I agree with what he is saying. People tend to remember the last drive of games, but that doesn't usually tell the story of the game. The story of the Jet Steeler game was in the first half. Neither the O or D played like they were capable of playing. The D let up 17 early points, and the O let up 7 while only producing 3. That's a losing formula, despite the good attempt in the 2nd half.
LOL, we've already had this debate, probably a couple hundred pages ago.. we won't agree, as you usually tend to emphasize last drives. on a side note, what is Garcia doing commenting on Tebow? He's not doing anyone any favors with that.
Baltimore's D got a stop late against den to give them a chance. Big time D's will get that stop, we had good Ds but not big time Ds.
So when the argument suits you, Baltimore has a big time D who made a play. When it suits you another way, Peyton choked. Or when people point out Denver's D blowing it, and Peyton played a good game, you suddenly look at the entire game including the ST TD's they scored in first half, but not the D giving up that late pass.. Sometimes its just the last drive for you, sometimes its the full game in 'context'. I'm not arguing a moving target with you. For me the turning point in Steelers game was the fumble 6. For you the turning point in the Giants game was the 99yd TD. It's pretty obvious at this point we will see things the way we will see them. I look at the entire game, entire team effort.
I know I'll never change your mind, and I don't know that I'm even trying to because the above statement is correct. The D failed big time in that spot. But it is almost as if we are crediting Sanchez and the O for a drive we never even got to see happen. If the D gets that stop it is not guaranteed the Jets win. I tend to agree with you that had the D gotten that stop that Sanchez and the Jets had all the momentum they would have won because Sanchez still had the nerves of steel at that time. I am not going to sit here and lie and say I wasn't afraid my worst nightmare of the Jets going to the SB almost came true. That said, our speculation as to that is 100% meaningless so I am left to conclude that the D failed in the first half and final drive but the O did in the first half as well. It just was not enough. But I have to disagree that the D gets majority blame due to the fact that they happened to play worse in the 2nd half on that one drive while the O sputtered and Sanchez gave up points in the first half. They both count. We have to analyze it all. I know you like to say it is a D first team but in year 2, we now know that that could have been his chance to change that and take the reins and make it an O first team. Just my opinion. Completely possible that I'm wrong about that and that maybe a Rex Ryan led team never will be an O first team but I gotta give Rex credit enough to know that the league is moving towards that. Sorry for being longwinded
Prediction: Sanchez is released within the next 12 months. Another team signs him as a backup. The fan forum of this new team is inundated with posts, citing Sanchez was run out of town, never got a fair shot, blame belongs elsewhere, and he should be the starter of this new team. There will also be a lot of talk regarding a playoff win. Forum mods, in an attempt to contain the incessant posts, will create a new forum section called 'Sanchezmania' Does this sound at all familiar? Except i think Sanchezmania will have a population of 1.
I don't think Bal had a big time D but they made big stops when they had to. Did a choking manning play a role? maybe, we stopped Peyton in '10. How did a guy get 2 TDs on STs, turn it over 3 times which directly led to 17 pts including the GW FG for the team have a good game? STOP LOOKING AT STAT SHEETS AND WATCH THE GAMES PLEASE. The fumble for the TD wasn't actually a big deal if you look at it logically. Let's say he holds on to the ball(though it was really a pass not a fumble) and we punt. Pitt would have had good FP near midfield w/ over a minute to play and a TO. They likely get 3 and we wouldn't have had time to get 3 at the end of the half so instead of 24-3 it would have been 20-0- a whopping 1 pt swing. We come out and score and it would have been 20-7 instead of 24-10. Again a miniscule difference that wouldn't really have changed anything in the long run. It would have been 20-16 when the D had a chance to stop Pitt and give our O a chance instead of 24-19. The bottom line is w/ the SB on the line the D FAILED. Maybe, we'll never know. Nothing is guaranteed, against a tough top D it wouldn't have been easy but I wish we had the chance to find out. The situations are nothing alike.
lol, how many 'ifs' and 'likelys' can u put into one argument? Bottom line, net 10 points from an offense does not win championship games on the road, and the O FAILED! (see i can type caps to prove i'm right too). you'll never put any accountability on the O tho, as it means putting accountability on Sanchez.....something u just won't do. Sanchez did what he does best under pressure, put the ball on the ground. Just like NE in OT... and 52 other times since that fumble in Pitt.
The amount of posts this thread has is classic. Mark as a player really represents the Jets franchise. Mostly terrible, but shows great promising flashes. As soon as you want to give up, something reels you back in.
