Ok, let's give it a shot
Glenn Greenstein
heading into a bye with the best record in the NFL, I'll try to post
something positive.
Last week the Jets played poorly and won, an ugly win as Burf put it
and this week was much of the same. It seems lots of you here are not
satified when the Jets play well and win let alone play poorly and win
but this IMO is the mark of a great team. Yesterday the jets had to
beat two teams, Denver and the Officials that practically gift wrapped
two TD's for the Donks and you know what, they won. They kept going
and they eventually made enough plays to win the game. This is what
seperates the good teams from the Championship teams, they don't go
into the tank when things look dark, they keep trying. We may for the
first time in over 40 years be looking at a team that can actually win
a SB by the end of the season.
This isn't a bad win, the last two weeks were great wins. When you can
win games when you are not playing well, that is a true asset and that
is also great coaching and that is what Championship teams do, they
win under any condition.
Screw the players looked flat, screw they looked unprepared, screw
that you think they were poorly coached, at the end of the day it was
a W and if this team keeps getting W's, they will eventually have a
date in Dallas at the end of Jan or begining of Feb.
Tutor
That officiating crew was abyssmal. A touchdown that wasn't. A
personal foul that was a clean hit (Leonard). Multiple PIs,
particularly one phantom PI on Cro, that dominated the flow of the
game. At least they got the PI inflicted on Holmes at the end of the
game correct.
The Jets have the best record in the NFL. They played better than and
should have beat the Ravens in that poorly managed week 1 game.
Defensively, the team is among the league leadrs in every category and
offensively the team has been inconsistent, but at times lethal. The
Jets play in a tough division. The Pats are still an excellent team
and Miami is capable of inflicting damage (although we all know they
suck). Sanchez, althuogh far from perfect, is coming along quite
well, and given his relative inexperience, I think extremely well. We
have a lot to be happy about so far. Great time for a Bye Week.
Miami plays the Steelers and New England heads into San Diego to play
that wounded animal. Wouldn't it be nice for both those teams to
slide down a half game next week?
Glenn Greenstein
> People see things, they discuss it.
> Saying the team was flat, or didn't play particularly well, is just reality... part of
> what happened.
> A game like yesterday, there weren't a lot of positives, per se, other than the outcome.
> Not much to discuss about that.
> But, as I mentioned in an earlier post, there were a lot of positives to be taken from how
> they overcame adversity, & mistakes.
>
> Honestly, I know you see a lot of negativity here, but I see a lot of crazy fans that seek
> perfection. And post their views on how, in their view, to get there.
>
> That we're 5-1 is a testament to the toughness, & business-like focus this team has.
> They don't quit. Even so, they've yet to put together 60 minutes of solid football,
> against good competition. I thought the closest they've come to that, was the 2nd half
> against the Pats.
> For me to think they're ready for a championship, I want to see them play solid for a full
> 60, even if they lose.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
See burf, that last sentence is what I see as the mental problem there
is here. What you just said, "even if they lose" is that SOJ attitude
that has festered in this place for years. Looking back on when the
Pats actually had a NG you could read and interact in, those fans got
it right. There were plenty of game where I said to myself after
watching them (the Pats) "How the Hell did they win that game? " but
when I read the Pats NG, what they said was "Another win for the
Pats". I guess my point in this is it doesn't have to be perfect,Hell,
it doesn't even have to look good, it just has to be a W.
If you line up two good teams, say the Jets vs. the Steelers, you will
not see the Jets play perfect nor will you see the Steelers play
perfect. there are going to be things each team does to the other that
will get them out of their comfort zone no matter how good or even bad
you may think they are because the guys across that LOS are getting
paid just like our players. This idea of a perfect team to me is just
that, an idea. Honestly, there is no perfect team, the winners of the
last 10 SB's did not play perfect football, what they di das they won
a lot games than they lost, imperfect as they might have been.
