So that's a no on addressing the fact that the D set the offense up in scoring position 4 times only to see 9 points come of it? Nobody is acting like you said anything other than what you said. Everyone has agreed with you that the D had some problems. Your overall point that the defense allowed Baltimore to control the game is foolish.
That has nothing to do w/ the point about the D. I have never argued the O was good, I have said all along the O was terrible.
And I still haven't accused you of saying any such thing. You are still arguing that the D allowed Baltimore to control the game when it couldn't be further from the truth. The defense had a few problems but played pretty well overall. The offense as you said was terrible and allowed Baltimore to control the game because of their failure to sustain any drives.
I have said all along the O was terrible and that they both deserve blame, my point has been the D deserves more. The D allowed just 10 pts which is great on the surface but allowing an opponent to hold the ball for near 40 mins is a major negative and the way they did it w/ so many 3rd and longs converted is a dagger to a team and it happened over and over and over again. We gave them a 1st down on a 3rd and 28!
Baltimore's O controlled the game and it was in large part due to penalties and poor play by the secondary. Bal O 38:32 NYJ O 21:28
The longest drive the offense had on Monday was 3:23. If the offense has one or two 6-7 minute drives the T.O.P is a lot closer to even. The T.O.P argument points to the offense as the bigger problem.
The offense had four chances to score within the 35 and did not get one touchdown! Ten points is ten points no matter what!
and despite that they still didn't score which is the ultimate goal. and, again, the offense is partially to blame as well for the time of possession, because it was due in part to the offense constantly giving the ball back to the Ravens and the defense wearing down throughout the game. had the offense sustained drives for 5-10 minutes the TOP wouldn't have been as uneven. that is the offense's fault.
This. Of course the Baltimore offense is going to be on the field more if our offense can't produce a drive lasting longer than 3 minutes.
That's great that we didn't break but the more time the opposing O stays on the field the less chances our O has to score. Who knows if Bal's O would have been able to stay on the field longer than 3 mins if we didn't help them w/ penalties? I understand the O deserves blame as well but the D allowing Bal's O to control the game was the biggest factor in the loss in my opinion. There were alot of factors but that was #1 for me.
the offense had the ball plenty of possessions and weren't able to move it, it wasn't an issue of not having opportunities. in fact the D put them in prime position to score throughout the game either in Ravens territory or near mid field and they couldn't do it. the Defense can't be blamed one bit for the offense not being able to score. the other issue is if the offense makes first downs, the Ravens would have inherently held the ball less as well, so the Ravens continually having the ball is the offenses fault as well. the Ravens having the ball meant the Jets offense either turned it over or punted, because they couldn't have the ball if the Jets offense maintained possession by gaining first downs. the Ravens offense didn't control the game, they struggled throughout and were bailed out by the Jets D. but they were alson continuously given the ball back by the Jets offense whenever they failed to get a first down, which was the entire game. had the Jets simply moved the ball, the Ravens offense wouldn't have been on the field for the Jets D to make those mistakes, would they? you have to completely ignore the fact that the Ravens only had the ball to begin with because of the sheer ineptitude of the offense. seems to me you are simply angry that the D made so many mistakes and want to blame them for the loss because you are angry, and will simply pick and choose whatever elements fit your position and ignore what doesn't. that's fine, we all are angry, but that doesn't absolve you from making a reasonable argument about who lost the game. at the end of the day, the Jets D did their job -- held the Ravens offene to only two scores, and gave the offense great field position throughout. the Jets offense failed to do anything all game. that makes it the offenses fault. ask yourself, all three scores were set up by the defense. without the D, the offense wouldn't have scored a single point. would you honestly assert it was the D's fault if the game was 10-0?
Again, the O gets their share of the blame but we are a defensive team and to allow the opposing O to control the game cost was the factor most responsible for our loss. I never said the D gets all the blame and O gets none of it, the D just gets the higher percentage. The D set up the scores but if the D would have stopped some of those 3rd and longs the O would have had more chances to score. The bottom line is Bal had the ball near 40 mins, our O isn't a quick strike O right now and to have it around 20 mins we won't win many games.
I think a lot of this blame in terms of defense to be on Rex. Why isn't Revis on Boldin the whole game? Or at least after his first few catches? But what really pissed me off, and the MNF announcers touched on it, were the plays designed to leave Kyle Wilson 1 on 1 with Boldin or Houshmanzadeh while the safeties blitzed. If i remember correctly, this enabled the ravens to convert on at least two third and longs. Rex's blitzes are great, and almost always get good pressure on the QB, but would it kill to back our rookie CB up with a safety when he's covering elite WR's in his first pro game???
Baltimore only scored on 2 possessions, so the offense got the ball back after every single non-scoring Baltimore drive like any normal game, and in great field position. just because they weren't defensive 3 and outs doesn't change that. the offense had more than enough possessions to score and did not. none of the defensive mistakes that did not lead to scores led to the offense continually going 3 and out themselves during the game. the offenses own inability to get first downs led to the TOP disparity, not the defense. the Ravens only had one significantly long drive.
Junc, you are not proposing things too deep for people to understand - as you have claimed previously in this thread. I assume that most people here understand your points, they just don't agree with your opinions. Hardly anybody is saying that the defense played stellar. However, the indisputable facts are that the Jets D held the Raven to 10 points (that would have been 6 points if not for a special teams turnovers) and that the defense put the offense in good position for much of the game. The "fact" that the defense is supposed to be better than the offense does not negate those facts. If the defense had allowed the Raven to go up and down the field (even without scoring a lot of points), giving the Jet offense the ball consistently deep in their own zone - with the pressure to have to go 80 or 90 yards to score a TD - then you might have a point. Clearly this was not the case. If you analyse two drives where the Jets did allow a large amounts of first downs (3-9, 3-13, 3-3, 3-28 and 3-9, 3-9) the end result was that the offense got the ball on the Jets 22 yard line and the Baltimore 31 yard line. So I ask, in the end, what is the difference if the Jets didn't allow those third down plays and then the Ravens punt the ball and the Jets offense gets the ball in similar or worse position? The only difference is that their would be more time on the clock. And you cannot use the excuse that the "lack of time" put pressure on the offense to score because the Jets were in striking difference throughout the whole game. There was not really a time crunch where the Jets had to score quickly. The fact that the Jets offense could have gotten perhaps 1-2 more drives if the Jets defense had stopped the Ravens offense faster doesn't really have a lot of value when it was clear that the offense produced nothing throughout the game, so what would 1-2 more drives have provided? You seem to be ignoring the fact that the Jets offense showed on Monday was a display of historically bad ineptitude - and if you consider the Jets history that's really bad. So, while the Jets defense wasn't all world - and nobody is claiming that they were - the offense was woefully bad. And your assertion that the defense is supposed to be better than the offense doesn't go a long way to prove your point.
