You acknowledged the O was terrible but continue to say the Defense cost us the game. I acknowledged that the defense caould play better, but they are far from the reason we lost the game. You ignore these things adn spin round and round, insult people, and act as if your free of blame on what you started. WSW is right, you titled the thread that way because your seeking attention. Its sad.
Your points about the offense in your initial posts are nonsensical. First of all, the Ravens only had one really time consuming drive, it was in the first quarter and it ended in a fumble that the Jets recovered. Then you say that it's the defenses fault that the offensive was ineffective because they were in clock kill mode. I'm not sure how that translates into the Jets longest drive of the night taking up just over 3 minutes or the fact that they never ran more than 5 plays on a drive before the comedy of that final drive. Don't insult peoples intelligence either by pretending like the Jets haven't milked the play clock as long as humanly possible every game either, at least going back to when Hackett was still the OC.
The defense was on the field for 40 minutes. And they only gave up 10 points. Give the guys a fucking break.
The defense did cost us the game. let me try and be clearer: -We played a game expected to be a low scoring defensive battle(why do you think Rex didn't go on 4th and 1? he knew every pt would be precious and couldn't risk not coming away w/ points on that drive). -The D is the premiere unit on our team -Our D could not gte off the field -we do not have a quick strike, high powered O -Bal had the ball for 38 1/2 mins -w/ that TOP disadvantage and w/ the D not being able to get off the field it played into how we played offense. We were more trying to milk the clock than run an offense. -If we could have done a better job on 3rd downs(specifically 3rd and long) we would have had more possessions, more offensive plays and could have gotten into a better rhythm offensively. It's not easy to see, you have to connect the dots. I don't expect everyone to agree w/ me and I don't expect many people to have thought about this before they saw the point but it's a valid point despite what some folks like you are saying.
They had the ball near 40 minutes, they controlled the game. It's not all on the D why the O sucked, the O deserves their share of the game as they were terrible but the D did play a role not being able to get off the field. Our D is held to a higher standard than our O, it is our dominant unit. They played well at times but not being able to get off the field killed us all night long. Hackett hasn't been here since 2004, we have had problems w/ tempo at times w/o a doubt but last night was pathetic.
If anything this is a credit to our defense, but still has little to do with your point. This goes against your point. True. True, although does not relate to your 'defense didn't play great' point. Obviously this falls on the defense but the offense takes equal blame for not being able to do ANYTHING. What kind of TOP do you expect when 80% of our drives are 3 and outs? 3 and out =/= milking the clock. Nothing to do with defense. So basically the defense was not at fault, but the offense. Thank you now go post your findings at finheaven.
if the offense moves the ball and gives the D a breather, maybe they play better on 3rd downs. but, again, the TOP becomes irrelevant if the Ravens don't do anything with it. considering the point of the game is to score, not simply rack up yardage, the Ravens didn't succeed on offense. the D, despite their flaws, put the offense in position to score all game and they couldn't finish. and that is the D's fault? those are what you have to address. you keep pointing to irrelevant elements like 3rd down conversions that didn't lead tp points. well, guess what, the point of the game is to outscore your opponent, and the D kept the Ravens at a point total that the offense should have been able to eclipse. so, your point is simply that the D lost because they gave up more than the offense can score. that's an asinine criteria because it can easily be flipped to be the offense lost the game because they couldn't score more than the defense gave up. it's a downright stupid as saying the offense lost the game if they scored 41 because the D gave up 42 simply because the offense scored so quickly that the D was on the field too long and got tired.
How does the D being our premiere unit go against my point? The more possessions, more plays had alot to do w/ the D. Their inability to get off the field kept our O off the field and our O was never able to get into a ryhthm. Apparently after all that you still cannot digest the info. have someone read it and explain it to you.