Harlan Lachman
<e5c5cb9d-a5a8-4395...@c20g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>,
Glenn Greenstein <lex...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Glenn, I agree with you on this one. Some teams expect to win. That is
almost as important as having the officials expect one team to win.
Harlan
Glenn Greenstein
> All I was saying is that I'm not ready to say we're a championship caliber team, yet.
> It has nothing to do with the same old Jets mentality.
> I want to see them play a solid 60 minutes, on all sides of the ball, against top
> competition.
> And as will happen to all good teams, if they play their best, and get beaten, I can deal
> with it.
> I haven't seen us at that level yet.
> And I disagree with you... yeah, no team is perfect, & I'm not looking for perfection.
> I've seen enough games in my life, between two great teams, where neither team gives an
> inch. It's just a battle.
> And I'm waiting to see us compete on that level.
> Where we are doing all we can to challenge a team, and they may or may not be meeting our
> challenge. And they're doing all they can to challenge us, and we are or not meeting
> their challenge.
> That's when I'll know we're there, and say we're at a championship level.
> Until then, I'll continue to take it game by game, and watch as the team matures, &
> develops to that caliber.
> I'm happy we're winning, and I'm seeing development of the players & team, but we're not
> there yet. We may be later in the year, but for now, I see a few teams better than us.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
If you read what I wrote, I didn't say we are there yet either, I said
we could be looking at a team that can actually win a SB "BY THE END
OF THE YEAR".
In this case I think you are missing my point. One very important
component to a champion is being instilled in them. They now expect to
win and I as a fan expect them to win.
Johnny Morongo
> All I was saying is that I'm not ready to say we're a championship caliber team, yet.
> It has nothing to do with the same old Jets mentality.
> I want to see them play a solid 60 minutes, on all sides of the ball, against top
> competition.
> And as will happen to all good teams, if they play their best, and get beaten, I can deal
> with it.
> I haven't seen us at that level yet.
> And I disagree with you... yeah, no team is perfect, & I'm not looking for perfection.
> I've seen enough games in my life, between two great teams, where neither team gives an
> inch. It's just a battle.
> And I'm waiting to see us compete on that level.
> Where we are doing all we can to challenge a team, and they may or may not be meeting our
> challenge. And they're doing all they can to challenge us, and we are or not meeting
> their challenge.
> That's when I'll know we're there, and say we're at a championship level.
> Until then, I'll continue to take it game by game, and watch as the team matures, &
> develops to that caliber.
> I'm happy we're winning, and I'm seeing development of the players & team, but we're not
> there yet. We may be later in the year, but for now, I see a few teams better than us.
The Steelers Would seem to have gotten it together to a more well
oiled extent that we. We're still working off the rough edges, but
other than them, I wouldn't know which teams are really better than
us.
But you're right. We haven't played a complete game against a quality
team, the 2nd half of the Pats game not withstanding. Spurts, but
nothing smooth, nothing well oiled. The erratic nature of the offense
still seems to me to be due to Shott's lack of "feel." Thus the
occasional brilliant call, but many more head scratchers. LT has
bailed his ass out on more than one occasion. In the Bronx, we would
say that he just doesn't have the "moxie." Can't wait till he's
tabbed by the Chargers to replace the mostly disappointing Norv. Next
year can't come quickly enough, in spite of the possibility that he
might finally "get it" due to the pretty incredible cast of players we
really do have.
As to your conversation with Glenn, I see both sides. But this team
does have the paper potential to become that well oiled, dominating
machine, hell bent on Vinceland.
A J
> Glenn, you missed my point.
> All I was saying is that I'm not ready to say we're a championship caliber team, yet.
> It has nothing to do with the same old Jets mentality.
> I want to see them play a solid 60 minutes, on all sides of the ball, against top
> competition.
> And as will happen to all good teams, if they play their best, and get beaten, I can deal
> with it.
> I haven't seen us at that level yet.
> And I disagree with you... yeah, no team is perfect, & I'm not looking for perfection.
