I still can't figure that one out. Was that the O-line coach quitting or the O-line or what ? I'd love to hear from Mangold on what happened -- he doesn't B.S. We don't give up 5-6 sacks to good D-lines....11 sacks to San Diego ? Something is up...someone or some players quit.
Doesn't matter what other QBs has what talent. Sanchez is going to have less talent this year than he had in 09 or 10. There's no reason to bring up other QBs, Sanchez is going to have less talent than he had in his first two years. What from that statement concerns other QBs? Nothing. That's a silly argument though. We are talking about his decision making and his decision making there was terrible. I don't care if in the long run it hurt or helped us (it hurt us as you will see below), it's still a stupid decision he shouldn't be making. And it did hurt us. You wouldn't 1st and 10 from the 30 instead of a pick? You wouldn't take 3rd and 8 from the same spot instead of the pick? It absolutely hurt us. It took away a chance to score points, that hurt us. Too much speculation here. Chances are we settle for a FG? Okay, percentage wise we make that FG, how is that a bad thing? Because then you speculate a WHOLE drive that NE will score? How does that work? Because the drive off the INT NE had, the defense stopped NE twice. Once the ST took a stupid penalty to give NE another set of downs where they promptly went 3 and out. (Also NE offense was 1/5 scoring in that half. The one time they did score they got the ball on their own 42 off a punt, so percentage wise no the Jets D wouldn't have given up points) That decision by Sanchez 100% hurt the Jets. Yes you can create a what if scenario where maybe if it happens the INT doesn't hurt, but that's completely one sided. Sanchez's INT took away a chance to score points, that by definition hurt the team. There's no other way to look at it. His bad decision took away an opportunity to score points. So yes that hurts the Jets. Yep. The offense was terrible, doesn't excuse Sanchez from missing EASY throws or forgetting how to protect the ball, or forgetting time and clock and game score in a game. That's on him not the talent around him which sucked. I never bring up his comeback throws or throws down the sideline, I bring up the easy crossing pattern where he throws behind a receiver after staring them down. I talk about INTs where he decides to throw a ball up for grabs in the opponenets RZ with 2 minutes left down 4. When you have a less talented, you have to get points when possible, and Sanchez threw away so many opportunities for us to get points last year. Just simple things like that. A basic player playing Madden knows down 4 in the RZ, you don't force a throw and a sack is OK. That's what is so discouraging, he just forget where he was and the score and time left way too much.
his name pops up all the time for coaching jobs... he is definitely in demand. and i cant blame them for going after him, he has proven he is a great coach.. well a pretty good coach... or is it a great coach? fuck acad help me out here!!!! im confused
that was a qb who didnt know what he was doing on the field. he turned into pressure a number of times that day. he almost sacked himself 3 or 4 times.
junc he wont be the opening day starter. i GUARANTEE you that. we are more likely to have joe namath or peyton manning as our starting qb on opening day than we are sancho. which we should thank god for since namath and manning suck so bad.
What kind of *insert insult here* doesn't understand that throwing a pick on 2nd down from the 36 in a game that went to OT most definitely hurts the team? Especially when you take in intangible things like the fact that a good drive ended in a "soul-crushing"(a junc term) turnover. Forgetting the fact that it absolutely took potential points off the board, it also has effects on things like momentum, the ability of the D to put pressure on the opposing O, coaching strategy, etc. Only an average fan looks back at the game after the fact and says "hurr durr NE didn't score after the turnover so it was like a good punt". That is like saying well I struck your kid driving drunk but he healed up completely and sued and became a millionaire so it was like a good accident.
The OL was not great but not as bad as 11 sacks allowed either. What we saw that day was a young QB not seeing anyone open, we/ sanchez he was taking chances and turning it over but w/ McElroy he was just taking sacks rather than turning it over. The point is other teams have stacked the talent for their young QBs and we have watched the talent erode since peaking in 2010. His decision making was terrible but he had no one to throw to so he was taking silly chances b/c the alternative was taking a sack and punting. Should he have done what McElroy did and take sacks? maybe but that didn't work out in our favor either. I don't believe it hurt us. Let's say we got a 1st and 10 from the NE 30, there was still 7 minutes left in the half. Are we going to assume we score a TD or wouldn't the better assumption be we kick a FG? let's say we kick a FG and trail 16-10 w/ about 4 mins left. NE gets the ball AT LEAST on their 20 if not better FP and a boatload of time. Do you think they wouldn't get at least a FG and we are trailing by 9 instead of 3. I don't believe that INT hurt us, I still wish it didn't happen and we had a chance to score a TD but in all likelihood the best case scenario was going in down only 6. He's retired from coaching, if he wanted to be a HC again he would have been a coordinator and worked his way back up. Either way I don't care if he ever coaches again, he did a good job for us w/ a job that NO ONE wanted.
