I'm still rooting for him but for the record, IMHO he either doesn't have it or the jets have ruined another QB. *puts on flame retardent jockey shorts*
What did you want him to say then? It sounds like any answer he would've given to that question wouldn't have satisfied you. I'm with you in that I don't think DJ's question was out of line. He's a reporter, he noted a trend about the offense since Zach's returned, and asked Zach about it when given the chance. I also don't think Zach's answer was anything to be upset about. He shouldn't care about some arbitrary number for points scored and yards gained on a weekly basis, he should care about winning games. Just for argument's sake, the 17 points the offense scored on Sunday would've beaten 15 teams in the NFL this week and tied another 3 teams. We've said it for years now, this is a results-based league. I don't care how we win, so long as we do, so why should Zach?
I'm only halfway through the video but so far I feel like JT's been pretty fair in his criticism of Zach. Good breakdown so far. EDIT: Man, we've got to replace McDermott. He's our 5th string OT so I can't be that upset with JD on this one but it's clear McDermott was way overmatched on Sunday.
There is zero reason to be upset at Wilson’s comments. They were fine. Guys answer questions with similar answers all year long. It just depends when the talking heads feel like making a big deal out of them otherwise you’ll never hear about them.
The fans that genuinely do not like Wilson will take any little thing he does and blow it up to make it this huge, negative mark on him. It's ridiculous at this point. There are legitimate concerns with his play that you could talk about to say he's bad, but a media comment, c'mon man.
I’d love to see what “metrics” this uses other than weird numbers slapped on a chart that no one understands.
What does any of this even mean? Is strength of schedule based on the opponents’ won-loss records at the time of that game? If so, what is the scale of -0.01 to 0.01 mean? Is that supposed to be a percentage? sorry…if someone is going to put stats out there, they should define what the stats actually are
The more to the left of the line you are, the easier the SOS has been, the more to the right you are, the harder the SOS has been. I.e. Zach's played the hardest SOS in terms of pass defense. Joe Burrow has played the easiest. It would help if the person that created this outlined what metric they used to come up with this though (PFF grades, ESPN Power Rankings, eye test, etc.), otherwise it's a pretty meaningless graph IMO.
The strength of schedule is based on the strength of the opponents pass defense. It's trying to show who has faced the best pass defenses throughout the season. I want to know how much of a difference there is between being atop the list and on the bottom of the list. How much of a difference strength of an opponents pass defense is there between what Burrow and Zach have faced?
So the creator of that chart is Timo Riske, a mathematician working for PFF. He explained that those numbers are based on the "defensive strength" of each team faced, but only factoring in the pass defense grades. Kind of confusing. Here is a recently updated chart showing the overall offensive/defensive strengths. Top right quadrant are the elite offenses and defenses. Almost all the teams the Jets have faced are in the above average to elite defense category, sans Houston, Atlanta, and soon Jacksonville.
I'm not going to dictate what his answer should be, but I would hope for the truth. If he actually is not worried about his part in the Jets offensive failures that is a big problem. What I don't want to see is a guy saying he's not worried about his part in the poor production of the offense when he's supposed to be the leader of that offense. He needs to demonstrate he accepts that responsibility at the microphone as well as on the field to send a message to those other guys on the team that rely on him to get the job done. I'm also not looking for a benchmark for either yards or points because each game situation is different as you note. Everyone here talks about things that, had they gone differently, would have changed the outcome of the game; I'm sure Wilson is capable of being that specific rather than the mumbled "need to do better" which has been the motto of this team for longer than any of us remember. As far as your closing question, Wilson needs to care about how the team wins because while fans can hope for fluke plays, favorable calls and boneheaded plays by the defense, that's no way to plan for a win. How much responsibility do you think he bears for the poor production of the offense? Don't you think he should be concerned about things like that?
I don't even need to know what one of those charts is for, I usually just look in the lower left every time.
Based on the statement, were the Bills and Miami games that Zach missed included in the stats? Also, the large chunk of the second Patriots game. If so, that would skew things.
First of all, I'm not going to go back and listen to every one on Zach's 8 pressers, but I'm fairly certain someone did ask that question. regardless, the reason the question was "redundant" is because Zach has repeatedly taken responsibility for the offense's problems. This was just a reporter trying to stir up shit, and no not "reasonable", since if this reporter was doing his job he would've heard Wilson take responsibility numerous times. And who said the questions were "too sensitive" to ask him? Please provide a quote or source for such a claim. In fact, Zach DOES specify the things he struggled with in games, unlike Darnold (and many other QBs) who actually did use the ""I have to do a better job at whatever."" throwaway line as a rule. And if you actually don't have a massive hard on for Wilson, can you provide a link or quote from one of your posts where you actually said something positive about him?