> I've seen enough games in my life, between two great teams, where neither team gives an
> inch. It's just a battle.
> And I'm waiting to see us compete on that level.
> Where we are doing all we can to challenge a team, and they may or may not be meeting our
> challenge. And they're doing all they can to challenge us, and we are or not meeting
> their challenge.
> That's when I'll know we're there, and say we're at a championship level.
> Until then, I'll continue to take it game by game, and watch as the team matures, &
> develops to that caliber.
> I'm happy we're winning, and I'm seeing development of the players & team, but we're not
> there yet. We may be later in the year, but for now, I see a few teams better than us.
I hear what you're saying burf, but I can't say I agree with you
Which team, in your opinion, has played 60 solid mins in all 3 phases,
and
Which team, in your opinion, can we not beat?
The Colts went to the dance last year, 15-1, and I can remember games
vs N E, Houston,
Jax, Mia & Balt that they could have/should have lost. I'll bet their
margin of victory for those 6 games was less than
24 points combined.
I like what the Jets are doing.
I like Rex's attitude.
They've set their goal, now, in the latter part of close games, they
seem to play to achieve that goal.
I also notice something else.
There's no doubt that Rex has put the bullseye on this teams back, and
as a result,
it seems we get every teams best effort.
Reigning champs expect this, and it's one of the reasons it's so
difficult to repeat.
Tell me when Denver played as good a game as they did yesterday?
It would seem the Jets will have to manage this anomaly BEFORE they
even
get a shot at a championship.
I've also heard excuses from other teams about injuries, etc.
The Jets have played the first 6 games, won 5, and have yet to have
all of their
starters on the field and 100% healthy, and they're still tied for the
best
record in the league.
There will be no team, IMHO, that will cruise to solid, uncontested
victories this season.
Even Pitt, the concensus selection for the best team this season, beat
Atl by 6,
Ten by 8, and lost to Balt by 3.
By every comparison, the Jets are deservedly in the conversation, and
I do not
see one team in the league that simply outclasses them.
Just My Opinion................
A J
JetsLife
See my post to Burf in another thread. The Jets DID NOT play poorly
last week. They beat a talented Minnesota team in a hyped-up MNF game.
Had Sanchez and his receivers performed even just slightly better that
game is much more lopsided.
JetsLife
Excellent, excellent post and insights. You are spot on, Glenn. Your
following statement couldn't be more accurate:
JetsLife
Also I posted something similar to this a few years ago. In today's
salary-cap, free agency era wins against solid teams should be viewed
as the works of art they are. So many teams are just so similar in
talent. After all they can only spend the same amount of money. It
ain't MLB where you can virtually buy playoff appearances.
Ritchie
of him :)
Percy Flage
I thought this week was the best time for them both to slip, but they
both managed 23-20 OT wins ... the bastards.
--
Percy Flage
"Life is too short to have to explain everyday."
BicketyBam
8158-ae5...@j25g2000yqa.googlegroups.com:
I agree - it's been forever since we've won games like this.
I'd like to add something that has me very encouraged. Even though Sachez
started yesterday miserably, he hung in there - in a very hostile
environment - and made enough plays to put his team in a position to win.
Last year, when he sucked, he sucked the whole game. I don't see that this
year and that is a HUGE plus.
Harlan Lachman
buRford <buR...@buR.ford.com> wrote:
> As far as whatever else I said, I am speaking only of the Jets, & what I want
> to see from
> them. No other team is part of the equation. If we're taking care of our
> own business, I
> could care less about what other teams, can or can't do.
At this point, if we win all the rest of our games, you'd be right.
h
Tutor
> On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 14:16:08 -0700 (PDT), John C TX <johnctxj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >X-No-Archive: Yes
>
> >> And seriously, finding Holmes down there, and throwing it, was about as brilliant a
> >> decision as he could of made, at that moment. Last season, he probably wouldn't have seen
> >> Holmes, let alone decide to pass it.
