He shouldn't of thrown it period because the playcall was dumb. I'm almost certain that was the 3rd time Schotty dialed up that play and all of them went to Cotchery! It couldn't of been anymore obvious when Cotchery came in motion and I gotta credit Colvin on making a good play. It was the right call in terms of the ruling, and the Pats had their heads up.
I can only think of a hand full of great QBs... Palmer, Manning, Brady, Brees, anymore? Every other QB has flaws or is inconsistant... Chad has a weak arm, Eli is inconsistant, and so on... We can win a SB with Chad. He is a touch, play action QB. Get a the running game going like it did with Curtis Martin in 2002 and 2004 and Chad will be fine. But he is no Palmer, Manning, etc. not many are.
I guess what I most take issue with is you saying that Pennington played "very very well" today. He was unable to capitalize on a number of RZ opportunities and the best I would've said about him BEFORE the turnovers was that he was playing OK, and if the D was able to make a few plays here and there the Jets might have a shot late in the game. Of course after the turnovers the game was far out of reach. If you want to say that alot of the Jets didn't play well today and it's not all Pennington's fault I'll certainly agree with you, but can we please stop with the over the top nonsense like he played "very very well" today?
I simply say he played well because usually he struggles bad when a team drops 7 and stays in a zone while NE got good pressure from just rushing 4. NE barely blitzed and with Chad's limitations, I really didn't think he would be able to find open holes in the zones due to the pass-rush of New England... He played well and had some nice drives...Just could not punch it in. His passes inside the 10 to Baker and Coles were horrible, luckily Bruschi didn't pickoff the Baker reception, and I think it was Samuel, or Hobbs who pretty much sat on the slant route and broke up the play, bad passes.
1. NOBODY (as a QB) can carry the offense without running attack. Even the vaunted Tom Brady looked miserable, having his own chinese fire drill with Dillon out in the past few years. (I remember one time where the Pats ran 5 times in the ENTIRE game. Brady sure looked like a deer in the headlight too, throwing errant picks all day.) 2. That said, what Pennington has done all season is just beyond description - I am lost for words to describe what he has done all season long. You think Tom Brady would be as successful without the protection AND the running game? Do you REALLY think Peyton Manning would be posting up 49 TD passes without running attacks to compliment it? Wake up. It just does NOT happen. Personally, if either of them were playing in Pennington's shoes, I would think that, maybe, MAYBE they could have led the team to the playoffs (just like Chad has) but to ask for more from them is plainly laughable, to say the very least. On the other hand, if Chad were in Peyton's shoes, how well would he have fared, would you like to think? For your information, Colts line gave up the least sack in the league with 15, and Jets line gave up 34 sacks. 3. This Jets team is, simply, lacking in talent. Period. The defense couldn't stop 3rd-and-long all day. That is NOT a staple of championship calibre defense. Championship defenses stop 3rd-and-short almost every time (not to mention 3rd-and-5~8, and 3rd-and-long.) The defense had their shot to keep the lead in the first half, and they have failed miserably. That can't possibly be Chad's fault, other than that he couldn't keep up with Pats scoring. And if you actually watched the game (I am sure you just haven't, simply taking a glance from the scoreboard) allowing 11 yard TD run is just NOT acceptable by any standard. 4. So, if the question was about whether Chad did have a chance of beating NE, the answer is flat NO - He is just playing QB, and there is only so much he could do. He doesn't block for the team, to help the putrid running game (there is a reason why this team could muster 9 points out of possible 21, aftre leading the offense deep into the red zone or getting a huge turnover in the red zone.) - much less plays defense to stop Tom Brady and Co. If the question is about whether this team lost because of the inability on Chad's part, you just haven't got the slightest clue.
