It's Rex's fault! It's Rex's fault!
Grinch
the Jets were on the verge of losing when McCoy connected with Chasni
Stuckey ..." only to be saved by the gift fumble. [NY Post]
Did that have anything to do with the game being close? Having a 4th-
game QB "carve up" our D in clutch time like that?
Would that have happened last year?
As the O has collected near 900 yards in the last two games, winning
with clutch big pass plays at the end of the half and regulation and
in overtime, with the baby QB getting better and better, we hear over
and over from the experts that It's Schott's Fault! No, no, not
Sanchez getting better and better, and all the big plays, and the 900
yards. That's not Schott's fault. :-)
It's Schott's fault that the wins weren't bigger, the 7-2 isn't real,
there are unappreciated weaknesses on this team that keep it from
being a real contender -- which, as the result of their detailed
expert parsing of the O, they know are Schott's fault!
After all, this team was Championship Game quality last year, and with
all the great talent brought in this year it should be much better
than it has shown. *Something* must be disappointing, holding the team
back. QED: It's Schott's Fault!.
I agree. Something *is* holding the team back, stopping the team from
blowing out the opposition. But I think I've found something else
(though apparently it is so small and subtle that even all our experts
here have missed it):
Jets pass defense:
....................... 2009 .... 2010
passing rating .......1 .......... 23
Yards/game ..........1 ........... 18
Yards/attempt ...... 1 .......... 7-9
Yards/completion .. 2 .......... 31
Interception % ......11 ......... 30
Sack yards ........... 8 .......... 16
AYA/A*..................1 .......... 20
(* Yards passing - sack yards - 45 per int +20 per TD, divided by
attempts, the one stat that correlates most strongly with winning.)
Notice anything?
I know a lot of the people here don't like fancy stathead metrics, so
those are just the straight old stats from NFL.com, except for AYA/A.
(For any who do like stathead metrics, Advanced NFL Stats has the Jets
pass D at #19, down from #1 last year, and FOers has it at #21 down
from #1.)
WTF? Didn't they tell me the disappointment this year has been the
offense?
Does defense affect the score in games?
The Jets pass D has *plunged* from league-dominating to *below
average*. How much of an "expert" does one have to be to see the
difference between being ranked 1 and 23 by passing rating, and 2 and
31 on yards per completion?
We all know the Jets aren't built to win a championship with the
passing O, it's just supposed to be competitive, the kid QB protected
and set-up by the ground and pound as he learns.
.
But they ARE built to win a championship with a dominating pass
defense, like last year's. Does anyone see a problem here relating to
that?
The defense brings in big new talent in Cromartie, Taylor, Wilson,
etc., and has plunged! Who can be responsible?
Hey ... It's Rex's Fault!
Meanwhile the passing O has significantly improved from last year:
Jets O rankings
passing rating:
2010: # 19
2009: # 29
AYA/A:
2010: # 16
2009: # 27
In fact, the Jets passing O now ranks *higher* than the pass D!
Jets O passing rating: # 19
Jets D passing rating: # 23
Jets offense AYA/A: # 16
Jets defense AYA/A: # 20
Yup, our "Schitty" pass offense ranks higher than our Rextastic! pass
defense.
This is in spite of the passing O being handicapped by, everyone will
admit, an inexperienced baby QB still learning his way, while the D is
all veteran and loaded with all-star talent all over the place!
The offense has brought in new talent and gotten better. What excuse
does the defense have to bring in all the new talent and get worse --
to have fallen all the way from #1 in the league to even worse than
Schott's offense?
It's Rex's fault!!
Let's follow the logic: The team is disappointing -- even failing in
expert opinion -- because it hasn't improved enough from last year.
The offense has improved significantly from last year. The defense
has plunged from last year.
Following the iron law of justice that places accountabililty upon he
who deserves it, that "fair is fair"....
It's the OC's fault!
No, sorry, SDS almost got me ... It's Rex's Fault!!!
This team is 7-2 because the *run* D is very good, the run O is good,
the passing O has improved from last year, special teams are generally
good, and they've been lucky in a bunch of close games. That looks
good enough to get to the playoffs. But the passing D that was the
backbone of the team last year is no more.