>
> >b, the poise was incredible. It would have been nice to have someone
> >open for a 1st down.
>
> >yes, that is a criticism of the play calling.
>
> From what Cimini is now saying, a first down play was never called.
> It was an all hail-mary, all the time playcall, with no outlet or other options.
> Just for that alone, our beloved OC should be sent packin', especially since Sanchez has
> very little accuracy on long passes. That pass to Holmes, though, was probably his nicest
> long one of the season, although it was a tad underthrown (worked out well for the Jets).
THat's not what Rex said at the presser. Go back and listen. Either
Cimini's full of it or Rex was dishonest or ignorant of what Schott
called.
Glenn Greenstein
> I know what Rex said, I also heard Sanchez say what Cimini said he said.
> Hopefully, someone recorded the game, and can put this to rest.
Did Cimini, one of this NG's Media whipping boys suddenly get
credibility here, more than Rex?
Harlan Lachman
buRford <buR...@buR.ford.com> wrote:
> Rex ignorant of what Schott called wouldn't surprise me.
> I know what Rex said, I also heard Sanchez say what Cimini said he said.
> Hopefully, someone recorded the game, and can put this to rest.
And Cimini lying or making something up would not surprise me.
To some extent, anyone at the game could answer this one. Either guys
were running 8 - 12 yard routes or they were not.
harlan
Glenn Greenstein
> what it was.
> So, if he was off on the 4th down call, too, why would I be surprised?
Becuase he said he knew the call in his presser which leads me to
believe you are giving Cimini more credit than our HC who IMO has done
an excellent job except for the Ravens game.
> As I said, numerous times in this thread, Cimini's a jerk, but since he's saying this, I'd
> like to know what the play was.
I don't get it, why would you think Cimini knew what was called. Does
Schott confer with him on the play selection? Was he in the huddle
with the Jets players during the down?
> I realize this does't meet your posting requirements, of ignoring everything, other than
> whether the Jets won, but hey, I'm interested.- Hide quoted text -
Never said that Burf, what annoys me is all anyone talks about is what
the Jets did wrong here.
JetsLife
> > On Oct 18, 11:26 am, buRford <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 09:41:56 -0700 (PDT), Glenn Greenstein <lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > >On Oct 18, 11:44 am, buRford <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote:
> > > >> >Amoung the negativity being posted here about a team that is 5-1
> > > >> >heading into a bye with the best record in the NFL, I'll try to post
> > > >> >something positive.
> > > >> >Last week the Jets played poorly and won, an ugly win as Burf put it
> > > >> >and this week was much of the same. It seems lots of you here are not
> > > >> >satified when the Jets play well and win let alone play poorly and win
> > > >> >but this IMO is the mark of a great team. Yesterday the jets had to
> > > >> >beat two teams, Denver and the Officials that practically gift wrapped
> > > >> >two TD's for the Donks and you know what, they won. They kept going
> > > >> >and they eventually made enough plays to win the game. This is what
> > > >> >seperates the good teams from the Championship teams, they don't go
> > > >> >into the tank when things look dark, they keep trying. We may for the
> > > >> >first time in over 40 years be looking at a team that can actually win
> > > >> >a SB by the end of the season.
> > > >> >This isn't a bad win, the last two weeks were great wins. When you can
> > > >> >win games when you are not playing well, that is a true asset and that
> > > >> >is also great coaching and that is what Championship teams do, they
> > > >> >win under any condition.
> > > >> >Screw the players looked flat, screw they looked unprepared, screw
> > > >> >that you think they were poorly coached, at the end of the day it was
> > > >> >a W and if this team keeps getting W's, they will eventually have a
> > > >> >date in Dallas at the end of Jan or begining of Feb.
>
> > > >> People see things, they discuss it.
> > > >> Saying the team was flat, or didn't play particularly well, is just reality... part of
> > > >> what happened.
> > > >> A game like yesterday, there weren't a lot of positives, per se, other than the outcome.
