You've now descended into self parody. How about week 7 last year ? Sanchez clearly outplayed Brady, despite the pick. If Hill catches that ball late, they bleed the clock, kick the GW FG. Instead, they kick the go ahead FG, the defense allows Brady to tie with 1:36 left. Now...lets look at the cast Brady had, compared to Sanchez.
4 TD passes? 1 less than mark in the divisional playoff later that year. He also got great FP and had multiple chances to end it. Dodge never should have punted if Eli could have run out the clock. GB wasn't losing to a Chi team not playing for anything. Week 17 was meaningless He didn't turn it over b/c he got LUCKY on 2 terrible decisions and terrible throws. 10 mins down on the road at NE in the 4th qtr is a tremendous comeback. it would have been a spectacular pass if he completed it. watch the clip again. We don't ignore stats, we use them in context as they tell part of the story. Too many of you guys post blind #s that tell us very little. why? b/c that was the plan all along, it was about the future not 2004. Once they felt Eli was ready he was going to start. A sinking ship w/ a winning record. He didn't turn anything around, he took over a team w/ a WINNING RECORD. They were 6-10 b/c he was so awful winning ONE game and losing 6. Holmes threw Schottenheimer under the bus at Pitt in the title game- did we get shut out? Stats w/ context. The reg season required 9 wins to get to the playoffs winning a division. They didn't have to be very good in that division, when it was time to win a SB they stepped up and led the team.
Once again, Sanchez was facing the 32nd ranking defense that day. 32nd, as in last. Brady was facing the Jets defense. It's not as if they were playing against each other. I'd take my chances with Brady against the worst defense in the league with virtually any supporting cast at WRs. Give me Middle Tennessee St.'s Receiving Corps, with Tom Brady and he probably beats the worst defense in the league.
once again you just look at rankings. NE scores at will, their D is on the field more than ours or most Ds. They were 8th in pts which is much more meaningful(by the way they were 25th in yds not 31st). We were 6th in pts allowed, not much difference. Our D allowed 297 pts in 939 plays NEs D allowed 306 pts in 1020 plays when looking at rankings the Pats D stunk, when actually watching games you realize they were pretty good.
No I watch the games, and I realize that they are actually a pretty terrible defense. It's also pretty ironic/strange that you tell me not to just look at rankings, yet use rankings to back up that point??
I posted the pts allowd ranking and discussed their actual points allowed. I didn't say "they suck b/c they were the 31st ranked D"(even though they were actually 25) or "they are great b/c they were top 10 in pts allowed"
The Patriot D had the benefit of almost always playing w/ a lead. That makes the opposing offense significantly more predictable w/ their play calling. Compare that w/ the Jets D who quite often were behind in games w/ a lethargic offense that basically forced them to take more chances in order to try & make big plays. I'll buy that perhaps NE's Defense isn't the worst in the NFL, but no way they are anything more than below average & no way they are in the same class as the Jets D.
we were playing from ahead in most games and our D blew many leads. We had the better D but it wasn't by too wide of a margin. Our D was NEVER a great D in 2009 or 2010, 2009's version was much better.
This makes sense except for the better collection part. Atlanta this year had Roddy White, Julio Jones, Tony G for example Granted this gets into examining the relationship between a WR and QB and game plan. Were Braylon and Tone not piling up stats because of the gameplan being run orientated? Were they not piling up stats because they weren't playing well? Were they not piling up stats because Sanchez was not getting the ball in great locations. It obviously boils down to a combination (one that includes Tone being suspended for 4 games) but the poor RZ% in 2010 probably leads to the downturn of TDs for the wide receivers. The reliance on the run for 3-4 yards instead of a short pass for a reception and 3-4 yards or more, and etc. I think the 2010 combo of receivers was a great combination for the Jets though, but don't agree you couldn't find better. And I see Stafford being discussed. Stafford is an interesting case because of his health and because the Lions rely on the pass so much and in my opinion too much. See below: 2012- Stafford 727 attempts, 45.4 att/gm, #1 in NFL 16 games played 2011- Stafford 663 attempts, 41.4 att/gm #1 in NFL, 16 games played 2010- Stafford 96 attempts, 32.0 att/gm #18 in NFL, 3 games played 2009- Stafford 377 attempts, 37.7 att/gm #1 in NFL, 10 games played 2012- Sanchez 453 attempts, 30.2 att/gm, #29 in NFL 15 games played 2011- Sanchez 543 attempts, 33.9 att/gm #15 in NFL, 16 games played 2010- Sanchez 507 attempts, 31.7 att/gm #21 in NFL, 16 games played 2009- Sanchez 364 attempts, 24.3 att/gm #37 in NFL, 15 games played So Stafford is relied on much much much more in the Detroit offense than Sanchez. However: 2012- Stafford had 17 INTS with INT% of 2.3 vs Sanchez 18 INTS and 4.0% 2011- Stafford had 16 INTS with INT% of 2.4 vs Sanchez 18 INTS and 3.3% 2010- Stafford had 1 INT with INT% of 1.0 vs Sanchez 13 INTS and 2.6% 2009- Stafford had 20 INTS with INT% of 5.0 vs Sanchez 20 INTS and 5.3% So the key with Stafford was limiting his INTs as his attempts per game skyrocketed compared to Sanchez who steadily increased. In 5 less games in 2009, Stafford still threw the ball 13 more times. 2012- Stafford had 6 fumbles vs Sanchez 14 fumbles. 2011- Stafford had 5 fumbles vs Sanchez 10 fumbles. 2010- Stafford had 2 fumbles vs Sanchez 9 fumbles. 2009- Stafford had 4 fumbles vs Sanchez 10 fumbles. The key with Stafford is either extreme luck the last two years, or he has found ways to give the ball to the other team even while his usage rate is extremely high. He is being asked to throw more than Brees, Rodgers, Brady, and P. Manning, all QBs we can agree are better than Stafford. So if you boil it down to how they play the QB position, part of why Stafford has much higher stats is because he throws more than Sanchez, the very impressive part is how he protects the ball so much better and more often than Sanchez is required to.
