1. The only 1st round pick that I can't make much sense out of under Ryan's reign is Kyle Wilson pick - to me, it was more of a luxury pick than a need pick. 2. Other than that, I just don't understand how people fail to see the defense needed talent infusion. When Ryan came in as the HC, it was the offense that was stacked with talent. (OL, RB, WR, TE, you name it.) Purely from the talent standpoint, the defense was in serious need of talent all across the board. (For instance, aging Pouha held up for 4 years - as good as he was with the Jets, imagine him playing in other uniform - and ask yourself if he could have been half as good as he was with the Jets. Or Eric Smith? Are you kidding me?) 3. To me, "Ryan only picks defense" cry sounds more like a crybaby thing. Jets defense as a unit performed exceptionally well - but look at the pieces. NOW Jets are getting some serious threats along the DL, but it will be another year or so before the investment comes to fruition. Before? Do the likes Mike DeVito's, Bryan Thomases and Eric Smiths strike fear into your heart? 4. Don't forget who Jets face in their division - Patriots. Unless you KNOW you can match their offensive production stroke per stroke, it is only natural for Ryan to go to his strength. Don't you think so? 5. Oh, don't forget the whizkid GM who would trade the picks away. That makes restocking the roster harder.
How can you blame the D for the Denver game when they allowed 10 points and forced 3 and outs all game? Selectively looking at just the last few minutes, and claiming it summarized the game is faulty logic. Games are won and lost based on the entire 60 minutes of football, not just the end. The D was beastly against Denver. Would it have been different if the D let in that touchdown in the 2nd quarter instead of the 4th? No it wouldn't have. Math kind of matters here and when the defense has to come back after 3 & outs from our offense and turnovers, they get worn down. For the eagles game, how can you consider 4 turnovers acceptable? 21 points off 4 turnovers. Take away those 21 points and the score is more like 24-19, much closer. The defense DID NOT lose us that game. It's not like Vick had a monster game or even McCoy. They played well, but nothing spectacular. Almost half their points were off Jets turnovers in short field situations. For the Giants game, the fumble in the endzone was a bigger momentum killer. Lucky for the Jets, there weren't points off it because Harris came up with a big INT immediately after, bailing out the offense. Thanks to Harris, we got the ball on the Giants 11 yard line and we were fortunate enough to convert, despite another Sanchez fumble for -17 yards that was luckily recovered by Ferguson. 14 points on offense is an acceptable performance? 3 TOs is acceptable? Plus you forget the Sanchez safety, giving them more points. After the Cruz TD, we were only down by 3 points, and it was still a manageable game. The endzone fumble probably cost us 7 (3 at the very least) points which would have again made the game close. You keep cherry picking single plays instead of looking at the games as a whole. The offense being at fault is pretty undeniable. It would be different if there were no turnovers and the offense put up 28 points only to be edged by the Giants offense putting up 34. Then you could legitimately blame the D but we lost by multiple scores due to bad turnovers. Sanchez fumbled twice despite us recovering one. For Miami, again you are ignoring the game as a whole and only cherry picking one or two plays. Blaming the D in a game where our offense had 3 turnovers (leading to 9 points) is ludicrous. Those 9 points were the difference in the game. Our defense got us 2 interceptions that kept us in the game, but the offense failed to convert either opportunity. How can you possibly blame this one on the D? They allowed one long drive? Big deal. Offenses throughout the league are expected to give up less than 1 TO per game, forget 3. Once you get into that territory the chance of winning become lower and lower. You are expecting the D to face insurmountable odds and overcome constant short field situations, as was the case all year long. I didn't even mention the poor oline play that year, which is also on the offense and led to quite a few of Sanchez' turnovers. I'm going to post the 2012 games later today.
Games do come to the end sometimes, but the score of any game is the sum of the entire game put together, not just the end. We were lucky that the Miami game was as close as it was. Despite 3 offensive turnovers leading to shortened field situations the D still held Miami to field goals each time. The D played just fine in that game. But it doesn't negate the 9 points of the Jets 3 turnovers. Take away just one of those TOs and we win the game. So the defense is at fault when they let teams score late, yet Sanchez playing like crap late in the game has nothing to do with the offense and is just 'forcing the issue'?
every game and season comes down a A moment. the question is what weight does that moment have compared to the totality of all the moments that comprised the game? you just can't compare basketball to football in that regards. in basketball where a team may score one hundred points, that means every 2 point basket has a value of 2% of the final score. so while that basket that is the very first in the game was necessary for the last basket to be the game winner, by itself it has very little value when the team is going to score around 50 times per game. that is hugely different than football, where a team may only score 3 or 4 times per game. that means every score has a significant value per game, from maybe 10% just for a FG to 25% for a TD. that is why every score in football is important, regardless of whether it occurs in the first quarter or the end, and none can be dismissed.
I blame both but if the D is a big time D they had the game in their hands and they failed. They had shut down a bad O all game long and Den needed to go 95 yds to win the game w/ a QB that can't pass the ball. That's on the D. On the scoring drives allowed by the D: -Philly started at Phi 23 -Phi 43 -NYJ 17 -Phi 11 -Phi 47 -NYJ 39 Only the drive that began at the 17 they can be excused for. The D was thrashed all game long. Nothing all season was bigger than allowing a 99 yd TD on 3rd and 9 w/ the Jets controlling the entire 1st half to that point. cherry picking in Miami b/c it was the biggest possession of the game! that rips the heart out from a team when an awful O can take 13 mins and 20+ plays to take the lead in the 4th.
