JETS Stength of Schedule

by LRJets Sun Dec 09, 2012 4:26 pm

The "punchless" Jets won. Not pretty, but a win. They say the Jets still have the best strength of schedule left in the NFL. Did they watch the Chargers today? Sure Ben is rusty and first game back, but it was at Pittsburgh and Rivers looked good. I wouldn't run to put a "W" on the SD game.

The Titans are not a sure thing either. The Bills have been a tough game for the Jets for 50 years.

Let's hope for the best, whatever that is.

by wassejet Sun Dec 09, 2012 11:32 pm

LRJets wrote:The "punchless" Jets won. Not pretty, but a win......
Let's hope for the best, whatever that is.

There have been some bright spots for the Jets this year, almost all on the defensive side. Cromartie has played great this year. A true mark of character to be able to step it up after Revis went down. Wilkerson has taken a big leap. Coples has been promising when in there. (I don't understand why he doesn't play more?) Both Landry and Bell have impressed as well. One bright spot on offense is Powell.

by LRJets Mon Dec 10, 2012 5:29 am

There have been some bright spots for the Jets this year, almost all on the defensive side. Cromartie has played great this year. A true mark of character to be able to step it up after Revis went down. Wilkerson has taken a big leap. Coples has been promising when in there. (I don't understand why he doesn't play more?) Both Landry and Bell have impressed as well. One bright spot on offense is Powell.

I agree with all of the above, and Cro should be Jets' MVP. As the season progresses, it looks more and more that not only did the Jets take a year out of Tebow's career, but they were cruel about it.

When he did enter a game, the defense was not fooled by what was built up before the season to be a package that would cost the opponents time to prepare. On the contrary, whether he picked up 5 yards,or a loss, he was taken out the next play.

by Guest Mon Dec 10, 2012 7:15 am

The Jets won, without using their best player..Tebow!
Use him, or release him. He deserves better. Evil or Very Mad

by LRJets Mon Dec 10, 2012 7:49 am

We need the Eagles to win next week.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by wassejet Mon Dec 10, 2012 5:06 pm

LRJets wrote:....As the season progresses, it looks more and more that not only did the Jets take a year out of Tebow's career, but they were cruel about it.

When he did enter a game, the defense was not fooled by what was built up before the season to be a package that would cost the opponents time to prepare. On the contrary, whether he picked up 5 yards,or a loss, he was taken out the next play.

I don't feel the Jets are cruel about the way they use Tebow. He was not likely to be the starting QB of any other team in the league. Even Jacksonville (his hometown) breathed a sigh of relief when the Jets outbid them for his services. Tebow must have known the way Sparano used the wildcat in Miami, that he was not going to get a whole lot lot of touches during a game. The biggest favor Tebow can do for himself is to face the fact that he's not going to be regular NFL QB and try some other position. If he agreed to play FB or even RB, he can stay on the field longer. There's no question the guy is a punishing runner, and any coach who is worth anything would be a fool not to throw in a few wrinkles with him throwing the ball from time to time.

by LRJets Mon Dec 10, 2012 6:05 pm

I don't feel the Jets are cruel about the way they use Tebow. He was not likely to be the starting QB of any other team in the league. Even Jacksonville (his hometown) breathed a sigh of relief when the Jets outbid them for his services. Tebow must have known the way Sparano used the wildcat in Miami, that he was not going to get a whole lot lot of touches during a game. The biggest favor Tebow can do for himself is to face the fact that he's not going to be regular NFL QB and try some other position. If he agreed to play FB or even RB, he can stay on the field longer. There's no question the guy is a punishing runner, and any coach who is worth anything would be a fool not to throw in a few wrinkles with him throwing the ball from time to time.

Your reply begs two questions:

Why did the Jets acquire Tebow other than for ticket sales and the back page?