I have never used the term "soul crushing". you can't even get that right. You assume the game plays out EXACTLY the same the rest of the way? so after we kick the FG on that drive we pin NE at their 2 on the KO? Interesting and NE trailing now by 6 settles for a FG in the last minute. You just can't beat that logic- you got me.
he retired because nobody wanted him. nobody wanted him because he wasnt any good. he was not good, he was bad. the fact that nobody wanted the job has nothing to do with him not being any good. he himself probably realizes that he was lucky to get a job in new york coming from the db/assistant head coach in tampa and has made quite a bit of hay from it. and has since moved on. you on the other hand will continue to talk about how good he was for a hundred years. that is why discussions with you tend to destabilize and turn to feces. ill say it again, this thread should be closed at this point. there is nothing of substance being brought forward anymore. 25 and counting!!!
^^Wrong, as usual. I'm bored swatting away these flies. And no, again, wrong. I said the exact opposite. I don't know why the simplest concepts escape you when you want them to. The game would obviously play out differently if the Jets had scored on that drive. You do know that points help teams win right? They kind of increase your chances of winning.
i will eat the crow if he is. i dont often come out and make guarantees but this one is for sure in my book.
Yes, but none of that affects Sanchez. That's not the point. The point was Sanchez performed his best when he had the great talent around him and many people feel the lack of talent excuses most of his problems last year. Well next year the talent level will not be near 09/10 level and he will have to play much better than he has in 09/10 to stay on the team, with less around him. Nobody to throw to? What about that wide open RB in the flat? Or against TEN on the 20 yard line down 4, yes 100% you take a sack there instead of throwing a pick and throwing the game away. There's a balance in between throwing every ball up for grabs and taking a sack every single time. There is a lot of room in between those two extremes you haven't acknowledged. Like taking a sack when the situation calls for it. Throwing the ball out of the back of the end zone or out of bounds. Spiking the ball in the dirt on screen passes. Holding onto the ball when taking a sack. You listed two extremes, but there is a ton of room in between those extremes Sanchez could have gone too. Okay let's say we kick and make a FG with 4 more minutes left. What guarantees a NE score? Their offense scored 1 out of 5 times in the half, the one time was when getting the ball on their own 42? How can you make that jump that they automatically get points? Also the best case is we score a TD on that drive and then stop the Pats! Are you kidding me? The BEST case is we score 7 there, have 14 total, stop the Pats O which we did 4/5 of times that half and go down by 2. You can't play the what if game and then limit the what ifs! Yeah you hypothetically assume we kick a FG and then NE goes down and kicks a FG and that's best case for us? How is that best case, please explain that. Best case, again, is we score 7 because Sanchez doesn't make a bad decision, then we stop the Pats offense like we did 80% of the time in the 1st half. I just completely disagree with your speculation that best case we only score a FG and NE automatically gets 3 points after that. That seems like creating a situation specifically where the INT won't hurt us. If you follow the trend of the 1st half, we get 3 points and stop the Pats. Best case we get 7 and stop the Pats. But the trend that half was that our D was stopping the Pats O. The facts are the INT took away a chance for the Jets to score points. Anything after that is speculation.
I don't recall ever using that term but I apologize on that one. The point is still rock solid though. You know NE has a pretty good offense, right? you know if we scored NE would have got another possession where they start at the 20 at least, right? The odds are much greater we go into the half trailing by more than 6 if he doesn't throw that INT.
Herm Edwards is the only coach in NY Jets history to take the team to the playoffs in 3 out of any consecutive 4 years. In franchise history. All of it. I have some respect for that accomplishment, particularly given that both years that he missed Chad Pennington missed a big chunk of the season with an injury.
I think he's got almost a 50% chance to start. Garrard isn't likely to be healthy come opening day and a rookie is a rookie. Comes down to how quick Smith can grasp the offense IMO.
He never had great talent but he had very good talent and yes he did perform. If healthy the talent will be MUCH, MUCH, MUCH better next year than it was last year. will it be as good as 2010? No but it will be light years ahead of 2012 and better than 2011 as well. He missed a receiver, is he the first QB to ever miss an open receiver? Does that mean he was missing these open WRs every week? if so he would have been benched long before he actually was. The chances are much better NE scores at least a FG. We stopped them a bunch of times in the first half just like the 2011 game at home. What happened in the last minute of the half? we stopped them numerous times this day, what happened w/ the lead in the final minute? NE's O has toyed w/ us the last 5 reg season games. Our D has allowed 32 PPG in the last 5 meetings in the reg season, if you were betting wouldn't you bet w/ 3-4 mins starting at their 20 they'd scored at least a FG? I'd bet a TD. Logic can help w/ speculation, knowing the type of opponent we faced. There is a much better chance we go into the half trailing by more than 6 if we complete a 1st down pass there.
I think if Mark is on the roster he will be the starter week 1. Where he goes from there is up to him, if he plays like 2012 he'll be yanked quickly.