I think we all can pretty much agree that the Steelers have a "big time D," right? But in the Superbowl against the Cardinals, their D gave up a late TD to Fitzgerald (however, they were bailed out by the game-winning TD to Holmes). Then, in the Playoffs two years ago, the Pitt Defense allowed a game-ending TD against the Broncos. So, I guess the Steelers don't have an elite Defense either, since they didn't step up and win the game for the team every time the opportunity arose. By the way, Jordan didn't hit every game-winning shot he took either. Guess he's not a big time player, since he let his team down several times.
I can't believe I got sucked into this debate about the Defense over the past 4 years -- it definitely ranks up there as one of the most idiotic arguments that I've seen on here.
Steelers had a pick 6 by James Harrison before the half. Steelers were a good all around team with good players on both sides with even better coaching. Bruce Arians prob one of the better offensive play callers in the league. Too bad the Jets didn't even have that
Yes, that ONE DRIVE is on the D. You can't just ignore the rest of the game. Offense: 13 total points scored = unacceptable 83 total rushing yards with 3.0 YPC = unacceptable 3 fumbles = unacceptable 2/4 field goals % = unacceptable (I know it's special teams, but it's directly related to putting up points) 6 QB hits & 3 sacks allowed = unacceptable 318 total yards of offense = unacceptable 5 three & outs = unacceptable Defense: 10 total points allowed: Very good 229 total yards allowed: Very good 125 yards allowed rushing: Weak 104 yards allowed passing: Very good 1 QB hit & 1 sack = unacceptable 7 three & outs forced = Very good Either way you look at it the Defense vastly outperformed the offense. You positively cannot blame them without cherry picking. It is not possible. Yes, stats matter. You could also argue that the offense had the game in their hands at the end but couldn't convert. Who's really to blame?
My point is that even elite/great Defenses don't "win the game" every time. And just because that happens, it doesn't mean that those Defenses aren't elite/great as a whole, over the course of a season/seasons. The Jets Defense might not have won and/or closed out every game in which they've had that opportunity; still, the Defense is what has been carrying this team for the past 4 years.
I get it, I have stated over and over the O deserves their share of the blame BUT with the game on the line against an awful offense our D came up short AGAIN. They couldn't even hold that offensive juggernaut to a FG, they had to let them go 95 yds for the TD.
I agree. I'd prefer to see a balanced team with its stars in the highest impact positions on each side of the field. I'd like the characteristic of this team to be mobile (as opposed to outright fast like the Raiders draft choices right before Al Davis died) and intelligent. Right now the Jets are defense heavy with most of the stars on defense and defensive toughness being the defining characteristic. I just don't see the Jets current state as a championship formula. The 2009 / 2010 Jets were much more balanced than the team's current configuration.
It's the important games that alarmed me. Great defenses find a way to get stops, we failed to do so in both AFCCGs. You play to get to this point and we flat out did not perform to our normal expectations. That's my issue. I understand let downs, but not in the playoffs. I would rather have a balanced team that is good on offense and defense also, but we drafted so many defensive players in the past couple drafts, especially in the first round and we didn't put together an offense that will last. With that said, that tells me the defense is the back-bone of this team. You draft those blue-chip players they are suppose to be the play-makers for this team going forward. Just my personal opinion on the whole thing.
The defense has been better than the offense the 4 years Rex has been here. Granted, that is to be expected since Rex is a defensive coach. The offense was more talented the first 2 years Rex was here and now the defense is more talented as part of a rebuild/process of the old and new GM. The offense is now under construction after going in for the offense couldn't pull through the SB result we wanted in 2010. The offensive draft from 2009 might leave us with 0 players 5 years down the road. It's time for the offense to balance out this team, something it struggled to do the 4 years Rex was here. Part of it was Rex not ignoring the offense, but entrusting it with OCs who struggled to produce great offenses. The reasons they struggled have been mightily discussed here already. Now it's time for the new GM to work on this new offense. All low risk moves were made this offseason to improve the offense. Maybe none of them pan out and we have a high pick next year to help the offense, maybe they do pan out and help this team get tremendously better. Overall it's on Rex to help this offense get on track. We know he can give us a defense a consistently good team should have, now we need to get the offense from him.
Its almost as if they are leveraging their defensive coach. Draft players so that he can coach them up and have a great defense and then go offense from that point on. I wish they had a bit more balance though.
As much as I hated to see Revis go, it's about time we built our defense from the front first ... Just like EVERY dominant defense in the history of the league was built. Enough of this "exotic blitzing" bullshit ... Especially since every single rule in the book is designed to give the WR a huge edge over any DB you put out there.
Could be that. Could also be that they are trying to overload on defensive talent in expectation of the absence of a great defensive coach.
What's really discouraging is that when Rex came in, I thought he could take players that weren't drafted high and made them fit a particular scheme - coach them up. I didn't expect us to draft what 5 defensive players in the first round over the course of 3 years. Rex is still the man no doubt, but it kind of disappoints me that we have to spend so many draft picks (especially early ones on defense)
