2015 New York Jets thread

[NJDevs4978]

You complain about selectively looking at stats yet you're even worse with that, Beezer (as was pointed out by the 'eight incompletions').

 

I'm actually fine with looking at yards on offense to a degree.  At the end of the day the name of the game is still points scored though but at least when you're getting yards - and not turning it over - you're moving the ball.  Looking at yards allowed on defense is a bit more faulty compared to points allowed though and you frequently cite yards allowed for a rank as opposed to points allowed on defense which for a number of reasons is problematic.  Number one being field position is dependent on offense/special teams giving up short fields or not, number two being if you're behind late in games you're not giving up a lot of yards then (and not a lot of passing yards in particular) and number three the D's just got to force more turnovers than it's been.  Not allowing yards is one thing, occasionally you have to make a play too.

 

While the offense has been better the defense also - particularly this week - was MUCH better than it'd been in any game all season and that certainly factors into improved performance as well.  And let's bear in mind Vick's NEVER been spotless in terms of turnovers himself, the last two weeks he has but that's not going to keep up...let's see how we do against the Bills after the bye (a team that destroyed us the last two times we played them) before I start canonizing the offense, it's not as if the Steelers have a great defense themselves.

Edited November 10, 2014 by NJDevs4978

[Colorado Rockies 1976]

Beez, you've been watching football long enough to know that yards gained isn't a great measure either.  For one, as we often see, teams that run up big leads often give up a lot of garbage-time yards (prevent D) that can bloat stats favorably for the offense.  Pats beat up on Atlanta last season and the Broncos pretty good, yet Matt Ryan and Peyton Manning put up over 400 yards passing in those games (though neither looked terribly great doing it).

 

And of course, yards gained don't account for red-zone efficiency...near the end of the Aikman era, those Cowboy teams were notorious for getting into the red zone and settling for field goals. 

 

Yeah, obviously the idea is to move the ball, but if you have the right personnel to do it, it's also nice if you have the luxury of moving the ball slowly down the field (to keep the ball away from the opponent, wear down their defense, etc).  It's not a necessity to rack up lots of yards.   

 

Here's a list of the offenses by yards gained, and as you can see, the correlation between yards gained and points scored is on the looser side:

 

http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/team/_/stat/total/sort/netYardsPerGame

[NJDevs4978]

Scoring points is very tricky, because there are other variables that go into it. As I said before: Amaro drops a pass on 3rd down that hits him in the numbers, which would've put the Jets in the redzone on the 16 yrd line.. that's not on Vick. Chris Johnson loses a fumble on 2nd and goal.. that's not on Vick. 

 

If you're going to play the what if game, how about what if Vick gets picked off on third down when he threw a dumb pass on the goalline?  You can't just selectively look at one side of the equation either.

[NJDevs4978]

Beez, you've been watching football long enough to know that yards gained isn't a great measure either.  For one, as we often see, teams that run up big leads often give up a lot of garbage-time yards (prevent D) that can bloat stats favorably for the offense.  Pats beat up on Atlanta last season and the Broncos pretty good, yet Matt Ryan and Peyton Manning put up over 400 yards passing in those games (though neither looked terribly great doing it).

 

Correct, that might be the biggest issue with citing yards for rank...yards get artificially inflated offensively when you're behind and defensively when ahead.  To a degree the same's true with points - but at some point you just gotta pass the eyetest.  I can't take 'the Jets D being sixth in the league' seriously because they really haven't been, I don't care about yards allowed - I know they haven't been able to stop other teams when they've needed to.

Edited November 10, 2014 by NJDevs4978

[Beezer34]

You complain about selectively looking at stats yet you're even worse with that, Beezer (as was pointed out by the 'eight incompletions').

 

I was not subjectively looking at the incompletions.. I was analyzing them. CR completely misunderstood what I was trying to say. The point wasn't to imply that Vick completed more passes than he did.. it was to break down the passes that he missed, and indicate that more than half of them weren't due to accuracy. That's surprised me in judging Vick as a quarterback. I knew Vick was talented on the ground with his legs. What I didn't realize is how surprisingly accurate of a passer he is.

