The Rams had a better record than us heading into this game, and had just tied a 9ers team that raped us.
i guess it wasnt the receivers fault this week. they must have all learned how to run the right routes while everyone else was having press conferences. frenbar, 51 different places... damn man thats alot of broken.
So what? They also took it up the ass from the same Pats team that was lucky to beat us. The Rams are awful. I can't believe how many "experts" predicted they would beat us.
Every play. I was very confident going into this game. We're a better team than the Rams. They have one weapon. I didn't expect them to be able to do much scoring against our defense. All we had to do was take care of the ball ... and for a change, we actually did that. With that said, that doesn't mean that Sanchez won't hand the game to the Pats on Thurdsay. That's always in the mix.
The Rams have a middle of the pack defense, its their offense(O-Line) That is bad....their defense has kept the Rams in games. Lets not try and deflect anything here, the Rams have a pretty good secondary with 4 very good players in Finnegan, Mikel, Jenkins and Johnson. Outside of that Pats and Bears games(Arguably two top 5 teams right now), they have been in many of their games including tough losses to Detroit week 1, tough loss vs Miami via missed kicks. They beat a Seattle team that laid us out and stood with the Packers in a somewhat competitive game. As for the Frenbar comment....that's weak. If you want to root against Sanchez because you detest him, that's fine I guess....but to want the man to get injured because he "Makes millions of dollars!" is shallow and weak and you lose the right to be called a "Fan of the game" with that mindset.
Well, the topic in question was why St. Louis was favored. Our offense hadn't scored a TD in the previous 8 or 9 quarters. That probably had something to do with it.
How do you go from breaking his legs in 51 different places to a non-serious injury is what I don't understand.
I loved this game for the simple reason it confirms my original thoughts that Sanchez can both suck and be the best NY Jets QB on the roster at the same time.
If you thought he sucked yesterday you may want to start following a different game b/c you have no idea what you are watching. mark Sanchez was OUTSTANDING yesterday. His season is still a bad one overall but if he plays like this the rest of the way we are very much in the playoff race.
mark did have a pretty good game yesterday, but I wouldn't call it outstanding. only qb who had an outstanding game over the weekend was schaub. not hating on mark or anything, outstanding is a bit much imho
Schaub was outstanding b/c he threw a screen pass to Andre Johnson and Andre did all the work? Schaub did throw an INT in OT(as well as one in the 4th) that could have cost them the game. He did a great job leading them back from 14 down(his INT set up that deficit) but Schaub was not outstanding b/c he had a million yards and possibly the best WR in the game who had almost 300 yds receiving. Chad Henne was better than Schaub in that game.
I've been reading this thread, not all 130++ pages, but most of them. It seems that if you discard "Sanchez no matter what" and "Anyone but Sanchez" fractions -- both relatively small -- the vast majority seems to agree that: (a) Sanchez is not the ideal QB and (b) However non-ideal, Sanchez is the best option Jets currently have. In other words -- pretty much what Ryan was saying. I'm willing to give Sanchez a little bit of space, but only until the next bone-headed turnover. As soon as he throw his patented red-zone pick, he's out and McElroy is in.
If you bought into the NFL hype that every playoff team is outstanding and a bunch of mediocre 4 and 6 games are still in the playoff hunt and potentially outstanding then Mark was outstanding yesterday against a potential playoff team on the road in the outstanding Rams team we faced and our record is currently potentially outstanding.
The game has to be in a manageable state for him to manage well. In 2009 and 2010 there was enough talent around him and the defense was good enough that games tended to stay manageable. The run game was good enough that he had a basis to manage from. The receivers were good enough that his inconsistency on throws didn't kill the Jets. Give him all that and he can take you to 7 on one drive in a minute thirty as well as anybody in the game, because he really doesn't care about throwing balls into tight places where they might get picked and he has the knack for doing both of those things pretty well (throwing the ball into tight places and occasionally getting picked.) He's the anti-Chad. His play is ugly a lot of the time but he can elevate it at the end of a tight game if all the other conditions are right. Chad looked great for 58 minutes and then was useless in a 2 minute drive because he wouldn't throw the ball into tight spaces and he would never risk a pick if he had a checkdown available instead.
