Right and if the offense played their part. The defense wouldn't be a position to have to get one more stop. That was a bad day for the overall team but to put the blame on one side of the ball is unfair.
What about Mark not picking up the blitz in the Pitt game that let to us falling way behind. Pitt had that game and they let the Jets ground and pound the clock out. A decent QB would have been able to get us down the field without time consuming drives.
so now it's Mark's fault he was blindsided on a throw, he should have been able to lead us to 40 pts on that crappy Steeler D. They always get blown out at home:rofl2:
The offense got the game w/in a score, the D then failed again to get the ball back. Pitt's O had the ball 10 more minutes than our O.
Pittsburgh didn't score a single point in the 2nd half. The defense also got a safety which gave the Jets 2 points and the ball back to the offense. All that after the offense went on a however long minute drive that generated 0 points. So because the defense couldn't get a stop at the end, the blame goes to them? The defense gave up 14 points. Sanchez gave them an additional 7 points. If Sanchez held on to the ball. The Jets probably win that game. The final score may have been 19-17
No b/c the D got thrashed in the first half allowing Pitt to dominate them then when the game was back w/in a score the failed again. Those are the reasons the D gets most of the blame- not all but MOST. Pitt would have had great FP if Sanchez didn't "fumble"(was really an incomplete pass) and they would have scored before the end of the half. Our D blew it, a real big time D gets a stop in that situation.
Whoooaaa...! How about using your powers of observation. This is just like Politics. Dont listen to what they say. Watch what they do idzik gets hired cries "COMPETITION!!!!!!" Then, when he has the money to sign a credible threat to Sanchez, like Kolb, who played for Marty, or Flynn, who played for Idzik, he signs the oft Injured Ivory, and the Questionable Goodson. You cant pretend that A: he didnt know Garrard hadnt seen a regular season snap, in two years, or B: that he was going to have Smith fall into his lap. Then he passed o. Him not once but twice. QB has not been a concern for Idzik, rehabbing the reputation of the one he has is..,, And P.S. the angry Rex story about Genos lack of leadership...? Who leaked that, and why now? How about Geno getting crap play calling while they left the ones in against the twos. P.S. If smith was deemed a game ready starter, he wouldnt have dropped to 39, which is not to say he cant rise to it, but he did not come from an NFL ready offense, unless he plays for Ne, who incorporates the Airraid. They started the season, coaching Sanchez to cut out fumbles, and teaching Geno to play from under center You can deny the reality all you want, but Idzik, is playing you, and its going to bite him in the ass, because the knock on Geno (who deserved better) will be...."what do you expect, he couldnt beat Sanchez"
Giving up 14 points is a "thrashing"? Anyway since that game I've always said that the defense sucked in that game. But I also acknowledged that the offense couldn't put up points either and the combination of the defense and the offense cost the team a SB trip. If Sanchez doesn't fumble the Jets punt there is a good chance the defense stop them, but obviously we will never know. You continue to absolve the offense because Sanchez is the QB. It's crazy. You do realize that if the offense scores at least ONE TD in the 1st half, they probably win that game? But no you continue to blame the defense.
They gave up 17 pts, got us in a 17 pt hole. When we got it back w/in a score they failed again. I have never absolved the offense, I said it many times both could have done more but the main culprit was the D and that's not really up for debate. We were a D first team, our D got pushed around all first half including a 9 min TD drive to open the game. The D cost us the game.
That game was truly a team loss. Both sides of the ball made some horrible plays and some great ones, but neither side of the ball did enough to win. For every instance you want to blame the defense, I'll give you one to blame the offense. We could have won that game IF either side of the ball had made one or two more plays when they needed to. One play that sticks out in my mind is Big Ben scrambling for a 1st down on 3rd and a mile on the first TD drive. I remember Pace had him lined up well behind the line to force a long FG attempt, but he slipped on the turf and Ben got past him to the marker. A minute later it was 7-0. A killer. Soon after that, the D came up with a big INT to change the momentum, but instead, our offense went backwards on three plays and punted the damn ball about 25 yards. Another killer.
Except that you are absolving the offense. You can't say contradicting stuff like "both could have done more" then say "the main culprit was the D". That was truly a team loss. The defense job is to make stops but they didn't. The offense job is to score and they didn't. One side failed to get stops. The other failed to score. But you conveniently leave that out. In the 2nd half the defense gives up ZERO POINTS and the offense didn't score until late in the 4th quarter, and that was after the offense had the ball for an eternity and generated no points, then the defense got a safety which put 2 points on the board and the ball back. That was overall a team loss. If the offense score One TD in the first half, and Sanchez not fumble we win that game. I know it's hyperbolic on my part but if the game plays out the same way in the 2nd half we win. Exactly but let the Sanchez excuse maker tell it. "it was the D's fault"
why can't one unit get more blame? in most losses it is not just on one player or unit but certain players/units contribute more and in this case the D was the main culprit. The D got a safety b/c the O was stopped on the 1 then Pit fumbled a snap, they didn't create anything. The O scored a TD to pull w/in 5 w/ 3 mins and 3 TOs. That is an eternity in the NFL. The D could have allowed 1 1st down and still given the O a chance, instead they allowed 2 and ended the game. We had a good O not a big time one, we supposedly had a big time D but big time Ds don't fail like that in that spot.
Because if you watched that game from an objective point of view, that loss was on everybody. When one side fails to do their job it puts more pressure on the other side. The defense not getting stops puts pressure on the offense to score points to keep up and vice versa. If the offense scores at least one TD in the first half and not turn the ball over, the Jets probably win. Just like if the defense got the 3 and out at the end that would have put the offense in a position to score. But the game wouldn't have had to come to that if the offense was able to put more points on the board. Just like if the defense were able to get more stops earlier in the game it probably wouldn't have come down to the D having to get a stop at the end. It goes both ways. BTW I find it funny that the defense gets a safety and you find a way that discredit it. Incredible.
Championship offenses score more than 10 positive points. Along with the D, they looked like absolute dogshit in the first half. It wasn't until Pitt dialed back the pressure, playing conservative D with a large lead, that offense even registered a point. The fumble 6 was really the dagger.
I was at that game and it was a incomplete pass. I don't give a shit about how much the Rooney's paid the ref's to make that a fumble. Whoa there big boy. You of all people shouldn't be throwing stones in glass houses about watching what politicians do instead of listening to what they say.
