You can't compare YPC against two RBs with two very different roles. Is Thomas Jones running on third and 1 or Shonn Greene.
I guess we'll have to disagree on this one. If you want to go that route, then I would suggest looking at Greene's YPC average when he was in the same role as Thomas Jones. Even though defenses were gearing up specifically to stop the running game, Greene averaged 6.4, 5.6, and 4.1 YPC over a three game stretch, the last of which saw the running game abandoned due to falling behind in the score rapidly. Thomas Jones, by comparison, only went over 5.0 YPC twice in the regular season. The first time was against Houston in Week 1, impressive considering Houston had the league's 10th ranked run defense. I watched that game, though, and Houston wasn't dropping extra men into the box nearly as much as playoff teams were doing against Greene. The last time he did it was against Buffalo in Week 6 when he went for 9.5 YPC... against the league's 30th ranked run defense. When Jones faced the type of resistance Greene had in the last few weeks of the regular season, here are his rushing attempts followed by his yardage: vs. Atlanta - 19 attempts for 54 yards, @ Indy - 23 attempts for 105 yards (we all know what happened in that game), vs. Cincy - 27 attempts for 78 yards. Conversely, Greene faced the very same Cincy defense a week after IN Cinncinnati against a team with extra film to gameplan against and whose plan revolved specifically around stopping the run to put the ball in Sanchez's hands. How did Greene do against the same defense that Jones had 27 attempts against? 21 attempts for 135 yards and a TD. By the way, Greene also had 13 attempts for 62 yards the week before, 16 yards less than Jones despite taking 14 less handoffs. But I guess it was all the draws though, right?
As for your predictions of how well Greene will do, you are stating opinions, not facts. You are basing those opinions based on two games.
What I'm actually saying is that I don't see a reason for why Greene should take a step back. He's a good back running behind the best O-Line in the division, and one of the best in the conference. My real purpose in this thread is comparing and contrasting Greene and Jones. In doing so and looking at the stats that I have just posted, I've come to the conclusion that I think Greene is the better RB of the two, and the Jets coaching staff agreed with my assessment last season when Jones became expendable due to Greene's production.
We have no idea how he will perform when he is the guy and teams gameplan for him.
The only thing about this is that teams DID gameplan specifically for him in the playoffs. All three teams that he faced did. Another thing that makes me believe that he probably won't take a step back next year is the possibility of Sanchez improving on his rookie season. If Sanchez improves only a little bit, teams have to respect the pass more than they did in the 2009 playoffs. That opens up even more holes for Greene.
Look at Joseph Addai. You look at a year and a half worth of production and you would think he was going to be a superstar. Since midway through his second season, he has been average at best but mostly mediocre. And you are judging Shonn Greene on two games.
You're not seriously going to try to compare the offensive system, gameplan, and O-Lines that Addai and Greene/Jones run behind, are you?
As for Thomas Jones age and getting older. There is no denying that. That isn't the point. Even if he returned, his production has declined. We have no idea if the return of Jones or giving Greene the reins, was going to give them a 1400 yard, 14 TD back. We won't know until the season starts.
There's simply too many things to take into account here when trying to prove the above statement correct or false. The biggest is whether or not the Jets see an improvement at the quarterback position that allows them to open up the playbook more than they did in 2009. If they do that, while it will open up more holes for the running game, it will also take away from the number of attempts that the backs see.
