What the Jets win teaches us.

[ctpatsfan77]

The only thing I didn't figure out this weekend is why someone in the league thought Carolina was worthy of being in so many prime time games.

In part, you can thank the refs who didn't call Luke Kuechly's "defending" of GRONK last season. . . .

 

[GaryfromTO]

on any given Sunday....
and even a broken clock is right twice a day

 

[OhExaulted1]

 

[Brady6]

Odell Beckham looks like Antonio Brown with DeSean Jackson/TY Hilton speed.

He is going to be an absolute stud. The only thing that will limit him from becoming a top 5 WR is Eli Manning.

 

[The Brandon Five]

He is going to be an absolute stud. The only thing that will limit him from becoming a top 5 WR is Eli Manning.

How the heck did we lose to that Goober TWICE?

 

[PATSNUTme]

It teaches me that if you turn the ball over 4 times and the other team does not, you lose. Oh wait, I knew that anyway -so it teaches me nothing.

 

[Oswlek]

In part, you can thank the refs who didn't call Luke Kuechly's "defending" of GRONK last season. . . .

That play was obviously immensely frustrating, but what pushes it over the edge is that NE stopped Carolina on their prior TD drive, only for their receiver to earn a DPI by latching on to McCourty. Devin literally had both arms raised up in the air! How in the hell are you holding a guy when they have their arms wrapped around you?

Seeing Carolina get a free first down for an incorrect penalty followed by NE losing on an actual penalty put my remote in serious jeopardy.

 

[Deus Irae]

That's because, contrary to what Felger believes, building a team through aggressive drafting will bite you in the ass at the end of the day. Yeah, Wilkerson and Richardson have been home-runs, as was Revis before them. But to field a competent, complete NFL roster you also need depth, so the misses of the aggressive draft strategy (Sanchez--which cost them a 2nd rounder along with some back-of-roster depth--and Gohlston immediately come to mind) are not only failed prospects but also the loss of other potential picks, say the 2nd rounder the Jets would have still had without trading up for Sanchez, or an additional pick or two had they traded out of the #6 spot in 2008.

And we're seeing it again this season...their D-line is beastly, Wilkerson and Richardson are simply incredible. But they have marginal LB's and their secondary is garbage. I'd never say it would have been better to move out of the 13th and 30th picks (where they got their stud D-linemen) but overall, the dreaded 'stockpiling of picks' just works, because you're not putting all your chips on so-called 'can't miss' first round studs...who often miss, period.

Anyway, this Steelers-Jets game, to me, is just another case of the 'any given Sunday' NFL doing what it do. The Steelers were overrated going in based on the last two weeks but they're a better team than the Jets, they just didn't show up and got their teeth kicked in before they knew what hit 'em.

The Jets had 12 picks this year. Only one has produced at all, and that's Amaro. They had 7 picks last year, including two first rounders, and they had 8 picks the year before, and 6 picks the year before that. So, over the past 4 seasons, the Jets have had 33 picks compared to the average 28. They've had 5 first round picks, 3 2nd round picks, 4 3rd round picks, 4 4th round picks, 3 5th round picks, 8 6th round picks and 6 7th round picks.

Aggressive draft strategy hasn't been the problem. Poor QB selections, terrible overall drafting in recent years, and poor FA success has been the problem. In other words, it's been a total failure, not something specific to an aggressive draft approach..

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/nyj/draft.htm

The Jets is a team that is $21m under the cap but couldn't be bothered to bring back Cromartie and Revis. So, instead of having what might well have been the best defense in the NFL, and a legitimate team, the Jets have a great front line and a garbage secondary.

 

[hambone1818]

Aggressive draft strategy hasn't been the problem. Poor QB selections, terrible overall drafting in recent years, and poor FA success has been the problem. In other words, it's been a total failure, not something specific to an aggressive draft approach..

I don't disagree with you but we're arguing different points. I'm pointing out the folly of their drafting strategy during the stretch from 2007 to 2010 or 2011, and how the Patriots and Belichick being patient and stockpiling picks gave them a much greater margin for error. The Jets putting all their eggs in one basket for multiple seasons backfired because many of those picks flopped. Players from those draft years are 3 to 7 years into their careers, i.e. players who should make up the core of a successful NFL roster. While the Jets were aggressively drafting Revis, Harris, Gholston, Sanchez, Keller, Ducasse, Wilson, etc, the Patriots bounced around the board and have some great 3rd-7th rounders to show for it.

The Jets hit in some instances like Revis, but they also whiffed in a big way on some top picks and it's had a negative effect on their roster. Without those depth picks in the 3rd-7th rounds they didn't have many hits during those years and it's shown.

I won't argue about their recent drafting, they've done a good job of collecting picks but seem to be missing on too high a percentage of them and they haven't identified a franchise QB. My argument is more in support of the Patriots drafting, and how it's proven emphatically that there's no such thing as a sure-fire pick so you're better off making more selections to up your chances, ESPECIALLY when you're drafting at the end of the first round every year.

