Hahaha. Fucking gold jerry. Gold. So let me get this straight. In certain situations the 35 yard line is near midfield, but certain situations it isn't? I beg of you Please Please PLEASE stop digging. I never wished this type of embarrasment but by all means if you continue do not blame me.
every situation is different. keep harping on a completely meaningless point, it will distract your fellow average fans from the important points.
To me, if a team gets from their own 20 yard line to the opposing 35 in their first play, that seems pretty close to the endzone. And in the 4th QTR, with 8secs left in regulation and down by 4 points with no time outs, it's pretty far away. Not sure if that is junc's logic, but the situation on the field is pretty relative in terms of critical distance when the situation dictates it.
It is one thing to analyze it like that. But absent him doing that, I have to conclude that he was just making it up as he goes along after the fact. I'm sure one must possess a Junc Dictionary in order to define when situations dictate that certain parts of the field are "near" certain parts of the field. Why does this dude get to define what words mean all of the sudden and when they are malleable? Never did he take into account the situation when he made these proclamations so I have to take it as face-saving that he is trying to do it now. This is beyond absurd.
Sorry, but I was just taking a cue from some other "reasonably intelligent poster", who had the audacity to say REX RYAN was a better coach than a HOF, and that a 1-15 team was talented and not a big deal to turn-around! I will try in the future to not mimic this poster, OK?
Of course not. But it just doesn't work that way. An offense that puts up 7 early in a game like that changes the complexion of everything. Heck, I actually think a made field goal early in a game like that (remember, Nick Folk missed a long, but makeable, kick on our opening drive) could have potentially swung things in a different direction. Football is a game centered on momentum and emotional energy. But anyway, the point remains that Sanchez played very poorly (along with the rest of his teammates) in that game. We just totally disagree on equal blame. Our lack of any kind of consistent offensive production cost us that game. The story after that game was how disappointing Sanchez and the rest of the offense looked. Again, nitpicking the defense is fine, but regardless, Sanchez was really bad in that game. Nothing you write about the defense will ever change the verity that Sanchez sucked in that game. Both samples tell us something. 15 games obviously carries more weight . . . and in the 15 games he played his rookie season, he threw 20 interceptions in a ridiculously low 364 pass attempts. (That is what is known as being unusually turnover prone) He was consistently turnover prone in both seasons. He was just especially inept last season. With Sanchez, we are merely discussing degrees of ineptitude. As discussed earlier, this is just an absurd oversimplification. Giving the defense no credit in games like NE (Where they shut out the pats in the second half) and Pit (where they forced Big Ben to take an absolutely critical safety late in the 4th quarter) is simply not credible. And the fact remains that in 4 of that teams 5 losses, Sanchez overtly struggled, as our offense failed to score an offensive touchdown. When one looks at that team's production from a purely objective point of view, the passing game stands out as having been the most glaring weakness.
That little exchange quoted above tells you (not the team) all one needs to know about how Junc's mind functions. When he lays down to sleep at night, he pictures himself as Mark Sanchez, throwing interception after interception to D linemen. Beats counting sheep I guess...
When you're blaming the defense for 10-9 and 9-0 type losses, well that's full-blown ASDS (Acquired Sanchez Defense Syndrome.) When you're blaming the defense for allowing the Ravens to hold the ball for nearly 40 minutes in a 34-17 thrashing in the context in which Sanchez turned the ball over 3 times leading directly to scores, well that's insanity. In the game in question the Jets ran 59 offensive plays on 15 drives. That's less than 4 plays a drive. They went 3 and out 4 consecutive series to end the game in the 4th quarter. Yeah, the defense is going to "let" the opponent control the ball for nearly 40 minutes in any game in which the offenses contribution just toggles back and forth between outright handing the opponent points and going 4 plays and out. That's just how it works.
Why are we talking about games in 2010 when it is 2013 and Sanchez played 32 games since the 2010 season? He is about to lose his job for 2011-12' not 2010.