And the skeptics are right, the Jets are going to have a real tough
time fighting their way through the playoffs to a title with pass D
that fallen to a quality rank near 20.
What excuse can there be for the pass D falling so far after adding so
much new talent? None. It's Rex's Fault!!!!
What excuse can there be for so many expert observers in this ng not
even seeing it? Only one: Schott Derangement Syndrome!
When our resident experts finally notice this fall in the D -- *and*
consider the effect on the points-for-against and W-L that can be
expected when a team's passing D falls from being ranked
"#1+dominating" to "below average" -- I'll consider them to be taking
the first steps towards recovery, and might weigh their expertise as
being worth considering again. If they stop being so self-righteous
about it.
Until then, hmmmm....'
Looking at the way the passing O has gotten better and the pass D has
plunged... maybe the problem is that Woody hasn't given Schott enough
power over the defense!
Michael
<Snip the clinical bs>
Wanna know why the offense had production the past two weeks ??? The
skill level and INDIVIDUAL play of Sanchez. Not the play calling.
You can not say that all that escape artist stuff by Sanchez and the
home run throwing had a single thing to so with Schotty.
And yes... The defense Rex called was IMHO partly at fault for letting
the Browns tie it up. Part of the reason was good receptions made by
the Browns in excellent coverage, but there still should have been
more pressure put on the pocket.
Rex made a few mistakes... Schotty makes them all the time.
Schotty sucks.
Harlan Lachman
<fa04bebb-1c73-47df...@l17g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,
Michael <mjd...@verizon.net> wrote:
Michael you are wrong. Rex is the HC.
The mistake Rex makes all the time is letting Shotty call the plays
without any feel for the opponent or a game situation.
Rex is also responsible for play design that is cutsie instead of just
going after the opposing D with zone blocking and cut backs after
spreading the box wide with two dangerous WR and sometimes a TE. None
of the motion is needed (except to spring a WR being held at LOS).
Shotty is just doing his job as well as he can. Rex is abrogating his
responsibilities.
Harlan
Michael
> In article
> <fa04bebb-1c73-47df-852a-b55f90a3d...@l17g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,
>
> - Show quoted text -
did rex hire schotty ???
i like woody but he is not a perfect owner. woody gave rex his job
and woody also gave rex his oc at the same time. i think woody is
impressed by schotty.
i credit woody for rex and blame him for schotty
papa.carl44
"Michael" <mjd...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:fa04bebb-1c73-47df...@l17g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
<Snip the clinical bs>
Schotty sucks.
Michael...here is a prime example. Some of us are not supposed to criticize
Schott and if we do we will get blasted. Yet all these other guys can mock,
ridicule...whatever it is...and it sure sounds like the kid on the
playground with all the "I'ts Rex / Schotts Fault" stuff. I know I never
said it was Schotts fault...I have said I don't like him as an offensive
coordinator and I don't think he gets the most out of what he has to play
with. But the point here is...how is this fair game and anything you, Burf,
me or Johnny says not?
papa.carl44
I have no proof..but I do know Schott was there first, and I do know that
Woody and Marty are friends and have been for some time. Marty even did
some speaking engagements for Woody in his many endeavors in Jersey. So I
make a connection. I have not seen anything to tell me it does not make
sense. When Woody wanted Favre he got him. And...although I really don't
care for Francesa I think his analogy of Woody not liking Mangini is
probably accurate. Woody loves attention, and Rex brings it, so Rex gets
away with some of the unorthodox behavior.
Michael
wrote:
> "Michael" <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote in message
i expect to get blasted here but i dont take it personal. i dont
think much of schotty. this is based on his history of constant
mornic calls and lack of adjustments. sanchez wins two games with
personal skill and heroic effort and a few people take it as an
oppertunity to poke fun at the anti-shottists.
schotty sucks
Johnny Morongo
OK, you granite headed stat master, You're absolutely right. There
is a big problem with the D. I don't know what it is, but even I can
see that we get eaten up over the middle. Are Scott and Harris less
productive this year than last? Do we need a Carrie? Someone has got
to address those hard questions with Rex. What's different? I know
for a fact that Revis has never been eaten up by a TE like he was
yesterday. Could it be that The Island is now accepting tourists
every week?
