I agree he had our number in the second half, after some of the injuries and protection adjustments. But if Peyton gets red-hot he'd have the 85 Bears number. I think the fact that Rex has never totally solved Manning and co. is something he takes kinda personally. I mean how many coaches would be #1 in pass defense, and then spend the offseason essentially blowing up the secondary and starting over (minus Revis)? Designing your defense to beat one guy is some thing you do in the NBA, not the NFL. But Rex just figures if it's designed to beat him then it should beat anybody. So maybe he's crazy. I think he is. Like a fox.
You also provided us with a neat little psych profile of Mark Sanchez. We're not just grasping at straws here.
They have absolutely not done anything up to this point to be in the discussion for all-time great defenses, and I have argued that the word 'great' should not be used when describing the top-ranked 2009 Jets defense. Because they weren't great. There were big-time holes on the roster and Rex and Co. did a masterful job of coaching and designing schemes to mask those holes. And I think that's the great thing about our situation. If that's what Rex can do with someone else's team, what will he be able to do when he gets a roster built around what he wants on defense? That may be a year or two off in the grand scheme of things, and this discussion is undoubtedly premature, but the defense is going to need to attain greatness until the offense gets their legs under them. As far as arguments against the defense, health is the only one that makes sense at this point.
That is completely untrue - regression to the mean has nothing to do with things like coin flips (you're talking about the law of large numbers and the fallacy of the "law of averages" there). In fact, regression to the mean has everything to do with events that have lots to do with each other; in fact, it has to do with events that are identical to each other from the point of view of expected value. The idea is that the observed value of a random variable can be written as a sum of the expected level and the random part: signal plus noise. In this context the signal represents the "true" ability of the defense to prevent points from being scored. The actual observed value (the number of points actually given up) is this "true" ability plus a random component, which might be positive or negative. If an observed value is extreme (in this case, unusually low), chances are that it is because of two things: that the expected level is low (that is, the Jets defense is good), and that the random component turned out to be negative (thereby making it even lower). The expected level carries over to the next year, but the random component doesn't; the odds are that if the random compenent was unusually negative one year, it will be less negative the next year, resulting in an observed value that is less extreme. This pattern is guaranteed to happen in every context where there are repeated measurements over time. The classic example of regression to the mean is that if you take a midterm and get a high grade, chances are you will also do well on the final (because you know the material), but will do less well (because you probably also got lucky on the midterm). This is obviously not at all saying that there is no connection between performance on the midterm and final; in fact, they are almost certainly correlated with each other. The true expected performance of the Jets defense might be better this year, or it might not, since no one knows how all of the various parts will perform - Jenkins might not come back from injury, Bart Scott might be a half-step slower, and so on. Everyone also thinks of injuries as the evidence of (bad) luck, but the good luck is much less visible - an opposition offensive guard turns the wrong way and a play is stopped, or a wide receiver drops a sure touchdown. The most obvious example is actually Revis - he had what many people considered one of the greatest seasons ever for a cornerback, which by definition is more unlikely than likely to happen again. Yes, he could raise the level of his game even further, but the more likely event is that he falls back to a less extreme level. The best evidence of this is the statistics I already gave - 24 of the last 26 teams that led the league in scoring defense gave up more points (usually a lot more) and didn't lead the league (in fact, usually weren't in the top 5) the next year. You would find the exact same pattern (to a greater or lesser extent) for ANY other statistic you care to look at, in ANY context. Weren't the fans of those teams saying the exact same thing you're saying now? Of course they were. Is it possible that the performance of the Jets defense will be even better in 2010 than in 2009? Yes. Is it likely that this will happen? Absolutely not.
Mistake 1: challenge statjeff's understanding of statistics. Mistake 2: call him staffjet before you do it.
I very much agree with stat's analysis, and the regression is more likely than not. Back to the 236 number however, if 56 of those points are not attributable to the defense, then a regression of the defense combined with a progression of the offense can actually make the numbers remain relatively stable year-over-year. Now I realize it is completely unrealistic to say that none of those non-defensive points will re-occur, but even if they are cut in half that gives the D more breathing room to actually allow more points. And those points actually reflect Mark throwing pick-sixes all over the yard. What they do not reflect is Mark putting the defense out there more often and faster than they should have been, something I believe he will do less of this season.
I absolutely agree with the point about Sanchez and the pick-sixes. And we don't have to only count those; a bad turnover that leads to a short field hurts the defense too (that's why yardage is probably a better measure than points anyway). That is why I've said in other threads that I view the offense as much more important than the defense. If the offense can score 100 more points and cut down on the turnovers this team should be scary (barring catastrophic injury), even if the defense is not ranked number 1.
* Part of how the defense does depends pn the offense, when you have Schottenheimer calling first down run(4-5 yard gain) second down pass(incomplete) 3rd down pass(dropped) your offense is off the field in about 2 minutes and the defense doesnt get much rest. If the Jets offense plays run oriented, ball control football ,looking to get first downs and march down the field and eat up the clock that will give the Defense time to rest, especially Jenkins. Those quick 3 and outs by the offense hurt the defense alot.
... * Ravens best Defense ever ? no way, they beat at best a good Giant team in the superbowl QBed by a good QB Kerry Collins.. Best defense Ive seen, # 1 Steelers of 75 who beat Tarkenton and the Vikings in superbowl, that defensive front 4 was best ever. # 2 defense ever, I hate saying this, the NY Midgets who beat the Patsies in 2008 in superbowl. That giant defense led by the front 4 was awesome, that Patriot team was undefeated and had a great offense with Brady at the helm. If you talk of best defense you have to talk of who they beat, Ravens beat a good collins in superbowl, Steelers won 3 superbowls in 70s, Minnesota and Dallas 2x, who were QBed by Tarkenton and Staubach, two of the greatest field Generals ever. #3, 85 bears Excellent defense, they were excellent. # 4 defense ever Cowboys who beat Broncos in superbowl XII, Cowboys Dooms day defense led by their fron 4 played great.
