But in another thread you said the losses were team losses with the o and d sharing the blame. So this post proves my previous point. If you can say we lost because of defense which is implying that the offense gets a pass which indirectly absolves Sanchez. Then by that logic Sanchez should get the blame for the mess that was 2011 and 2012. Another note folks can post up offensive stats but how can you have a dynamic top 5 offense with a QB like Sanchez running the show?
Also I thought Peyton the "choker" was the reason they weren't having more playoff success. Now lack of success is used to discredit Tom Moore?
The O played a role but the main reason we lost was b/c the D failed to show. if have the NYG D from '07 or '11 we make both SBs and have a great chance to win. Our D played really well for 2 rds then not so well in the title games. Sanchez and the O get the bulk of the blame for the last 2 years. I don't care about dynamic top 5 offenses. Did Bal have one last year? NYG 2 years ago? GB 3 years ago? Pitt in '08, NYG in '07. The only dynamic top 5 O to win a SB in recent years was NO. GB wasn't fully healthy for their run but they played great O so I guess you an consider them but it's still very few big time Os. Peyton is the reason but if he couldn't get an all time great to play well in January why would we have been scoring 30+ PPG in the tile games to win them?
As did Baltimore. The Ravens offense averaged 27.5 ppg in the playoffs. That's discounting the defensive touchdown in Denver and the kick return in the SB. They weren't top 5 in the regular season (neither was the Giants defense in '11) but they sure stepped up in the playoffs.
Neither side of the ball can control what the other does. If the defense was so called failing then that doesn't absolve the offense. The offense must control the aspect of the game they control and that to make sure they put up points. Or at the very least put the team in a position to get 3 points. Both sides failed the defense can't control what the offense does. It's the defense job to get stops and they failed in key moments. I'm not saying the offense had to be top 5. My issue is the constant bashing of an oc that had a young inexperienced QB at the helm and expected the offense to be spectacular.
They were team wins and losses but blame doesn't get shared equally. We won more b/c of the D but the O was also key to winning, we lost the title games mostly b/c of the D but the O gets their share.
Nah you win and lose as a team each side of the ball must control what they can control. For example in the 09 title if the offense kept scoring in the 2nd half the defense wouldn't be in a position to "choke". On the flip side it's the defense job to get stops and they didn't. However it's hard to ask a young rookie QB to go to Indy and beat an opportunistic Colts defense. Just like its hard to ask a defense to go out and try to shut out Peyton in his own place. Both sides failed in both title games point blank period because they failed to execute.
The O gave the D a double digit lad, sure they could have kept scoring but Indy could have too instead of running clock. Would it be better if we lost 41-34? Peyton's O's in playoff losses have not been good and he's lost more than he has won. we faced a team that chokes more often than not in January, a team that would only score 17 in the SB, scored 20 the week before and we allowed 30.
How about the defense getting 1 freaking stop in the Pittsburgh game ? Is that too much to ask for ? I still think if we get the ball back in the 2011 AFC CG that Sanchez goes down the field and we win it.
I don't know if we score a TD but I wish we had the chance. I do know that Stadium was scared at that point and didn't feel comfortable giving us the ball back. I wish the O had a chance to win it.
Right and like I said this goes back to my original point. That is every aspect of the team doing their job. So the "o gave the d a 10 point lead" that means that the offense job is over? Whenever the offense goes on the field the objective is to score. If the offense kept scoring that puts pressure on Indy. Not scoring with a stagnant offense and relying on the defense to hold a 10 point lead against Peyton in his building is too much to ask. The defense actually shut out Pittsburgh in the 2nd half. In the second half the offense had plenty of opportunities to put points up. With that said the defense failed I the 1st half and failed on that last drive.
A big time D will hold an O like that down, don't forget we lost Shonn Greene on the first possession of the 2nd half so we had a rookie QB w/ no threat of run game in a dome w/ 2 excellent pass rushers coming for him. That's not a recipe for success.
am i in the twilight zone? i really thought that i was going to come into this thread and see something about brian schottenheimer sucking.
You are partially right, yes a big time defense is supposed hold an offense. But with that said the offense failed to generate points. The offense can't control what the defense does, even if the defense is "choking" the defense should be able to lean on the offense to bail them out and vice versa.
I've said it before, I'll say it again. Schotty was not an OC. He was a failed QB coach with a well known last name that thought he could run an offense, so the Jets gave him a chance. Our offense was only above average twice under his reign twice and it was with HOF talent (Brett Favre, LT). Schotty wasn't good as a QB coach and wasn't good at running an offense. People seem to think Sparano failing makes him good. No it doesn't, it makes them both suck. MM is a proven OC that's been there and done that. No gamble involved. Same with our new QB coach. He has experience developing QBs, unlike Cavanaugh, who was a failed OC and the Jets gambled thinking he could successfully develop Sanchez. Schotty sucked. It will become more and more apparent this year when the Jets over achieve on offense.
Schottenheimer wasn't a horrendous O-Coordinator, but he wasn't a very good one either. All in all he was an average NFL coordinator that got saddled with a terrible QB, that's what did him in.. It's amazing what a QB can do for people. Schottenheimer went from being an up-and-coming young coordinator in this league, to fired, just because he ran into the buzzsaw that is Mark Sanchez. Had Sanchez been any good, Schottenheimer would've been a premier HC candidate. As it stands, he'll probably never get a chance anymore. Now he's an average NFL coordinator with an average NFL QB in Bradford. Still better than his situation with Sanchez, but he's not ever going to light the league on fire, which is what he will have to do now to get a HC job.
How can you have a good offense with bad QB's like Sanchez running the show? Actually Schotty deserves some credit for getting the most out of him in 2010.
Well, by youre own logic, a good QB should be able to make the players around him better. I guess your thinking/observation just doesnt extend to the coordinator level? I dont seem to recall Schotty being very good with Pennington, either...and he was a more seasoned veteran QB with sound fundamentals...
I think the final four rules were bad luck and things like that. The Jets FO also messed up. We should remember with how badly the FO messed up in 2011, we were sitting at 8-5 in the driver's seat for the playoffs and covered up most of our problems decently for the season. Who knows if Schotty wants to be a HC? He turned down BUF if I remember correctly? He's average, I agree with that. I think inconsistency and overly complex strategies are held him back.
Coaches can only do so much. Pennington was a limited QB by the time Schotty got here. Pennington was solid in 06 IMO. The one year we had a great QB we had a top 10 offense. It's not a coincidence.