But that's not the point, is it? You want me to say that Schitt is
doing a damn fine job, right? Sorry G(ranite), What is Schott's fault
has to do with the haphazard construction of his game plans.
All you have to do is to look at the Brown's last regulation drive and
the one that ended with Stuckey's fumble. They were well organized
and oiled drives that had a beat, a tempo to them that our offense
lacks. That 10 minute drive? What was smooth about that? "Fits and
starts" is the characteristic I most see in the O. Sanchez and his
weapons made some extraordinary plays that were not a product of the
Offensive design, i.e. Sanchez's TD dive, for only one.
The waste and misuse of the talent on offense IS CERTAINLY Schitt's
fault. And the D has big problems. If they get to the playoffs
playing like they have been, on both sides of the ball, they'll be an
easy out. Luck tends to run out, especially against quality
opponents.
Johnny Morongo
> In article
> <fa04bebb-1c73-47df-852a-b55f90a3d...@l17g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,
>
>
>
Nothin' wrong with your eyesight, Harlan. Calls 'em likes ya sees 'em.
Johnny Morongo
Fixed.
Harlan Lachman
<378035df-a34c-4275...@h21g2000vbh.googlegroups.com>,
Johnny Morongo <mire...@yahoo.com> wrote:
For the record, it is the same problem. The Defensive calls have lacked
sense too and have cost us, especially with that slow POS Smith playing
safety, plays that put Leonhard one on one with no LB jamming throwing
lanes against huge WR and TE, and the failure of Kyle and rarely Drew to
play consistently well.
H
Harlan Lachman
<a683dcfe-90a4-42e2...@y37g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
Michael <mjd...@verizon.net> wrote:
If Rex had said him or me, do you think he would not have the job? If
Rex said Shott has to go, do you think Woody would fire Shott.
This is silly.
And if it was true, at this point, Ryan could have any job he wanted.
harlan
Grinch
Youze guyz are amazin'!!!
I point out that -- on this team that was built to win with *defense*,
and which gained all its success last year with *defense* -- the pass
DEFENSE has plunged from #1 to circa 20th....
... and all you guys talk about in response is Schott!!! Schott!
Schott! Schott! Schott! Schott! Schott!
Of the 13 responses I've seen 12 1/2 have been about Schott!!!! ????
Fellows, this is an unhealthy obsession. Try to get a grip.
Papa, *forget* Schott, if you can. Try. Just answer this question:
In year one a team had the #1 defense in the league and in particular
the #1 passing D by near *every* significant measure. It is the
foundation upon which the team's success is built. The O is mediocre,
average, for whatever reason, doesn't matter.
In year two that team's passing D falls to the bottom part of the
league: 23rd in opponents' passing rating, 31st in yards per
completion, etc.
How much would you figure that would probably hurt the team's results,
by points f/a, W-L etc?
Forget the offense -- even you and Burf wouldn't blame such a fall of
the Defense on the OC (I think). Assume the offense stays the same,
no change.
How much would you expect such a fall of the D on a D-based team to
hurt the team?
A little? A lot? Would it reduce the number of one-sided victories?
Enquiring minds want to know.
Grinch
Ah, points for you! In touch with an important reality. Full credit.
See, it doesn't take much. :-)
> I don't know what it is, but even I can
> see that we get eaten up over the middle. Are Scott and Harris less
> productive this year than last? Do we need a Carrie? Someone has got
> to address those hard questions with Rex. What's different? I know
> for a fact that Revis has never been eaten up by a TE like he was
> yesterday. Could it be that The Island is now accepting tourists
> every week?
I don't know. One can't see what the full D is doing on TV even if
Tivo'd. Not knowing what the D is doing is significant ignorance, and
it drives me to be more modest than many other people around here when
it comes to critcizing co-ordinators.
But there is an obvious pattern. Rex's D puts priority #1 on forcing
incomplete passes, at the risk of giving up big gains, more than any
other D I've ever seen ever.
Last year it was hugely successful. The D was #1 in allowing the
fewest completion and #2 in allowing the fewest yards per completion.
Compounding those numbers = dominance, #1 defense in passing rating
overall.
This year the D is still #1 in allowing the fewest completions but #31
in yards per completion. It could be just that opposing OCs have
figured out how to make Rex pay a price for all bringing all that
heat. It leaves a lot of empty space back there, maybe they've
figured out how to exploit it with their completions.
