big deal over close "lucky" wins,
> > are now the classic pot calling the kettle black. Even a child could
> > argue better than you.
>
> Wrong, the Pats often have trouble with new QB's because they
> haven't schemed for 'em. like Fitgerald earlier in the season
> against Buffalo and a couple more examples I can't think of from
> seasons back.
>
> rj
The Patriots were beat by the Packers at the line of scrimmage. The
Packers DL knocked Brady around and slammed Patriot RBs behind the
line often. Frankly, I was surprised just how badly the Pats Oline
played. Almost cost the Pats the game. The big return by the lineman
where the refs ignored no fewer than 3 blatant blocks in the back
(watch the replay... OMG, they were flagrant) made the needed TD
pretty easy. Thank the refs for the win.
MuahMan
If not for the refs and tripping players the Jets would 4-12 like they
usually are. Even the free safety the Jets got on Sunday wasn't a
safety. The entire ball crossed the goal line. 10 more seconds in that
game and Jets lose again to a team the Patriots destroyed with
relative ease.
Tutor
I see. When you have no counter, why not just make stuff up? You are
hopeless as well as slow. For you to even attempt to deny that the
Pats* have been the beneficiaries of an overwhelming number of
favorable calls dating back to the tuck call is just absurd. This has
been pointed out by several NFL players as well. Your cheating team
got destroyed by the Browns and by the Jets. Aside from Brady it is
nothing special. Green Bay would likely have had a great chance if the
refs didn't hand them an easy TD by ignoring the flagrant blocks in
the back on that bogus return. Add to that the constant camera shots
of your drunken owner on his knee pads in between Goodell's knees
throughout the game and it's Pat*ently obvious how biased things are
in favor of the cheaters in Foxboro.
Percy Flage
So a Jets' coach tripping a player on one play in one game and *all*
those lucky calls are responsible for an 8 game swing? Fuckwit.
Ignorant of not just the question. There were blatant blocks in the back
on players #30, #26 and #2. Watch the replay and accept/refute.
--
Percy Flage
"Life is too short to have to explain everyday."
JetsLife
>
> - Show quoted text -
You mean like last year when the Pats watched the Jets upset SD and
play for the AFC title, weeks after said Pat-chokers were humiliated/
eliminated in the playoffs at home by Baltimore?
LMAO!
JetsLife
> Great win. Maybe a bit too much for my heart.
> Sanchez played great... Wayne Hunter, Braylon... the players really stepped up.
>
> But the decisions by the coaches, on both sides of the ball, in the last coupla minutes...
> yow.
>
> Rex was just too conservative. Ya have to at least rush 4. With no rush, Ben just waited
> for the open receiver. Once in the Red Zone, then that D made sense, and coverage was
> great.
You mean like the Giants rushed 4 and more v. Philly and got torched?
Yes it's different with Vick, but playing zone late isn't always the
worst idea regardless of field position.
Further, IINM: one of the early 3rd & longs that drive the Jets rushed
more than 3, and R-berger eluded the rush & ran 15-20 yards for a key
first down.
The Jets' standard, 4-man pass rush has been weak all year -- adding a
4th rusher likely wouldn't have made a difference. If anything maybe
the Jets should've tried some 'all-out' zones: rush 1 or 2 dropping
the rest into coverage. Or if they want a pass rush, go man and blitz
everyone else.
Rushing 3 did what it did for the Jets; rushing 4 likely would've
created similar results. One can argue rushing 4 instead of 3 could've
been worse for the Jets: more space those elusive, fast Pittsburgh
skill players to run after the catch.
JetsLife
> Great win. Maybe a bit too much for my heart.
> Sanchez played great... Wayne Hunter, Braylon... the players really stepped up.
>
> But the decisions by the coaches, on both sides of the ball, in the last coupla minutes...
> yow.
>
> Rex was just too conservative. Ya have to at least rush 4. With no rush, Ben just waited
> for the open receiver. Once in the Red Zone, then that D made sense, and coverage was
> great.
>
> Even if the rush didn't work, it kills time. Dumb.
>
> Great win.
And oh yeah, well said: great win.
I'll throw in: great *team* win, across the aboard.