Again, your reading comprehension fails you. I never said rex was a better coach, I actually called BP an all time great coach- did I say that about rex? I said Rex did a better job for the Jets. Wouldn't you prefer 4 playoff wins and 2 title game apps to 1 playoff win and 1 title game app? Maybe an early score could have changed things? the O was trailing when they first saw the ball and we did miss a FG w/ an opportunity to tie then a few plays later it was 10-0 and the rout was on. ALL units were horrible that night, we can't blame that loss on any one unit. We are allowed to disagree. I think mark and the O deserve plenty of blame but when your D can't get off the field and the O only has 20 mins of possession it's hard to score against a good D. 75% of his INTs came in 4 games, 74% of total TOs. he was TO prone in those games not throughout the season. Now w/ 14 TOs(including 2 bogus INTs) in 2010 he was TO prone? I didn't give the D no credit, I was discussing pass O/rush O/STs as far as who led the way scoring pts. and the fact remains that mark was vital to our success as proven in your 4 of 5 comment. When he played well we won the majority of the time, when he didn't we lost. That doesn't sound like someone "along for the ride", does it? stick to jokes b/c when it comes to football you are lost. Some of us understand the game better than others, I never blamed the D for the GB game so as usual you have to make things up b/c you have nothing. The 10-9 game was equally on the D who was terrible that night despite the 10 pts allowed. We knew it would be a low scoring game w/ 2 good Ds, our D couldn't get off the field but to simple minded fans like yourself we only allowed 10 so it must have been the offense's fault! Where did I say oyr D was responsible for the 34-17 loss at Bal in 2011? 3 games, 2 lies and 1 game you don't understand.
The 34-17 game in a nutshell: Marks Sanchez is strip sacked THREE times leading to to 17 points, two direct TD's after the strip-sack and a fumble on his own 23 leading to a FG shortly thereafter. He also throws a Pick-6 in that game. Our defense scores a TD on a David Harris Pick-6 and we get a KR for a TD plus a FG off of a short field on a defensive stop. We get blown out of the building 34-17. Why? Because Sanchez Sucks. It's really simple. It's not like he has been sucking quietly in ways that are not easy to see, like say Kyle Orton has. He's been blowing chunks all over the field for the better part of two years now and yet we still have people defending him because they've dug themselves a hole so deep they can't get out of it. That 34-17 loss to the Ravens was a 17-13 win with almost any other QB on the field that day. Hell, Kyle Orton could have "led" the Jets to a win on a day when the opposing passing game was 10-31 for 155 yards and a pick-6. It took a really bad QB to just hand that game to the Ravens. If we win that game BTW, we make the playoffs in 2011.
BradwaySux listed the Offensive woes in the Baltimore game, specifically the 3-&-outs; and naturally, you chose to ignore that aspect. At this point, I'm not sure what's worse -- Junc's blind homerism for Sanchez or Abyzmul's newly appointed position as Junc's attorney.
Nah even the NYJs being as dumb as organization as they are would not stoop that low to hire NY Junc :sad:
There's no way nyjunc is giving equal blame to the Giants defense if it's Eli Manning throwing for 74 yards and not converting a third down until the final possession of the game, all while the defense forces three turnovers and surrenders just 10 points. There's just not a chance. In fact, his main weapon in devaluing Eli in the playoffs is bringing up the low point totals surrendered by his defense.
Probably another example of Junc speaking outta both sides of his mouth. Now that BeastBeach exposed that, it'll be a little bit easier to recognize just how often Junc does this.
And this is the problem and the thing that basically makes him unreadable for me. He has a slippery, transactional morality when it comes to debate that is hard to deal with. In organized debate this is a valuable quality because you are often scored on the points you make as much as the coherence of your overall argument, particularly if those points nonplus your opponent and reduce his ability to respond effectively. In a discussion forum like this one the slippery transactional morality is just annoying because it detracts from the overall discussion. Threads here are not about being won and lost they're about communicating points to the community in a way that furthers the discussion. And of course venting like a red-faced mofo when the situation calls for it. Every time I see a thread go off on a bizarre tangent because junc has brought something largely irrelevant into the conversation to avoid losing a point I wonder what we would have actually gotten out of the conversation if he had just conceded the obvious point, something we've all done at times, and moved on.
