Luck come a helping the Jets again

[The New Guy]

Block aren't as common because:
1. Not too many opportunities to block one
2. Teams mostly focus on returning punts than trying to block one
3. Jets have blocked a handful of punts under Westhoff.

Answer this question. If Jets scored a FG instead of a TD on either one of those long TD drives, would the Jets win or not? Just a quick yes or no, nothing else.

That is a silly question, and the answer is no if everything played out the same way it did. Here is one for you. If the Jets did not block the punt and return it for a TD, would the Jets have won or not? You fail to see that the Jets offense did nothing down 24-17. They needed a lucky break to win.

There were over 2,800 punts last season, and only 12 (SD and Mia's poor ST play accounted for 6) were blocked. That is less than half of a 1 percent chance. The chance of it being returned for a TD is even less. Teams focus more on trying to return them rather than trying to block them because blocking a punt usually happens when the other team makes a mistake. Not from a great play by the defender. It was a lucky break. The Jets needed help from Dallas to win and they got it.

It was a stupid play, but the Jets weren't lucky they defended it. A lucky play would mean a dropped pass that would have converted it. You don't understand the meaning of luck. BTW, Drew did win the Lions two out of the 3 games he started (Packers, and TB, yes, two of the better teams last year including the SB winners). Does that rest my case or u still wanna complain about how the receiver could have been wide open if he had turned right instead of left?

I give the Jets credit for defending the play just like I give them credit for winning the game in OT. That does not negate the fact that if Det had run the ball, the Jets would not have had enough time to get into FG range to tie it. The Jets had no control over the Lions running or passing, and benefited from the Lions decision to pass. It was as lucky break that they chose to pass. Drew had not attempted a pass in 3 weeks, and was not expecting to attempt a pass in that game. I don't care what he did after that. It was a dumb call that gave the Jets a chance to tie it.

No, it took the refs 14 second to make the call, not to see that Sanchez crossed the line. He either got it with in the first two seconds, or he didn't get it at all cuz his knee hit the ground fairly quick. U can't tell, and I can't tell if he crossed the line, and neither could the Lions, since it wasn't challenged. The time gets added back in such circumstances.

It was not challenged because it was ruled a TD and there was not any overwhelming evidence that would overturn it. Why would it take the refs 14 seconds to make a call that you say they saw in just a couple of seconds? It was because they did not know if he crossed or not, and just gave it to him. It was one bad call for another.

Im guessing injuries are not part of the game then. I've seen kickers get injured. Ive seen punters get injured. I've seen em both in NY. There is a reason why roughing the kicker penalty is harsh. Its because kickers are very vulnerable to injury while in their kicking motion. The blocked was pushed in to the kickers leg and Hansen got hurt. Lucky break for Lions, cuz the blocker didn't intend on running over the kicker. (not the mention the time Lions took off the playclock and gained extra 3 pts, although roughing the kicker was the right call).

Speaking of lucky breaks only going against the Jets, Braylon Edwards had lost a fumble only thrice in his career with about 300 catches until then. There's a 1% chance he fumbles and loses the ball. Guess what, it happened. If Jets had to block punts on 100 attempts, I'm sure they would block a couple. I wouldn't bring such a point up, but u just wouldn't stop moaning about the kicker getting injured and a blocked punt, as if they are not part of the game.

U didn't see the Jets win, cuz u didn't watch the game.

I've seen many roughing the kicker penalties where the kicker does not get injured. In fact, I am sure there are more roughing the kicker penalties where the kicker did not get injured than there are penalties where they do. He was not blocked into the kicker. There was a Jet player standing in between him and the kicker which caused him to role into the kicker, but he was not blocked into him. Injuries are part of the game, but that does not mean that the Jets didn't get a lucky break. The Jets don't win that game if that does not happen. Were the Dolphins lucky that Brady went down in 08? Injuries are part of the game right?

In regards to Braylon's fumble: it was a good strip by the defender. You can call it a lucky break for the Lions, but you have to watch how each play happens. If you think all fumbles, dropped passes and ints are all the same, you are wrong. Some are caused by the defense, and some are caused by bad decisions / throws, and lack of concentration. The latter are considered lucky breaks.



I certainly watched the Jets game against the Cowboys, and it was very clear to everyone (other than some Jets fans) as to what happened. If you think the Jets played good enough to win that game without the help of the Cowboys, you are sadly mistaken.