Wording and linguistics is hardly "calling someone out" by the internet police on a message board bro. If any POV sounds agenda driven, it's: "Oh well, Vick only scored 30 points over these last 2 games.. and you can't really count what happened in Buffalo either, because that was a blowout!"  

 

Beez, you've been watching football long enough to know that yards gained isn't a great measure either.  For one, as we often see, teams that run up big leads often give up a lot of garbage-time yards (prevent D) that can bloat stats favorably for the offense.  Pats beat up on Atlanta last season and the Broncos pretty good, yet Matt Ryan and Peyton Manning put up over 400 yards passing in those games (though neither looked terribly great doing it).

 

..that's absolutely true. (and I never said that Y.P.G. is not without it's flaws) But it's the lesser of the two evils.. and fundamentally, one of the only ways in determining how an offense is moving the ball week-in, and wee-out.

Please don't misunderstand what I'm saying.. garbage time, and\or special-teams field position CERTAINLY plays a factor in deterring YPG. However, despite the statistical variables, it is still the closest way to judge an offenses efficiency. --hence, why it is used by the NFL in ranking(s)

 

I find this attachment you have to Vick to be bizarre. I guess if you see him as "not Geno", that's fine.

 

 ..pretty much Daniel. When you've been treated to 25 games of Geno Smith over the last 2 seasons, anyone & everyone (including Matt Simms) can come in and win games, looking like the conquering hero. Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Matt Moore your conquering hero a few weeks back?

Edited January 26, 2015 by Beezer34

[MadDog2020]

The Jets actually did everyone a pretty big favor yesterday by beating Pittsburgh. That could end up helping a lot of teams (including mine) somewhere down the line.

Edited November 10, 2014 by MadDog2020

[NJDevs4978]

I was not subjectively looking at the incompletions.. I was analyzing them. CR completely misunderstood what I was trying to say. The point wasn't to imply that Vick completed more passes than he did.. it was to break down the passes that he missed, and indicate that more than half of them weren't due to accuracy. That's surprised me in judging Vick as a quarterback. I knew Vick was talented on the ground with his legs. What I didn't realize is how surprisingly accurate of a passer he is.

Wording and linguistics is hardly "calling someone out" by the internet police on a message board bro. If any POV sounds agenda driven, it's: "Oh well, Vick only scored 30 points over these last 2 games.. and you can't really count what happened in Buffalo either, because that was a blowout!"  

 

This is where your argument goes off the reservation.  Vick is NOT an accurate passer historically.  His career completion percentage is 56.2, which would be 32nd ranked if it was a team rank this season.

 

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/V/VickMi00.htm

http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/team/_/stat/passing/sort/completionPct

 

And I never mentioned the Buffalo game lol (after all, Vick didn't start, he was rushed in), the problem with that game was the three additional turnovers and the fact the offense did nothing in the second half.  They did actually have seventeen points at the half so they weren't piling up everything against a prevent, but by the same token Vick's passing numbers weren't great till the last drive either.

Edited November 10, 2014 by NJDevs4978

[SS#4-Life]

This is where your argument goes off the reservation.  Vick is NOT an accurate passer historically.  His career completion percentage is 56.2, which would be 32nd ranked if it was a team rank this season.

 

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/V/VickMi00.htm

http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/team/_/stat/passing/sort/completionPct

 

And I never mentioned the Buffalo game lol (after all, Vick didn't start, he was rushed in), the problem with that game was the four additional turnovers and the fact the offense did nothing in the second half.  They did actually have seventeen points at the half so they weren't piling up everything against a prevent, but by the same token Vick's passing numbers weren't great till the last drive either.

thats also somewhat missleading though, because a lot of the seasons where vicks completion percentages were poor came early on in his career. it seems as he matured he became a better passer

[Colorado Rockies 1976]

I was not subjectively looking at the incompletions.. I was analyzing them. CR completely misunderstood what I was trying to say. The point wasn't to imply that Vick completed more passes than he did.. it was to break down the passes that he missed, and indicate that more than half of them weren't due to accuracy. That's surprised me in judging Vick as a quarterback. I knew Vick was talented on the ground with his legs. What I didn't realize is how surprisingly accurate of a passer he is.

