Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: The Jets D...
1 view
Skip to first unread message
Message has been deleted
WaterBoy
Oct 17, 2011, 9:31:44 PM10/17/11
to
"buRford" <buR...@buR.ford.com> wrote in message
news:balp97dairnv8r5qv...@4ax.com...
> Fascinating how bad the Jets D has been looking, these past few weeks.
> I'm beginning to think that they're kinda losing their intensity, not sure
> why, but with
> an O that does endless 3 & outs, I suspect it may be getting to them.
>
> This O is just a total mess. And there seems to be a growing discontent
> among the
> players, which may be infecting the D.
> Amazing how, again, against a poor pass D, most of the passes are short.
> Ingenius gameplan.
Hmmm, you can add another 3 and out. That makes 4 in a row! Great game plan
against one of the worst teams in the league!
WaterBoy
Message has been deleted
Papa Carl
Oct 18, 2011, 7:02:35 AM10/18/11
to
"buRford" <buR...@buR.ford.com> wrote in message
news:balp97dairnv8r5qv...@4ax.com...
> Fascinating how bad the Jets D has been looking, these past few weeks.
> I'm beginning to think that they're kinda losing their intensity, not sure
> why, but with
> an O that does endless 3 & outs, I suspect it may be getting to them.
>
> This O is just a total mess. And there seems to be a growing discontent
> among the
> players, which may be infecting the D.
> Amazing how, again, against a poor pass D, most of the passes are short.
> Ingenius gameplan.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
think....he has really regressed IMHO.
Message has been deleted
Michael
Oct 18, 2011, 1:13:45 PM10/18/11
to
On Oct 18, 8:21 am, buRford <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 07:02:35 -0400, "Papa Carl" <papa.c...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> >"buRford" <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote in message
> Obviously he's regressed, but is it because he's incapable of growing, or because he's not
> being mentored properly, and is running a dysfunctional offense?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
coaching and dysfunctional offense would be my guess. more
speculation... if the offense is not handed over to moore or a quality
OC, (and made free of any *ground and pound* involvement from rex),
sanchez is probably finished.
> On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 07:02:35 -0400, "Papa Carl" <papa.c...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> >"buRford" <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote in message
> being mentored properly, and is running a dysfunctional offense?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
coaching and dysfunctional offense would be my guess. more
speculation... if the offense is not handed over to moore or a quality
OC, (and made free of any *ground and pound* involvement from rex),
sanchez is probably finished.
Message has been deleted
Papa Carl
Oct 18, 2011, 2:59:40 PM10/18/11
to
news:9krq97h7lt9fm9jb9...@4ax.com...
have any idea what is really going on but something ain't right and I do not
think Rex looks very happy at all. But....even if the offense is not a well
designed one...some of those plays were not all that bad...the thing was
there...the guys are open and Sanchez can not hit them, he had time, lots of
time and he still can not deliver the ball....he can't lead people. Holmes
is the only one with hands fast enough to grab his stuff that is somewhat
off. Does he look this bad in practice????? If so, they know they have a
HUGE problem and they do not have the tools to go back to a ground attack.
Greene is NOT the guy, he has no vision and is actually slower than LT in
getting to the LOS. I agree...the O is terrible...but so is
Sanchez....could it be he is just confused, I guess it could...but even that
does not stop him from making a simple throw and catch play. He is way off
on some stuff. This is one reason I could not understand getting rid of
Cotch and Edwards....the QB was shaky enough without giving him new targets
to learn. None of this crap makes any sense if you look at it as a team
trying to seriously get better....it looks like a team trying to cut corners
and save money or something....they are just not good at all.
> Obviously he's regressed, but is it because he's incapable of growing, or
> because he's not
> being mentored properly, and is running a dysfunctional offense?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You know I'm not a fan of Schotts or even so much Rex now...I don't think we
> because he's not
> being mentored properly, and is running a dysfunctional offense?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
have any idea what is really going on but something ain't right and I do not
think Rex looks very happy at all. But....even if the offense is not a well
designed one...some of those plays were not all that bad...the thing was
there...the guys are open and Sanchez can not hit them, he had time, lots of
time and he still can not deliver the ball....he can't lead people. Holmes
is the only one with hands fast enough to grab his stuff that is somewhat
off. Does he look this bad in practice????? If so, they know they have a
HUGE problem and they do not have the tools to go back to a ground attack.
Greene is NOT the guy, he has no vision and is actually slower than LT in
getting to the LOS. I agree...the O is terrible...but so is
Sanchez....could it be he is just confused, I guess it could...but even that
does not stop him from making a simple throw and catch play. He is way off
on some stuff. This is one reason I could not understand getting rid of
Cotch and Edwards....the QB was shaky enough without giving him new targets
to learn. None of this crap makes any sense if you look at it as a team
trying to seriously get better....it looks like a team trying to cut corners
and save money or something....they are just not good at all.
Michael
Oct 18, 2011, 3:37:39 PM10/18/11
to
On Oct 18, 2:59 pm, buRford <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote:
> At 24... ok, almost 25?
>
> It's just remarkable to me, how many get so caught up in their emotions, & expectations,
> especially those that know what he's been dealing with, since drafted.
