Look, I'm happy we won I just think the game could have been put away a lot sooner if we attacked there weakness rather than there strength. Against any other team we probably don't come away with a win on Sunday. The yardage and yards per carry are completely irrelevant when discussing the number of rushing attempts in relation to the number of passing attempts. It's really not a difficult concept to grasp. We should have attacked there glaring weakness and run the ball more than we passed the ball. Yes, we could have executed better. Schotty could have put the offense in a better position to execute better by running the ball more. Coaches must do there best job to put players in a good position to exectue well. The fact that those INTs made the game closer suggests we need to pass? WHAT? Please explain that. Leon got 3 carries. Everyone expected the team to attack the other teams blatant glaring weakness, yes. I'm sorry you can't grasp this simple concept. This was in response to your "hindsight" comment that was complete bullshit.
I guess it's how you want to look at it. Outside of the 60-yard Washington TD run, the Jets did not run the ball well. Chiefs opponents in 2008 would not kill for a 135-yard rushing day. New England ran for 126 against them and were a Dwayne Bowe dropped pass away from being forced into overtime. The lowly Raiders ran for 300 yards on them. Atlanta ran for 186. Denver only ran for 94 yards against the Chiefs. This was a major problem, along with fumbles by Eddie Royal and Brandon Marshall. Carolina ran for 205. The Titans ran for 332 yards.
Yes, we got the win. It is concerning that our OC doesn't appear to be attacking other teams obvious weaknesses though. We're seeing a pattern of bad offensive play calling and against good teams that will not get the job done.
How about the Jets pummel the Chiefs so that Brett Favre can either hand off during the entire 4th quarter (like Joe Namath in Super Bowl 3) OR he can take a seat on the bench so Kellen Clemens can get some garbage time late in the game? The Jets should not have struggled to beat the pitiful Chiefs.
I really didn't think when we did run that were effective. Other then the one Leon run. And I think they did plan to run more but once Baker got hurt they had to change the plan. Once you put a 6th offensive lineman on the field it's very difficult to pass the ball. They obviously don't trust Keller enough to use him as a blocker. They actually seemed more effective throwing the ball and if Favre doesn't throw three picks we win a nice easy game.
I disagree that they weren't effective running the ball outside of the LW run. Rewatch the game, they were picking up decent chunks when they ran on a good percentage of the runs. Against the shittiest run defense in the league you should be able to line up, say I'm running in the "A" gap, try and stop me and be successful. Having a 6th o-lineman out there isn't a good excuse IMO.
Their weakness based on what....rankings? Cause the Jets are ranked 8th in PPG on offense...how many of the teams own fans would say we're the 8th best offense? I doubt anyone would. This is why I don't agree with your logic. It's a pretty large assumption to make IMO...that we could just run all over them...I'd think they'd be a little more prepped for the run just because they just got run on for over 300 yards.
DWare, please respond to a couple of things. The dose of Leon you claimed we gave KC was actually 3 carries. That's not a dose at all. And please respond to the following (which was a response to you saying "teams would kill for a 135-yard rushing day"). And also, please don't respond with the cowardly "In the end it was a W." That just ducks the issue at hand.: After seeing this, don't you think we should have run the ball more REGARDLESS of the end result, which was a W?
Based on the fact that just about everyone they faced ran all over them. This is irrelevant to the conversation as well as misleading. So because someone just ran all over them, we should think that they are going to prepare for the run so we should trick them and try to pass. This is exactly the illogical type of thinking that I fear Schotty is going with. The fact is that when we did run we were successful, much like just about every other team that faced them. It is also a fact that they were run all over for most of the season and that whatever extra preparation they had been doing to stop the run wasn't working. edit: I also want to point out some ridiculous logic you used in this thread. 1) You said we ran the ball well so we ran enough. 2) You said we threw too many INT's so we should have passed more. So you're saying we should have done more of what was hurting us and less of what we were successful at. Good work. Are you some kind of masochist?
Bingo. So, they were going to wait until they played the Jets to really prepare extra for the run? As if they hadn't been really trying to stop the run all season?
His approach is this: We won. Shut up. 'Nuff said. (Comparison, analysis, critique doesn't belong here.)
And then when we lose, his approach is this: We lost. It's one game. Stop overreacting. So basically, he never wants to critique or analyze anything. That's one boring fan to hang out with.
If the Jets had his mentality they would only beat teams with a worse record than theirs until the Jets had the worst record in the NFL and then went 0-16. Because everything is "fine"
Yup. The scary thing is, I don't think our coaching staff is that far off from this mentality. Or maybe I'm just confusing that with their lack of testicular fortitude.
I didn't mind that call. I obviously agree we should have run more throughout the game. But an occasional play action for a long pass on a short-yard situation is a good call. If that's complete, we're all talking about what a great and gutsy call by Mangini and Schotty.
I wonder if Schott has ever done a competitive sport in his life. You can't "deceive" someone until you actually make them think you're going to do something else first, and then you have to actually be able to pull off whatever you're trying to "deceive" with. That means if you establish the run and then start throwing play action passes or get them with 8 in the box playing the run, you're deceiving them. But throwing into pass coverage will only work when it's an opposing QB against us. That's more because our pass defense sucks and our run defense is pretty good, so teams "deceive" us by just throwing it against us. One of the hallmarks of a great competitor is forcing someone to stop you. You do the same thing over and over and over again until they show they can do something about it. If they can't, great, you keep doing it. If they can? You do something else. Now they're not sure what to do, they have to devote everything to stop one thing, but you might do the other. Now there is hesitation. Now they are "deceived." Maybe all our players just suck though, and the coaches ARE trying to do this but our players just can't do it. Although I don't know how running into 8 man fronts all the time in Oakland shows any of that...
That's an interesting way to look at it. Try this way instead. We ran the ball 23 times for a total of 28 yards or 1.2 YPC. Washington also had one additional carry for 60 yards on top of that.
The Oakland game actually shows how clueless Brian is. During the regular time, when the Raiders D were hellbent on defending the pass (and blitzing) Jets do exactly just that - PASS. After a decent success, (and 4th Qtr TD) Jets finally learn to rush - by then Raiders know Jets are coming at their front 7. Come overtime, what does Jets do? Exactly. RUSHING. Somehow, Jets offense played perfectly into Raiders' defense ALL GAME LONG. You can't call better offense than that!
