Schein thinks the Bills will be this year's Cinderella

[The New Guy]

Ari got the ball w/ 10 1/2 to play in the 3rd, scored a TD w/ under 3 mins to play. They had two possessions prior to the score changing to 28-17- the fumble for the TD on their 2nd play of the 2nd half and then a drive where they had 2 penalties for 15 yds. where were they supposed to run the ball?

That is part of the point. In a 4 point game, the D allowed a 6 1/2 plus drive that ended in a TD. How about the 7 possessions in the first half? It is not just about the opportunity to run the ball. The Falcons had opportunities to run the ball, they just couldn't do it very well. Against AZ they had 24 carries for 60 yards. That is a 2.5 average.

For your reference, while the Jets did run it well overall they didn't have great 1st halves running it outside of 1 play at Cincy '09 and Ind '10.

1st half rush yds:
2009 playoffs:
at Cincy: 15-72, 4.8 avg. Looks great but remove the 39 yd TD and it's 14-33 and a 2.4 YPC. Not exactly churning the yardage out.
at SD: 14-45, 3.2 YPC
at Ind: 17-46, 2.7 YPC

2010 playoffs:
at Ind: 13-74, 5.7
at NE: 14-56, 4 YPC
at Pit: 5-3 yds, .6 YPC

totals: 78-296, 3.8 YPC

But the Jets did have a 39 yard run for a TD against the Bengals. I'm not talking about games that the Jets lost. In the games they won they averaged 4.8, 3.2, 5.7 and 4 YPC in the first half alone. The Jets didn't run the ball very well in the 2 playoff games they lost.

AT Ind: 29-86-0 2.9 YPC
AT Pitt: 22-70-0 3.1 YPC

Those numbers are still better than anything the Falcons ever got from their running game. The Jets got big plays from their running game. The 37 yard TD against the Bengals, the 53 yard rushing TD against the Chargers, the 23 yard run against Indy, and a 20 yard run agasint NE. Those are the longs of each game.

The Falcons had a long of 8 yards against AZ, 12 yards against the Packers and a long of 13 yards against the Giants.

It doesn't matter where that first TO was, he gave a great offense the ball back and prevented his team from getting at least 3 pts. Ryan's INTs gave GB the momentum to pull away.

Sure it does. There is a big difference between a pick 6 and a turnover where the other team starts at their own 20 and still scores. One is all on the QB, and the other the D gets part of the blame.

Ummm how about after the D gave up a FG to Peyton manning and Indy Sanchez led us to a chip shot GW FG to win ON THE ROAD at the Colts in the '10 WC game?

Yes, I remember that. Thanks to Cromartie's great kickoff return, he didn't have to go very far. Sanchez was 18 of 31 for 189 yards 0 TDs and 1 Int in that game. The Jets ran 38 times for 169 yards and 2 TDs. He only had 20 more passing yards than the Jets ran for, and his D held the Colts to 17 points. That pretty much sums up how Sanchez wins.

I'm talking about the last 4 years not ben's first 4 years.

If Sanchez had won a Super Bowl and 3 division titles in his first 4 seasons, I would cut him a little slack. Pitt has been down these last 2 years, but with Ben, they have been to the playoff 6 out of 9 season. They have 4 AFCC game Apps. 3 Super Bowl Apps and 2 Super Bowl wins. Just because they have only been the the playoffs 2 times since 2009 doesn't mean that the Jets are consistent winners like the Steelers.

The Jets never attempted to get Peyton.

Because he told them that he wasn't going to play there. The Jets were interested in Manning.

He nearly brought them down from 24-0 down at Pitt. He led us to a double digit lead in Indy. Our defense was the main reason we lost both of those games. mark played well enough to win both if our D stepped up. If our D played like the Giant Ds of '07 and '11 we make the SB both times.

He was a big part of the Jets being down 24-0 against Pitt in the first place. He led his offense to 0 second half points against Indy.

 

[nyjunc]

That is part of the point. In a 4 point game, the D allowed a 6 1/2 plus drive that ended in a TD. How about the 7 possessions in the first half? It is not just about the opportunity to run the ball. The Falcons had opportunities to run the ball, they just couldn't do it very well. Against AZ they had 24 carries for 60 yards. That is a 2.5 average.