> There is such a vast range of territory, between bust & elite.
> I too, am concered that another year in this system, could scar him, but finished at this
> point? Nah ;)- Hide quoted text -
under schotty, he will regress furhter and wind up being a total
disaster. in that case, when he finds his next team as a low paid
back-up, it is possible he can learn somthing on the bench and return
as a starter a few years down the road... but one thing is for sure...
if he stays in this offense under schotty, he's done. and it will be
an ugly ride. you can see it already. his head is gone.
>
> It's just remarkable to me, how many get so caught up in their emotions, & expectations,
> especially those that know what he's been dealing with, since drafted.
> There is such a vast range of territory, between bust & elite.
> I too, am concered that another year in this system, could scar him, but finished at this
> point? Nah ;)- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
yeah... finished at 24... if he continues on this course with the jets
> - Show quoted text -
under schotty, he will regress furhter and wind up being a total
disaster. in that case, when he finds his next team as a low paid
back-up, it is possible he can learn somthing on the bench and return
as a starter a few years down the road... but one thing is for sure...
if he stays in this offense under schotty, he's done. and it will be
an ugly ride. you can see it already. his head is gone.
John C TX
Oct 18, 2011, 4:10:55 PM10/18/11
to
On Oct 18, 1:59 pm, "Papa Carl" <papa.c...@verizon.net> wrote:
> "buRford" <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote in message
>
> news:9krq97h7lt9fm9jb9...@4ax.com...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 07:02:35 -0400, "Papa Carl" <papa.c...@verizon.net>
> > wrote:
>
> >>"buRford" <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote in message
Papa, initially, & to some extent still do, I understood not signing
Edwards. He could get suspended. He was locker room issue. is there
anyone that likes Eric Smith better than Kerry Rhodes? Maybe Edwards
doesn't sign that deal with us the 49ers got but I wish we had him
instead of Burress.
I never understood letting Cotchery go or his request for a release.
He is in the last year of a contract & he thinks going to another team
late in camp will get him more catches?
Sanchez is a worry. I agree with what you wrote.
> "buRford" <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote in message
>
> news:9krq97h7lt9fm9jb9...@4ax.com...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 07:02:35 -0400, "Papa Carl" <papa.c...@verizon.net>
> > wrote:
>
> >>"buRford" <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote in message
Edwards. He could get suspended. He was locker room issue. is there
anyone that likes Eric Smith better than Kerry Rhodes? Maybe Edwards
doesn't sign that deal with us the 49ers got but I wish we had him
instead of Burress.
I never understood letting Cotchery go or his request for a release.
He is in the last year of a contract & he thinks going to another team
late in camp will get him more catches?
Sanchez is a worry. I agree with what you wrote.
Papa Carl
Oct 18, 2011, 5:38:04 PM10/18/11
to
"John C TX" <johnc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:96c25a41-23dd-496d...@31g2000prt.googlegroups.com...
something bad was on the near horizon...at least Cotch did. They aren't
dumb...maybe they wanted out and were vocal about it or made demands that
they knew would get them out the door. I don't think I'd want to be in the
middle of that offensive mess right now. We just have no idea. As for Eric
Smith? Rex's whole defense is set up to push receivers into the corners or
at least give the safety support...the old sky and clouds deal. For what he
wants to happen you need to have a LB in the short coverage, or a DB
replacing a LB....Smith can do that. What I think they are missing is the D
lineman or men who can put pressure on the QB without needing a bunch of
blitzes and schemes....if they had that at least once in a while the rest of
the deal falls into place and the safety (s) do not get hung out to dry as
much. Rex likes Smith because he can jump up into a LB slot and stay alive.
I'm not sure how Rhodes was at doing that.
Michael
Oct 18, 2011, 6:23:50 PM10/18/11
to
On Oct 18, 5:38 pm, "Papa Carl" <papa.c...@verizon.net> wrote:
> "John C TX" <johnctxj...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:96c25a41-23dd-496d...@31g2000prt.googlegroups.com...
> I'm not sure how Rhodes was at doing that.- Hide quoted text -
seven, preferably on the d-line that is a "disruptive", penitrating
player.. and i dont mean disruptive in the locker room. jenkins was
the last one they had. pouha, devito and k. ellis are good guys, but
none of them are the singular talent that the jets defense really
needs... the jets need another jenkins or a guy like suh or ware
> "John C TX" <johnctxj...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:96c25a41-23dd-496d...@31g2000prt.googlegroups.com...
>
> - Show quoted text -
agree... all the jets defense is missing is one singe guy in the front
> - Show quoted text -
seven, preferably on the d-line that is a "disruptive", penitrating
player.. and i dont mean disruptive in the locker room. jenkins was
the last one they had. pouha, devito and k. ellis are good guys, but
none of them are the singular talent that the jets defense really
needs... the jets need another jenkins or a guy like suh or ware
Papa Carl
Oct 18, 2011, 7:42:19 PM10/18/11
to
"Michael" <mjd...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:e6cdae50-ed77-4bd7...@u13g2000vbx.googlegroups.com...
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
0 new messages