 

[thespygatetapes]

In regards to Braylon's fumble: it was a good strip by the defender. You can call it a lucky break for the Lions, but you have to watch how each play happens. If you think all fumbles, dropped passes and ints are all the same, you are wrong. Some are caused by the defense, and some are caused by bad decisions / throws, and lack of concentration. The latter are considered lucky breaks.



I certainly watched the Jets game against the Cowboys, and it was very clear to everyone (other than some Jets fans) as to what happened. If you think the Jets played good enough to win that game without the help of the Cowboys, you are sadly mistaken.

Your point is self defeating. When Romo ran for the goal line, he didn't just drop the ball, Jets D lineman Mike Devito punched it out and you can clearly see that. If gravity took the ball from Romo then maybe you have a case, but that is not what happened, the ball was knocked out of his hand. Blaming things on luck is a convenient explanation when we don't feel like examining things in detail.

On the interception by Romo, you have a case where Dez Bryant was clearly mentally unprepared for the play, because as was said afterwards in the media and so on, it was really Dez's fault that Revis had such an easy pick, he was supposed to turn and jump for the ball just like the same play where he got the catch against Revis early on in the first quarter. It was the same exactly play, but this time the Jets played different coverage, letting a safety roll over to Revis' side forcing the QB to try and force the ball in underneath and then Revis jumped it. Good play, not luck. Luck is just a convenient excuse for things we don't feel like explaining or cannot explain.

 

[The New Guy]

Your point is self defeating. When Romo ran for the goal line, he didn't just drop the ball, Jets D lineman Mike Devito punched it out and you can clearly see that. If gravity took the ball from Romo then maybe you have a case, but that is not what happened, the ball was knocked out of his hand. Blaming things on luck is a convenient explanation when we don't feel like examining things in detail.

On the interception by Romo, you have a case where Dez Bryant was clearly mentally unprepared for the play, because as was said afterwards in the media and so on, it was really Dez's fault that Revis had such an easy pick, he was supposed to turn and jump for the ball just like the same play where he got the catch against Revis early on in the first quarter. It was the same exactly play, but this time the Jets played different coverage, letting a safety roll over to Revis' side forcing the QB to try and force the ball in underneath and then Revis jumped it. Good play, not luck. Luck is just a convenient excuse for things we don't feel like explaining or cannot explain.

You have to compare the situations. You said it yourself, Romo ran for the goal line. Yes, it was still a good play by the defender, but Romo ran towards the defender while Sanchez was trying to run away from the defender. Dallas had the ball with 1 and goal on the 3 yard line up 7 points. All they had to do was run it 3 times, and at worst case they go up by 10. The Jets were lucky that Dallas chose to pass twice (on the 2 yard line), and that Romo made a run for the goal line rather than throwing it away or taking a sack.

The interception by Romo was a horrible decision, and a horrible throw. Please watch the play again. You can't force a QB to throw a ball to a guy that is clearly covered. Romo threw it about 2 yards short of Bryant, and all Revis had to do was catch it. It was thrown right at Revis. Very different from the int Lee got from Sanchez.

Even if you want to call both of those plays great plays by the Jets, they are still 7 points short of a win. They still needed the Cowboys to let a guy come through (right up the middle) to block a punt. It is very easy to explain. At the end of the day, the Jets still won. A win is still a win no matter how it came about. I just don't like when people can't see the difference of when a team wins a game and when the other team losses the game. There is a difference.

 

[truthbtold]

You have to compare the situations. You said it yourself, Romo ran for the goal line. Yes, it was still a good play by the defender, but Romo ran towards the defender while Sanchez was trying to run away from the defender. Dallas had the ball with 1 and goal on the 3 yard line up 7 points. All they had to do was run it 3 times, and at worst case they go up by 10. The Jets were lucky that Dallas chose to pass twice (on the 2 yard line), and that Romo made a run for the goal line rather than throwing it away or taking a sack.

The interception by Romo was a horrible decision, and a horrible throw. Please watch the play again. You can't force a QB to throw a ball to a guy that is clearly covered. Romo threw it about 2 yards short of Bryant, and all Revis had to do was catch it. It was thrown right at Revis. Very different from the int Lee got from Sanchez.

Even if you want to call both of those plays great plays by the Jets, they are still 7 points short of a win. They still needed the Cowboys to let a guy come through (right up the middle) to block a punt. It is very easy to explain. At the end of the day, the Jets still won. A win is still a win no matter how it came about. I just don't like when people can't see the difference of when a team wins a game and when the other team losses the game. There is a difference.