But the Jets did have a 39 yard run for a TD against the Bengals. I'm not talking about games that the Jets lost. In the games they won they averaged 4.8, 3.2, 5.7 and 4 YPC in the first half alone. The Jets didn't run the ball very well in the 2 playoff games they lost.

AT Ind: 29-86-0 2.9 YPC
AT Pitt: 22-70-0 3.1 YPC

Those numbers are still better than anything the Falcons ever got from their running game. The Jets got big plays from their running game. The 37 yard TD against the Bengals, the 53 yard rushing TD against the Chargers, the 23 yard run against Indy, and a 20 yard run agasint NE. Those are the longs of each game.

The Falcons had a long of 8 yards against AZ, 12 yards against the Packers and a long of 13 yards against the Giants.




Sure it does. There is a big difference between a pick 6 and a turnover where the other team starts at their own 20 and still scores. One is all on the QB, and the other the D gets part of the blame.



Yes, I remember that. Thanks to Cromartie's great kickoff return, he didn't have to go very far. Sanchez was 18 of 31 for 189 yards 0 TDs and 1 Int in that game. The Jets ran 38 times for 169 yards and 2 TDs. He only had 20 more passing yards than the Jets ran for, and his D held the Colts to 17 points. That pretty much sums up how Sanchez wins.




If Sanchez had won a Super Bowl and 3 division titles in his first 4 seasons, I would cut him a little slack. Pitt has been down these last 2 years, but with Ben, they have been to the playoff 6 out of 9 season. They have 4 AFCC game Apps. 3 Super Bowl Apps and 2 Super Bowl wins. Just because they have only been the the playoffs 2 times since 2009 doesn't mean that the Jets are consistent winners like the Steelers.



Because he told them that he wasn't going to play there. The Jets were interested in Manning.




He was a big part of the Jets being down 24-0 against Pitt in the first place. He led his offense to 0 second half points against Indy.

This was AFTER he threw an INT for a TD and another INT that led to a TD but you will blame the D?

His 3 TOs against Ari hurt more than the lack of rushing yds. Ari rushed for less than 3.6 YPC, GB averaged 3 YPC- how come they weren't held back?

We didn't run it well outside of 1 play at Cincy, you make it sound like we controlled that game on the ground which we did not and Mark Sanchez was near flawless in that game throwing just 3 incompletions w/ 2 of them being drops.

Ryan's INT cost his team 3 pts and led to another team getting 7. That's a 10 pt swing.

Cro had a nice return but mark still had to make plays. The great Peyton was in an almost identical situation near midfield w/ more time and he couldn't get closer than a 46 yd attempts while Sanchez got his K a chip shot attempt.

mark led the Jets 40 yds for the GW FG against Indy, Ryan led his O 41 yds. why does ryan get credit and mark does not?

We ran it well that 2nd half but w/ the game on the line we needed to throw and we did setting up a chip shot FG for the win. Not a great game overall by Mark but a great job to get the W in that tough spot.

He'd have a SB if his D showed up in title games like Eli's Ds or Ben's D's.

They weren't going after him unless he came for basically nothing. They made a courtesy call but hiring Tony Sparano right after the season ended tells us all we needed to know about how serious they were about going after Peyton.

The D was the biggest reason we were down 24-0. A 9 min drive to start the game leading to a Pitt TD was a bad start and Pitt pushed our D around all 1st half.

He gave his supposed elite D a double digit lead at Indy. The D blew it quickly and momentum was w/ the Colts.

 

[The New Guy]

This was AFTER he threw an INT for a TD and another INT that led to a TD but you will blame the D?

Against the Packers his first interception put the Packers on their own 20 yardline. It was a tie game at 14. Yes, the D gets part of the blame for letting the Packers go 80 yards to take the lead. His other interception came after that, and it was a pick 6 making it 28 -14. Ryan gets all the blame for that one. His fumble in the 4th that led to a Packers FG was meaningless since the game was already out of hand. (42-21) The Packers were able to do whatever they wanted on offense the whole game. Take away the 7 points they scored on the pick 6 and they still scored 41 points. That wasn't because of Ryan's turnovers, it was the D and the lack of a running game.

His 3 TOs against Ari hurt more than the lack of rushing yds. Ari rushed for less than 3.6 YPC, GB averaged 3 YPC- how come they weren't held back?