Do you think the Jets utilized Tebow as promised and/or effectively?

by LRJets Mon Dec 10, 2012 6:12 pm

If he agreed to play FB or even RB, he can stay on the field longer. There's no question the guy is a punishing runner, and any coach who is worth anything would be a fool not to throw in a few wrinkles with him throwing the ball from time to time.

Not too sure he is fast enough to be a RB in the NFL. A FB may not be in any main scheme of most teams today. He is a football player, problem is the right fit.

All season long I called for Tebow to get a shot, as did others, now past the 3/4 pole, the guy should be in a state of confusion. He has no highlight film for this season so far, so it was/is cruel the way the Jets handled the whole situation.

I think many fans and non-fans of the Jets would agree as many analysts already did.

by wassejet Mon Dec 10, 2012 8:16 pm

LRJets wrote:
Your reply begs two questions:

Why did the Jets acquire Tebow other than for ticket sales and the back page?

Do you think the Jets utilized Tebow as promised and/or effectively?

I think Rex liked what the wildcat added to the offense in '09 and '10 with Smith and missed it last year. He hoped to recreate it with Tebow running it who is a natural fit. I don't know why some people expected Tebow to be on the field more than Smith was, but I feel they both got about the same number of touches per game which is also about the same number of touches that Ronnie Brown got in Miami. The Jets Tebow version was a disaster because 1) there was so much confusion in running it, they often had to call a time out to get everyone straightened out. 2) the play would often result in a penalty on the Jets 3) opponents could use that time to put the right defense on the field 4) opponents knew that Rex wasn't going to let Tebow throw the ball down the field, therefore they could play 8 or 9 in the box. 5) if the Jets had been able to move the football this year, I think you would have seen more Tebow. Bottom line: the Jets tried to use the wildcat with Tebow about the same as they did with Smith. I might have used Tebow more in short yardage situations, however, the Jets this year as we all know, were rarely in those situations.

As for me, I was never a fan of the wildcat (even with Smith), so the less it's used, the happier I am.

by wassejet Mon Dec 10, 2012 8:25 pm

LRJets wrote:
Not too sure he is fast enough to be a RB in the NFL. A FB may not be in any main scheme of most teams today. He is a football player, problem is the right fit....

You don't need great speed to be an effective RB. I think Tebow has as much (if not more) speed than say a guy like Peyton Hillis who was a FB in college and became a very effective runner for the Browns before he got hurt. Also Jerome Bettis, not a speedster by any means, yet ran the ball very well.

by Guest Mon Dec 10, 2012 8:57 pm

LRJets wrote:The "punchless" Jets won. Not pretty, but a win. They say the Jets still have the best strength of schedule left in the NFL. Did they watch the Chargers today? Sure Ben is rusty and first game back, but it was at Pittsburgh and Rivers looked good. I wouldn't run to put a "W" on the SD game.

The Titans are not a sure thing either. The Bills have been a tough game for the Jets for 50 years.

Let's hope for the best, whatever that is.

I agree that none of them are a sure thing, and with the Jets that wouldn't matter what year it is or how good the ream is. However, they are all games that we CAN win, if we play good defense and can run the ball.

One game at a time guys. If we're going to play well this year, these three games are the time to do it.

by Guest Mon Dec 10, 2012 9:02 pm

wassejet wrote:
LRJets wrote:The "punchless" Jets won. Not pretty, but a win......
Let's hope for the best, whatever that is.

There have been some bright spots for the Jets this year, almost all on the defensive side. Cromartie has played great this year. A true mark of character to be able to step it up after Revis went down. Wilkerson has taken a big leap. Coples has been promising when in there. (I don't understand why he doesn't play more?) Both Landry and Bell have impressed as well. One bright spot on offense is Powell.