Wording and linguistics is hardly "calling someone out" by the internet police on a message board bro. If any POV sounds agenda driven, it's: "Oh well, Vick only scored 30 points over these last 2 games.. and you can't really count what happened in Buffalo either, because that was a blowout!"  

 

 

..that's absolutely true. (and I never said that Y.P.G. is not without it's flaws) But it's the lesser of the two evils.. and fundamentally, one of the only ways in determining how an offense is moving the ball week-in, and wee-out.

Please don't misunderstand what I'm saying.. garbage time, and\or special-teams field position CERTAINLY plays a factor in deterring YPG. However, despite the statistical variables, it is still the closest way to judge an offenses efficiency. --hence, why it is used by the NFL in ranking(s)

 

No agenda here...like I said, Vick is the no-brainer if the Jets are trying to win games, and the offense is clearly better and headed in the right direction...what I'm saying is based on the stats in a small sample size, it's simply too early to tell how much better it's actually going to be.   

 

Just because of the general nature of football, there's really no great way to rank team offense/defense...seems like no matter what stat you use, all of them have flaws and don't tell the full story (and in a 16-game season, a few outlier games can really bloat numbers one way or the other)...like Has says, sometimes you really just gotta go with the ol' fashioned eye test. 

[NJDevs4978]

thats also somewhat missleading though, because a lot of the seasons where vicks completion percentages were poor came early on in his career. it seems as he matured he became a better passer

 

Vick's second best season in terms of completion percentage was 59.8 and that would only rank 26th among teams this year.  His top mark was 62.6 and even THAT would only rank 17th.

[Beezer34]

thats also somewhat missleading though, because a lot of the seasons where vicks completion percentages were poor came early on in his career.

 

..that's a very fair point. Vicks completion percentages were; 44.2% & 54.9% in 2001 & 2002. They jumped to; 56.4% & 55.3% in 2004 & 2005.. and again to; 59.8% & 58.1% 2011 & 2012.

 

In fact, the website shows: The 6 years in Atlanta, Michael Vick's (in his 20's) completion percentage was 53.8%. However, the 5 years in Philadelphia, Vick's (now in his 30's) completion percentage was nearly 60%.

 

I never mentioned the Buffalo game (after all, Vick didn't start, he was rushed in), the problem with that game was the four additional turnovers.

 

..four turnovers? I'm pretty sure he only had three.

Careful now Has.. we wouldn't want to alter statistics in any way that would further your point. Just an innocent accident I assume.

[Muevelos]

Sanchez plays great. Sucks y'all got rid of him. Has a functioning team and he's performing great.

[Beezer34]

Mr. RG3 sounds off during yesterday's postgame..

 

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2014/11/16/rgiii-distributes-blame-evenly-after-2nd-straight-3-7-start-to-redskins-season/

 

“It can’t be on one person. It takes eleven men. It doesn’t take just one guy. That’s proven. If you want to look at the good teams in this league, the great quarterbacks - the Peyton Mannings, the Aaron Rodgers - those guys don’t play well if their teammates don’t play well. They don’t. I need everybody.. every one of those guys in that locker room. I’m gonna be there for them. I promise you that. I’ll give it for them every day. I’ll never quit on them. I need them to do the same. I believe they will. I mean.. what else am I supposed to believe?” –RGIII

 

Alot of people want to peddle Geno Smith's 9-15 win\loss record, (myself included) but Robert Griffin is: 12-20, and they're both the same age.

..seems like this divorce with Washington is underway. Might be worthwhile to try to trade Geno (with an added late round kicker) for RGIII, and pair him up with Vick next year. Just Sayin'

Edited November 17, 2014 by Beezer34

[Daniel]

Mr. RG3 sounds off during yesterday's postgame..

 

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2014/11/16/rgiii-distributes-blame-evenly-after-2nd-straight-3-7-start-to-redskins-season/

 

“It can’t be on one person. It takes eleven men. It doesn’t take just one guy. That’s proven. If you want to look at the good teams in this league, the great quarterbacks - the Peyton Mannings, the Aaron Rodgers - those guys don’t play well if their teammates don’t play well. They don’t. I need everybody.. every one of those guys in that locker room. I’m gonna be there for them. I promise you that. I’ll give it for them every day. I’ll never quit on them. I need them to do the same. I believe they will. I mean.. what else am I supposed to believe?” –RGIII

 

Alot of people want to peddle Geno Smith's 9-15 win\loss record, (myself included) but Robert Griffin is: 12-20, and they're both the same age.