I agree w/ the first part but when our D is the premiere unit on our team they are held to a higher standard. They annot wait for the O to get it going, they have to take the game in their hands and get it under control which they could not do. The O deserves their share of the blame as well, don't act like I am giving them a pass. The O was awful but i think the D deserves more of the blame b/c of their inability to get off the field. I'll bring up the 2003 point again. Our D was brutal that year yet we were top 10 in PA, that's similar to last night. Bend but don't break defenses don't win in this league and we bent but didn't break which is fine but it also limited the TOP for the O and the offensive plays. You guys are treating the O and D like equals, they are not equals. This is a team driven by it's defense so they are held to a different standard.
Actually, I think that's a bit impressive. To constantly get burned on 3rd down, which means they were moving the ball, but ONLY give up 10 points (and 7 of those points were more on the O than the D) is fucking solid. IMO.
You're arguing the chicken and the egg. The Jets did give up several bad 3rd down and long conversions, but with the offense having 3 or 4 first downs the entire game before the last drive how would the Ravens not be dominating on TOP? The defense may be the dominant unit but you have to be realistic as well, without the plays the defense and special teams made the offense would've been shut out. The defense was basically -1 with 10 points allowed and responsible for the 9 the offense did score. If you can't win a game with a defensive performance like that there is really only place you need to look to start assigning blame.
they didn't wait for the O to get it going. they shut out the Ravens for the first half until the final seconds, and then only gave up 3 points in the second half. what you fail to want to acknowledge is that the D constantly being off the field for only 3 plays because the O can't get a first down, thus wearing out the defense, isn't the same as the D not playing well. the fact remains that despite all the elements you brought up, the D still did their job -- they only gave up two scores AND gave the offense great field position. you attempt to minimize the former and ignore the latter, of which doesn't accurately reflect what occurred in the game at all. the D played well, and despite some lapses still put the offense in great positions to score, and they couldn't. but because the offense couldn't capitalize on the field position the Defense gave them the D cost us the game and waited for the offense to get it going? that's simply ludicrous.
Isn't this better? Rather than attacking me you make some valid points. Why couldn't you do that to begin the discussion? I agree if the O started getting some 1st downs and give the D a breather it would have been huge for us BUT my point is the D is the unit we rely on. They have more pressure on them and by Baltimore possessing the ball for almost 40 mins it left our O cold most of the night. They culd never get it going, w/ a few more possessions who knows? We still may have sucked but they would have had a better chance to get into a rhythm.
Yep, a trademark of the D last year. Play great until those huge moments to end a half or a game. You must have loved that '03 D then and thought they did their job b/c last nigth our D did a decent job but this unit is supposed to be a top D andtop D's do not allow all those 3rd and longs to extend drives.
not getting 3 and outs and giving up third downs doesn't mean they didn't play great. you have to dig deeper. I know you will simply look at that and ignore the fact that despite some lapses they still did their job by not allowing the Ravens to score many points, but it isn't black and white like you want to make it out. The Ravens failed time and time again to score despite moving the ball because the D held up. until scores cease to be the barometer for wins and losses, that's ultimately what matters. you have to dig deeper.
They allowed Baltimore to dictate the game in what we all expected to be a very close, low scoring game. Sorry if you cannot see that.
Nobody disagrees with that but Junc wouldn't have gotten this many people to come out and argue with him if he had originally titled this thread like that.
I see it, but it isn't so black and white. there are multiple things that you have to consider which you are either incapable of seeing or are ignoring. you have to dig deeper, you can't just look at the 3rd down conversions and make an evaluation of the game. you have to dig deeper.
Our defense gave our offense the ball on the Ravens 31 yard line, 12 yard line and 35 yard line (after the Jim Leonhard punt return) at three different points in the game. Our offense managed a grand total of 6 fucking points on those three possessions. Our defense gave up a grand total of 10 points (7 of which came off of a running into the kicker penalty followed by a very questionable PI call). Again, if our offense punches the ball in the endzone on ONE of those possessions starting deep in Baltimore territory, we win. CASE CLOSED/END THREAD