All in all, despite a few games, the defense has played reasonbly well. You have targeted some of the bright spots on D. I also agree that Powell has been a nice addition. He and Greene seem to make a good combination. We'll have to see in a game against a team that plays the run well. IMHO

by wassejet Mon Dec 10, 2012 10:54 pm

rdariusxxxx wrote:
All in all, despite a few games, the defense has played reasonbly well. You have targeted some of the bright spots on D. I also agree that Powell has been a nice addition. He and Greene seem to make a good combination. We'll have to see in a game against a team that plays the run well. IMHO

Any team that plays the Jets should play defense to stop the run. Reason #1: that is what Rex has announced to the world he wants to do. Reason #2: that is all the Jets are able to do with any consistency. It is very hard to move a football team down the field to score a touchdown strictly running the ball. Of course some teams will play the run better than others, but I believe any NFL team can make running difficult if that is what they concentrate on. Case in point, the Jaguars last Sunday. This is a team that was second to last in run defense, yet the Jets were only able to score 17 points mostly running the ball. The game was won because the Jet defense held the Jag offense off the board, not because the Jets ran wild on the Jaguars.

by Guest Wed Dec 12, 2012 6:22 am

wassejet wrote:
rdariusxxxx wrote:
All in all, despite a few games, the defense has played reasonbly well. You have targeted some of the bright spots on D. I also agree that Powell has been a nice addition. He and Greene seem to make a good combination. We'll have to see in a game against a team that plays the run well. IMHO

Any team that plays the Jets should play defense to stop the run. Reason #1: that is what Rex has announced to the world he wants to do. Reason #2: that is all the Jets are able to do with any consistency. It is very hard to move a football team down the field to score a touchdown strictly running the ball. Of course some teams will play the run better than others, but I believe any NFL team can make running difficult if that is what they concentrate on. Case in point, the Jaguars last Sunday. This is a team that was second to last in run defense, yet the Jets were only able to score 17 points mostly running the ball. The game was won because the Jet defense held the Jag offense off the board, not because the Jets ran wild on the Jaguars.

Didn't say anything like they ran wild with the ball. However, remember that we ran for over 160 yards on the Jags, so they hardly stopped us from running the ball. I do agree that the D was the main reason we won, but if we hadn't run the ball well, would we have scored enough to win?

The fact is, if you're a running team, chances are you are not a high scoring team, and you need a good D to go with it. 17 points for a team that runs twice as much as it throws, which is where we should be at with this particular team, is right about where you want to be. You're expecting your D to be able to stop the other team from scoring even that many.

IMHO

by wassejet Wed Dec 12, 2012 11:14 am

rdariusxxxx wrote:
Didn't say anything like they ran wild with the ball. However, remember that we ran for over 160 yards on the Jags, so they hardly stopped us from running the ball. I do agree that the D was the main reason we won, but if we hadn't run the ball well, would we have scored enough to win?

The fact is, if you're a running team, chances are you are not a high scoring team, and you need a good D to go with it. 17 points for a team that runs twice as much as it throws, which is where we should be at with this particular team, is right about where you want to be. You're expecting your D to be able to stop the other team from scoring even that many.

IMHO

Agree. However, I don't think you can go very far in the NFL by relying on running, especially to the extend that the Jets did in the Jag game. It's not like they have an A. Petersen or C. Johnson, guys who can take it to the house whenever they touch the ball. The Jets have no runner capable of doing that which means they have to bull their way down the field using 10-15 plays and time on the clock. When you need that many plays to score, the likelihood of something negative happening (loss of yardage, penalty, fumble, etc) increases making scoring that much more difficult. Rex can talk all he wants about "ground and pound" but that is not how you win championships in the NFL today. For proof, all you have to do is look at the Colts. 2-14 last year, they draft one guy (who can throw the ball) and look where they are today.

by LRJets Wed Dec 12, 2012 1:44 pm

Agree. However, I don't think you can go very far in the NFL by relying on running, especially to the extend that the Jets did in the Jag game.

How true! Witness playing NE. They score early, you fall behind even further, and you have to abandon your running game.