Whatever, compounding those numbers gets the #23 defense in passing
rating overall.
> But that's not the point, is it? You want me to say that Schitt is
> doing a damn fine job, right?
Um, no. Damn, now you're down to half credit.
Quote *one* post I ever wrote in my entire life where I said Schott is
doing "a damn fine job" or *anything* like it.
But Geeze Marie, you guys go on and on about how the team is
disappointing this year, we expect more, we're winning too many close
games, which is underachieving .... and the only reason given is
Schott, Schott, Schott.
You know, a lot of people think 7-2 isn't disappointing, and that
winning close games is the mark of a good team. But forget that.
Let's agree the team *is* in fact disappointing, under-achieving this
year.
Then when someone says maybe part of the reason is the baby, still-
learning QB with the league bottom completion %, the reply is:
"There's nothing wrong with the QB, it's Schott! ... That's an
attempt at complete exoneration of Schott!! "
Or someone says, maybe the reason is that the pass D has plunged from
#1 to #23, and the reply is: "that's not the point, is it? You want
me to say that Schitt is doing a damn fine job, right?"
No ... it IS point! You've never once seen me write that Schott is
doing a good job. So why do you throw up a bogus straw man falsely
claiming that's what I say, and then answer it by going into another
listing of Schott's failings? Schott! Schott! Schott!
WTF does this obsession come from?
> Sorry G(ranite), What is Schott's fault
> has to do with the haphazard construction of his game plans...
Geeze Marie II.
Let's say Schott is an average OC. Average is a lot worse than very
good, so it leaves plenty to criticize, so that ought to make people
happy. But he's still not holding back the team compared to the rest
of the league.
Or let's say he sucks. I don't give a rat's ass. He sucks, OK?
Now let's agree the team is underperforming compared to expectations,
should be doing better.
And let's ask: What is the primary cause of this under-performance,
these disappointed expectations?
Now let's look at some facts:
Jets O passing ranking 2009: #29
Jets O passing ranking 2010: #19 -- better
Jets D passing ranking 2009: # 1
Jets D passing ranking 2010: # 23 -- *much* worse
Now, in your honest opinion, after looking at that, is the *primary*
cause of the under-performance, the disappointed expectations...
a) Schott's offense
b) The plunge of the passing defense
Pick one.
Papa, Burf, anyone else who wants to play, feel free to look at that
and *pick one* too.
> All you have to do is to look at the Brown's last regulation drive and
> the one that ended with Stuckey's fumble. They were well organized
> and oiled drives that had a beat, a tempo to them that our offense
> lacks. That 10 minute drive? What was smooth about that?
Geeze Marie III.
You criticize a 10-minute drive because it lacked a beat and tempo you
like?
When did this become Dancing With The Stars? :-)
> "Fits and
> starts" is the characteristic I most see in the O. Sanchez and his
> weapons made some extraordinary plays that were not a product of the
> Offensive design, i.e. Sanchez's TD dive, for only one.
>
> The waste and misuse of the talent on offense IS CERTAINLY Schitt's
> fault. And the D has big problems. If they get to the playoffs
> playing like they have been, on both sides of the ball, they'll be an
> easy out. Luck tends to run out, especially against quality
> opponents.- Hide quoted text -
Johnny Morongo
First of all. it's Jeeze Louise.
Look, stone head, I already acknowledged that you're right about the D.
But if you will look back at my comments about the Schitt offense, and
then look at your responses, you'll notice that you have nothing to say
about them. All you do is fall back, ad nausem, on you brilliant
observations about the D.
You say:
> Let's say Schott is an average OC. Average is a lot worse than very
> good, so it leaves plenty to criticize, so that ought to make people
> happy. But he's still not holding back the team compared to the rest
> of the league.
But perhaps you have missed the point about our effectiveness in the Red
Zone? On the season, we're 11 for 28, a 39.3% TD rate that is 30th in
the league. In case you haven't noticed, the D is not on the field for
these instances. Last week, the only Red Zone TD came off a busted play
that resulted in Sanchez's TD dive. We failed on three other tries.
