Not saying it does but the D's are way better then the O's. The biggest problem on this team is the offense, in recent years it's always the offense. Huge issue.
Offense has been a glaring issue for a long time, probably ever since the league decided that the passing game was what they wanted to succeed and the Jets ignored it. I'm not saying that it's right that the NFL decided the passing game would be the untouchable part of their game, but the fact that the Jets tried to be Johnny Rebel and go in the opposite direction is pretty stupid.
we didn't ignore, we were trying until post 2010. Remember that the pass game was what led the O in 2010.
We were trying very hard with a QB that was raw and needed remedial instruction to be average, and traded for two troubled receivers that flamed out pretty quickly. The only year the Jets got serious about the passing game was 2008.
If by "led the O" you mean "pulled out some close games," then yeah. If you mean that the passing game was the consistent strength of the offense, game in and game out, then no way. We were 4th in rushing and 22 in passing in 2010. No reasonable person who watched the Jets that year would ever characterize our passing game as a distinctive strength, especially in comparison to the elite passing games around the league.
You have to throw the ball to win in this league nowadays. That's just what it is, doesn't matter if the rules ridiculously favor the offense. You have to adapt to it and the Jets haven't. It's mind boggling how bad the Jets have ignored this over the years. It's an offensive league and i'm seeing receiving cores that are made up of guys like Chaz Schillens, Stephen Hill, David Nelson, Clyde Gates, Greg Salas, etc. And these guys aren't just on the roster, they're actually playing fairly big roles in our offense.
pass game was more reliable in big spots in 2010 than 2008. the pass game led us that year, the run game was very good early and inconsistent after that. you can pull up meaningless rankings all you want(which include wildcat, reverses, etc.. to skew the #s), we won 11 games mainly b/c of the pass game.
Agreed 2009 and 2010 our offenses were absolutely led by our rushing attack. 2011 was the year the Jets tried to switch that up and go more pass oriented.
that is incorrect. 2010 the pass O led us, 2009 the rush #s were very misleading. many garbage time #s and a few games really skewed those #s but we had a rookie QB and we leaned on the run game more. in 2010 we tried to run, couldn't do it it consistently then pass O bailed us out time and time again. 2011 was going to be similar to 2010 but we couldn't run at all and we fell behind forcing us to throw more. the pass O got us back into many games but D would let down.
1) Why do wildcat, reverses, etc "skew the numbers?" After all, they are running plays. 2) You can pretend that quintessential NFL statistics like total passing yards, yards/attempt and completion percentage are "meaningless" if you want to, but no intellectually honest person is ever going to take you seriously.
1) it is not a traditional run game, they are trick plays. they didn't help w/ play action. 2)I don't care if average fans don't take me seriously. It's about how #s are accumulated more than the accumulations. fans get to worked up over meaningless #s.
It's not incorrect. We were a run oriented ground and pound team in 2009 and 2010. The pass offense made a lot of big plays in close games, they were very clutch that year. But they were not what we were built on. We were a team that believed in running the football and wanted to run the football.
In 2009 more than 2010, in 2010 the pass O was why we won as much as we did. 2009 was more run, 2010 was more balanced w/ the pass game carrying the team to 11 wins.
The pass O is why we won as many games as we did that year. But the Jets game plan was more run oriented. Not as heavy as 2009 and probably leaning closer to more balanced, but they were still a run first team. Rex said it those first two years all the time. "run the football and play great defense" "ground and pound". That was what the team believed in those years.
1) It's interesting that they are "trick plays," but nonetheless, they running plays. Our rushing offense gets credit for them. If we happen to be particularly good at implementing "trick" running plays into our offensive game plan, then our rushing offense is, quite obviously, the better for it. In essence, your argument that a statistic like rushing yards is "meaningless" because it includes "wildcat, reverses, etc." which "skew the numbers" is patently absurd. It is particularly absurd for a team like the Jets in 2009-2010, who utilized Brad Smith in the wildcat role quite a bit. 2) I agree that "how #s are accumulated" matters. But, the problem is that the statistics (aka "meaningless fantasy numbers") that you constantly bash jive perfectly with what our eyes (most of our eyes, anyway - apparently not yours) tell us. Our eyes told us that the Jets were a mediocre passing team (at best) in 2010. And guess what? Magically, the "meaningless fantasy numbers" support that assertion.
Come on we got lucky the first two wins against TB & NE. and we played the 3 worst teams in football. We should have been 5-6 win team last year.