> > > >> Not much to discuss about that.
> > > >> But, as I mentioned in an earlier post, there were a lot of positives to be taken from how
> > > >> they overcame adversity, & mistakes.
>
> > > >> Honestly, I know you see a lot of negativity here, but I see a lot of crazy fans that seek
> > > >> perfection. And post their views on how, in their view, to get there.
>
> > > >> That we're 5-1 is a testament to the toughness, & business-like focus this team has.
> > > >> They don't quit. Even so, they've yet to put together 60 minutes of solid football,
> > > >> against good competition. I thought the closest they've come to that, was the 2nd half
> > > >> against the Pats.
> > > >> For me to think they're ready for a championship, I want to see them play solid for a full
> > > >> 60, even if they lose.- Hide quoted text -
>
>
> > > >is here. What you just said, "even if they lose" is that SOJ attitude
> > > >that has festered in this place for years. Looking back on when the
> > > >Pats actually had a NG you could read and interact in, those fans got
> > > >it right. There were plenty of game where I said to myself after
> > > >watching them (the Pats) "How the Hell did they win that game? " but
> > > >when I read the Pats NG, what they said was "Another win for the
> > > >Pats". I guess my point in this is it doesn't have to be perfect,Hell,
> > > >it doesn't even have to look good, it just has to be a W.
> > > >If you line up two good teams, say the Jets vs. the Steelers, you will
> > > >not see the Jets play perfect nor will you see the Steelers play
> > > >perfect. there are going to be things each team does to the other that
> > > >will get them out of their comfort zone no matter how good or even bad
> > > >you may think they are because the guys across that LOS are getting
> > > >paid just like our players. This idea of a perfect team to me is just
> > > >that, an idea. Honestly, there is no perfect team, the winners of the
> > > >last 10 SB's did not play perfect football, what they di das they won
> > > >a lot games than they lost, imperfect as they might have been.
>
> > > All I was saying is that I'm not ready to say we're a championship caliber team, yet.
> > > It has nothing to do with the same old Jets mentality.
> > > I want to see them play a solid 60 minutes, on all sides of the ball, against top
> > > competition.
> > > And as will happen to all good teams, if they play their best, and get beaten, I can deal
> > > with it.
> > > I haven't seen us at that level yet.
> > > And I disagree with you... yeah, no team is perfect, & I'm not looking for perfection.
> > > I've seen enough games in my life, between two great teams, where neither team gives an
> > > inch. It's just a battle.
> > > And I'm waiting to see us compete on that level.
> > > Where we are doing all we can to challenge a team, and they may or may not be meeting our
> > > challenge. And they're doing all they can to challenge us, and we are or not meeting
> > > their challenge.
> > > That's when I'll know we're there, and say we're at a championship level.
> > > Until then, I'll continue to take it game by game, and watch as the team matures, &
> > > develops to that caliber.
> > > I'm happy we're winning, and I'm seeing development of the players & team, but we're not
> > > there yet. We may be later in the year, but for now, I see a few teams better than us.
>
> > The Steelers Would seem to have gotten it together to a more well
> > oiled extent that we. We're still working off the rough edges, but
> > other than them, I wouldn't know which teams are really better than
> > us.
>
> > But you're right. We haven't played a complete game against a quality
> > team, the 2nd half of the Pats game not withstanding. Spurts, but
> > nothing smooth, nothing well oiled. The erratic nature of the offense
> > still seems to me to be due to Shott's lack of "feel." Thus the
> > occasional brilliant call, but many more head scratchers. LT has
> > bailed his ass out on more than one occasion. In the Bronx, we would
> > say that he just doesn't have the "moxie." Can't wait till he's
> > tabbed by the Chargers to replace the mostly disappointing Norv. Next
> > year can't come quickly enough, in spite of the possibility that he
> > might finally "get it" due to the pretty incredible cast of players we
> > really do have.