NE's offense is on par with their '07 team and they have a running game to boot!

by Guest Wed Dec 12, 2012 5:48 pm

wassejet wrote:
rdariusxxxx wrote:
Didn't say anything like they ran wild with the ball. However, remember that we ran for over 160 yards on the Jags, so they hardly stopped us from running the ball. I do agree that the D was the main reason we won, but if we hadn't run the ball well, would we have scored enough to win?

The fact is, if you're a running team, chances are you are not a high scoring team, and you need a good D to go with it. 17 points for a team that runs twice as much as it throws, which is where we should be at with this particular team, is right about where you want to be. You're expecting your D to be able to stop the other team from scoring even that many.

IMHO

Agree. However, I don't think you can go very far in the NFL by relying on running, especially to the extend that the Jets did in the Jag game. It's not like they have an A. Petersen or C. Johnson, guys who can take it to the house whenever they touch the ball. The Jets have no runner capable of doing that which means they have to bull their way down the field using 10-15 plays and time on the clock. When you need that many plays to score, the likelihood of something negative happening (loss of yardage, penalty, fumble, etc) increases making scoring that much more difficult. Rex can talk all he wants about "ground and pound" but that is not how you win championships in the NFL today. For proof, all you have to do is look at the Colts. 2-14 last year, they draft one guy (who can throw the ball) and look where they are today.

I don't disagree. I think Greene and Powell make a nice tandem that seems to be able to grind out yards. But neither is a real threat to have a 40 yd. TD run. So we do have to have long, time consuming drives. And one problem sustaining them is we have a QB and receivers who have a hard time hanging onto the ball. Because of that, it's hard to rely on them for much help at all. So, for this year anyway, we have to rely on the run and the D, and hope the passing game doesn't doom us.

I think Edwards will help the passing game, if he is in enough playing shape to take a reasonable number of snaps. He's had a chemistry with Sanchez. If he can help Sanchez, we won't have to run as much, and maybe then we'll be effective running the ball against better defenses.

We both realize that the NFL is about passing these days, and I don't have a particular problem with that, though I like good, old-time, grind it out football. The problem is, the Jets don't seem capable of a competent passing game at this point, and so they must run the ball. It's where they've been at all effective. You have to play to your strengths, not your weaknesses.

Obviously of course, we have to throw enough to keep the D honest, and we have to take a couple of shots down the field, but there wouldn't be anything wrong with a 60-40 split, or even 65-35, depending on how well we're running the ball.

IMHO of course.

by wassejet Wed Dec 12, 2012 8:10 pm

rdariusxxxx wrote:
I don't disagree. I think Greene and Powell make a nice tandem that seems to be able to grind out yards. But neither is a real threat to have a 40 yd. TD run. So we do have to have long, time consuming drives. And one problem sustaining them is we have a QB and receivers who have a hard time hanging onto the ball. Because of that, it's hard to rely on them for much help at all. So, for this year anyway, we have to rely on the run and the D, and hope the passing game doesn't doom us.

I think Edwards will help the passing game, if he is in enough playing shape to take a reasonable number of snaps. He's had a chemistry with Sanchez. If he can help Sanchez, we won't have to run as much, and maybe then we'll be effective running the ball against better defenses.

We both realize that the NFL is about passing these days, and I don't have a particular problem with that, though I like good, old-time, grind it out football. The problem is, the Jets don't seem capable of a competent passing game at this point, and so they must run the ball. It's where they've been at all effective. You have to play to your strengths, not your weaknesses.

Obviously of course, we have to throw enough to keep the D honest, and we have to take a couple of shots down the field, but there wouldn't be anything wrong with a 60-40 split, or even 65-35, depending on how well we're running the ball.

IMHO of course.

