Or the offense not to hand the Steelers 7 points, or the offense not to falter repeatedly on scoring opportunities. Yes the defense failed, but remember in that game the Jets had 1st and goal and failed to score, they score there (the epic fail) and the defense doesn't need to make a 3rd down stop, they were I think the 5th best team that year at preventing third down conversions, but that's still 1 out of 3 on average that were successful. Which is the bigger choke job? The offense not scoring on first and goal from the one, or the defense not being able to stop two consecutive first downs?
I'm just going to post up all the losses in 2011. Let's find out if we can see which ones are the fault of the defense and which ones are on the offense. Raiders - 34-24 - Sanchez: 369, 2 passing TDs, 1 rushing TD, 1 INT, 96 rating; This one is on the defense. Cromartie muffed the kickoff return, which screwed us as well as McFadden's huge runs. Sanchez kept us in this one and almost brought us back near the end. The Raiders D did not score, although they had a couple short field situations. Ravens - 34-17: Sanchez: 119 yards, 0 TDs, 1 pick, 3 fumbles. 21 points off 3 defense TDs. Unquestionably this game is on the offense. Take away the turnover points and the Ravens have 12 points. Patriots - 30-21: Sanchez: 166 yards, 2 TDs, 105 QB rating: Green also had a TD. Cromartie had a pick. No defensive TDs on either side. The O should do better against a terrible secondary, but the D should also be able to keep them under 30 points. This is on the team as a whole. Patriots - 37-16: Sanchez: 306 yards, 1 passing TD, 1 rushing TD, 2 ints, 64 rating. Mcknight had a fumble. 1 defensive TD for Patriots. This game goes on the offense. 3 TOs including the Sanchez pick 6 near the end. 16 points is unacceptable and the defense forced a safety as well. Broncos - 17-13: Sanchez: 252 yards, 0 TD, 1 INT, 67 rating. 1 fumble from Mcknight. Sanchez INT was a pick 6. Our defense played beastly in this game. 100% this game is on the offense. I don't care that Tebow won the game at the end. Our D let in a grand total of 10 points despite multiple turnovers and 3 and outs from the offense. Eagles - 45-19: Sanchez: 150 yards, 2 TDs, 2 INTS, 1 fumble 67 rating. Holmes also had a fumble. So that's 4 offensive turnovers. Yeah, the defense didn't play great, but they destroyed us and killed Sanchez. Giants - 29-14 Sanchez: 258 yards 1 pass TD, 1 rush TD, 2 INTS, 1 fumble, 54 rating. The defense didn't help with that 99 yard play to Cruz, however the fumble in the end zone killed us. Those 2 plays were momentum killers, but 14 points on offense with 3 TOs, is unacceptable. Another loss goes on the offense. Dolphins - 19-17: Sanchez: 207 yards, 2 TD, 3 INTS, 65 rating. The D had 2 picks. This one is definitely on the offense. The famous game where Holmes got benched and all that. The defense TRIED to win us this, but the offense didn't do squat but turn it over. So it seems out of every loss in 2011, the defense is responsible for just 1, possibly 2 if you count the tie. It's easy to just say "oh the defense blew the lead", but there is so much more involved than that 1 moment.
and don't forget the offense would have STILL needed to score even if the Defense had gotten a first down. something the Jets offense had only managed to do when the Steelers were playing a soft defense and the Jets were able to run and short pass their way under the deep coverage.
I've given up trying to keep it focused on the defense, I'm of the conclusion now that any thread that relates to the Jets play, past or future, has to devolve in to a Sanchez thread. Hell even the Namath thread devolved in to a Sanchez thread thanks to a couple poor souls.
oak: D Bal: O NE: both games the D crumbled late but neither unit did enough to win. Den: both deserve blame, D blew it late phi: D NYG: D, 99 yd TD changed game and season for both teams. Mia: D, we were a dead team but one w/ a lead before a ridiculous 13 min drive allowed Mia to take lead.
Classic Junc in Sanchez colored glasses. If the Defense doesn't play perfect it's the Defenses fault. 2 games were clearly on the Defense, but arguing the Denver game on the defense is just silly...In Junc's mind if the offense scores and takes the lead in the first quarter but never scores again it's the defenses fault for not holding the other team scoreless. Junc, I'd put you on ignore but I need a good laugh too much to do that.
I think this post illustrates how little you understand the current build of offenses and defenses in the NFL. Offensive Coordinators are very important. But not even close to enough in respect to their unit as Defensive Coordinators are. Both units have signal callers. Rex has used Jim Leonhard, Davis Harris and at times even Brodney Pool (2011). Never once has the defense ranked overall out of the top ten. That is a testament to the fact that the DC/HC that Rex has been has total control of the unit that is the pride of the team. On offense, you simply cannot have any player other than the quarterback calling plays. The offensive coordinator has far less control over what goes on with the offense than the QB has. Most of their calls happen on the field and after the defense shifts. And the radio is off. This is why teams are seeking out the most talented and cerebral and most well-adjusted people at the QB position. Sanchez doesn't fit that description. He doesn't, no matter how you try to argue it. I don't think Smith does either. Oh well. We're stuck in a pattern.
