Crushing for the team, that shocked the team and they never recovered. If you ever get the opportunity to speak to any player or coach ask them about that play.
And you know so much about what play crushes a team...? I'd argue that a Sanchez turnover is equally if not more crushing to a team.
And what better reason for an entire team to quit, watching their leader throw 3 awful picks in a must-win game to give the game to the other team?
They can be, I'm not sure we have ever seen a Sanchez TO that was similar to the Cruz 99 yd TD but tell me what you think were close?
a must win game where w/ the lead in the 3rd qtr our "great" D allowed a 13 min, 21 play, 90+ yd TD drive. But it was all on Mark. By the way, much like 2008 the week 17 game was virtually meaningless as the team basically quit. had we won we don't make it, we blew our chances the weeks before those games but it's all phin fans have to look back on fondly in the last 20 years so they pretend those games were like playoff games for us.
This year alone Buttfumble. Triple pump fake in Seattle interception. Could have at least 3 points. Hill wide open in endzone Houston red zone interception. Instead of being tied at 14 we go into halftime down 17-7. Tennessee throw into triple coverage. Or any of his other 3 interceptions. Those are extremely devastating turnovers. Moreso than the cruz touchdown.
I'm sure if I asked them about the blocked punt against Dallas, same reaction. Big plays are exciting plays and exciting plays stick in your mind. So they couldn't overcome that play with a whole halftime. 3 point advantage by the Giants with 30 minutes left of football and getting the ball back was too much to overcome? That's ridiculous. If that play rattled the team the mentality of Sanchez, the coaches, and the whole team changed in less than a season? Don't buy that momentum talk when there is a halftime after and the Giants didn't score until the end of the 3rd. I could buy into Schotty panicked and forgot that a 99 yard TD and a 1 yard TD both count for 6 points. But I've always had a problem with the playcalling that game.
we stunk this year, he was brutal this year. We weren't winning anything w any QB but we'll disucss these plays: we were already down 14-0 when the buttfumble happened, we weren't winning that game. awful INT in Sea but it was still early in 2nd qtr and we got the ball back w/ the game still tied. That was all JJ Watt, a guy who terrorized QBs all season long and it's hard to say that crushed us when we had the ball in our hands w/ a chance to win w/ 3 1/2 mins to play. The Ten one was crushing but again we weren't going anywhere. You will not get a debate from me about how bad he was in 2012, we know this. The team stunk too though.
The Giants were a dead team at that point, they lost at home to a bad Wash team the week before. Giant fans had given up, we dominated the 1st half and that play not only sparked them that game but sparked their SB run.
After 919 pages of back and forth, it's pretty simple to sum up the current situation: How many starting QBs out there would you trade Sanchez for right now? 10? 20? 25? More? I have to look at the current list, but I'm putting the o/u at 25. Nuff said.
Pick 6 at Denver. Pick 6 at Baltimore. "Fumble" for 6 at Pitt Fumble in OT at NE Pick down 6 on the Miami 10 with 3 minutes left. Pick down 4 on the TEN 20 with 2 minutes left. Pick at Seattle. @ New Orleans, pick and choose. That's off the top of my head. The pick 6 vs Denver was brutal because it basically undid all the work the D did to that point. Baltimore, giving them 7 points to start the game. Giving them 7 more free points to let them pile on. Giving them 7 more in the 3rd quarter only down 10. Giving them 7 more points and letting them pile on. Game ended with the fumble in NE. Lost the game against MIA. Lost the game against TEN. Lost 7 points vs a tough D in Seattle after tying the game on our defense and Wilkerson 99 yard pick by Darren Sharper. 3 and out. Then fumble in our own end zone.
You are great at doing what you accuse others of doing. I never said it was "all on mark". I said it was a majority on him. Please read or you're never going to catch me in this race. Blah blah "virtually meaningless". Which means it wasn't meaningless when the game started and is a bullshit excuse.
We scored 7 point up to that point in the 1st half. Hardly dominating or you have a low bar for what dominating means in football. The Giants then didn't score for real time 30-45 minutes and game time 15 minutes after that. It really sparked them except it didn't kick in until the end of the 3rd?
The story behind the int to the defensive lineman: http://www.newyorkjets.com/news/art...-Offense/582ddfe0-f43a-4ca1-b3ea-ba1203734459 REX: Well, but you look at who it was, it was "Snacks" [Damon Harrison], so I don’t think there’s anything to be ashamed of. With that particular defense, it’s interesting, to just show you how multiple we’re being, we actually had the defensive tackle spying the back. So sure enough, he saw the blitz, launched it over there and he was right there for it. [Nick] Mangold was blocking and was like, “You have to be kidding me.” But, yes, it was disappointing. That’s one, you just have to throw it away. If it’s not there, weigh the positives and minuses of that and I prefer that he gets rid of it, throws the ball away or runs with it.
Interesting for our D. Also interesting for our offense. There has been topic if playing against our D causes problems for the offense, but you think it would help their decision making and when to eat a play instead of throwing it up for grabs, guess not.
pick 6 at Den: Nope, we had the lead w/ a few mins left and Tebow backed up to his 5 yd line. pick 6 at Bal: I can agree w/ that one, it's not on a Cruz level but it was a crusher as we were finally back in that game and that killed our hopes. fumble at PittI still believe it was an incomplete pass), we came right back and got a FG. If he doesn't fumble there we punt to Pitt and they get at least a FG. If he takes sack we are down at least 20-0, we went into the half down 24-3. basically the same difference. We also got it back to a one possession game but of course our D couldn't get a big stop. fumble at NE ended game, that's different and mark brought us back down 10 in the 4th and gave us a lead. ok on Miami one but game turned out to be meaningless anyway. ok at Ten but we weren't going anywhere anyway at NO, they were bad picks but we got back in the game. we dominated play and would have got the ball near midfield w/ plenty of time to score to make it 10-3 or 14-3.
I just hope Junc is as forgiving to our new QB, Geno Smith's mistakes as he has been for Mark Sanchez's... Remember Junc, once Geno takes over (Week 1) - If Smith throws an INT it's a "good punt" too. If its bad turnover, it's because he has bad weapons and "we weren't going to win anyway.." and if the Jets do lose, it's because of their top 10 defense, not because of Geno Smith. Just be consistent with your QB evaluations. Hopefully Geno Smith is good like Mark Sanchez and not bad like Peyton Manning - - right Junc?
That's been an issue with Sanchez for awhile. He has a Farvian attitude towards just trying to squeeze a pass into a spot where it shouldn't go and not giving up on plays. He did try to give up on a few of them last year, but for the most part he doesn't have that clock in his head that Quarterbacks need to have. That attribute of his is a horrible one to have on a team with sub-par wide receivers.
It's so fun when posters just don't(or can't) read. Go back and read those posts about "good punt", have someone who CAN read go over it slowly with you so the info can sink in. I am always consistent, if I feel we can't win w/ him I will say so. If I feel we can I will back him, it is the average fans swayed by the media like you that will calling for his benching/releasing in 2 years like you guys always do.