That is all well and good and I don't disagree with it, but my problem is this: why did we move up in the draft 4 years ago to get Sanchez if not to throw the ball? I think the Jets have done a horrible job of getting him ready and supporting him as a passer. So now we Jet fans are supposed to be happy to see him hand the ball off 35 times a game? Not me. It's very depressing. Here's this kid Luck from Stanford tearing up the league in his first year. One reason is because the Colts are not afraid to let the guy do what he does best and take his lumps to learn the game. The Giants did that with Eli, the Jets never did that with Sanchez. The Jets are not going anywhere this year so why not turn Sanchez loose and see what he can do. If not, I think we're at the point where the Jets need to reset the dial and draft another QB in Rd 1. There are some good ones coming out this draft and if the Jets miss out and let these guys go to other teams, mediocrity will be with the Jets for many years to come.

by Guest Sat Dec 15, 2012 3:07 pm

wassejet wrote:
rdariusxxxx wrote:
I don't disagree. I think Greene and Powell make a nice tandem that seems to be able to grind out yards. But neither is a real threat to have a 40 yd. TD run. So we do have to have long, time consuming drives. And one problem sustaining them is we have a QB and receivers who have a hard time hanging onto the ball. Because of that, it's hard to rely on them for much help at all. So, for this year anyway, we have to rely on the run and the D, and hope the passing game doesn't doom us.

I think Edwards will help the passing game, if he is in enough playing shape to take a reasonable number of snaps. He's had a chemistry with Sanchez. If he can help Sanchez, we won't have to run as much, and maybe then we'll be effective running the ball against better defenses.

We both realize that the NFL is about passing these days, and I don't have a particular problem with that, though I like good, old-time, grind it out football. The problem is, the Jets don't seem capable of a competent passing game at this point, and so they must run the ball. It's where they've been at all effective. You have to play to your strengths, not your weaknesses.

Obviously of course, we have to throw enough to keep the D honest, and we have to take a couple of shots down the field, but there wouldn't be anything wrong with a 60-40 split, or even 65-35, depending on how well we're running the ball.

IMHO of course.

That is all well and good and I don't disagree with it, but my problem is this: why did we move up in the draft 4 years ago to get Sanchez if not to throw the ball? I think the Jets have done a horrible job of getting him ready and supporting him as a passer. So now we Jet fans are supposed to be happy to see him hand the ball off 35 times a game? Not me. It's very depressing. Here's this kid Luck from Stanford tearing up the league in his first year. One reason is because the Colts are not afraid to let the guy do what he does best and take his lumps to learn the game. The Giants did that with Eli, the Jets never did that with Sanchez. The Jets are not going anywhere this year so why not turn Sanchez loose and see what he can do. If not, I think we're at the point where the Jets need to reset the dial and draft another QB in Rd 1. There are some good ones coming out this draft and if the Jets miss out and let these guys go to other teams, mediocrity will be with the Jets for many years to come.

I totally agree about Sanchez. I think he has the talent, though he HAS to protect the ball better. But I think the Jets as an organization have not given him the kind of support he needs. They basically gutted the receiving corps. They haven't done much to keep the O-line top tier. We've had problems running the ball at times because of that. They don't often have him on the move, which is where he seems to do his best work. I've hardly seen them do that at all with him this year. And dammit!! Are we the worst screen team in history? I can't remember the last time we were able to use screens effectively. Going back 20 years at least, I can't remember us running screen plays well.

I do think that Sanchez has suffered from not having a good, cerebral QB coach. I also think it would have benefitted him to sit at the beginning of his rookie year, at least for a few games, to get a view and a feel for the NFL game. I mean, he still makes some of the most horrible decisions, and that's on him. But a guy like Chad would, in my estimation, have been a huge help in preparing Sanchez.

What the hell. Like you say, let him throw and see what happens. At least we're not 1-15. LOL

by LRJets Sat Dec 15, 2012 4:05 pm

What the hell. Like you say, let him throw and see what happens. At least we're not 1-15. LOL

A shame we're not. We'd have 2 of the first 32 picks. Who remembers the Colts dismal season last year? It was a break from solid football for 14 years and now they are set for the next 10 or 12.

A quarter century of contention ain't bad.

We'll be in the middle, not addressing our needs and once again mediocrity. I'll never understand how Rex et al. got Tebow and did not use him. It'll be a sore point for awhile with me.