 

[Deus Irae]

I don't disagree with you but we're arguing different points. I'm pointing out the folly of their drafting strategy during the stretch from 2007 to 2010 or 2011, and how the Patriots and Belichick being patient and stockpiling picks gave them a much greater margin for error. The Jets putting all their eggs in one basket for multiple seasons backfired because many of those picks flopped. Players from those draft years are 3 to 7 years into their careers, i.e. players who should make up the core of a successful NFL roster. While the Jets were aggressively drafting Revis, Harris, Gholston, Sanchez, Keller, Ducasse, Wilson, etc, the Patriots bounced around the board and have some great 3rd-7th rounders to show for it.

The Jets hit in some instances like Revis, but they also whiffed in a big way on some top picks and it's had a negative effect on their roster. Without those depth picks in the 3rd-7th rounds they didn't have many hits during those years and it's shown.

I won't argue about their recent drafting, they've done a good job of collecting picks but seem to be missing on too high a percentage of them and they haven't identified a franchise QB. My argument is more in support of the Patriots drafting, and how it's proven emphatically that there's no such thing as a sure-fire pick so you're better off making more selections to up your chances, ESPECIALLY when you're drafting at the end of the first round every year.

But you're claiming that it was the aggressive drafting that was the problem, when the evidence doesn't support that claim. During the time you're talking about, the Jets were actually competitive and went to the AFCCG twice in a row, despite having drafted Sanchez. They did it by doing well in free agency, which made up for the lost draft picks. That team had a solid defense, a solid OL, some good running backs and some good receivers. What it didn't have was a QB. Hell, when Favre was healthy, to start 2008, the Jets were 8-3.

2006-2009 is also the period of time where the Patriots were spitting the bit when it comes to drafting. They stayed competitive because they have Tom Brady and Bill Belichick, although they fell behind the Jets in the playoffs for two seasons.

What the Jets/Patriots drafting since 2007 shows is just how important a QB is in the modern NFL.

 

[slam]

on any given Sunday....
and even a broken clock is right twice a day

I feel this saying is too generous for the Jets, as I don't think they average being right twice a day.

How about: "Even a calendar with all of the pages ripped out but one is correct once in it's existence"?

 

[IcyPatriot]

 

[libra957]

It taught me that on any Sunday.....any Steelers team can be beat.

 

[Haley]

I'd say it taught me that you can't turn over the ball 4 times in a game but that was already pretty obvious to everyone.

I'd say it taught me that you have to contain Mike Vick and not let the guy run for first downs but this is also not a news flash for anyone.

I'd say you have to be good in all three phases of the game but we all know this.

I'd say the Jets are opportunistic and good at using D and ST to make up for some of their deficiencies on O but we as Pats fans have known this for years now.

Honestly, I'm not sure I learned much from this game other than that Ben is inconsistent/easily fooled and the Steelers have a lot of work to do on ST.

 

[Jlaff]

I'm actually blown away that both the Jets and Buttfumble came together to give me a huge win in a national pool. If I would have thought about that longer before Sunday, my good sense would never have allowed it.

 

[Ivan]

* Tampa's fourth rounder continues to look mighty appetizing.

This could well end up being the first pick of the fourth, which is a sweet spot to be in.

 

[goheels22002]

The Steelers aren't frauds any more than the Patriots are frauds.

I don't think the Steelers are frauds either. Frauds need to boast about being better than they are (see: Ryan, Rex c. 2012). I do believe the Steelers play to the level of their competition.

The Steelers' losses to the Jets, Buccaneers and the Browns indicate a team that thinks they can coast into games with lesser competition, and a team who is not fully on board with their coaching staff. If they get into the playoffs, (and their schedule is set up nicely for them to win 4 or maybe 5 of their last 6) the Steelers are a team that could make a run like the NY Giants did in their runs to the Super Bowl.

The Steelers are the kind of team that could jump out to a lead against the Broncos or the Colts in the playoffs and force Manning or Luck into panic mode. They already did that against the Colts.

 

[RayClay]

As far as that first ugly Jets game, I'm reminded of the boxing axiom styles make fights. Knowing the Jets had good lines and wanted to run, I wan't surprised they extended us in that game.

 

[50-yard-line]

I didn't learn anything, but my son did: listen to your father.

I told him the Jets were going to beat the Steelers. i never doubted it. The Steelers were highly overrated and the Jets suck, but their defense doesn't suck.

 

[Deus Irae]

I don't think the Steelers are frauds either. Frauds need to boast about being better than they are (see: Ryan, Rex c. 2012). I do believe the Steelers play to the level of their competition.

The Steelers' losses to the Jets, Buccaneers and the Browns indicate a team that thinks they can coast into games with lesser competition, and a team who is not fully on board with their coaching staff. If they get into the playoffs, (and their schedule is set up nicely for them to win 4 or maybe 5 of their last 6) the Steelers are a team that could make a run like the NY Giants did in their runs to the Super Bowl.

The Steelers are the kind of team that could jump out to a lead against the Broncos or the Colts in the playoffs and force Manning or Luck into panic mode. They already did that against the Colts.

What's also been overlooked in the Steelers' recent loss is that they were missing two defensive starters. Two defensive starters missing + bad turnovers is a good recipe for a loss, regardless of what team is playing.

It's as if people here refuse to remember when this type of thing has happened to the Patriots, and the Chiefs game wasn't so long ago that they have an excuse.