It's logical, sorry you fail to see it. The bottom line is the O got w/in a score w/ plenty of time to play. so much time we didn't have to kick an OS kick and we had all 3 TOs. The D FAILED as they often did in big spots, didn't even give the O a chance. NE in OT he brought us back from 10 down and gave us a lead which as usual the D blew.
haha pretty much the way i see it, sanchez sucked last season something awful. but hes shown enough to deserve the chance to turn it around. if he isnt able to somehow turn it on and stop making so many bad decisions, then he wont have a job much longer. personally, i hated schotty as a coach, and thought sparano looked like he was in a bit over his head. i have never thought that the offensive system, nor the talent around sanchez, was consistent or reliable enough to say without a doubt that mark sanchez isnt a good player. this happens to a lot of players, they get drafted and dont work in a system, sometimes they get second chances elsewhere, sometimes they fade away. just playing the wait and see game with mark at this point. he hasnt been nearly as bad as people on here are trying to say. he makes poor decisions, but he has also made great plays. i think that a system like the one mornhinweg runs can benefit any qb though.
Hypocrit!! In NE he had 2 chances to put the game away, which you argue he never had in the Pitt game. In NE, we saw first hand what he could do given the chance. 1 first down would have ended it in 4th.. he couldn't do it In OT, yet another chance, he put the ball on the ground...again. That is how the game ended. If you only seem to care about the last drive.....there it was in NE.
oh but you know, if the jets would have just scored 40 points in the first half, the game would have never turned out that way... i just dont get how you cant say that something like a football game, a timed game at the end of which whatever team has the most points wins, isnt decided in the final minutes if the score is close. THAT is discounting the rest of the game and relying on what ifs, not saying oh if the d got that stop we could have had time to score. had the defense given the ball back to the offense, and the offense didnt score, then the offense failed. just because the rest of the game led to a certain score at the end of the game, doesnt mean that the end of the game cannot decide the game. teams make adjustments, players try desperate things, etc. shit happens if you will but the bottom line, is that as time expires, teams adjust their strategy to try and win the game. sometimes the score doesnt allow for any chance of a comeback, sometimes the game is so close that the final plays will decide the outcome. thats not just something espn says
he had 2 chances to put the game away? really? after we recovered fumble and clock stopped immediately at 2:01 to help NE we ran it 3 times, what was he supposed to do? hand it off better? in OT he got the all w/ the Jets trailing, we needed a TD and a blitzer came in untouched to sack and strip the ball but it was all Mark's fault.
The bad decisions, inability to recognize defenses, the accuracy, and most importantly the turnovers need to change dramatically. That is a lot to expect for this year, as the team won't be all that deep. I agree regarding the previous OC's though. Schotty's 2 worst playcalling games had to be Pitt and the NYG game. Sparano was really limited in what he had to work with, including Sanchez, but he was also terrible and unimaginative in game planning. Was actually a downgrade from Schotty. I'm excited about what MM can bring to the table, and think they got it right this time. If they trot Sanchez out there again, and he hasn't dramatically improved, i think everyone gets fired, and the team gets set back even further. They better be confident about Garrard as an option, or find someone in the draft who could step in if need be.
It was definitely on the Offense as a whole, not just Sanchez. But maybe if we had a QB who we trusted just a tad, we would have thrown it in 4th quarter. Maybe in OT he could have recognized the D and the pressure, or maybe just held onto the football for a change. Bottom line, the O and Sanchez had the ball and the ability to end the game. Something you argued we never had in Pitt, and the reason we lost.
we threw in the 4th qtr just not after we recovered the fumble and we had an ultra conservative OC. My guess is Marty would do things a little different, at least throw on 1st down w/ 2:01 to play as the clock was going to stop anyway.
So I guess they should just do away with the other 58 minutes and just have a 2 min game if that is when the game is decided right? You can't say something like "if the game is close then the last 2 minutes determine the outcome." What if both teams go 3 and out twice each in the last 2 minutes. Was the game decided by missed opportunity? When was that game won? Who choked and who didn't? Players don't know what is going to happen before it happens. If a D lets a late score to lose the lead and then the QB marches down and scores, did the D blow it in the grand scheme or did they do their job? Is there a certain amount of points one can reasonably expect the D to allow without being blamed because of letting a TD at the end? Is there a certain amount of points you can reasonably expect the O to put up without blaming them in the final 2 minutes for not executing if the D gives up 40 points? Did the QB choke who failed to score to take the lead? Did the QB choke who was ahead and didn't convert on 3rd to ice the game if the other team fails to score after? I mean the QB does not know that the other team won't score when they punt. These are not answers that are black and white. This is why I say people put too much into this whole "clutch" nonsense, which is something that ESPN and Skip Bayless try to ram down our throats. 58 minutes to ice the game and put it out of reach. And if not we analyze what happened in the final 2 but by no means is majority share of blame lumped on who failed in that final 2.