How so? His first Int gave the ball to the Cardinals on their own 37 with the score 0-0. The Cardinals did drive to score to make it 7-0, but that is hardly a game changer so early in the 1st. His second pick came when the score was already 27 -17 and led to no points for the Cardinals. The fumble returned for a TD hurt them, but as you said, it really wasn't his fault.

"We couldn't run the ball," Falcons wide receiver Roddy White said. "We had to throw it around a little bit more than we're used to. Things like that kind of put us behind the 8-ball."

"They controlled the line of scrimmage," Falcons coach Mike Smith said of the Cardinals' defense.

The Falcons could not run the ball, and the D let them down. That hurt them more than the turnovers Ryan had. With no running game and Ryan's turnovers, he still cut it to a 6 point game with over 2:00 left in the 4th. The Cardinals were in a 3rd and long, and the D couldn't even get a stop to give the O a chance to win it. The Cardinals and Packers rushing average wasn't great, but it was still better than what the Falcons could do. The Cardinals and Packers did not rely on the running game like the Falcons did in the regular season. The Cardinals ranked last in rushing in 2008, the Packers ranked 24th in 2010 and both teams ran the ball better than the Falcons who were ranked much higher in both of those seasons.

We didn't run it well outside of 1 play at Cincy, you make it sound like we controlled that game on the ground which we did not and Mark Sanchez was near flawless in that game throwing just 3 incompletions w/ 2 of them being drops.

41 rushes for 171 yards and 2 TDs is a pretty good rushing day to me. Mark was very efficient, but he didn't have to do much. He only attempted 15 passes. If the Jets were not able to run the ball like that and asked Mark to carry the team like the Falcons asked Ryan, it wouldn't have ended well. We've seen what happens when the Jets have done that.

Cro had a nice return but mark still had to make plays. The great Peyton was in an almost identical situation near midfield w/ more time and he couldn't get closer than a 46 yd attempts while Sanchez got his K a chip shot attempt.

Are you comparing the Colts 2010 D to the Steelers 2005 D? You want to give Mark more credit than Manning since his kicker made the FG, yet the situation were not even close. I can't prove what Mark would have done against a much better Pitt D, but I have a good idea of what he would have done.

mark led the Jets 40 yds for the GW FG against Indy, Ryan led his O 41 yds. why does ryan get credit and mark does not?

I give them both credit for leading game winning drives. I don't think they both deserve the same amount of credit since Mark didn't do as much as Ryan did throughout the course of the game.

We ran it well that 2nd half but w/ the game on the line we needed to throw and we did setting up a chip shot FG for the win. Not a great game overall by Mark but a great job to get the W in that tough spot.

Mark has made plays to help the Jets win games, but he has had a lot more help than Ryan. Do you honestly believe that if the Jets had Ryan at QB and the Jets still game planned the same way they did with Mark, that Ryan would not be able to accomplish what Mark did in those playoff games? You will say he hasn't, but he has never been in the same situations Mark has. They've had different game plans, different opponents, different D's and running games. I can look at the whole body of work from each QB, and easily tell you which one is better and which one I would want on my team. Looking at 4 playoff wins and comparing that to better Qbs who were in different situations is silly.

He'd have a SB if his D showed up in title games like Eli's Ds or Ben's D's.

Eli carried his team to Super Bowl wins with less help from the running game than Mark has had. Mark hasn't won a single playoff game without his running game rushing for at least 120 yards. In Mark's playoff wins, the Jets averaged over 150 yards a game, and the D allowed an average of 16 PPG.

They weren't going after him unless he came for basically nothing. They made a courtesy call but hiring Tony Sparano right after the season ended tells us all we needed to know about how serious they were about going after Peyton.

The Jets made a courtesy call to Peyton? The hiring of Sparano doesn't mean a whole lot since Peyton is his own OC. The Jets wanted Peyton and many of the Jets players were vocal about it. Why give a QB coming off a 26 turnover season a 2 year extension? For the same reason the Dolphins gave Sparano an extension after flirting with Harbaugh. That's why.

The D was the biggest reason we were down 24-0. A 9 min drive to start the game leading to a Pitt TD was a bad start and Pitt pushed our D around all 1st half.

