Dilfer also didn't mention the fact that now and then there's a completion to somebody being covered by absolutely nobody. I didn't understand those breakdowns until I read the article and suddenly realized they're not breakdowns, just an artifact of a QB who had a chance to get a second look at the field and found the guy who had been released to nobody by design.
If we beat the Bills and the Pats the next two weeks we are in the division lead no matter what they do in the game they don't play us over that span. The Pats can beat the Giants next week and we're still taking first place with a win over the Bills and Pats.
I take what Dilfer said to mean the Jets are subtly shifting their coverages as the play develops. The specific reference to Kyle Wilson's INT is a great case in point. It sounds like he's saying the Jets will give the opposing Qb a look that assumes who his targetted receiver will be in the order the Qb could be expected to check down, start out showing coverage of that receiver or receivers and then shift away as the play unfolds. You are right then if the Qb gets too much time he can go back and see a receiver who looked covered has now been left open. It's easy to see that while complex this scheme is about playing the percentages. It is why we may see what looks like a blown coverage really is due to the pass rush not getting to the Qb in time, and with time bought he finds a receiver left open. I wouldn't exactly call it a gambling D, but there is certainly an element of risk involved.
well of course. But I think its a bigger deal (media wise) if we are tied record wise going into NE, as opposed to tied record wise coming out. Having a 1 game lead in the divison after 10 games would be something any Jets fan would have been more than happy to take prior to the seasons start. But it all starts with the bills. If we cant beat them, we are talking about a must win game in NE in order to keep our playoff hopes alive. If we beat the bills, we talk about a chance to take over the division and possibly even start thinking about seeding should we beat the Pats.
I think what the Jets are running is a very successful gambling defense. The way I read Dilfer's description of it is that people literally are being released to no coverage at all. However the way they are being released is designed to preserve the illusion, by stacking a coverage at the start of the play, that the receiver is covered when in fact nobody will be on that receiver after 2 seconds into the play. I'm not at all opposed to that type of scheme because it can cover up personnel flaws that otherwise would be crippling if the Jets played straight up coverages and tried to keep three or four receivers all pinned down until the QB was forced to throw the ball away or take a coverage sack. I do think that in the end it will be hard to beat a good offense that is aware that this is happening, because they will train their QB and WR's to recognize the patterns and break them down after awhile. It really is smoke and mirrors, albeit very good ones.
Every 3-4 weeks the jets will play a half of football where they look unstoppable on all sides of the ball. Week 2 second half vs Jaguars, week 7 vs Chargers second half. Outside of that there's always an element that's off.. except for special teams they've been money all season
Antonio Cromartie's fumbled KO against the Raiders was huge and took the Jets completely out of the game. Not Westhoff's fault obviously but the ST's contributed their share to that loss.
that's what I also got out of it. and like you said, i didn't realize either that a lot of the time when we see those plays where a guy gets the ball and is wide open, it's not a breakdown but part of the scheme. As fans, we're always like WTF why is this guy so open and as a result blame somebody, but the fact seems to be that it was just one of the times the QB did see the opening despite the shift in coverage. In fact, even the announcers don't realize this during the game and deem it a "blown coverage". more often than not, it has been successful and the wide open catches we give up don't outweigh the overall success of the scheme.
Imo there is another element in addition to awareness by the opponent, and that is time to check out the coverage before throwing it. Teams that can protect the Qb long enough to see if someone is left open will have the better ability to break it down. Which means that while the Jets are effective with their coverage players, the pass rush, a relative weakness, has to be decent to get the whole thing done.
And the Jets have been blitzing much more in recent weeks to try to get the necessary pressure on the QB. You have to respect Ryan and Pettine and Thurman for keeping things on an even keel while they make wholesale changes to the scheme during the season. The Jets still desperately need their pass-rushing ROLB but they're using the scheme to cover for not having that and have been for three seasons now. I still think we're going to be in trouble at the end of the season if the Jets can't find a way to get honest pressure on the QB. As good as Revis is there's no substitute from making the QB feel heavy pressure on half the snaps he takes.
I had no idea the defense did all those things AND I never really noticed. No wonder it takes so long to pick up Rex's schemes and for a new players or rookie's to get it. Love this game you just keep learning.
I agree. But stopping the run is the other big issue. Bottom line is I don't see the D carrying the team deep into the playoffs. The O will have to step it up. Dilfer's article makes some great points, and a team that is not prepared for Ryan's approach, as SD was more or less not prepared, can be beaten. But there are ways around it, no doubt.
We better hope the Patriots beat the Giants this week. When, if EVER, was the last time Brady lost three games in a row? Let them get a home win against the Giants, and let us take care of them in our building.
I agree, our defense won't be able to carry this team into and throughout the playoffs. We have to get back to running the ball and stopping the run. If we can do that, having seen some of that coming into the bye, I like where we are headed. When the offense could run the ball and we knew going into any game that we could rush for 120+ yards and hold the opponent to around 60 rushing yards, we were at our best. Our offense is built around the run- Sanchez is easily a top ten QB if our run game is going; he strives off of PA and bootlegs. Its disappointing knowing that we play the only QB in the NFL twice a year who fits the description of what could beat this defense- intelligent QB who can get off reads quickly, change plays at the line, understand most of coverages (smoke and mirrors) and having an Oline that can pass protect.
I realize that the Pats under Brady have rarely lost multiple games in a row but the Giants are a 5-2 team. They may be up and down, but with their pass rush they definitely have the potential to get to Brady early and rattle him. I don't think a Pats win is a given by any stretch.
Or their defense leading the league in sacks can further beef that number up against brady in a meaningful manner
I don't want to open up the Schotty debate in this thread, but despite all the recommendations that he call plays that do something other than fit with or go against emphasis on the running game, the O can best help the D by running it with success. That is the way this team is built. Run the ball and stop the run. if they do that opponents have to play into the teeth of the Jets D, which is pass coverage. But the O has to have heavy emphasis on the run.