I can only speak for myself ... but you convinced me. The Jets are the luckiest team in the league. Somehow, we get breaks that no other teams seem to get. I don't know why that would be the case, or how you would know that without watching every play from every other game ... and even though it defies every shred of logic, I'll take your word for it. Other teams just can't seem to get out of thier own way when they take the field against us. We must live a charmed life.

I expect that we'll be lucky again against the Raiders on Sunday. VERY lucky.

 

[smk224]

The New Guy, why are you even trying to make a point against whether it was lucky or not? Luck is part of the NFL, and has always been. What you may consider lucky won't be regarded the same way by others. It's a stupid argument both ways.

There's no point in people trying to convince you, and the same goes for you.

It doesn't matter if the Jets were lucky or not. The bottom line is Jets are 2-0, and Dolphins are 0-2.

You take any win any way you can get them. That's all that matters.

 

[truthbtold]

TO ALL THE LUCK CRYBABIES ...
lets recap what just happened ...
dolphins defense isn't goood enough to keep the browns from going 80 yards with the game (season) on the line ... but then they get two HUGE lucky breaks that give them the ball at midfield with 43 seconds left and only needing a FG to win. what do they do? 4 plays 0 yards ... SD up next ... see you next season.

Give Sanchez the ball in the same situation there's NO DOUBT we win the game.
and then we'd be hearing how lucky we are.
it's not about luck.

 

[The New Guy]

I expect that we'll be lucky again against the Raiders on Sunday. VERY lucky.

Not the hot dog eating contest you were hoping for, was it? The Jets should have been able to handle the Raiders without any luck. They could have used better defense against the run.

TO ALL THE LUCK CRYBABIES ...
lets recap what just happened ...
dolphins defense isn't goood enough to keep the browns from going 80 yards with the game (season) on the line ... but then they get two HUGE lucky breaks that give them the ball at midfield with 43 seconds left and only needing a FG to win. what do they do? 4 plays 0 yards ... SD up next ... see you next season.

Give Sanchez the ball in the same situation there's NO DOUBT we win the game.
and then we'd be hearing how lucky we are.
it's not about luck.

I don't know why you keep bringing up the Dolphins. I never said other teams don't get breaks, and even mentioned a few the Dolphins have gotten in the past. The Dolphins did not play well enough to win that game regardless of the final outcome. Just like the Jets did not play well enough to win the game against the Cowboys. The difference in this game was the Dolphins offense still needed more yards to be in FG range while the Jets offense did not. I don't know how you can say there is NO DOUBT Sanchez would have won that game when he did not do that in the Cowboy game when it was tied and he had 2:16 left on the clock. Sanchez also threw for 0 yards on 2 plays after the turnover forcing a long FG attempt for the win.

If the Dolphins had been in FG range due to a dumb penalty, or mistake by Cle, and won the game, I would tell you that they got outplayed and did not deserve to win the game. I would not try and give credit where it is not due.

 

[truthbtold]

Not the hot dog eating contest you were hoping for, was it? The Jets should have been able to handle the Raiders without any luck. They could have used better defense against the run.

I don't know why you keep bringing up the Dolphins. I never said other teams don't get breaks, and even mentioned a few the Dolphins have gotten in the past. The Dolphins did not play well enough to win that game regardless of the final outcome. Just like the Jets did not play well enough to win the game against the Cowboys. The difference in this game was the Dolphins offense still needed more yards to be in FG range while the Jets offense did not. I don't know how you can say there is NO DOUBT Sanchez would have won that game when he did not do that in the Cowboy game when it was tied and he had 2:16 left on the clock. Sanchez also threw for 0 yards on 2 plays after the turnover forcing a long FG attempt for the win.

If the Dolphins had been in FG range due to a dumb penalty, or mistake by Cle, and won the game, I would tell you that they got outplayed and did not deserve to win the game. I would not try and give credit where it is not due.

You're making my point. The Raiders won because they made the plays they needed to make. They deserved to win.
And when we win it's because we make the plays we need to make. We didn't get it done on Sunday. That's it and that's all.
Luck has nothing to do with winning in the NFL. Well, maybe not "nothing" .... but very little. Every once in a while you see a crazy bounce or a game changing call (see Clavin Johnson against the Bears last year). But this place is filled with people who actually believe that luck is the resaon for the Jets' success. That's ridiculous ... open your eyes.

The team that performs better on Sunday wins 95% of the time. Since Rex has been here, more often than not, that team is us. That's why we win.