How did the Jets respond after Pitt's first drive? They gained 16 yards, then punted. How about after the Jets D intercepted Ben on Pitt's second drive of the game? They went 3 and out. How about when the Jets D held Pitt to a FG on their 3rd drive? Another 3 and out. None of that played a role?

He gave his supposed elite D a double digit lead at Indy. The D blew it quickly and momentum was w/ the Colts.

With only 17 points on the board. It was an 11 point lead with over 2 minutes left in the first half. 17 points wasn't going to cut it against the high powered Colts O. Without the kind of running game he had in his wins, Mark led his offense to 0 second half points.

 

[nyjunc]

Against the Packers his first interception put the Packers on their own 20 yardline. It was a tie game at 14. Yes, the D gets part of the blame for letting the Packers go 80 yards to take the lead. His other interception came after that, and it was a pick 6 making it 28 -14. Ryan gets all the blame for that one. His fumble in the 4th that led to a Packers FG was meaningless since the game was already out of hand. (42-21) The Packers were able to do whatever they wanted on offense the whole game. Take away the 7 points they scored on the pick 6 and they still scored 41 points. That wasn't because of Ryan's turnovers, it was the D and the lack of a running game.




How so? His first Int gave the ball to the Cardinals on their own 37 with the score 0-0. The Cardinals did drive to score to make it 7-0, but that is hardly a game changer so early in the 1st. His second pick came when the score was already 27 -17 and led to no points for the Cardinals. The fumble returned for a TD hurt them, but as you said, it really wasn't his fault.



The Falcons could not run the ball, and the D let them down. That hurt them more than the turnovers Ryan had. With no running game and Ryan's turnovers, he still cut it to a 6 point game with over 2:00 left in the 4th. The Cardinals were in a 3rd and long, and the D couldn't even get a stop to give the O a chance to win it. The Cardinals and Packers rushing average wasn't great, but it was still better than what the Falcons could do. The Cardinals and Packers did not rely on the running game like the Falcons did in the regular season. The Cardinals ranked last in rushing in 2008, the Packers ranked 24th in 2010 and both teams ran the ball better than the Falcons who were ranked much higher in both of those seasons.




41 rushes for 171 yards and 2 TDs is a pretty good rushing day to me. Mark was very efficient, but he didn't have to do much. He only attempted 15 passes. If the Jets were not able to run the ball like that and asked Mark to carry the team like the Falcons asked Ryan, it wouldn't have ended well. We've seen what happens when the Jets have done that.




Are you comparing the Colts 2010 D to the Steelers 2005 D? You want to give Mark more credit than Manning since his kicker made the FG, yet the situation were not even close. I can't prove what Mark would have done against a much better Pitt D, but I have a good idea of what he would have done.



I give them both credit for leading game winning drives. I don't think they both deserve the same amount of credit since Mark didn't do as much as Ryan did throughout the course of the game.




Mark has made plays to help the Jets win games, but he has had a lot more help than Ryan. Do you honestly believe that if the Jets had Ryan at QB and the Jets still game planned the same way they did with Mark, that Ryan would not be able to accomplish what Mark did in those playoff games? You will say he hasn't, but he has never been in the same situations Mark has. They've had different game plans, different opponents, different D's and running games. I can look at the whole body of work from each QB, and easily tell you which one is better and which one I would want on my team. Looking at 4 playoff wins and comparing that to better Qbs who were in different situations is silly.




Eli carried his team to Super Bowl wins with less help from the running game than Mark has had. Mark hasn't won a single playoff game without his running game rushing for at least 120 yards. In Mark's playoff wins, the Jets averaged over 150 yards a game, and the D allowed an average of 16 PPG.



The Jets made a courtesy call to Peyton? The hiring of Sparano doesn't mean a whole lot since Peyton is his own OC. The Jets wanted Peyton and many of the Jets players were vocal about it. Why give a QB coming off a 26 turnover season a 2 year extension? For the same reason the Dolphins gave Sparano an extension after flirting with Harbaugh. That's why.



How did the Jets respond after Pitt's first drive? They gained 16 yards, then punted. How about after the Jets D intercepted Ben on Pitt's second drive of the game? They went 3 and out. How about when the Jets D held Pitt to a FG on their 3rd drive? Another 3 and out. None of that played a role?