So one mindset: If an opposing offense has scored very little then the defense has done their job. If low scoring game is lost thanks to a late drive against the defense its more on the offense for not scoring enough to keep that from being possible. If the score is 3-9 in our teams favor, than the defense has done spectacularly, a late game win format the opposing offense is on a weak effort on the other side of the ball. that should be a win, the defense is great but the offense screwed things up. Another mindset: A defense is responsible for keeping the offense in the game at all cost, no matter how much the offense has scored. If they can't stop a late drive from winning a game, the game is on them, not the offense. If the score is 3-9 in our teams favor, a great defense keeps that lead. Losing that lead is solely a defensive problem, and a sign that no matter how well they played earlier that they aren't that great. Thats seems to be the jist of what I'm seeing.
No. The Denver game, was blown. I agree with Barcs post, except the Denver game. At some point in the Season, the stregnth of the team needs to stand up, and be the stregnth of the team. At the critical juncture, they blew the lead. In 2011, the Jets failed to win a single game, where they scored less than 24. Denver, is on the defense.
Sometimes, a game or a season comes down to one moment. Jordan, utah, finals...but Ive already made my point about the Denver game,, and my opinion on the Miami game, was that the whole team quit, and it was evident in the holmes situation. However...I will go out on a limb here...maybe....just maybe....if they dont allow the Phins to hold the ball for nearly a quarter on a single posession..they may have eked out 3 points. Sanchez threw INTS late in that game, (and this is not excusing him), but at that point, they were forcing the issue. Giving up a 12 minute drive moves this game at least to the whole team. That has to take a toll later in the game. At least thats what Ive been reading about, when the offense goes 3 and Out.
I'll break this down a little. The Jets defense in 2011 was on the field for about 1.5 drives a game more than the NFL mean, aka an equal number of teams above and below that break point. that equates to about 24 extra drives a season. The defense ranked 10th at 30.8% of drives scoring. that, on average, is 8 less scoring drives a season, on it's most simple calculation, that's anywhere from 24 to 168 less points allowed over a season, with the midrange in the 70-90 point range being most probable. Simply reducing the turnovers and increasing the third down conversions would help move towards that goal. But the reality is reducing turnovers and increasing third down conversions would also lead to the defense defending in better field position, giving them more margin for error. For example, and I know I said I wouldn't talk sanchez anymore but in this case it is very relevant to the topic at hand, in 2011 10 of Sanchez's 18 interceptions and 6 of his lost fumbles were on the jets side of the field. 3 of the interceptions and 3 of the fumbles occurred at or behind the Jets 20 yard line, meaning that unless the defense got a turn over, or several BIG sacks the other team was going to score with little the defense could do except win a victory by holding it to a FG...but that still counts as a scoring drive by the opposition. By making for better field position the defense has more room to bend but not break and doesn't have to be flawless and the scoring percentage per drive defended improves. So that nets more points off the board that the defense "allows". It also means less time on the field in general which keeps the defense fresher, not just in that game but in games down the road by exposing them to fewer injuries, which also improves a defenses performance. All of these things together, moving the chains, reducing turnovers, even if they still don't result in an offensive score still helps the defense reduce the number of points surrendered. Tell me that if the Defense hadn't had all those extra drives against it over the season that extra 70-90 points surrendered over the course of the season wouldn't have made a difference in the standings in 2011. But more realistically with moving the chains the scoring percentage would probably have been slightly lower due to better field position so that "saved" point total probably would have been between 90-120 points. and you never know, turning the ball over less and moving the chains a little more effectively, just to league average levels even, might actually have resulted in the offense scoring a few more points to boot...if nothing else due to better starting field position overall. the reality is when evaluating defenses you can not separate the defense from the offense entirely in the evaluation. What some called a thinly veiled jab at the offense is really just an honest critique of the defense and the cause and evaluation of points allowed and why the Jets would rank 20th in points allowed in 2011 but rank 10th in drives that resulted in scores. Those two facts on the surface seem at odds with each other and it's only through the evaluation of cause and effect that the picture of the whole takes form.
We're going to disagree there, on Denver, if you have to be perfect to win the game it's on the other side of the ball where the problem lies. Additionally, if the Jets offense moved the chains even just improving off of their 3 and out statistics, never mind drives of more than 1 first down, and reduced their turnovers the number of points allowed would have been lower, simple math. But I won't repeat the explanation in my previous post, you can just read it. If a defense gives up 10 points in a game, regardless of what that last play is, it's on the offense, hands down. Saying anything else is just a justification and an excuse.
I hate the "The defense blew it in the end so it's their fault" arguments. Perhaps if the offense didn't completely suck all game, the defense never should have been in a position to "blow it".
I've done extensive research and know it to be true. I patiently await your response to my other post.