..seems like this divorce with Washington is underway. Might be worthwhile to try to trade Geno (with an added late round kicker) for RGIII, and pair him up with Vick next year. Just Sayin'

 

The Jets should draft Winston assuming he enters the draft, and he's available, which he probably should be.  He's a really, really good quarterback.  If he didn't have that personal baggage he would be a consensus number 1 pick.  And that personal baggage is actually less substantiated than what Mark Sanchez faced when he was at college, and Rothleisberger as a pro. 

[NJDevs4978]

RGIII also has a $6.5 million cap hit next year.  But no sadly I wouldn't put it past the Jets to go after him.  Can't believe I'm saying this but I'd almost rather give Geno another chance, or bring in anyone with a pulse (Winston aside) over RGIII...if he can't get his **** together with DeSean Jackson, Pierre Garcon, good catching TE's and a good running game there with a playcaller in Gruden that got a borderline elite season out of an average QB in Cincy last year, then how's RGIII going to do with our meh group?

 

And Winston's red flags are like tripled when you add 'New York' into the mix.

Edited November 17, 2014 by NJDevs4978

['7']

Sanchez plays great. Sucks y'all got rid of him. Has a functioning team and he's performing great.

 

He wasn't so great this week. Garbage yards aside...he also threw for his usual 2 interceptions...held the ball too long and took some bad sacks

 

We have to consider all options, and RGIII would be one of them. You look at his limited numbers this year and he's not terrible...he has completed a good % of his attempted passes, but his legs aren't what they used to be and that's a big part of his game.

 

Cutler is the guy I'd want here, but that's probably not happening.

Edited November 19, 2014 by '7'

[Muevelos]

Every one knew Philly was losing this week with whatever QB in front. And he wasnt horrible either.

Rgknee is gonna be pricy and risky. And Cutler. Well. Cutler is just Cutler. To much $ for what he will give on the field.

He wasn't so great this week. Garbage yards aside...he also threw for his usual 2 interceptions...held the ball too long and took some bad sacks

We have to consider all options, and RGIII would be one of them. You look at his limited numbers this year and he's not terrible...he has completed a good % of his attempted passes, but his legs aren't what they used to be and that's a big part of his game.

Cutler is the guy I'd want here, but that's probably not happening.

Edited November 19, 2014 by CarterforPresident

[Colorado Rockies 1976]

Every one knew Philly was losing this week with whatever QB in front. And he wasnt horrible either.

Rgknee is gonna be pricy and risky. And Cutler. Well. Cutler is just Cutler. To much $ for what he will give on the field.

Did you see the pick-6 Sanchez threw to Peppers? And he turned the ball over four times (2 INT, 2 lost fumbles). If that isn't horrible, I don't know what is...no, he didn't fully lose the game on his own, but he looked exactly like the Sanchez the Jets felt like they should move on from. And let's face it, the only reason that Sanchez is even getting this shot is because Foles is injured. It's not like Sanchez is some gem who somehow was getting screwed by not being named some team's starting QB at the beginning of the season. This guy clearly had some serious warts and they were on full display against the Packers. No one should second-guess the Jets for moving on from him (though one can DEFINITELY second-guess the decision to make Geno Smith the QB of the future). Edited November 19, 2014 by Colorado Rockies 1976

[Muevelos]

As if that team trust Foles. He isn't even much better. Sanchez is what he is. Everyone knew this was a lose as i said. And he wasn't as BAD as the stat line said. The entire line collapsed around hi. The entire team collapsed. He isn't the qb that'll make something out nothing. He can't work with a sh!t offensive line like ARod can. They should have drafted Manziel lol.