>
> > As to your conversation with Glenn, I see both sides. But this team
> > does have the paper potential to become that well oiled, dominating
> > machine, hell bent on Vinceland.
>
> At this time last year we sat 3-3 & remember how everyone felt last
> year at this time? Jenkins lost for the year & a 3 game losing streak
> having just lost to Buffalo. Last year they made their corrections &
> improved ea week. Hopefully Ryan & company can do the same this year.
> We beat Minnesota who was coming off their bye week -- btw NE had 2
> weeks to prepare for Baltimore. We traveled to Denver & avoided the
> trap game.
>
> Sanchez can't play poorly. Not because he is young, but because in
> the NFL if your QB kills you, then you are screwed.
>
> Here is what we have left. We need to win 6 to make the play offs
> while winning 7 or 8 would be nice. That is possible.
>
> 8 Sun October 31 Green Bay Packers
> 9 Sun November 7 @ Detroit Lions
> 10 Sun November 14 @ Cleveland Browns
> 11 Sun November 21 Houston Texans
> 12 Thu November 25 Cincinnati Bengals
> 13 Mon December 6 @ New England Patriots
> 14 Sun December 12 Miami Dolphins
> 15 Sun December 19 @ Pittsburgh Steelers
> 16 Sun December 26 @ Chicago Bears
> 17 Sun January 2 Buffalo Bills
That's a challenging 4-game stretch NE - Chicago. Would be nice to win
our next 5 entering that MNF clash at Foxboro.
JetsLife
> On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 12:03:52 -0700 (PDT), Johnny Morongo
> I have to see us against the Pats again, to see if the 2nd half was real or not.
>
>
>
>
>
> >But you're right. We haven't played a complete game against a quality
> >team, the 2nd half of the Pats game not withstanding. Spurts, but
> >nothing smooth, nothing well oiled. The erratic nature of the offense
> >still seems to me to be due to Shott's lack of "feel." Thus the
> >occasional brilliant call, but many more head scratchers. LT has
> >bailed his ass out on more than one occasion. In the Bronx, we would
> >say that he just doesn't have the "moxie." Can't wait till he's
> >tabbed by the Chargers to replace the mostly disappointing Norv. Next
> >year can't come quickly enough, in spite of the possibility that he
> >might finally "get it" due to the pretty incredible cast of players we
> >really do have.
>
> >As to your conversation with Glenn, I see both sides. But this team
> >does have the paper potential to become that well oiled, dominating
> >machine, hell bent on Vinceland.
>
> Once Revis is back to Revis, that will help, but even when we blitz, we're rarely even
> close to pressuring the QB. I think, if I remember correctly, we had 1 sack & 1 hit
> yesterday. Of course, with the Broncs passing attack, our D was more backloaded than it
> is normally, which is one reason they ran so effectively.
> Our next draft needs to focus on finding us a pass rush... and building depth.
The lack of pass rush is troubling. But, you are mistaken the Jets
blitzing pass rush doesn't generate pressure. You're only counting
sacks and hits. Rushed throws are almost as effective. I wouldn't be
surprised if the Jets are among the league leaders in rushing opposing
QBs' throws.
Tutor
> In article <ojksb61gpusv3bd2slpf8neorn59o1r...@4ax.com>,
>
>
>
>
>
> buRford <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote:
>
> - Show quoted text -
I have it on my DVR. I have not looked at it a second time, but I
recall the camera focusing on Sanchez scrambling and not on where the
receivers were. I'll look at it again tonight but I don't think I'm
going to learn much
Harlan Lachman
<cb1a4a6f-d4fa-49e6...@a37g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>,
Tutor <dcat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Thanks David. I erased the game as being unwatchable even after I knew
they won.
I doubt you will see anything from a TV view. God I miss being in the
upper deck in Shea and watching the first second of line play and then
watching the routes and defenders employed.
h
Tutor
>
> - Show quoted text -
then come to a game with us Harlan. Its not that far from Vermont.
Glenn Greenstein
> wouldn't be surprised.