This, more than the mediocre efforts of the E, is the reason that we've
played so many close games.
So go on pouring out the stats, but maybe you could watch the games too?
Grinch
Who was talking about Louise? I left out the reference to Joseph for
propriety's sake.
> Look, stone head, I already acknowledged that you're right about the D.
> But if you will look back at my comments about the Schitt offense, and
> then look at your responses, you'll notice that you have nothing to say
> about them.
I look and see I did say something about them.
You criticized a 10-minute drive, not for something like its ending in
a stupid turnover or not scoring, but because you didn't like its
"beat and tempo". And I said, "When did this become Dancing With the
Stars?"
Since you missed my point there, let me make it clear: *Nothing* is
more subjective and made up, or more irrelevant to winning, than
whether someone dislikes the "music of the offense". Hey, tastes in
music vary, maybe others *did* like the beat and tempo of that drive.
But its still irrelevant to winning.
Did you like the "beat and tempo" of the big scoring passes at the end
of the half, regulation, and start of OT of the Det game? And in OT to
win on Sunday?
I sure did. If you didn't, well, tastes in music vary. But it doesn't
matter to winning.
Do you think that Vince Lombardi practiced the Packer sweep with samba
drums in the background because if Jim Taylor stepped on guy's throat
to the wrong tempo a 10-minute drive was a bust?
> All you do is fall back, ad nausem, on you brilliant
> observations about the D.
Not at all. I made the exact same observations about the offense,
comparing them by the exact same stats. Refreshing your memory,
here's the summary:
> > Jets O passing ranking 2009: #29
> > Jets O passing ranking 2010: #19 -- better
>
> > Jets D passing ranking 2009: # 1
> > Jets D passing ranking 2010: # 23 -- *much* worse
See? How much more balanced could I be?
When the question is: "Is the primary cause of the team's
disappointing perfomance the play of the O or the D?", the play of the
D is entirely relevant.
But you duck the question, don't answer -- snip it like it wasn't
asked -- and rush back to bashing Schott! Schott! Schott!
> You say:
> > Let's say Schott is an average OC. Average is a lot worse than very
> > good, so it leaves plenty to criticize, so that ought to make people
> > happy. But he's still not holding back the team compared to the rest
> > of the league.
Actually what I said was:
>> Or let's say he sucks. I don't give a rat's ass. He sucks, OK?
> But perhaps you have missed the point about our effectiveness in the Red
> Zone? On the season, we're 11 for 28, a 39.3% TD rate....
Geeze, Maire and Jusef.
I say: "He sucks. I don't give a rat's ass. He sucks, OK?"
You snip that so you can pretend I defended him, then start attacking
him again to refute my defense and prove to me he sucks!
WTF is wrong with you people? Take an anti-obsession pill.
> that is 30th in
> the league. In case you haven't noticed, the D is not on the field for
> these instances. Last week, the only Red Zone TD came off a busted play
> that resulted in Sanchez's TD dive. We failed on three other tries.
I'll grant you that all the recent big game-saving and winning passes
at the end of the half and regulation, and in OT and OT, were thrown
from well outside the red zone. :-)
And btw, if red zone stats are the *only* ones that impress you, do
you know who has the highest scoring pct in the red zone this season,
#1? Buffalo. They are 1-8. #2 is Detroit, they are 2-7.
That's how well red zone scoring rate matches up with winning.
But Buffalo and Detroit, they don't hit the big passes thrown from
outside the red zone.
> This, more than the mediocre efforts of the E,
> is the reason that we've played so many close games.
I don't know what "E" is.
But anyhow, you snipped and ducked the question. Give a straight
answer, and as long as you say it is your opinion and not some kind of
proven fact, I will politely respect it and we can move on. Really.
To wit:
> > Let's say he sucks. I don't give a rat's ass. He sucks, OK?
> >
> > And let's ask: What is the primary cause of this under-performance,
> > these disappointed expectations?
>
> > Now let's look at some facts:
>
> > Jets O passing ranking 2009: #29
> > Jets O passing ranking 2010: #19 -- better
>
> > Jets D passing ranking 2009: # 1
> > Jets D passing ranking 2010: # 23 -- *much* worse
>
> > Now, in your honest opinion, after looking at that, is the *primary*
> > cause of the under-performance, the disappointed expectations...