Did you see the pick-6 Sanchez threw to Peppers? And he turned the ball over four times (2 INT, 2 lost fumbles). If that isn't horrible, I don't know what is...no, he didn't fully lose the game on his own, but he looked exactly like the Sanchez the Jets felt like they should move on from. And let's face it, the only reason that Sanchez is even getting this shot is because Foles is injured. It's not like Sanchez is some gem who somehow was getting screwed by not being named some team's starting QB at the beginning of the season. This guy clearly had some serious warts and they were on full display against the Packers. No one should second-guess the Jets for moving on from him (though one can DEFINITELY second-guess the decision to make Geno Smith the QB of the future).

Edited November 19, 2014 by CarterforPresident

[CRASHER]

I've asked other Jet fans this question, if you end up in the top 5 range, would you be willing to give up that 2nd Round pick for Manzell? (provided of course that Hoyer stays the course, gets the Browns to the playoffs and gets extended)...I would think if the Browns think Hoyer is the guy that's a decent return on Johnny Backup.....

[MadDog2020]

I've asked other Jet fans this question, if you end up in the top 5 range, would you be willing to give up that 2nd Round pick for Manzell? (provided of course that Hoyer stays the course, gets the Browns to the playoffs and gets extended)...I would think if the Browns think Hoyer is the guy that's a decent return on Johnny Backup.....

I hope the Jets take the bait for RG3. He blows. Plus watching that guy deal with the NY media would be hilarious.

[CRASHER]

I hope the Jets take the bait for RG3. He blows. Plus watching that guy deal with the NY media would be hilarious.

 

I wouldn't say blows....I'd say RG 3-8 has been ruined (first by Shanahan and now by lil Gruden...another coach that doesn't realize he has a power run team and personell and wants to throw the ball over the damn place).....I'd say Johnny Backup could have equal potential with the media but with more upside potential

 

You could also throw Sam Bradford in the mix....provided he can actually survive a damned pre-season for once

[MadDog2020]

I wouldn't say blows....I'd say RG 3-8 has been ruined (first by Shanahan and now by lil Gruden...another coach that doesn't realize he has a power run team and personell and wants to throw the ball over the damn place).....I'd say Johnny Backup could have equal potential with the media but with more upside potential

You could also throw Sam Bradford in the mix....provided he can actually survive a damned pre-season for once

Nah, he blows. He also showed his awesome character the other day with his postgame remarks too. RGknee would be my first choice for the Jets to get. Actually Bradford might be worse, and is even more injury-prone than RGknee, so I may have to put him first. I don't want them getting Manziel, too much of an unknown in that he may actually be good. Edited November 19, 2014 by MadDog2020

['7']

I've asked other Jet fans this question, if you end up in the top 5 range, would you be willing to give up that 2nd Round pick for Manzell? (provided of course that Hoyer stays the course, gets the Browns to the playoffs and gets extended)...I would think if the Browns think Hoyer is the guy that's a decent return on Johnny Backup.....

 

I'd think long and hard about it. He's had a year to sit and learn (I hope that's what he's doing)

 

You have to weigh if he's looking good in practice...progressing. He may need another full year on the bench and in that case the Jets can just bring Vick back and start him.

 

I would lean yes on this trade

[Daniel]

I'd think long and hard about it. He's had a year to sit and learn (I hope that's what he's doing)

 

You have to weigh if he's looking good in practice...progressing. He may need another full year on the bench and in that case the Jets can just bring Vick back and start him.

 

I would lean yes on this trade

 

According to Fatcessa, the Jets braintrust, who may or may not be there after this year ends, did not like Manziel coming out of college.  He didn't exactly light things up this preseason, and did not get the job when the fanbase and probably the owner wanted him to. 

 

I don't see Manziel as being a special player that will advance things all that for whoever he ends up playing, and he has the potential to be an enormous distraction.  At most, he's Russel Wilson who might not be all that much if he wasn't playing for the Seahawks. 

 

Again, the Jets should draft Winston with their first pick, and stay away from Vick like the plague.  Vick is not a "tutor", he's not particularly smart or motivated, and you don't want him being anyone's mentor.  Instead, you sign some kind of retread that has enough credibility that you're not a complete laughing stock, i.e., Schaub, Fitzpatrick, Hasselback, Matt Moore.