The most dominating defense was the '85 Chicago Bears (double playoff shutouts): M.O.: KILL THE QB.....THAT's what I want the NYJ to own in 2010 DL: Hampton, Dent, McMichael, etc.....their outrageous LB corp (Otis Wilson, Wilbur Marshall, Mike Singletary, ...ouch).... The Bears beat the Jets 19-6 on a Saturday afternoon late in the season at the Meadowlands.....ice behind both benches. The lone touchdown was set up off a swing pass to Walter 'Sweetness' Payton that Jet DB Kirk Springs (#21) was clearly 'clipped' but was not flagged for. Notes: Kevin Butler (GA): college super-duper kicker attempting a 37-yard field goal into a frigid wind into the 'south' endzone....his "KICK" reached the 2-yard line. Any Jet fans remember that 'brick' ??? lol.... Jet kicker Pat Leahy with the "wind at his back" hit a line-drive 55-yarder during the game. Long story short: Jim Mc Mahon (on a number of occassions) took potential "2nd-and10...3rd-and-6" and avoided Jet pass rushes to put the Bears into manageable positions. McMahon's "avoiding" loss won the day...Bears DL vs. Jets Sack Exchange. Bears' "D" members made mention of that fact in the papers the next the next day, saying they'd rather reserve comment (i.e. "we might play them again").... O'Brian had a great arm but that day Jim McMahon was able to maintain field position with his scrambling..... yeah, Marino's Dolphins handed the Bears their only loss that season on Monday Night Football......the Bears QB that evening was: Mike Tomczak....a point often forgotten on Don 'flood the field' Shula and the NFL... mcmahon learned to "win" nearly 70% of his games...a point also often forgotten.... FAST FOWARD TO JINTS-RAVENS SUPER BOWL 2001 (after the Jints beating the Eagles/Vikes): Jim Fasel (after WINNING the coin flip--with WHO? as the Ravens QB?--) should've elected to either: --DEFER to the 2nd half --Kick off (and gain "3 and out" field position) Bad choice Jim. Fassel was seduced by his NYJ offensive juggernaut vs. two NFC DL-and-secondary-strapped teams, because his team's strength (like the Ravens) was in essence rooted in the Jint's "D" line .... Fassel should've kicked off and played for field position. The Giants wents 3-and-out and already gave up field position against a dominating defense....and from there, it was all over....again, Seahorn & Co. got schooled by a bad coaching decision......just my humble opinion. Jim: 'should've kicked off, or deferred to the 2nd half.... Jason 'GQ' Seahorn got 'schooled that day DEEP' by "whitey" WR's that day. ....and that doesn't include the bombs that "just missed" prior to the Td's ......
The key to our defense in my opinion is, we need to be able to shut down the recievers. That alone will pressure the quarterback a lot more. But then add say Kris Jenkins and Jason Taylor bringing pressure right off the bat then the defense is unstoppable in my opinion.
soxxx, I agree, BUT: when you have a miserable, cold day with a wind (earned by playoff home field advantage) that serves as an additional "DB" then it really comes down to (imho) Payton Manning and Tom Brady NOT....repeat....NOT having time to check off to the deeper "3rd" receiver. Time and distance. The NFL has changed the 'rules' so as to have receivers be allowed to run down the field. For example, #37 "Lester-the-Molester" Haynes can no longer put their hands on you after 5 yards......FIVE YARDS?!!!.....best get into Peyton and Brady's face in no time flat. Yes Revis, Cromartie and the kid from Boise State will 'hang' with the receivers....but why give these VERY EXPERIENCED QB's the time to look for their "3rd" and "4th" options?.....recalll the 1st half of the Jets-Colts AFL game when we put pressure on Peyton? Life was good. Second half? NO QB wants NO TIME to "sit back there" checking off....again, 'tis 'bout time & distance...kill the qb....(minus our "Jerry Holmes" secondary)...imho... jmho
on paper our defense is better than last year, and we upgraded certain positions that we needed, and it's the second year under ryan's system, this is gonna be a great defense, how great? we shall see.
This. Let's all calm down and just be happy to have a legitimate chance at possibly having one of, if not, THE best defense in 2010-2011.
00 Ravens D was statistically the best ever. Add in the fact they won the SB that year and there's no question IMO that that was the best single season defense ever.
I am a huge jet fan, Jet defense last year one of best ever? NO way! I was at the jacksonville game where they got ran over, the holes in the defensive line were so big Rex Ryan could have got yards running, and that one Miami game thay got destroyed by the run. The defense got tired because Schotty was calling offensive plays where the offense was going 3 and out and giving the defense about a 1 minute rest. Another big thing Sanchez throwing pics , fastest way to lose a game is turnovers, The Jets are a power run team, why in the first half of the year was Schotty having a rookie quarterback throwing the ball all over the field ? those pics cost us games. This year power run, eat up clock, let snachez do a little more but dont let games hinge on his play, run 80% throw 20%. The great coach Paul Brown said it best when asked why he doesnt like passing alot "When that balls in the air its not our ball anymore, its anyones ball, and I dont like turning over the ball thats how you lose games " You want the Jets offense to do better, get rid of Schottheimer, let Ryan call both offensive and defensive plays. If Ryan didnt step in last year and tell Schotty how to run offense, we would have never made playoffs. We are very close to a championship, dont let it slip away due to terrible play calling.
