Hah; Your world is any better then mine? Your are perpetually stuck in the downward spiral and wish others would join you in the dark. Yes we haven't won yet I understand stand that and I am not idiot you thinking i live in some fantasy land is down right dis respectful. Just because I'm not a debbie downer like yourself don't insult me you POS. For us to win it takes time hopefully you have enough left so you can smile once in your life
I don`t get any more real than what you see/read. You`re probably around 24-27 years old. If so, I had done the Jets games your entire life. If you older, you ain`t that much older. If you are, then you should understand unless you just became a Jets fan recently.
I`ve had family members who never saw the Jets win it. Weren`t even born yet, and they have passed on in this life. 45 years kid. How old are you? 22? 26? It`s been 45 years, going on 46 now since the Jets were anything in this world. I hope YOU live long enough to see one.
I think its safe to say that Rex Ryan will lead the Jets to a Super Bowl at some point over the next 45 years. I would like to think someone born today will get to see a Jets Super Bowl appearance in their lifetime or perhaps even a manned mission to Mars. Not sure which will happen first though..
Well 1st, I wasnt talking about you. 2nd, I am only 25 years old, but I can say that no matter how long the Jets suck while I'm a fan I will never take it as seriously as some of the people on here. At the end of the game its still only a game.
You guys are looking into this WAY too deeply. This isn't Rex proclaiming we're the best, it's describing how he wants to build this team. And the vision he has for this team is one that is hard nosed and will make you fight every game for every yard. Despite all the high flying offenses there are out there, the more physical team can win the day as often as not. This is the identity that has gotten the Ravens and Steelers multiple rings and sent us on our most recent runs in the playoffs. If you go look back at the Falcons and Saints games this year, you can see two teams that were not ready for our level of physicality, despite being objectively better teams. I remember one drive where Atlanta was within the 5, and you just knew the Falcons weren't tough enough. The Saints, Packers, and Falcons haven't made it to the super bowl in the last few years because they ran up against a tougher team and lost. Rex wants the Jets to be the tougher team.
Did anyone consider that maybe Rex has been quiet these past 2yrs because he knew he didn't have a team that had a chance to compete?
Says here that the Pack and Saints HAVE been to the SB in recent years, so I am not sure what point you are trying to make about them. The Falcons were considered a likely playoff team last off season, but got hit with too many key injuries. And to your point it wasn't only so-called physical teams that were able to beat them. They lost a lot of games last year. The Saints also were too banged up to prevail when the Jets came up on their schedule.
The post you quoted wasn't mine but I think the obvious point being made was that the teams he mentioned had playoff runs in the last few years that were cut short when they came up against teams that out-toughed them on the field regardless of the fact that they might not be as talented on paper. We all know that the Saints and Pack have recent SB appearances, duh. Also, I just can't stand when people play the injury card to discredit particular wins or losses. All teams have injuries every year, it's part of the game. A win is a win and a loss is a loss and making excuses because of injuries is just as weaksauce when it's used in the Jets favor as when it's used against them.
What nonsense. Injuries are part of the game cuts both ways. Do you really think it makes no difference if a team's key players are hurt as compared to a team that has all its key players? One of the things I like about football is its complexity. Some would rather a more simple minded analysis, and object to complexity. Oh well...
I did not say that injuries don't make a difference. My point is that if you want to start rating wins and losses based on which "key" players are injured it becomes a never ending exercise. Who decides which guys are considered "key" in a given game? How do we know that that "key" guy may not have had a poor game or that the guy playing in his place doesn't step up and play well? A lot of untapped talent gets discovered that way. There are times, like when a franchise QB is injured, where the effect is obviously magnified, but even then we can't know for sure what might have happened had they played. In the end football is, as they say, the ultimate team sport. It's up to the team to make sure they build as talented a team as possible not only when it comes to it's starters, but on all levels. Building depth is part of the game, that's why there are 53 guys on the roster. If they don't build a team that has the ability to adapt when injuries inevitably happen than that's a team problem. It's part of the game. Wins and losses are facts. There are unexpected outcomes every week in the NFL. What's simpleminded is pointing to one guy and saying that if he played, his team would have won. You can make an educated guess but that doesn't make it a fact. There are way too many other factors involved.
Glad to hear it. I thought you were talking to me since your post followed mine. Sorry. I use to be one of those who took it way too seriously. Took me awhile to realize it`s just a game. Trying to help others see the light now. I would love to see Jets fans stop supporting financially until the Jets front office gets their heads outta their asses and realize without fans, they have nothing. I don`t believe all the bullshit Woody and his cohorts throw out about wanting to win and all that. They, or should I say Woody, is only in it for profits, profits, profits. As long as money is coming in, he truly doesn`t care. Well thats how I see it and we are always being reminded football is a business first. Business first? It`s a game.
You are speaking in generalities that are frankly mundane. Atlanta obviously underperformed pre-season expectations for the whole year, and not just against the Jets. The reason why was obvious. Too many injuries at key positions. It wasn't one guy.
No but I think U should consider hiring a shrink to assist U in losing your obsession to the NYJs? BTW remember this is a NYJ forum & being a NYJ fan probably before U were born I wish to advise U & all others that either throw insults at me or call me names neither will stop me from continuing to post the true facts on the NYJs on this board
It would be nice if you actually posted facts but in fact all you ever do is whine and complain like a 4 year old. You also type like one.
I was speaking in generalities because I was discussing an overall concept - not sure why that strikes you as "mundane". You countered by citing a specific example (ATL last season) and I don't disagree that their season was obviously heavily effected by injuries. You are missing the point. I said this in the post that you quoted but I'll repeat it again - I'm not arguing that injuries don't effect teams' abilities to play at their best, I'm saying that once you start using that as an excuse for the team losing (or as the reason that their opponent was able to win) you are headed down a road of never ending hypotheticals. Almost every team has a player out week to week who plays an important role. There's nothing wrong with discussing injuries in the context of a team's success or failure, but when you start using it as the reason that one team won or lost it becomes bullshit. It may be likely that X or Y would have happened if player X or Y had played, but you can't know that. If someone told you that Tom Brady would be out all season, would your expectations for their win-loss record change? Of course it would. Well, when that actually happened a while back, how many people would have guessed that they would have the kind of success that they did with Cassel? You just can't know. No matter how important the injury, you can't use a hypothetical idea of what would have happened to discredit what actually did happen. If that isn't clear enough then I'm not sure how else to explain it.
You are missing the point. The point is not the ability to say that if Team A had this or that player or even group of players available, that were not when they played Team B and lost, they would have instead beaten Team B. No one is saying that. What it does say is the win by Team B does not mean as much in assessing Team B's relative strength, since Team B beat Team A when Team A was relatively weak. The point in other words is that the Jets beating Atlanta last season does not say as much in favor of the Jets as some assert here.