Sanchez? He'll throw or even run for some yards and smiles all over. I just don't see fluidity in the Jets offense. Watch any game, the quarterback throws the ball, the chains move and I become envious. It's like a struggle for us to get a first down at times. It shouldn't be this way.

I blame Rex for his rose(green)-colored glasses style. His denial, plus Woody Johnson's non-assertiveness

in this coach-owner relationship simply stinks. It's indefensible.

by wassejet Sat Dec 15, 2012 4:37 pm

rdariusxxxx wrote:.... though he HAS to protect the ball better.....

I agree here, but we have to remember that the Jets don't have an explosive offense by any means. Andrew Luck is making mistakes too, however, he is the kind of player that can make up for a mistake in a hurry with a great play. And you can say that about almost any of the great QBs. Brady makes mistakes, but nobody gets down when he makes them because everyone knows he will make more great plays than bad ones. Part of Sanchez' problem is that he has such a poor cast of supporting players that every mistake he makes is magnified as a potential game costing one.

by Guest Sat Dec 15, 2012 9:56 pm

wassejet wrote:
rdariusxxxx wrote:.... though he HAS to protect the ball better.....

I agree here, but we have to remember that the Jets don't have an explosive offense by any means. Andrew Luck is making mistakes too, however, he is the kind of player that can make up for a mistake in a hurry with a great play. And you can say that about almost any of the great QBs. Brady makes mistakes, but nobody gets down when he makes them because everyone knows he will make more great plays than bad ones. Part of Sanchez' problem is that he has such a poor cast of supporting players that every mistake he makes is magnified as a potential game costing one.

Having an explosive offense or not has nothing to do with protecting the ball. Luck has 10 fumbles this year. He is a rookie. Sanchez has 11 fumbles this year. He is a 4th year player. The elite QB's of the league have 5 or less fumbles.

It doesn't matter what kind of offense you have, your QB has to protect the ball.

by Guest Sat Dec 15, 2012 10:08 pm

LRJets wrote:What the hell. Like you say, let him throw and see what happens. At least we're not 1-15. LOL

A shame we're not. We'd have 2 of the first 32 picks. Who remembers the Colts dismal season last year? It was a break from solid football for 14 years and now they are set for the next 10 or 12.

A quarter century of contention ain't bad.

We'll be in the middle, not addressing our needs and once again mediocrity. I'll never understand how Rex et al. got Tebow and did not use him. It'll be a sore point for awhile with me.

Sanchez? He'll throw or even run for some yards and smiles all over. I just don't see fluidity in the Jets offense. Watch any game, the quarterback throws the ball, the chains move and I become envious. It's like a struggle for us to get a first down at times. It shouldn't be this way.

I blame Rex for his rose(green)-colored glasses style. His denial, plus Woody Johnson's non-assertiveness

in this coach-owner relationship simply stinks. It's indefensible.

We should not have gotten Tebow. I have nothing against the guy. We just shouldn't have gotten him. He's not been a help, and it's not his fault.

by Sponsored content

JETS Stength of Schedule

JETS Stength of Schedule

Re: JETS Stength of Schedule

Re: JETS Stength of Schedule

Re: JETS Stength of Schedule

Re: JETS Stength of Schedule

Re: JETS Stength of Schedule

Re: JETS Stength of Schedule

Re: JETS Stength of Schedule

Re: JETS Stength of Schedule

Re: JETS Stength of Schedule

Re: JETS Stength of Schedule

Re: JETS Stength of Schedule

Re: JETS Stength of Schedule

Re: JETS Stength of Schedule

Re: JETS Stength of Schedule

Re: JETS Stength of Schedule

Re: JETS Stength of Schedule

Re: JETS Stength of Schedule

Re: JETS Stength of Schedule

Re: JETS Stength of Schedule

Re: JETS Stength of Schedule

Re: JETS Stength of Schedule

Re: JETS Stength of Schedule

Re: JETS Stength of Schedule