38 carries for 181 yards and 4.8 yards per carry. hmy: I'll take that every single week in a heartbeat.:up:
\ His stats were 22-210 . Take away the 135 yards on two runs his AYPC was 3.75 . He also had nine runs of 2 yards or less .
TBJ - all due respect, I absolutely cannot stand this logic. You keep pounding the rock with TJ and he's going to bust one or two long ones. Why do people always want to take away his long runs when looking at his average YPC? We've heard this about every long run he's had this year. He's been one of the most productive backs in the league over the past 5 years.
Yes and one of them went for 33 yards. Again the point some of us are trying to make is that although the Jets ran for over 300 yards , they were stopped for little to no gain on a lot of carries. You can't assume that just simply running the ball would have yielded a big play and wouldn't have resulted in 3 and outs and punts . Its not like 80% of our carries were gaining 5 yards or better.
OK - here's a breakdown of TJ and Leon's runs against the Bills. TJ Code: <= 3 4-9 10-20 20+ 2 8 64 -3 7 71 2 4 2 4 -1 5 3 7 -1 9 2 8 1 7 9 5 22 runs 9 for 3 yards or less 11 for 4-9 yards 2 for 20+ yards 59% of his runs went for 4 or more yards Washington Code: <= 3 4-9 10-20 20+ 1 4 13 25 2 6 33 2 5 2 5 -3 2 0 2 15 runs 8 for 3 yards or less 4 for 4-9 yards 1 for 10-20 yards 2 for 20+ yards 46% of his runs went for 4 or more yards Total: 37 runs 17 for 3 yards or less 15 for 4-9 yards 1 for 10-20 yards 4 for 20+ yards 54% of the TJ + Leon combined runs went for 4 yards or more. Now I have no idea what the norm is, but that number sounds pretty damn high to me. I think we can all agree that it's time to end the "but we only got 2 yards most of the time" crap.
^ 17 runs went for under 3 yards , thats a lot. String some of those together and your talking 3 and outs . To me that's evidence that we still needed to pass the ball.
3 and out with a punt is better than an INT. The majority of the runs were at least 4 yards. Of course you still need to pass, but not 29 times in the wet windy weather with a struggling rookie QB when the running game was extremely effective.
ok i think the argument is not that schitty was calling passes as much as it's what passes he was caliing.some short underneath crosses and quick hitters would've helped mark rather than making his first read 20yds down field.the long ball wasn't there
Not Necessarily. Sometimes an Int especially thrown downfield can have a better outcome than a punt - especially if it was a 3 and out. The yard markers where the Bills took over were as follows: 1) Buf 38 2) Nyj 43 3) Buf 26 4) Buf 22 5) Buf 39 Outside of that 2nd pick , we really didn't setup the Bills with a short field. If the argument is to have us punt and let the defense stop them - we still had that chance. Again would I rather the Jets held on to the ball and had drives that resulted in scores absolutely, but there was no guarentee teh run would have yielded that. We played agressively to try and put away a struggling team - it just did not work . There's always going to be 2nd guessers when that happens. But personally I rather lose going for the jugular than by sitting back and praying we hang on - like we've tryed to do so many times in recent history.
But who said his first read was 20 yards downfield. Is it possible some of those plays were designed to go elsewhere but he read the play wrong. In addition the Bills were flooding the middle of the field forcing throws to go outsdie the numbers and deeper. he did check down a few times but he missed a number of shorter passes and had a few dropped on him. Again this isn't a gameplan issue , its an execution issue.
I think it's both. Clearly Sanchez had a shitty game. The coaches could have done a better job of putting him in a position to do well by running the ball more. We were running well, passing poorly and the conditions weren't very optimal for the passing game.
I think they did put him in a good position to throw because we did have some long runs. The safeties were cheating up into the box and the LBers weren't really dropping back far into coverage. There were plays to be made in the passing game , they just didn't make them . Its hard to say how much the weather really played a factor. Hard to tell how that wind circles at field level. I know at the game the flags on the goalposts were whipping at times and others not so much. Sanchez did seem to sail more throws going torward the side he threw 4 of his picks , but how much of a factor it was only he knows.
hey i just read in another thread that rex may be just like his dad buddy. i'll believe it when rex knocks shotty out on the sideline during the raiders game. wooohooo!
I think after 3 or 4 picks and you have the lead, maybe ultra-conservative isn't a bad idea. But what do I know. Having one more pick certainly couldn't hurt, right? Oh wait..it did hurt. nevermind.
retarded. absolutely retarded. 1) Line is overrated but Ill give yo this one. We also scored a shit load of pts last year with SHOTTY 2) 2 plus years of the last 4 productive years for TJ is under SCHOTTY! 3) Keller is NOT an excellent receiving TE at this point...he has regressed tremendously 4) never started with decent WRs and this allegedly best tandems has been together for two weeks....one week we scored 24 pts on the road and one shit week in bad conditions. 5) I dont even know what this means. He was the 5th pick so he should walk right in and be great so apparently Schotty is preventing him from doing so? c'mon dude, this is all garbage. The team lost for several, several reasons on Sunday
If you take away all the long runs, plus the good passes by Sanchez plus any touchdowns involving the offense we haven't produced very much. Why argue a point when it involves taking away stats that factor into the equation? The reason you pound the ball and keep at it is to break open for those plays. It was the same deal against Houston. Lets keep on running we have the second ranked rushing attack in the league thanks to last week.:smile:
I think BigMehl has made several excellent points on this thread. I am not a huge fan of Schott, but he's not the reason the team lost. I think we're all stunned by the combo of all those rushing yards and still ending up with a loss. But I don't buy the answer would have been to play prevent offense for the whole second half against Buffalo. The reasons the Jets lost were because of penalties and poor execution, and that Fitzpatrick outplayed Sanchez. I invite Schott's critics to go to the Game Book and focus on the OT. Tell me a single play the Jets passed the ball they should have run it. The other point I would hope we could all agree on his when we see the Qb attempt a pass to a particular receiver, that does NOT mean the OC drew that up with such receiver as the primary option. Big's point about the set of Buff's D is also right on - they were flooding the short routes to take away the slants and screens. They didn't respect Clowney and doubled Edwards. Keller sucking (man that guy is the most disappointing returning player this year) did not allow the Jets to make Buff pay over the middle. How is the OC responsible for all that? He's not. The one caveat I have goes back to the Keller situation. It's not just playcalling and game management that goes into being a good to great coach. It's also working with the players to make them better. THAT is a more fruitful field for Schott's critics, imo. I dont see much offensive player development coming from him.