The first thing you need to learn is that any comparison between Pennington and Brady is absurd and is only going to leave Pennington looking like shit. Brady won 2 SB's without Dillon or a running game
But wait! Pennington is more accurate and a better decision maker!:rofl: Look I like Pennington a lot, one of my favorite players. But comparing him to Brady is just disrespecting Brady, Brady is a better QB in every aspect of the QB position. Chad is a middle of the pack QB, which i'm fine with...But he cannot be compared amongst the elite.
And let me tell you: If you are talking about 2003 SB, Ok, Dillon wasn' there to run for them. But you know what? Pats had been running over 100 yards in all (or almost, in ONE occasion Smith ran 96 yards, against strong Tennesee defense.) of their playoffs game. Pats had their running game working for them, Ok? Now, your point? (Read: if you are trying to make Brady into what he is not - a QB that can lead a franchise without running attack - it doesn't work here. I can bring the stat sheet up for you if you want me to.)
I'm talking about 2001 and 2003. In 2001 the Pats were 13th in the league in rushing yards and 24th in YPA, in 2003 the Pats were 27th in rushing yards and 30th in YPA. Smith ran for 100 yards(and exactly 100 yards) once in the 6 playoff games. If you're talking about 100 yards as a team, well that's hardly an accomplishment at all, as the Jets averaged over 100 yards rushing a team this year.
So have the Jets done so today? What was the YPC? Did they have any consistent running attack to bail Pennington out??? In case of Pats, their YPC for running was over 4.3 yards - Usually Antoine Smith getting some 75-80 yards (a few times over 100) at 4.3 and Kevin Fault getting some 30-40 at 4.8. Try to make your argument any way you want it. The bottom line is that, maybe, MAYBE you can make your case with 2001 Pats team (but then you have to agree a LOT have gone in their favor that year, including the Snow Bowl controversy and even SB controversy in 20-17 win over Rams. If the things have gone in Jets' favor like it has in 2001 Pats, they would have beaten Pats today) After that, Pats have been consistently running well. (Even with Dillon, Pats have been splitting up the carries and yards with Kevin Faulk like they have been doing in 2003, if you have been so oblivious about it.) And while Brady has been a masterful quarterback in the postseason, don't even think that he could have done it all alone, since it can't be farther from the truth.
They only ran it 16 times today because they were trailing most of the game and trailing big late. They had 70 yards on those 16 carries which was significantly better then their YPC average on the season. If this Jets team was in a position to be winning 6 playoff games in a row behind a great QB like Brady they'd be running it 30+ times a game and go over 100 yards too. The 01 and 03 Patriots had miserable rushing games.
Since you just refuse to accept that Pats had a respectable running game by 2003: Let's look at 2003 Super bowl. (This is just one example of how 2003 Pats Playoff team looks like, by the way. Look at all of them if you so care.) 3rd down conversion: 8-17 4th down conversion: 1-1 NE Rushing: (Order: Att Yd Avg Td Long) A. Smith 26 83 3.2 1 9 K. Faulk 6 42 7.0 0 23 T. Brady 2 12 6.0 0 12 T. Brown 1 -10 -10.0 0 0 Team 35 127 3.6 1 23 Time of Possession: 38:58 And NO, Patriots weren't leading Panthers wire-to-wire, as it was another Vinateri goal at the end of the game that saved the day. Now, today's Jets: 3rd down conversion: 3-11 4th down conversion: 1-2 (that one conversion came during the garbage time, by the way.) 1st down from rushing: 3/18 L. Washington 11 50 0 19 J. Cotchery 2 19 0 14 C. Pennington 2 1 0 7 C. Houston 1 0 0 0 Time of Possession: 26:40 Now, do you see any consistent running attack helping the team, like it has in case of Patriots? (Read: 3rd down conversion looks like shit, and out of 18 1st downs they obtained, only 3 came out of running game.) --------------------------------- Why is it so difficult to just accept that Patriots did have better balanced attack by 2003?
Because you're talking out of your ass. Of the 3rd down conversions only 2 came via the ground, and one of those was a 12 yard scramble by Brady. The Pats were also stopped on the ground on several 3rd and 1s during the course of the game.
