Has anyone stopped to think about what this 2008 Jets team would be like if we didn't have Brett Favre? I know we have seen Pennington be very "efficient" this year for the Fins...but he hasn't gotten the job done in New York in a few years now. He may be a better fit in Miami than New York, plain and simple. But I don't see us 3-2 with Chad playing, and everyone having the same amount of optimism that we have now. I'm thinking if there were no Favre, we are thinking about the "Clemens project" again at week 7 against the Raiders. Now I know we DO have Favre, so this is kind of a wasted thread...But I think we need to appreciate these WINS that we're having now. Because I don't think we are this successful, or anywhere close to it without Favre.
No offense but you guys giving Favr all this credit are absolutely nuts. We'd be AT WORST 3-2 w/ Chad and likely 4-1. Favre has played great in ONE game, he's getting better and I feelo we haven't seen the best of him yet but it's ridiculous to think he's the reason we are 3-2. The O hasn't been productive except for ONE game, the biggest reason we are alot better is Kris Jenkins. Jenkins has been amazing and all the help we signed/traded for along both lines are the major reasons we are alot better. Brett helps and I expect he'll get alot better and be a key down the stretch for us but SO FAR he is way down the list why we are 3-2.
No, I don't think any thread here has ever speculated on Favre's impact on the Jets! Translation for the sarcasm-impaired: Do we really need to create another thread like this? Can't you juts post to the more than a dozen that already exist? I'm self-admittedly one of Favre's biggest fans here. Almost by definition (as a Packer carpetbagger). But ... merci, si vous plait! Sometimes I can almost understand why so many NFL fans (including Packer fans) get so sick of the sycophantism that they started to hate Favre. Even though (IMO) Favre did almost nothing to earn this, he's the kind of player any true fan of the game should at lest enjoy watching, if not love, sometimes the water drip torture can make you do and say things you would not if you were rational. But, to answer your question: thinking about each win, I think Pennington also wins each game, except maybe the Cardinal game (assuming he is not playing for both offenses in week 1, lol). Thinking about each loss, I think Pennington loses each game, except maybe the Pats game. So maybe the net on the record so far is ... zlich. Not that I'm saying Favre doesn't matter to the team, as I posted elsewhere there is more upside there. It's later on that this experiment may bear fruit (thank god the schedule is the way it is). I'm just saying, you're going to far to say that the Jets would probably be a losing team right now (have any more losses than they do in reality right now) without Favre.
I'll tell you exactly where CP would have fallen short of BF--On the drive after the fumble. Maybe we get 3 from CP. If we even drive, no way does he overcome 2 waived off TD's to produce a 3rd. I'm not saying its all on CP--maybe the playcalling is different, whatever. (Just for clarity, I think CP is great and I want him back as a coach)
Parcells figured out how to use Chad – let him take you to the 20 and then completely take the ball out of his hands; don’t even let him try to hand it off and your success rate in the red zone goes through the roof. 1 – 4 with Chad.
Theres really no reason to think the Jets would not be 2-3 right now with Chad. Beat Miami, then someone else.
We lose both of those games. We have no runnng game we are lucky to put up 20 against AZ even with the Turnovers with Chad at the helm. NE beat us on special teams, Chad would have lost that game. Favre had a great game against AZ beyond anything Chad is capable of particularly with our running game.
We'd be 3-2. The only reason the cardinals put up so many points is because we started playing prevent early because we had such a big lead. You dont get 5 turnovers in the first half and lose the game. No doubt in my mind we would have won that game. Miami and Bengals we also definitely would have one. The biggest difference in my mind is if he wasnt a jet, hed be a patriot right now...
we spent the 2nd qtr deep in their territory w/ all the TOs, there's no doubt we beat Ari. NE did beat us on STs BUT we didn't move the ball at all, we would have moved it better as Chad knows this offense unlike Brett in week 2. Our running game was ALOT worse in 2006 and Chad had success leading us to 10 wins. AT WORST we'd still be 3-2 but I think we would have beaten NE and been 4-1 and maybe we don't have all those TOs in SD? he did beat NE and SD w/ less talent around him. They scored 35 points in garbage time after the game was decided. Much like at GB 2 years ago we scopred 30+ at the half.
The game would not have been decided we would never have had 30 in the first half and NE beat us by pounding the ball down our throats and converting every third down play not to mention they destoyed us in field position. Chad has thrown 5 TD in 5 games 3 of them coming out of trick plays based on their running game which we don't have. We also have a bad kicker this year which makes Chad an even bigger liability since he is a FG machine in a base O.
Not true!! They scored most of there points in the 3rd quarter when we were blitzing the shit out of them.