With only 17 points on the board. It was an 11 point lead with over 2 minutes left in the first half. 17 points wasn't going to cut it against the high powered Colts O. Without the kind of running game he had in his wins, Mark led his offense to 0 second half points.

The first INT cost them at least 3 pts and changed momentum in that game. GB had a dynamic offense that year, giving them the ball on the Atl 1 would have been bad.

He gave that game away, he allowed it to get out of control. Instead of 21-17 or 21-20 at the half it was 28-14- a HUGE difference.

You are caught up where the opponent got the ball. Now the 37 yd line isn't good FP? again, giving a really good offense more possessions is not good. he failed in this game as well.

A WR making excuses about the run game tells us something? They have dynamic weapons in the pass game, the lack of run game was an excuse. Ari averaged 3.6 YPC, why didn't their lack of run game hold them back? every team can use the run game being effective to help the pass game, when teams know GB or Ari can't run it makes the job easier to defend the pass game. The struggles of the run game are an excuse, AGAIN they were down double digits in the 2nd half- not exactly many opportunities to run.

We had a good day b/c we didn't fall behind by double digits and eventually wore Cincy down but in the 1st half we didn't run it well outside of a misdirection play taken 39 yds for a TD. Much like Atl who struggled to run in the 1st half but our QB wasn't turning it over and putting us in a big hole.

Are you comparing the Jets 2010 O to the Colts 2005 O? Mark was in a TOUGHER spot all things considered and he led his K to a chip shot attempt.

The situations were almost exactly alike. The major difference is Peyton lost the game 3 different times only to have miracles give him another chance. he threw an INT to Polamalu that was clear yet they overturned it on replay or the game would have been done earlier then after failing on downs and setting up Pitt deep in Ind territory he saw Bettis fumble running out the clock and Ind return it to near midfield.

Peyton got the ball at his 42 yd line trailing by 3 at HOME w/ 1:01 to play and all 3 timeouts.
Sanchez got the ball at his 46 w/ 45 secs left and 2 TOs on the ROAD.

Ryan had a better overall game at HOME in his 4th career playoff game but he failed late to allow Seattle back into it and to eventually take the lead.

a lot more help than Ryan? when has Mark ever had a Julio Jones or Roddy White? a Tony Gonzalez? NEVER. Even the RBs edge goes to Atl. matt has played 3 of his 5 playoff games at home due to not having a NE in their division.

Eli didn't carry anything, his Ds carried them to both SBs. The difference btw the '07 & '11 NYG and '09 & '10 NYJ were the Ds/STs in the championship games that set Eli up for chip shot FGs to win. In SF Bradahaw fumbled and they ruled him down or SF wins, in Pitt they ruled the Sanchez incompletion a fumble for a TD. Change those 2 plays and we have 2 different teams winning those games.

Tony Sparano was not running a Peyton Manning offense, we had Peyton's longtime OC on our payroll in the 2011 season. A man who wanted to get back on the sidelines and we hired Tony Sparano. That is all we need to know about how serious we were about Peyton.

That 26 TO QB also accounted for 32 TDs.

They responded w/ 17 yds not 16 on 11 plays giving their D a breather.

The INT of Ben was more like a TO on downs, they went for it on 4th and 1. when he had nowhere to throw he threw it short and it was picked. On 1st down we ran an end around and lost 4 yds, on 2nd down we had a false start. 2nd and 19 at Pitt- that's mark's fault?

Great job by the D holding Pitt to a 20 yd FG. The tone was set w/ that first drive, the O tried but failed to turn the tide. B/c the O didn't score didn't mean we had to allow Pitt to run all over us.

I never said the O was blameless, in any loss there are many areas of blame but the main culprit was the D for allowing Pitt to set the tone then when we got w/in a score w/ plenty of time left allowing Pitt to run out the clock.

Who cares if was 17 pts? In Peyton's 11 postseason losses his O's have averaged less than 15 PPG so 17 is more than 15, right?

He had NO run game the 2nd half at Indy, Shonn Greene got hurt on the first possession and Thomas Jones was shot that postseason.