This is a good point, playing with a 14 points lead or knowing your room for error is greater than let's say 10 total points all game, allows for a much different scenario than where giving up 10 points leads to a loss. That's why if you could engage NE in a close game, their D is more susceptible. Really is a team sport.
The issue w/ close games has more to do w/ their offense. SB XLII they scored 14, XLVI 17. we had a few low scoring games(Bal, GB, Mia, NE) but other than that we scored at least 22 in every other game.
Exactly, their D couldn't play perfect when needed unlike in their earlier SB runs where they held teams to low scores and scored just enough to win. If they need to rely on their D because their offense has the rare off game, they rarely can rely on them. That's what has held them back the past few years, they rely too much on offensive execution but come playoff time, you play better defenses, not a Broncos or Jaguars defense. That's just 2010 you listed though, we had other low scoring games we lost too in the last 4 years. Part of it is strategy by limiting the game, the other part is that our offense has been too inconsistent over the last 4 years. Like in 2011 we improved in the RZ dramatically but our 3rd down % fell. In 2010 we had a better 3rd down % but a worse RZ % than our 2012 RZ %! EDIT: To add onto your NE exampes think back to our 2010 playoff game IN 2010 I believe the Pats cut the game to 14-11 then J CO busted free on the next drive and we got another TD? That's a different scenario than if we were down 3-14.
If the Jets had those three receivers Sanchez would still throw into the ground, over their heads or behind them so what would the difference be? It's not the receivers it's the guy throwing the ball.
I mean I don't think with those 3 Sanchez turns into Matt Ryan. But it wouldn't have hurt Sanchez if hypothetical those were his receivers last year. He would have had a high turnover year still I think, but helped the team score more TDs based on the talent of the WRs there. Still wouldn't have been a great QB, but instead of being one of the worst, he would have been average
Keller was a rookie when he had a future HOFer throwing passes to him. :lol: Do you ever get tired of being wrong? Did you even watch that game? Like I told you before, we were down 3 points when Hill dropped that pass. How are we going to kick the game winning FG down 3 points? After Hill dropped that pass and we kicked a FG to tie it, we got the ball back when NE fumbled on the kick return. We had the ball on the NE 18 with 2:01 left, and only gained 3 yards. We are basically in the position you think we would have been in had Hiil made that catch and we couldn't bleed the clock. We gained 3 freaking yards!!
Sanchez had one of his nice coffin corner punts. Still, I really thought we were going to win that game. Right up until Sancho got sacked and fumbled.
Is anyone ever going to understand that no argument will ever sway junc or Hobbes? I know it's a discussion forum, but this has ventured far from discussion. I like junc, but he has described his interactions here as "battles" over the years. I like him because of his tenacity, but that is also his failing point. He's a warrior, not a debater. He must win. At some point, when a pit bull is latched onto your arm, you let the animal control guy give it a shot and let it die. In this instance, the animal control guy is your own common sense. That pit bull is never going to give, even if you put a piece of filet mignon next to his head. He only wants to win. Just let him unlatch from your arm and consider it a survival, because that dog doesn't know how to stop. Sorry, junc. But that's what you are becoming. Fighting that dog has become an excuse for debate here. Maybe people need to let the dog view debate from the outside. As far as Hobbes... He is far more malleable. Given time.
Lol!! I was nervous when we kicked the FG to tie it with a little over 2 minutes and NE getting the ball back, but I really thought we had it in the bag when NE fumbled and we had it on the NE 18 with 2:01 left in the game. Just 1 1st down is all we needed. :sad: I learned that a while ago. It isn't about swaying them for me. I just really enjoy reading some of the ridiculous responses they post. It is strictly entertainment for me. I'm newer to the forum than a lot of you guys, so I can understand how it might get old after a while. I'm just not at that point yet. :lol:
Game over. As in 'effin' game over. put your quotes next to mine next time, spanky! You've posted NOTHING in your thoughts vis-a-vis my previous comments. Nothing. Nothing more than who you were addressing. This isn't about upfront, ernest, forthright discussions regarding our beloved New York Jets, this is more about YOUR psychotic need to twist-and-turn the web of obsession into a snare of no return-lol. I placed (REPEATEDLY), my thoughts/observations on this topic....and did so NEXT TO YOURS in green and then in blue and in both cases (esp. blue), you ignored putting forth an answer next to my comment. You don't play straight up junc. I've had to contend with the cherrypicking and other 'ignore/spin' devices you employ at your disposal (when convenient) and it's always been on an 'unlevel playing field' basis. Your (ever moveable) goal posts await you. ;-)