>
> > a) Schott's offense
> > b) The plunge of the passing defense
>
> > Pick one.
In the light of those *facts* above, if you still want to say the
Jets' below-expectation performance is primarily *not* due to the big
plunge of the defense, but due to the offense in spite of its ranking
gain and statistical improvement, because all that improvement is more
than offset by the poor "beat and tempo" of Schott's play calling, and
poor red zone performance such as Buffalo and Detroit excel at, go
ahead.
Just say that's your opinion. We're all entitled to our opinions. No
matter how strange. :-)
>>Papa, Burf, anyone else who wants to play, feel free to look at that
>>and *pick one* too.
> So go on pouring out the stats, but maybe you could watch the games too?
I watch 'em all and Tivo 'em all.
In last week's game I saw an O earn near 400 yards and 26 points (2 of
the 3 FGs should been hit) in regulation, both well above league
average.
I also saw a D get carved up by a 4th-game rookie QB to get the tying
score (right through the red zone!) as time ran out to send it into
OT, and continue to carve up the D at the start of OT until we got a
"thank God!" game-saving fumble.
The D in the clutch failed just as the O in the clutch excelled the
prior week.
Hmmm .... Now *why* was that game close?
What game did you watch?
Grinch
> X-No-Archive: Yes
>
> Johnny, I can think of at least two times in the red zone it was 100%
> on Sanchez for screwing the pooch & missing an open man and I watch on
> TV. If we score 2X that bumps us up 8%. Watching more film probably
> would lead to more.
>
> I am not saying Sanchez sucks but using this stat to hang Schott is
> questionable.
>
> btw we were 50% last year does that mean Schott is good or bad?
The teams that are #1 and #2 at red zone efficiency are Buffalo, 1-8,
and Detroit, 2-7.
While right next to us at the bottom is the Steelers. Their OC, Bruce
Arians, obviously sucks. How Pitt hopes to win more than one Super
Bowl with an OC who's league-bottom at scoring in the red zone is a
mystery!
What this all *really* means is that "red zone efficiency" is one of
those crap statistics that mean nothing that TV commentators use to
fill time on the air.
The problem with it that makes it meaningless crap is small sample
size.
Spend your life in a casino thowing a pair of dice 100,000 times and
the numbers you will see come up most often, in order, are 7, 6 and 8
(equal), 5 and 9 (equal)...
Go to a casino for a day, throw a pair of dice five times, and who
knows what you will roll? Maybe 2x boxcars and 3x snake eyes.
Red zone plays are a *very small* portion of total plays. So a team's
"efficiency" there is basically a random number. That's why you get
#1 Buffalo and #2 Detroit at a combined 3-15, and Schott's and other
OCs' numbers being high one year and low the next, and a Super Bowl
winning OC like Arians at the bottom of the league.
Random numbers mean nothing.
The best *predictor* of future red zone play is the offense's (or
defense's) level of play outside the red zone. When the number of red
zone plays becomes large enough there is no difference between
efficiency in and outside of the red zone. But you have to add up
multiple seasons to get a large enough number from in the red zone.
John C TX
> Random numbers mean nothing.
>
> The best *predictor* of future red zone play is the offense's (or
> defense's) level of play outside the red zone. When the number of red
> zone plays becomes large enough there is no difference between
> efficiency in and outside of the red zone. But you have to add up
> multiple seasons to get a large enough number from in the red zone.
No kidding trying to assess an offense on 28 plays is idiotic. Then
the fall back position is, "I trust what I see. " Ignoring offsides,
dropped passes, guards bumping into runners, QB not seeing the open
man & when he does, missing them. They see things but not those
things. Johnny at least was smart enough to see that the Packer game
was on the receivers.
BicketyBam
95cae6...@g25g2000yqn.googlegroups.com:
Excellent post and I agree. The defense has given me more agita than the
offense this year. Henne lit us up for 350+ yards. Farve looked reborn
in the second half. Denver moved the ball up and down the field. If
Stafford doesn't get hurt, we probably lose the Lions game. And the Jets
D choked up the lead to Colt McCoy.
That being said, we have two losses on the year and we have given up a
combined 19 points in those loses. Hard to blame the D for that ;)