> If ya read what I said, I'm not giving Cimini any credit. What I was doing was asking if
> anyone that recorded the game, was able to see what routes our receivers ran, because
> Cimini said they all went deep... after he reviewed the game tapes.
Burf, even if they all went deep, it doesn't mean the call was bad. as
I mentioned in the other thread, receivers make defensive reads as
well, it isn't you run this route even if there are 5 guys clogging
the under routes, they have a secondary route they run if the primary
one isn't there or they won't be open. If the Broncs were all sitting
on the under routes it is possible they al went deep and rightfully.
>
>
>
> >> As I said, numerous times in this thread, Cimini's a jerk, but since he's saying this, I'd
> >> like to know what the play was.
>
> >I don't get it, why would you think Cimini knew what was called. Does
> >Schott confer with him on the play selection? Was he in the huddle
> >with the Jets players during the down?
>
> Again, read what was written. He said he reviewed the tapes... and everyone went deep.
>
> >> I realize this does't meet your posting requirements, of ignoring everything, other than
> >> whether the Jets won, but hey, I'm interested.- Hide quoted text -
> >Never said that Burf, what annoys me is all anyone talks about is what
> >the Jets did wrong here.
>
> ALL anyone talks about is what went wrong?
> Or, is it that's all you see people posting?
> I see people posting about strengths, weaknesses, what & how to improve our deficiencies,
> etc.- Hide quoted text -
Sorry Burf, other than Jets Life, I don't see anyone posting about
what a good game let alone season Coleman is having, how Sanchez
actually is making better decissions, etc. About the only thing
mentioned I can recall is about Slauson.
JetsLife
> What I see is that often when we do generate pressure, that's when our 2ndary is getting
> torched. This past week, Rex put more emphasis on coverage... numbers in the 2ndary. I
> think this game, he had the most active DBs this season.
I'll have to go back and review the tape to confirm from my end. I
wonder.
But let's say you're data is accurate. Somewhat limiting Denver's
prolific passing game - with Moreno back - was key, and not half bad.
It ain't just about the pass rush with us (or most defenses) - it's
our pass defense as a whole. And we continue to lead the league in
opposing QBs' completion %. That stat has something to do with being
5-1. It's not an end-all stat but most teams in the top 10 are legit
playoff contenders.
JetsLife
> On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 10:40:47 -0700 (PDT), JetsLife <JetsL...@aol.com> wrote:
> What I see is that often when we do generate pressure, that's when our 2ndary is getting
> torched. This past week, Rex put more emphasis on coverage... numbers in the 2ndary. I
> think this game, he had the most active DBs this season.
Watching the first few defensive series it looks like you're wrong. A
pass rush isn't only judged by if it gets home; it's judged by if the
QB rushes his throw. QBs are as human as you and I. When they see 5,
6, 7 people lined up rushers lined up pre snap who then, they react.
It shortens their internal clock of having to get rid of the ball.
If you have the game please review. So far, the tape says you're
wrong. Will keep you posted as the game wears on.
Before Jets/Minny on MFN Countdown, Tom Jackson said he did some
counting of how much time opposing QBs have had to throw against the
Jets. He said 2.8 seconds. It's not just about sacks and hits but
speeding up the opposing QBs internal clock because he knows he's
about to get smashed. When the QB gets hit he and the entire feel it.
Harlan Lachman
<6235eb9a-48d2-44e8...@u10g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>,
Glenn Greenstein <lex...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Sorry Burf, other than Jets Life, I don't see anyone posting about
> what a good game let alone season Coleman is having,
Glenn, I know I posted a mea culpa about Coleman. I wanted him off the
team last year. He has been a key component of our 5-1 record given the
failure of Wilson and Pool and Revis' absence.
Ironically, I think he performs best in man coverage and makes errors on
blitzes and zones, but Drew deserves to be a jet.
Eric Smith, OTOH, should only play on specials. Or not at all.
harlan