If Jets Win the Toss Should They Defer?

The roadmap to defeating the Chargers is to run all over them. If in a scenario where the Chargers get the ball first and score on that drive, it immediately puts pressure on the offense to get back into it, which takes away from their ability to get the running game going. Obviously you don't abandon the run game at a 7 point deficit, and they didn't against CIN last week, but the whole idea is to put them into an optimal position to succeed. Half the reason for Sanchez's interceptions throughout the year was him throwing in poor situations that didn't allow him the opportunity to do better things.

What I'd like to see is the Jets get the ball to start with and immediately introduce them to Shonn Greene. That's a name I have a feeling they won't forget after this week, especially if given the opportunity.

 

"SWINGYNESS" ???? ... I love it.

 

we defer. then we stop them. then we go on the drive. then we score. then we keep repeating steps 2-4 until time runs out.

 

And if the Jets start off going three and out...then what?



At least if you defer......your defense has a chance to make a statement early in the game...and give the offense a short field.......then you have the luxury of getting the ball back to start the 2nd half. It may not work out this way....but i'm assuming that's Rex's line of thinking.

 

If you believe in our defense, then playing catch up isn't an option.

Shut 'em down on the first drive, make them think, then march down the field on their asses.

 

this.


Praise Ringo. :wink:

 

The entire premise of your argument seems to be that the Jets defense won't be able to hang. As you say, being down 7-0 in the first quarter is hardly a reason to abandon the run, so why are you so nervous about giving up that one score? The only thing I can think of is that you think they're going to score at will on us, in which case it really doesn't matter who gets the ball first.

 

Agree.

Defer, try and punch them in the mouth and set the tone early.

 

I understand what you're saying but to me that attitude is "playing not to lose". I'd prefer the Jets do what they've been doing under Rex which is to play to win... and playing to win is not sitting back on defense hoping for a turnover.

While the defense is the strength of this team, the offense needs to be nearly as good for the Jets to make a Super Bowl run. Shonn Greene has been absolutely incredible this past month and the real crime would be to not place the ball in his hands. He can be the difference of this team getting eliminated or moving forward.

 

The premise of my argument is that the Jets give their entire team the best opportunity to succeed, and the way to do that is to let the offense take the ball first and try to set the tone.

Either side of the ball failing could cost us the game. In my opinion the Jets win on their running game with the defense backing it up, not the other way around.

 

What about this team makes you believe they're more likely to drive 80 yards for a TD than to force a team to go 3 and out thus setting up a short field? This teams success is predicated on a nasty defense giving a below average offense a short field.

That's the recipe that's worked for the Jets this year. Not the other way around.

 

Its not about any of this.....you do what puts your strongest unit on the field. In this case.....the D.

We defer......

 

How'd that work out?

 

This is becoming a "what came first, the chicken or the egg?" argument. The defense needs to make SD go 3 and out whether its before or after the Jets get the ball. I think the offense getting the ball first is superior because it provides the opportunity to drive 80 yards and score as opposed to sitting back and taking what is given.

If you flip the argument around the other way, and say what if the defense provides the 3 and out that they need to, and the offense doesn't get its job done even with good field position, then I'd say we're not going to win.

Going under the assumption we need a 3 phase effort to win this week and every week after, I'm also going to assume the Jets are capable of driving however far they need to drive to score. If they can't do it, we'll lose and then we'll be talking draft rather than playoffs.

EDIT: I realize the first line might be a little confusing... what I intend to say is that I'd like the "first strike" opportunity, rather than SD getting it.

 

You didn't answer my question. You seem to believe we're more likely to drive 80 yards and score than to force the Chargers 3 and out. Why?

To answer your question, if we force a 3 and out and the offense fails, we're still ahead of the curve in the field position game. Field position is crucial for this team. Again, we don't put together many 80 yard drives, our scores generally come from a short field setup by the defense.

Obviously I agree we're best off scoring first, I just disagree with the best way to go about doing that.

 

The difference for me is Greene. How different is the offense with him in there than with Jones. Jones is productive but Greene is a playmaker. When Greene is in the game I have faith in the offense being able to maintain drives. Also, Schottenheimer has begun to realize that Sanchez shouldn't be throwing much more than 15 times a game. The offense in general is better than it was - and at the perfect time too.

Our return unit isn't that bad either so unless you think Kaeding is going to blast it out of the endzone on the kickoff, I don't see why we don't start on the 30 or maybe further?

Best case scenario for a 3 and out by our defense followed by a punt is that we start on our own 40. If you really compare the two, the ten extra yards I figure could help but it's not enough of a difference to pass up the opportunity to draw first blood.