Luck come a helping the Jets again | Page 7 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Luck come a helping the Jets again

so the romo fumble wasn't a great play? Revis had Bryant blanketed forcig Romo to run. The INT they confused Romo baiting him into trying the same throw that worked against revis earlier in the game. The Jets made plays to force the action.
The fumble was a good play by the defense, but more of a dumb decision by Romo. The Int was all on Romo. Even if you call those two plays a draw, the Jets still needed Dallas to allow a guy to come through unblocked on a punt to win it.
 
I was out of town and did not get to see the game, so it is hard for me to judge the play. If he completely dropped an easy TD pass, then yes, the Dolphins got a break. You could also say the Texans got a break when the Dolphins missed 2 easy FGs. The Dolphins did not play good enough to win that game with that break or not. A better example of a lucky break for the Dolphins is when Holmes dropped that easy TD pass last year. That was a difference maker.

Johnson dropping a TD pass, does not compare to the lucky breaks the Jets got against the Cowboys. The Cowboys gave the Jets 10 points, and the Jets offense did not have to do anything to get them.

Really? Why not? If he catches it, like he probably does 9 out of 10 times, that's an extra 7 on the board for Houston. Sounds like a lucky break to me.

My point is this ... in EVERY game BOTH teams get good breaks and bad breaks. Its part of every sport. Its ridiculous to look after the game and extract a few good breaks one team got and think that's the reason they won. I'm sure I could find half a dozen breaks that went the Dolphins way in that game if I really wanted to. And the same goes for the Texans.

This really is a ridiculous thread. The Jets win most weeks for one simple reason ... because they're one of the best teams in the league.
 
My point is this ... in EVERY game BOTH teams get good breaks and bad breaks. Its part of every sport. Its ridiculous to look after the game and extract a few good breaks one team got and think that's the reason they won. I'm sure I could find half a dozen dozen breaks that went the Dolphins way in that game if I really wanted to. And the same for the Texans.

I agree that every team gets good and bad breaks. Sometimes those breaks play a huge role in who wins, and sometimes they don't. It is not always equal. If it was, it would be silly to point out one teams breaks and not mention the others. In the case of the Jets games discussed, the Jets got more breaks than the other team did which played a direct role in the Jets winning. It is not a thought, it is a fact.
 
The Jets make more breaks than the other teams, the Jets capitalize on more breaks.
 
I agree that every team gets good and bad breaks. Sometimes those breaks play a huge role in who wins, and sometimes they don't. It is not always equal. If it was, it would be silly to point out one teams breaks and not mention the others. In the case of the Jets games discussed, the Jets got more breaks than the other team did which played a direct role in the Jets winning. It is not a thought, it is a fact.

The good teams take advantage of the breaks they get and turn them into game-changers. That's why they don't seem equal to you. Bad teams don't do anything with the breaks they get so nobody remembers them. The Cowboys had the ball with a chance to win and they couldn't get it done. If the Cowboys won the game, would you be talking about how lucky the jets are? I doubt it.
 
The good teams take advantage of the breaks they get and turn them into game-changers. That's why they don't seem equal to you. Bad teams don't do anything with the breaks they get so nobody remembers them. The Cowboys had the ball with a chance to win and they couldn't get it done. If the Cowboys won the game, would you be talking about how lucky the jets are? I doubt it.

Of course not. If the Jets lost the game, no one cares about the breaks they got. It just shows that they were outplayed by the other team. Sometimes those breaks are turned into game changers, and sometimes they are game changers on their own. You have to watch the games and see how they unfold. What game changing plays did the Jets offense make with the break they got when Romo fumbled? What did the offense do after Romo threw the Int?
 
I'd rather be perceived to be outplayed and win than to be perceived outplaying another team and losing.
 
I'd rather be perceived to be outplayed and win than to be perceived outplaying another team and losing.

Absolutely! If you outplayed the other team and lost, that means you made some pretty dumb mistakes that gave the other team the win. In some ways that is worse than just getting outplayed. That is not something to crow about if you are the other team though, but a win is a win.
 
How come it only counts when "lucky" plays go for us and not against us? Was it lucky for us that Sanchez threw that pick that set up a TD and that he fumbled near midfield?

This guy is delusional. He keeps saying Jets get breaks and that the Dolphins didn't. He also says that he'd give credit to the Jets if they deserved, yet again he doesn't give the offense any credit for putting up two timely long TD drives against the Cowboys to keep the game alive. He thinks that two missed FGs for Miami was luck. He forgot about the Santonio dropped TD against the Dolphins last year and he thinks its luck that the Lions called a passing play, but questions that it might took Sanchez 13 seconds to get that 1yard QB sneak TD against the Lions.
 
Oh and he thinks that Jets forcing a fumble on Romo, and getting an int on him was luck. Not to mention, he discredits the Jets punt block because no one blocked McKnight, but doesn't bother to see that the blocker 'missed' the block.
 
This guy is delusional. He keeps saying Jets get breaks and that the Dolphins didn't. He also says that he'd give credit to the Jets if they deserved, yet again he dosn't give the offense any credit for putting up two timely long TD drives against the Cowboys to keep the game alive. He thinks that two missed FGs for Miami was luck. He forgot about the Santonio dropped TD against the Dolphins last year and he thinks its luck that the Lions called a passing play, but questions that it might took Sanchez 13 seconds to get that 1yard QB sneak TD against the Lions.

Oh and he thinks that Jets forcing a fumble on Romo, and getting an int on him was luck. Not to mention, he discredits the Jets punt block because no one blocked McKnight, but doesn't bother to see that the blocker 'missed' the block.

I guess you don't actually read my post. From post #86 below:

A better example of a lucky break for the Dolphins is when Holmes dropped that easy TD pass last year. That was a difference maker.

I have only talked about the Jets breaks in this thread and have never talked about breaks that the Dolphins didn't get.

Why would I give credit to the Jets for 2 TD drives (The latter early in the 4th) when it was not enough to win the game? The score was still 24-17. They had a chance to tie it themselves with 2 drives after that and could not. They needed a break. They needed the Cowboys to flub up a punt to get the tie. I clearly saw the blocker "Miss" the block. That is the point. The blocker "Missed" the block. It was the Cowboys mistake, not the Jets great play that caused it.

It was a lucky break that the Lions called a passing play up 3 with under 2:00 in the game. I agreed with you that the breaks equaled out since the refs cost the Jets 13 seconds on Sanchez' sneak. I never said it took Sanchez 13 seconds to cross the goal line. I questioned if he crossed the goal line at all. In my opinion, it did not look like he crossed it, and my argument was that it would have easily taken 13 seconds for the Jets to reset and run another play to get it in. Even after all that, I said call it a draw and pointed out the other breaks the Jets got in that game that the Lions did not.

Before you post about things I say, you should really read what I actually said.
 
I guess you don't actually read my post. From post #86 below:



I have only talked about the Jets breaks in this thread and have never talked about breaks that the Dolphins didn't get.

Why would I give credit to the Jets for 2 TD drives (The latter early in the 4th) when it was not enough to win the game? The score was still 24-17. They had a chance to tie it themselves with 2 drives after that and could not. They needed a break. They needed the Cowboys to flub up a punt to get the tie. I clearly saw the blocker "Miss" the block. That is the point. The blocker "Missed" the block. It was the Cowboys mistake, not the Jets great play that caused it.

Why would you not give the credit to the Jets for the drives that kept the game alive? To me, if Jets don't score on one of them, or get just FGs out of them, Jets lose the game, so yeah, they were enough to win.

And when a blocker misses the block, it means he had his focus on another player. Thats great ST coaching, but u won't agree.

It was a lucky break that the Lions called a passing play up 3 with under 2:00 in the game. I agreed with you that the breaks equaled out since the refs cost the Jets 13 seconds on Sanchez' sneak. I never said it took Sanchez 13 seconds to cross the goal line. I questioned if he crossed the goal line at all. In my opinion, it did not look like he crossed it, and my argument was that it would have easily taken 13 seconds for the Jets to reset and run another play to get it in. Even after all that, I said call it a draw and pointed out the other breaks the Jets got in that game that the Lions did not.

Before you post about things I say, you should really read what I actually said.

Seriously, how is someone calling a passing play a lucky break? Lions risked winning the game vs. defending a long drive. They came up short. In other words, the Jets were at risk losing the game, yet the D came up big and stopped the play. I give the Jets D the credit.

Sanchez crossed the goal line. The refs who had a better angle than us saw it that way. U can continue arguing.

And which other breaks did the Jets get that the Lions didn't? The missed PAT? U do know that the kicker got hurt on a FG attempt and that the roughing turned the 3 point Lions drive into TD right? The only time Suh doesn't kick the PAT is if the never got roughed, hence taking off 3 more points. Whats ur "Jets got break" excuse now?
 
Why would you not give the credit to the Jets for the drives that kept the game alive? To me, if Jets don't score on one of them, or get just FGs out of them, Jets lose the game, so yeah, they were enough to win.

And when a blocker misses the block, it means he had his focus on another player. Thats great ST coaching, but u won't agree.

No, they were enough to keep it close, but not enough to win. The Jets needed a break and got it with a blocked punt returned for a TD when their offense could do nothing. Block punts do not happen very often and when they do, it is usually because of a blocking breakdown (As in the case of the Cowboys) The Jets lined up the same exact way a few other times when the Cowboys were punting and were not able to block it. It took a breakdown that allowed the guy to come through untouched right up the middle. With a minor adjustment, the Cowboys could have made sure that the punt would not have been blocked. If I saw the Jets player push through his block, I would give them credit, but that is not what happened.




Seriously, how is someone calling a passing play a lucky break? Lions risked winning the game vs. defending a long drive. They came up short. In other words, the Jets were at risk losing the game, yet the D came up big and stopped the play. I give the Jets D the credit.

Sanchez crossed the goal line. The refs who had a better angle than us saw it that way. U can continue arguing.

And which other breaks did the Jets get that the Lions didn't? The missed PAT? U do know that the kicker got hurt on a FG attempt and that the roughing turned the 3 point Lions drive into TD right? The only time Suh doesn't kick the PAT is if the never got roughed, hence taking off 3 more points. Whats ur "Jets got break" excuse now?

It is a stupid call to pass the ball when you are up 3 with under 2 mins and the other team has no timeouts. Especially, when it is your 3rd string QB who you ask to complete the pass, and who does not know to take a sack if the play is not there . Yes, the defense gets credit for the incomplete pass, but that call allowed the Jets a chance when they would not have had one. It is similar to when the Colts got lucky when NE went for it on 4th and 1 up 6 points with 2:00min left. Another dumb call that was a lucky break for Indy.


It took the Refs 14 seconds to see that Sanchez crossed the goal line in Det, so you can keep on arguing that the Jets deserve that time back.

It was a lucky break that the kicker got injured. You can't take away the penalty just because he got injured. The Jets still roughed the kicker. The kicker did not have to get injured on the play for the penalty to be called. It was a lucky break that he did get injured and that the coach put in Suh to attempt the extra point and he missed. Should I give credit to the Jets for Suh missing the extra point? Maybe is was another example of Westhoff's brilliant ST calls?

You can crow all you want about these wins, but I saw the other team lose, I didn't see the Jets win.
 
No, they were enough to keep it close, but not enough to win. The Jets needed a break and got it with a blocked punt returned for a TD when their offense could do nothing. Block punts do not happen very often and when they do, it is usually because of a blocking breakdown (As in the case of the Cowboys) The Jets lined up the same exact way a few other times when the Cowboys were punting and were not able to block it. It took a breakdown that allowed the guy to come through untouched right up the middle. With a minor adjustment, the Cowboys could have made sure that the punt would not have been blocked. If I saw the Jets player push through his block, I would give them credit, but that is not what happened .

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.

It is a stupid call to pass the ball when you are up 3 with under 2 mins and the other team has no timeouts. Especially, when it is your 3rd string QB who you ask to complete the pass, and who does not know to take a sack if the play is not there . Yes, the defense gets credit for the incomplete pass, but that call allowed the Jets a chance when they would not have had one. It is similar to when the Colts got lucky when NE went for it on 4th and 1 up 6 points with 2:00min left. Another dumb call that was a lucky break for Indy

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?

It took the Refs 14 seconds to see that Sanchez crossed the goal line in Det, so you can keep on arguing that the Jets deserve that time back.

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 a lucky break that the kicker got injured. You can't take away the penalty just because he got injured. The Jets still roughed the kicker. The kicker did not have to get injured on the play for the penalty to be called. It was a lucky break that he did get injured and that the coach put in Suh to attempt the extra point and he missed. Should I give credit to the Jets for Suh missing the extra point? Maybe is was another example of Westhoff's brilliant ST calls?

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, Im 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.

You can crow all you want about these wins, but I saw the other team lose, I didn't see the Jets win.

U didn't see the Jets win, cuz u didn't watch the game.
 
No, they were enough to keep it close, but not enough to win. The Jets needed a break and got it with a blocked punt returned for a TD when their offense could do nothing. Block punts do not happen very often and when they do, it is usually because of a blocking breakdown (As in the case of the Cowboys) The Jets lined up the same exact way a few other times when the Cowboys were punting and were not able to block it. It took a breakdown that allowed the guy to come through untouched right up the middle. With a minor adjustment, the Cowboys could have made sure that the punt would not have been blocked. If I saw the Jets player push through his block, I would give them credit, but that is not what happened.






It is a stupid call to pass the ball when you are up 3 with under 2 mins and the other team has no timeouts. Especially, when it is your 3rd string QB who you ask to complete the pass, and who does not know to take a sack if the play is not there . Yes, the defense gets credit for the incomplete pass, but that call allowed the Jets a chance when they would not have had one. It is similar to when the Colts got lucky when NE went for it on 4th and 1 up 6 points with 2:00min left. Another dumb call that was a lucky break for Indy.


It took the Refs 14 seconds to see that Sanchez crossed the goal line in Det, so you can keep on arguing that the Jets deserve that time back.

It was a lucky break that the kicker got injured. You can't take away the penalty just because he got injured. The Jets still roughed the kicker. The kicker did not have to get injured on the play for the penalty to be called. It was a lucky break that he did get injured and that the coach put in Suh to attempt the extra point and he missed. Should I give credit to the Jets for Suh missing the extra point? Maybe is was another example of Westhoff's brilliant ST calls?

You can crow all you want about these wins, but I saw the other team lose, I didn't see the Jets win.

In the end dont matter much what u saw jets are 2-0
 
Back
Top Bottom