Who said you didn't? Just pointing out that the competition has been, well rather mediocre overall which may have the effect of making the Jets look better than they actually are. Still a playoff birth is a playoff birth and any team can win on any given day.
We should beat the titans by 2 TD's minimum. They have no run game to speak of and the biggest weapon they have is Delaney Walker, who will get his catches and yards, but should not dominate us.
Yes, but my point remains, the Jets have not beaten a single quality opponent. Although I do admit that quality opponents are lacking this year.
Haha, well said. The Jets are 1 of the 11 teams, in a league where 12 teams make the playoffs, still the Jets have a tough chance of making it. Crazy.
I understand your perspective, but it's more than just "indulging fans' woe-is-me tendencies." While Leonard Williams looks like he's going to be a very good player for us, "fine" is really not good enough. It doesn't matter how good Williams turns out to be if Mariota continues to develop and becomes one of the top 5 QBs in the NFL. No DL, now matter how good, is enough to carry a team to and win a SB. A QB is. Getting Mariota would have this franchise set up for the next 10-15 years of being a perennial legitimate contender for the Lombardi Trophy, and in all likelihood, would wind up being the greatest QB in Jets' history. Not tanking because it's "wrong" or "unmanly" (or whatever one's rationale is) is classic short-sighted thinking imo. The goal in the NFL is to win the SB and become the strongest, best team one can, not win another game or two that accomplish nothing. I submit that if you have a golden opportunity to secure a player that will give you the serious potential to accomplish that goal, then you're nuts to pass it up in the name of winning another meaningless game or two. The extra 2 wins last season did nothing to help the Jets in the short term or long term. Tanking to get a player that can quickly turn your team around and solve a problem that your franchise has had for many, many years is a sound strategy. In contrast, those two wins not only cost us the chance at Mariota or Williams, and hurt the team in every other round of the draft, but could have kept Woody from firing Idzik and Rex. I can understand why Rex and Idzik wouldn't have tanked those two games since they would have gotten nothing out of it. As much as I detest Rex and think that Idzik was an incompetent talent evaluator and GM, I would have been ok with Woody promising both of them an extra year to get things worked out if they had tanked those two games so the Jets could draft Mariota. Now, neither Rex nor Idzik may have been willing to do it, either because of their own disdain for tanking, their disdain for each other or for Woody and the Jets' situation. It may have been more appealing to Rex, however with all the cap space that the Jets had, and with a legitimate topflight QB prospect in the mix.
That's a poor argument because if you take away the losses that some of the teams have had vs the jets, they are over 500 and that would make them a "quality" opponent.
If by "the game" you mean the SB, I agree. If you're talking about games in general, I still agree, but there are special times when that conventional thinking should be set aside. If you know going into the last game or two of the season that an additional loss will secure the #1 spot in the draft and there's a great QB prospect sitting there, you lose the game and don't look back because you know that that QB will give you a much better chance at winning every game for the next 10-15 years or more, and will give you a realistic shot at getting to and winning the SB. Not getting that QB, practically guarantees that your team would continue to struggle to get beyond mediocrity. Trying to win the game in that situation isn't even rational.
Who on the Jets schedule IS quality? Literally only the Patriots. Bills and Texans are (6-6), the Jets beating either one would have made them (5-7). The Eagles and Raiders are (5-7), the Jets beating them would have made either (4-8).
decent defense by Tennessee, ranked 8th in total yds, but also a beatable one. they are poor at red zone D, letting up 65% of opportunities for TD's. also not very good at 3rd down, allowing 42% conversion, which ranks 24th in league. this tells me the D has trouble getting off the field at critical moments. if we play a balanced offensive attack, we should take this game without too much trouble.
I thought it sounded familiar. Talk about irony. He always said that, then had the team playing "not to lose."
The Dolphins, Skins, Giants, and the Colts would have winning records or be 500 if they beat the Jets. I'm not saying they are good teams but 500 or better teams are quality enough. They just haven't beat any elite teams yet but the only one they really play are the Pats.
Ok let me see A game we need to win combined with a game we should win.... Means we come out flat and lose
so if we win the SB you want to give it back because we beat the teams we were supposed to beat? got it. Besides, those teams have losing records because the NY Jets killed them. So there.
Where did I ever say that? That's just a silly counterpoint. All I was saying was the weak schedule does what the 2011 and 2013 seasons did, make the Jets look like a better team than they actually were. Nowhere did I ever say, or imply, that if the Jets reach the playoffs they should give it back or they didn't deserve to be there. Like I said, a playoff birth is a playoff birth and it's a ticket to the next level, worse teams have reached the Superbowl.
actually the point you make is a poor argument, by the same token you take away those wins from the Jets and they're a sub .500 team.