 

[Nublar7]

How did this turn into a Jets thread? :unsure:

 

[Locke]

How did this turn into a Jets thread? :unsure:

More importantly, how did I actually read that Mark Sanchez is a better QB than Matt Ryan? Someone needs to direct WV to this thread stat...

 

[SkapePhin]

Junc will be defending Sanchez to the bitter end... It is kind of sad to see this level of delusion.

 

[The New Guy]

How did this turn into a Jets thread? :unsure:

Well, you were the first person to mention the name Mark Sanchez in this thread. I just joined in and kept it going.

I think Junc just needs a little more time to realize what type of QB Mark really is. It's been fun reading his post on how Mark is a better QB than Eli, and then seeing Eli win the Super Bowl in 2011 while Mark went 8-8 with 26 turnovers. Then reading how Mark is a better QB than Joe Flacco, then seeing Flacco win the Super Bowl while Mark went 6-10 with 26 turnovers. He could be 3 for 3 if Ryan wins the Super Bowl next year.

 

[Vaark]

Well, you were the first person to mention the name Mark Sanchez in this thread. I just joined in and kept it going.

I think Junc just needs a little more time to realize what type of QB Mark really is. It's been fun reading his post on how Mark is a better QB than Eli, and then seeing Eli win the Super Bowl in 2011 while Mark went 8-8 with 26 turnovers. Then reading how Mark is a better QB than Joe Flacco, then seeing Flacco win the Super Bowl while Mark went 6-10 with 26 turnovers. He could be 3 for 3 if Ryan wins the Super Bowl next year.

I'm sure there are also still some Rex Grossman homers pointing to actual conference championships and SB appearances as evidence that he's shown "he can win" :idk:

 

[The New Guy]

I'm sure there are also still some Rex Grossman homers pointing to actual conference championships and SB appearances as evidence that he's shown "he can win" :idk:

I think you have to be carried to 2 AFCC games and lose to be considered a proven winner. Being carried to 1 Super Bowl doesn't count.

 

[Vaark]

I think you have to be carried to 2 AFCC games and lose to be considered a proven winner. Being carried to 1 Super Bowl doesn't count.

But being gifted into a postseason after blowing a must-win game 14 at home they should have won against a dead Atlanta after a recent 6 out of 7 losing streak does count more than contributing only 1 legitimate winning season out of 4. Don't forget.

Of course it's important when The Buttfumbler's play may put his team in a hole, so long as he brought or almost brought them back - but unimportant when he gives them a lead in the second qtr yet loses because he disappears thereafter.

 

[nyjunc]

Well, you were the first person to mention the name Mark Sanchez in this thread. I just joined in and kept it going.

I think Junc just needs a little more time to realize what type of QB Mark really is. It's been fun reading his post on how Mark is a better QB than Eli, and then seeing Eli win the Super Bowl in 2011 while Mark went 8-8 with 26 turnovers. Then reading how Mark is a better QB than Joe Flacco, then seeing Flacco win the Super Bowl while Mark went 6-10 with 26 turnovers. He could be 3 for 3 if Ryan wins the Super Bowl next year.

Mark was better than Eli in 2010, in 2011 Mark threw 3 less TDs and 2 more INts while his team won one less game. Unfortunately for him his team didn't play in a division where 9 wins could get you a div title.

Put mark on NYG '11 or Bal '12 and the teams still win the SB. The Giants won w/ defense and Baltimore had so many weapons you or I could have QB'd them to a SB.

Flacco was being run out of town a month before the SB. Eli and Flacco are good QBs, nothing special.

I think you have to be carried to 2 AFCC games and lose to be considered a proven winner. Being carried to 1 Super Bowl doesn't count.

but Eli was carried to 2 SB titles and you think he's the greatest.

 

[Vaark]

Put Matt Moore on the 09Jets and they may have actually scored more than 7 pts at home to beat Atlanta in game 14 and beat a dead Cinci team even if their starters were in and trying for the full game for a legitimate winning record. Put Matt on the '10 team and they may have even made it to their only more than 2 post season games post merger SB appearance. Hell, probably could say the same about Rex Grossman :idk:

 

[nyjunc]

Matt Moore on 2009 Jets and we probably finish 6-10/7-9. Matt is a "good" QB on bad teams.

 

[Vaark]

vs Sanchez who is an equal opportunity QB: bad on both good and bad teams. :idk: