Whao!! Jets may release santonio holmes wednesday!!

[Vaark]

waaaah waaah waaah, Tom Brady didn't play ad nauseum. Well in 09 when the jest faced brady in the 2nd or 3rd game of the year, he was shaky as hell and scared ****less of another injury. However by late in the season, when Brady got back his sea legs, he destroyed those same jest. The last 3X the mighty Tom Brady faced Eli and Giants. How did any of those work out?

Realistically the only jest team that might have beaten the 08 Ravens was the 98 version. A few afterwards might have given them a run, or maybe not since we know how well Chad Pennington at his healthiest and best ended up doing against them twice in 08. The 7-7, lost 6 out of 7, beat no winning teams, lose at home to Atlanta 09 version would have been even more humiliated than they were in the last 31 mins of the conference game by being outscored 24-zero with 2 of the colts 2 best defenders either hobbled or on the shelf.

 

[The New Guy]

Yes, they couldn't beat ten or Hou w/ Henne playing a complete game but they lost to Pitt b/c henne went down They were alrady down a TD when henne went out and Miami's D couldn't stop Ben all game.

Henne swept the mighty Jets that year, and also beat NE. I heard beating that 10-6 NE team was enough to make a team's season.

Yes I think the 2010 Seahawks were as good as the '10 Giants and Bucs, it didn't imopress me that thegiants won a couple of late games after choking away their season and that TB beat bad teams all year w/ zero pressure to win.

:lol2: The Giants were 9-4 with 3 games left. They won 10 games including a 41-7 beatdown of that Seahawks team you thinki s just as good. That doesn't impress you, but the Seahawks wins against 6-10 SF, 9-7 SD, 11-5, Chi, 5-11 Az 2-15 Car, and 7-9 STL does.

The Seahawks also lost to the Buc that year 38-15. That makes a combined score in the Giants and Bucs games 79 to 22.

The '08 Dolphins beat 4 .500 or better teams? Wow! they beat the choking Jets, the choking Broncos and Cassell's Pats early in the year along w/ SD when they were struggling. They beat ONE playoff bound team and that team was 8-8.

The 09 Pats beat 4 .500 or better teams. Wow! Somehow they get a ton of credit even though they won fewer games than the year before without Brady and got pummeled in the playoffs. I wonder why that is? You can keep saying playoff bound, but it is nothing more than spinning. Sometimes good teams make the playoffs, and sometimes bad teams make the playoffs while the good teams miss out.

10-6 in 2009 was better than 11-5 in 2008, the '09 Pats were much better than the '08 version b/c they had Brady for 16 games.
We count near wins and losses now? NE started 6-2, one of those losses was to the Jets. You can whine about that any way you want but those are facts.

They had a Brady that was coming off a knee injury. They were not a very strong team, and beating them the 2nd week of the season when Buff had them beat a week before is nothing to hang a season on. Had it not been for McKelvin returning / fumbling the kickoff when they were up 5 points with 2:00 minutes to go, the 6-10 Bills would have beat them as well. The 7-9 Dolphins beat them later in the year.

You are right, it's about postseason success. There wasn't a playoff team in 2008 in the AFC that you would have beaten so it didn't matter that it was Baltimore. We had to go on the road and win 2 games including beating the hottest team in the league- a team better than the 2009 Ravens. You guys made the playoffs b/c:

A) Tom Brady didn't play
B) the Jets choked
c) you had one of the easiest scheds I have ever seen(so did we and we choked so Miami still gets credit for winning the division but they weren't anywhere near as good as the '09 or '10 Jets).

You make too big of a deal about Brady not playing. You don't play NE 16 times in a season. You play them twice. The Dolphins split with Brady many times before including 09. The Dolphins would have split with them in 08 even if Brady had played. The teams the Pats lost to in 09 would, and have beat Brady before. They won 11 games without Brady, and 10 games with him the next year. If you are competing for a playoff spot, I want the team in my division that wins less games, regardless of who the QB is.

I know you will cling to thinking the 09 Jets were a better team forever, so we will just have to agree to disagree.

 

[nyjunc]

waaaah waaah waaah, Tom Brady didn't play ad nauseum. Well in 09 when the jest faced brady in the 2nd or 3rd game of the year, he was shaky as hell and scared ****less of another injury. However by late in the season, when Brady got back his sea legs, he destroyed those same jest. The last 3X the mighty Tom Brady faced Eli and Giants. How did any of those work out?

Realistically the only jest team that might have beaten the 08 Ravens was the 98 version. A few afterwards might have given them a run, or maybe not since we know how well Chad Pennington at his healthiest and best ended up doing against them twice in 08. The 7-7, lost 6 out of 7, beat no winning teams, lose at home to Atlanta 09 version would have been even more humiliated than they were in the last 31 mins of the conference game by being outscored 24-zero with 2 of the colts 2 best defenders either hobbled or on the shelf.

Yes, Brady was so shaky he led NE to a 6-2 start to the year and the 2 weeks after the Jets beat him he didn't throw an INT and led NE to wins over Atl and Baltimore where they scored 26 and 27 pts. Amazingly he was rusty in week 2 but not so in weeks 3 and 4.

In 2010 the Jets beat him early then got crushed late and in postseason the Jets beat him up.

The last 3 times Brady faced the Giants the NE D choked late in those games to blow all 3.

The '98 Jets would have crushed the '08 Ravens, '02 and '04 would have beaten them too in addition to '09 and '10 having a great chance.

Chad at his healthiest best was in 2002 not 2008 and defenses like baltimore's gave Chad fits throughout his career so Miami getting destroyed tells us nothing other than the Dolphins weren't good enough to compete w/ a good, not great, Baltimore team.

Henne swept the mighty Jets that year, and also beat NE. I heard beating that 10-6 NE team was enough to make a team's season.




:lol2: The Giants were 9-4 with 3 games left. They won 10 games including a 41-7 beatdown of that Seahawks team you thinki s just as good. That doesn't impress you, but the Seahawks wins against 6-10 SF, 9-7 SD, 11-5, Chi, 5-11 Az 2-15 Car, and 7-9 STL does.

The Seahawks also lost to the Buc that year 38-15. That makes a combined score in the Giants and Bucs games 79 to 22.




The 09 Pats beat 4 .500 or better teams. Wow! Somehow they get a ton of credit even though they won fewer games than the year before without Brady and got pummeled in the playoffs. I wonder why that is? You can keep saying playoff bound, but it is nothing more than spinning. Sometimes good teams make the playoffs, and sometimes bad teams make the playoffs while the good teams miss out.



They had a Brady that was coming off a knee injury. They were not a very strong team, and beating them the 2nd week of the season when Buff had them beat a week before is nothing to hang a season on. Had it not been for McKelvin returning / fumbling the kickoff when they were up 5 points with 2:00 minutes to go, the 6-10 Bills would have beat them as well. The 7-9 Dolphins beat them later in the year.



You make too big of a deal about Brady not playing. You don't play NE 16 times in a season. You play them twice. The Dolphins split with Brady many times before including 09. The Dolphins would have split with them in 08 even if Brady had played. The teams the Pats lost to in 09 would, and have beat Brady before. They won 11 games without Brady, and 10 games with him the next year. If you are competing for a playoff spot, I want the team in my division that wins less games, regardless of who the QB is.

I know you will cling to thinking the 09 Jets were a better team forever, so we will just have to agree to disagree.

and henne led you to 3 losses to end the season and a 7-9 record, what is your point?

9-4 turend into 9-6 and they were essentially done.

NO crushed Seattle in the reg season too, how did the rematch go?

NE in 2008 beat one playoff bound team- the Miami Dolphins. In 2009 they beat NYJ(title game team) and Baltimore(div rd)- 2 real playoff teams and your #s are off. NE beat Den(8-8), Ten(8-8), NYJ(9-7), Bal(9-7), Atl(9-7). That's 5 .500 or better teams. 11-5 in 2008 was the equivalent of 8-8 in 2009.

Buf had them beat, did Buf beat them? In 2003 Buf beat them 31-0 then finished 6-10 while NE won the SB- did that take away from NE's success? teams play close games, the Giants lost 7 of them and nearly lost to Buf and Miami.

NE went from 16-0 w/ Brady to 10-5 w/o him starting the next year. They tied for the div lead w/o Brady- you don't think Brady gets them AT LEAST one more win? all they needed was one win to win the division and keep Miami at home. Even if Miami splits w/ NE w/ Brady NE was winning at least one more game that year and winning the division.

I don't think it, I know the '09 Jets were better b/c they proved it.

 

[Vaark]

LMAO@dogpaddling in a river in Egypt without a floatation device. 1998 Team was good, 2010, although sneaking in the backdoor was pretty good; beyond that the 08 Ravens would put 11 in the box and make any version of Penny look like dog**** 11 out of every 10 times.

The 09 team proved nothing: they were lucky to be 7-7 before 2 teams placed more value on keeping their starters healthy then needless additional wins. They were the recipient of more charity than Warren Buffett contributes to African developing countries. They faced the worst team in the playoffs in 10 years who were about 7 games beyond their peak and fading fast and then the biggest choking kicker and HC in the league. Proves absolutely nothing other than they shouldn't have been there in the first place. Even if they hadn't choked at home against Atlanta, they still were a crap team. That just clinched it. You can disagree all you want but that scheduling was so disgracefully egregious that the league immediately changed their policy as a result. It is what it is despite your attempts at feel good homeristic spin-worthy revisionist history.

 

[The New Guy]

and henne led you to 3 losses to end the season and a 7-9 record, what is your point?

The point is they might have beat them had Henne played the whole game. They beat the Jets twice and NE which was better than Pitt that year.

9-4 turend into 9-6 and they were essentially done.

NO crushed Seattle in the reg season too, how did the rematch go?

7-9 is just as good as 10-6. And when that 7-9 team loses to that 10-6 team 41-7, you are still just as good as the 7-9 team. Makes perfect sense to me.

Are you saying Seattle was better than NO as well?

NE in 2008 beat one playoff bound team- the Miami Dolphins. In 2009 they beat NYJ(title game team) and Baltimore(div rd)- 2 real playoff teams and your #s are off. NE beat Den(8-8), Ten(8-8), NYJ(9-7), Bal(9-7), Atl(9-7). That's 5 .500 or better teams. 11-5 in 2008 was the equivalent of 8-8 in 2009.

No, my #'s are correct. NE did not beat Den that year. They beat 4 .500 teams or better, just like they did in 08 without Brady.

NE went from 16-0 w/ Brady to 10-5 w/o him starting the next year. They tied for the div lead w/o Brady- you don't think Brady gets them AT LEAST one more win? all they needed was one win to win the division and keep Miami at home. Even if Miami splits w/ NE w/ Brady NE was winning at least one more game that year and winning the division.

No, I honestly don't think they would have won more than 11 games. They still would have split with the Dolphins and Jets. Indy had won the last 2 out of 3 with Brady at QB, Pitt was the Super Bowl Champs that year, and the Chargers always play them tough in SD.

The 08 Pats without Brady won 4 games against teams that were .500 or better and finished with an 11-5 record. The 09 PAts with Brady won 4 games against teams that were .500 or better and only won 10 games. Again, I will take the team in my division that wins less games regardless of who the QB is.

I don't think it, I know the '09 Jets were better b/c they proved it.

You know it just like you know the sideline rule is separate, it wasn't a catch, it wasn't a safety ect..... Your bias for the Jets and against other teams blind you from reality.

Being let into the playoffs and then beating a dead team walking and then an overrated SD team who missed 3 FGs in a 3 point loss is hardly proving anything.

 

[nyjunc]

LMAO@dogpaddling in a river in Egypt without a floatation device. 1998 Team was good, 2010, although sneaking in the backdoor was pretty good; beyond that the 08 Ravens would put 11 in the box and make any version of Penny look like dog**** 11 out of every 10 times.

The 09 team proved nothing: they were lucky to be 7-7 before 2 teams placed more value on keeping their starters healthy then needless additional wins. They were the recipient of more charity than Warren Buffett contributes to African developing countries. They faced the worst team in the playoffs in 10 years who were about 7 games beyond their peak and fading fast and then the biggest choking kicker and HC in the league. Proves absolutely nothing other than they shouldn't have been there in the first place. Even if they hadn't choked at home against Atlanta, they still were a crap team. That just clinched it. You can disagree all you want but that scheduling was so disgracefully egregious that the league immediately changed their policy as a result. It is what it is despite your attempts at feel good homeristic spin-worthy revisionist history.

2002 Chad was the 2nd best QB in the league that year, w/ Coles, Moss and Chrebet he would have had success against Baltimore.

The '09 team won TWO road playoff games en route to the title game. they proved they belong.

The worst teams in the playoffs in the last 10 years were Sea '10, Mia '08 and KC '10.

The Jets weren't the first team to benefit from a team resting starters, again should they have lost the game like we did in '93 or Buf in '04?

The bottom line is the Jets won 2 road playoff games, Miami only has 3 road playoff wins in their history and Miami hasn't won 2 playoff games in a single postseason since 1984.

The point is they might have beat them had Henne played the whole game. They beat the Jets twice and NE which was better than Pitt that year.



7-9 is just as good as 10-6. And when that 7-9 team loses to that 10-6 team 41-7, you are still just as good as the 7-9 team. Makes perfect sense to me.

Are you saying Seattle was better than NO as well?



No, my #'s are correct. NE did not beat Den that year. They beat 4 .500 teams or better, just like they did in 08 without Brady.


No, I honestly don't think they would have won more than 11 games. They still would have split with the Dolphins and Jets. Indy had won the last 2 out of 3 with Brady at QB, Pitt was the Super Bowl Champs that year, and the Chargers always play them tough in SD.

The 08 Pats without Brady won 4 games against teams that were .500 or better and finished with an 11-5 record. The 09 PAts with Brady won 4 games against teams that were .500 or better and only won 10 games. Again, I will take the team in my division that wins less games regardless of who the QB is.




You know it just like you know the sideline rule is separate, it wasn't a catch, it wasn't a safety ect..... Your bias for the Jets and against other teams blind you from reality.

Being let into the playoffs and then beating a dead team walking and then an overrated SD team who missed 3 FGs in a 3 point loss is hardly proving anything.

They also lost to Houston, Buffalo and Ten who were worse than the Jets. Henne had his chance, he failed late in the year.

7-9 is not as good as 10-6, if Seattle didn't beat the defending Champs in the playoffs I wouldn't mention them but they did.

Again, NO killed Seattle in the reg season too- how did the return trip work out?

My mistake, regardless of that they beat Bal and NYJ- 2 teams that wona combined 3 postseason games and advanced to the title game and div rd. In 2008 NE beat one playoff bound team and that team was humiliated at home in the WC rd.

It's a lock NE wins more than 11 games, I am 100% sure they sweep us so that's one more win. There's no doubt they win probably 13-14 games. They lost to the Colts by a FG w/ Cassell, SD was 8-8, they owned Pitt w/ Brady until this season(they would crush Pitt in Pitt in 2010). There is no doubt NE wins more than 11 games w/ Brady.

'07 Pats w/ Brady against playoff bound teams: 6-0, avg. margin of victory? 19.7 PPG, NE 39 Opps 19

'08 Pats w/o Brady against playoff bound teams: 2-4, avg. margin of defeat? 17.8 PPG

The Jets earned their way in, taking care of business against a tougher sched than the '08 phins had to play, even w/ a qtr and a half of Indy backups then once in postseason they won TWO road games including defeating the hottest team in the league and one many expected to go to the SB.

We got a qtr and a half of Indy backups in a close game, Miami got 4 cupcake games to end the season.

 

[Vaark]

Too ****ing funny .. in the last quarter and a half of the 3rd PO game, when the Colts starters were actually in, instead of the scary Curtis Painter, they outscored the jest 17-0 as in "shut out" despite having 2 of their 3 best defenders hobbled or shelved. So much for that delusional talking point.

Beyond that, to underscore what a sham and disgrace the 09 charitable contribution was, the Colts starters scored 46 points in a game and a half vs the jest starters who in 2 games scoring 27 points.

To graphically represent that reality that the 7-7 09 jest who lost 6 out of 7 and couldn't even hold serve by beating a 6-7 Atlanta team at home to stay in playoff contention were bigger posers than Leonardo DiCaprio in "Catch Me If You Can," ....in 1.5 games, the Colts starters scored 70% more points than the jest did in 2 games. It is what is is. But it is hysterical how you credit the defense instead of Eli for his wins yet refuse to admit that Sanchez has always been the jest' weakest link.

Still waiting for you to try to spin a shine on the meatball, Sanchez style.

 

[nyjunc]

Too ****ing funny .. in the last quarter and a half of the 3rd PO game, when the Colts starters were actually in, instead of the scary Curtis Painter, they outscored the jest 17-0 as in "shut out" despite having 2 of their 3 best defenders hobbled or shelved. So much for that delusional talking point.

Beyond that, to underscore what a sham and disgrace the 09 charitable contribution was, the Colts starters scored 46 points in a game and a half vs the jest starters who in 2 games scoring 27 points.

To graphically represent that reality that the 7-7 09 jest who lost 6 out of 7 and couldn't even hold serve by beating a 6-7 Atlanta team at home to stay in playoff contention were bigger posers than Leonardo DiCaprio in "Catch Me If You Can," ....in 1.5 games, the Colts starters scored 70% more points than the jest did in 2 games. It is what is is. But it is hysterical how you credit the defense instead of Eli for his wins yet refuse to admit that Sanchez has always been the jest' weakest link.

Still waiting for you to try to spin a shine on the meatball, Sanchez style.

The 1st half doesn't count? being down just 3 in the 4th qtr is meaningless? Scoring 17 in the 2nd qtr is meaningless? w/ a rookie QB on the road in the title game?

30+15=45. The Colts were better than us but anything can happen in one game and we were very much in that first game before Indy pulled their starters.

Atl wound up as a 9-7 team and we lost by a FG to them

In the same week this season the Giants were thrashed at home by an awful redskin team, does that mean their playoff spot was a sham?

what's to spin on Sparano? in his one year calling plays he had a top 5 offense, I don't know what he will be as an OC. We'll see , maybe he'll be as good of an OC as you thought he was as a HC until 2 years ago. Remember when you thought he was better than rex?:lol2:

 

[Vaark]

The 1st half doesn't count? being down just 3 in the 4th qtr is meaningless? Scoring 17 in the 2nd qtr is meaningless? w/ a rookie QB on the road in the title game?

30+15=45. The Colts were better than us but anything can happen in one game and we were very much in that first game before Indy pulled their starters.

Atl wound up as a 9-7 team and we lost by a FG to them

In the same week this season the Giants were thrashed at home by an awful redskin team, does that mean their playoff spot was a sham?

what's to spin on Sparano? in his one year calling plays he had a top 5 offense, I don't know what he will be as an OC. We'll see , maybe he'll be as good of an OC as you thought he was as a HC until 2 years ago. Remember when you thought he was better than rex?:lol2:

yeah, the only problem is you don't have cloose to the offensive weapons that Dallas did that year...could well have been on auto pilot... not to mention that it was Haley who designed the passing plays and was in charge of the receivers. Sparano was so good that he was bumped by Jason Garrett after that one job-sharing year. Right! Oh, remember when I said that Ozzie Newsome knew what he was doing and that Harbaugh (hell pick either one) was better than Rex? Yes? Still saying it. But I do grant you that as flawed as Rex is, he was a better HC than Tony. But since we're playing that game, still saying you wouldn't trade Sanchez for Ryan, Rivers, EManning, Schaub or even for 2 first round picks? (just to put your grasp of reality into perspective.)

Too bad for spin-sake that each game is 60 minutes or you'd come closer to turning a turd into a nugget. The fact remains that when the Colts were trying, in 1.5 games they scored 70% more points than the jest did in 2 whole games. Likewise, when it counted the colts outscored the mighty jest defense 24-0 in the last 31 minutes.. but breaking that down to address your spin: when the starters, not Curtis Painter and his band of merry ****ups, was in in the last quarter and a half, they outscored the jest 17-0 when they were actually trying. So much for that nonesense of a)"even though we were a 7-7 team losing 6 out of 7 and chokinhg against a 6-7 Atlanta team we needed to beat at home, we still earned our way into the playoffs" and b)"we were a quarter and a half away from being in the SB." So much for that delusion!

The only difference in 09 between our two 7-7 09 teams was that "there but for the scheduling go the Fins."

 

[nyjunc]

yeah, the only problem is you don't have cloose to the offensive weapons that Dallas did that year...could well have been on auto pilot... not to mention that it was Haley who designed the passing plays and was in charge of the receivers. Sparano was so good that he was bumped by Jason Garrett after that one job-sharing year. Right! Oh, remember when I said that Ozzie Newsome knew what he was doing and that Harbaugh (hell pick either one) was better than Rex? Yes? Still saying it. But I do grant you that as flawed as Rex is, he was a better HC than Tony. But since we're playing that game, still saying you wouldn't trade Sanchez for Ryan, Rivers, EManning, Schaub or even for 2 first round picks? (just to put your grasp of reality into perspective.)

Too bad for spin-sake that each game is 60 minutes or you'd come closer to turning a turd into a nugget. The fact remains that when the Colts were trying, in 1.5 games they scored 70% more points than the jest did in 2 whole games. Likewise, when it counted the colts outscored the mighty jest defense 24-0 in the last 31 minutes.. but breaking that down to address your spin: when the starters, not Curtis Painter and his band of merry ****ups, was in in the last quarter and a half, they outscored the jest 17-0 when they were actually trying. So much for that nonesense of a)"even though we were a 7-7 team losing 6 out of 7 and chokinhg against a 6-7 Atlanta team we needed to beat at home, we still earned our way into the playoffs" and b)"we were a quarter and a half away from being in the SB." So much for that delusion!

The only difference in 09 between our two 7-7 09 teams was that "there but for the scheduling go the Fins."

Ozzie Newsome's Ravens which were built already have 2 title game apps in the 4 years since he hired Harbuag, Rex taking over a new team w/ a rookie QB has 2 title game apps in 3 years. 2/4= 50%, 2/3=67% which is better?

I wouldn't trade Sanchez for Rivers, Ryan, Schaub or 1st rd picks. Eli is on a new level right now so I move him up to the next group that I would take over Sanchez. People like you are wowed by meaningless fantasy #s, I just want to win.

The facts are the Colts were leading a close game in week 16 then won a close game in the title game. i love how you bring up others spinning.

In 2009 Miami had 3 non playoff teams to wrap up the sched- they went 0-3 against teams we went 2-0 against. All you needed was 2 wins and you were in, you couldn't win a single game.

 

[Vaark]

I think we should just agree, neither team deserved to get in. And FWIW, a good HC has a handle on his lockerroom, addresses and resolves conflicts when they happen, recognizes the makings of a good OC and conversely, isn't hands-off when it comes to offensive philosophies and strategies, especially when delegated to a clueless coordinator so he can tinker with his defense. Hopefully he'll give Tony the same rope. Oh, did I add that a good HC is someone who reflects well on his franchise, is not a personal and professional punchline or embarrassment? No question Rex is an excellent DC, as Ozzie Newsome realized, and certainly much better than his twin, but as a HC, I can see why you like him like you do Sanchez: both of em being carried and propped by teams exceeding their capabilities and contributions. Don't get me wrong, whoever hires him after he crashes, will be getting an outstanding and motivated DC, but a DC nonetheless as he, just like his father and his brother were both born and destined to be.

Objectively speaking, as much as I hate to admit it, I think if they had retained Mangini and hired Rex as the DC, they may have at least gotten to the SB in 2010. .

 

[nyjunc]

I think both teams deserved to get in, both teams got breaks and took advantage(that's what good teams do).

I think Mangini has the tools to be a really good HC but until he stops w/ the Belichick imitation he won't succeed(if he gets another chance). Rex is the best thing to happen to this franchise in all my years following them. Bash all you want but when the Jets are getting bashed for going 8-8 that tells you the bar has been raised and that is all thanks to Rex. Yes he talks too much but Rex is being himself not trying to be someone else and I know we'll bounce back in 2012 after a "bad" 2011 where we went 8-8.