 

[nyjunc]

yesterday we had everything go against us as far as bad calls but we should have been able to overcome, more opftent han not we do overcome them but yesterday we did not. Do I count this is a lucky win for the Raiders?:D

 

[The New Guy]

You're making my point. The Raiders won because they made the plays they needed to make. They deserved to win.
And when we win it's because we make the plays we need to make. We didn't get it done on Sunday. That's it and that's all.
Luck has nothing to do with winning in the NFL. Well, maybe not "nothing" .... but very little. Every once in a while you see a crazy bounce or a game changing call (see Clavin Johnson against the Bears last year). But this place is filled with people who actually believe that luck is the resaon for the Jets' success. That's ridiculous ... open your eyes.

The team that performs better on Sunday wins 95% of the time. Since Rex has been here, more often than not, that team is us. That's why we win.

I never said all of the Jets wins were from lucky breaks. The Jets have been outplayed in some games, but becasue of lucky breaks, they were able to win those games. It happens to other teams too. Some teams can get those breaks and still lose the game. When a team wins those type of games, just tell it like it is. Don't try and make up reasons to give credit to a team when they clearly did not play well enough to win.

yesterday we had everything go against us as far as bad calls but we should have been able to overcome, more opftent han not we do overcome them but yesterday we did not. Do I count this is a lucky win for the Raiders?:D

I was out and did not get to see the game, but I will take your word for it. :up: When a team allows 230 plus rushing yards and 4 rushing TDs, that is hard to overcome.

 

[nyjunc]

I never said all of the Jets wins were from lucky breaks. The Jets have been outplayed in some games, but becasue of lucky breaks, they were able to win those games. It happens to other teams too. Some teams can get those breaks and still lose the game. When a team wins those type of games, just tell it like it is. Don't try and make up reasons to give credit to a team when they clearly did not play well enough to win.



I was out and did not get to see the game, but I will take your word for it. :up: When a team allows 230 plus rushing yards and 4 rushing TDs, that is hard to overcome.

Just to recap:

-On Sanchez INT Burress was interfered with/held
-on long Mcfadden long TD that got oak back in the game there were 2-3 blatant holds that went uncalled
-Wilkerson slightly pushes Campbell and gets called for roughing
-Sanchez is hit hard and hig twice very late w/ no flag
-3 or 4 of the defensive holding calls were awful
-no call on last drive when Burress was blatantly interfered w/ in EZ- should have been 1st and goal from the 1.


W/ all this against us we still should have won but we didn't play well enough. We usually overcome stuff like this though it never gets noticed on here.

 

[Ilovemyfins4eva]

Just to recap:

-On Sanchez INT Burress was interfered with/held
-on long Mcfadden long TD that got oak back in the game there were 2-3 blatant holds that went uncalled
-Wilkerson slightly pushes Campbell and gets called for roughing
-Sanchez is hit hard and hig twice very late w/ no flag
-3 or 4 of the defensive holding calls were awful
-no call on last drive when Burress was blatantly interfered w/ in EZ- should have been 1st and goal from the 1.


W/ all this against us we still should have won but we didn't play well enough. We usually overcome stuff like this though it never gets noticed on here.

That was a bull**** call, but the refs made up for it by giving the raiders a intentional grounding call which was just as big of a bs call, so the jets didnt actually get penalized by it because it offset.

 

[nyjunc]

That was a bull**** call, but the refs made up for it by giving the raiders a intentional grounding call which was just as big of a bs call, so the jets didnt actually get penalized by it because it offset.

I think so but the point of that was Campbell barely gets tocuhed and we see a flag but sanchez got hit much later and harder yet we didn't see flags.

 

[The New Guy]

Just to recap:

-On Sanchez INT Burress was interfered with/held
-on long Mcfadden long TD that got oak back in the game there were 2-3 blatant holds that went uncalled
-Wilkerson slightly pushes Campbell and gets called for roughing
-Sanchez is hit hard and hig twice very late w/ no flag
-3 or 4 of the defensive holding calls were awful
-no call on last drive when Burress was blatantly interfered w/ in EZ- should have been 1st and goal from the 1.


W/ all this against us we still should have won but we didn't play well enough. We usually overcome stuff like this though it never gets noticed on here.

Since I only saw the highlights, I can't comment on those plays. I will take your word for it though.

 

[CirclingWagons]

Good luck next week, Jetfans...your interior o-line looks like dogsh*t and now you get Haloti Ngata. I'm sure that'll work out just fine :up: