Let's compare what the jets have done compared to the colts (this decade). Umm, on second thought, I'll save you the embarrassment. If you honestly think peyton is everything, then you don't watch football. Last time I checked, tom brady needed 10 other guys around him. You just assume that 1 person is all that matters. Sad.
Peyton Manning is not a choker. That may have been accurate in his early career but not anymore. He has become a 4th quarter comeback magician ask the Patriots if he is a choker. Do you know how many times we Colt fans have been told "Manning may not finish the game" yet he always does. In fact he's missed ONE play due to injury his entire career and that was a broken jaw and he missed one play. And the pressure thing... no qb's like pressure, none of them. And Peyton knows what paragraphs are
And the result is that Jets did enough to prevent the Chargers from using their passing game to win. See how stupid your point looks now? The Chargers are not the Colts and the Jets are not the Ravens
Did you seriously not get the point? How well the Colts did against the Ravens run game is as (ir)relevant to this week as how well the Jets did against the Chargers passing game.
MY point is that the teams (Jets/Colts) have already met this season. MY point is in that meeting the Colts were winning through most of the football game while STILL sitting half the defense and two key components of the offense. MY point is that the Colts were controling the Jets running game until Caldwell put the entire JV squad in. MY point is that an intentionally hobbled Colts offense put up two touchdowns against a Jets defense that was playing for its life. I'm not talking about the Chargers. I'm talking about what we've already seen between these two teams. Why is this so hard to understand?
I also find it amusing that no one has posted an intelligent response to DZ's (the link from 18 to 88) arguments. I've seen people call him a homer and I've seen a couple of clever references to zombies but I haven't seen a single poster actually take him on. I wonder why that is...
But none of us should care, because if you live in the city you'll see 50 women who are more attractive than them every day.
You want to know why? Because the argument is ridiculous. "The Jets have scored 38 offensive touchdowns this season (including the playoffs). 11 of them have come from 29 yards out or more. That's nearly 30% of their total touchdowns. In the playoffs, that ratio has sky rocketed. 3 of the Jets 5 playoff touchdowns have come on plays of at least 39 yards. It's clear that though the Jets are a run heavy team, they depend on big plays to take the pressure off Sanchez. When a team has a young quarterback, they know that long 10 or 15 play drives are going to be hard to come by. They seek to exploit mistakes in coverage and set up big plays. They know they can't afford the long brutal drives because they inevitably lead to multiple third downs where the quarter back HAS to make a play. It is a critical factor in Jets wins. On the season they have scored a long touchdown in 6 of their 11 wins. The only teams they've beaten without a big play for a score were Buffalo, Tennessee, Carolina, Indianapolis (though they did have a kick return and a fumble returned for scores), and the Pats early in the season." The point of the article is saying how hte Jets can only win a game if they get a "big play for a score". There are 4 games during the regular season in which we've won and gotten a "big play". These games are as followed: Houston (24-7) We won this game by 3 scores. Take out the big play, we still win the game. Oakland (38-0) What a nail biter. Luckily we got that big play or we would have lost! Tampa Bay (26-3) We only let up 3 points and won by 23, I don't think a big play would matter Cincy (37-0) I don't need to say anything here. They fail to mention the fact that during the 4 games we've won only because we've gotten the big play for a score, we've outscored opponents 125-10
So the article that states that the Jets rely on the "big play for a score" to win games is entirely false. In all 9 of the Jets wins in the regular season, they have not needed a big play for a score to win a game. Not even once.
I wonder if the Jets players already have their vacations setup for Monday. It will be good family time for them.
"The point of the article is saying how hte Jets can only win a game if they get a "big play for a score" No. The point of that section of the article is " It's clear that though the Jets are a run heavy team, they depend on big plays to take the pressure off Sanchez. When a team has a young quarterback, they know that long 10 or 15 play drives are going to be hard to come by.". There's a difference between saying a team relies on the big play to move down the field and the team relies on the big play to score. What DZ is saying is that the big running play means that the Jets don't have to go on long drives. Long drives are a problem because the odds go up that you will get into a 2nd and long or 3rd and long situation - two situations that are brutal for a rookie quarterback. I will say this though: I appreciate your post. It's obvious that you know your team. I respect that.
refer to whatever you want buddy. it doesnt get more simple than big time players make plays in big time games. weve won 2 big games cause of big plays I guess thats not the point of football. and i know the whole article/analysis is predicated on the fact the colts simply dont get beat for big plays. thats fine. all the bullshit has been debated enough. time to see what happens. either way its gonna be a hell of a game and I consider it an honor and the ultimate litmus test on the biggest stage sans the Super Bowl itself for this Jets D. oh im editing this now like 2 mins after the original post. cause if your pointing to sanchez, hes made big plays. (ie all of his passes to Keller) there was no bigger play than the rollout td that went on the stat sheet for under 10 but kept us in it. while were at it though lets take out all gains over 20 yards. oh wait if we wanna change the debate lets take out everything under 20. basically all this ifs and but bullshit needs to stop the colts are good the jets are good we'll find out whos better sunday.
I tried. If the conversation used stats and I used them then stats were stupid. If the conversation was about it being a good game then the Jets were going to run for 170+ yards on us. When I pointed out that we held the Ravens to 87 yards when they just ran for 268 on the Pats then the Jets aren't the Ravens. There is always an excuse.
The Ravens were playing from behind against the Colts and were playing with a huge lead against the Patriots. How many times did the Ravens run against the Colts?....20 or less?....and how many against the Patriots?....40..plus ray rice ran that first td for what 70 yards...which lead to a lot of their yardage against the Patriots.... The Jets gameplan will be different than the Ravens...they won't abandon the run...the gameplan is to keep pounding the ball between the tackles and wearing down the defense...see the Shonn Greene TD run against the Chargers....as long as the Jets don't find themselves down 2 scores...they won't panic and will continue to pound that rock...
