Awful. I don't mind the green on green, but when you add it to the sleeves and socks it is terrible. The white contrast on the socks and sleeves would be much better.
2015 Jets: Back on Track
- Thread starter SeoulSoxFan
- Start date
- Status
BrazilianSoxFan said:https://twitter.com/nyjets/status/662432108783280128
It looks like maybe a different shade of green? And no more white trim on the jerseys or pants? Even the green on the helmet looks brighter. Actually, the more I think about it, the more the shade of green reminds me of their terrible mid 90s uniforms. I am sure all Jets fans would like to forget that era.
They are fucking awful. Those unis look like a Nyquil dye job. Just a complete lack of respect from Nike for tradition and taste.
CaptainLaddie said:
This was my first thought. God those are awful. I hope Nike stays away from Foxboro with shitty ideas.
Eh I think the Krafts are smart enough to not let Nike meddle whereas Woody sees more jersey sales $$$ and HYPE!!1!11
I have not watched a lot of Jets football this season. But I think it's noteworthy that two weeks in a row young WRs have pretty good performances against Jets. Cooper had 5 catches for 46 yards (9.2 yds per catch) , Allen Robinson had 6 for 121 yards (20.2 yds per catch) and Allen Hurns had 5/122 and a TD (26.5 yds per catch)
Anyone watch these games? Was Revis matched up on these WRs for most of the games?
I'm curious if this is a sign that a 30 year old Revis in his 9th season has started to come back to Earth a bit, something in Bowles system that limits pass rush/puts DBs in less favorable spots or just another sign that rules in the NFL are so tilted towards the offense that Blake Bortles can now have success throwing at Revis.
Anyone watch these games? Was Revis matched up on these WRs for most of the games?
I'm curious if this is a sign that a 30 year old Revis in his 9th season has started to come back to Earth a bit, something in Bowles system that limits pass rush/puts DBs in less favorable spots or just another sign that rules in the NFL are so tilted towards the offense that Blake Bortles can now have success throwing at Revis.
Well Simple Ben Volin wrote yesterday that he thought Revis was getting fat, of all things, so it must be true!
Somehow I doubt it.
Somehow I doubt it.
I (reluctantly) watched a good portion of the Jets game yesterday. Revis did not have a good game and was getting beaten more than I remembered during his time in NE. But he was still a ton better than Cromartie who is a guy who is starting to look cooked.
Revis has looked gimpy to me a couple of times this year. I think he landed on the injury report once for a few days and might not be 100%.
Revis is probably being asked to do more than he was in NE from what I remember of pats last year but I'm not sure. He looks fine to me but not dominant.
Saw some of the Jets game yesterday and they did not look good. Jacksonville' passing game was effective, which it shouldn't be against the Jets. Coverage was poor- I agree that Cromartie looks old and Revis does not look like Revis.
Mangold was hurt, and so was Folk (in pregame warmups - a quad injury, or something), which put the Jets in some odd situations b/c they didn't want to try FG (the punter kicked the XP). Fitz was decent, but Ivory was stuffed.
They found a way to win, which is better than losing, and something good teams do, but it wasn't pretty.
Mangold was hurt, and so was Folk (in pregame warmups - a quad injury, or something), which put the Jets in some odd situations b/c they didn't want to try FG (the punter kicked the XP). Fitz was decent, but Ivory was stuffed.
They found a way to win, which is better than losing, and something good teams do, but it wasn't pretty.
Quick update.
Cromartie most likely won't play, and Milliner is activated for the first time this year.
A bigger news is that Willie Colon is put on IR and will miss the rest of the season, replaced by Bryan Winters. Colon has played well when he was healthy (which isn't often), and with the sudden drop in run production it could put more pressure on the QBs.
Fitzy will have the thumb surgery right after the TNF game (Friday), and hopes not to miss any additional games. Because Geno.
Edit: Cimini had this in his revised W/L records contribution: http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/186768/nfl-nation-revised-record-predictions-for-every-team
Cromartie most likely won't play, and Milliner is activated for the first time this year.
A bigger news is that Willie Colon is put on IR and will miss the rest of the season, replaced by Bryan Winters. Colon has played well when he was healthy (which isn't often), and with the sudden drop in run production it could put more pressure on the QBs.
Fitzy will have the thumb surgery right after the TNF game (Friday), and hopes not to miss any additional games. Because Geno.
Edit: Cimini had this in his revised W/L records contribution: http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/186768/nfl-nation-revised-record-predictions-for-every-team
Last edited:
Jets' RB situation is now a real challenge - Ivory is always an injury waiting to happen, Stacy has a broken ankle, Powell is coming off an ankle injury, and Ridley is trying to get back into form.
Gary Myers writes in today's NY Daily News that Rex out coached Bowles.
http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football/jets/myers-jets-loss-train-rex-ryan-coaches-todd-bowles-article-1.2433407
My focus isn't so much on the Rex side of that coin. In fact, the notion of exalting Rex over anyone is mouth vomit inducing.
But I do like the Bowles part of the conversation. When the season started, I worried that the Jets had finally gotten it right. And, of course, it's early, and Bowles might turn out to be an excellent head coach. There are aspects of Bowles that already seem to be very strong.
But, as detailed by Myers (which I will not repeat, as they are easily read in the link) and based on some of my own observations, I think there are some signs that he might be a little over his skis at this stage of his head coaching career.
Many in NY commented after the loss to the Pats that we would see a lot of what Bowles and the Jets were about when they traveled cross country to play the Raiders after such a dispiriting result. Would Bowles have them up and ready for that game? And judging by the many missed tackles throughout that game, and in particular the second and fourth Raiders TDs (long strikes with multiple whiffs along the way), it sure looked like that team wasn't quite ready.
The point is not to overemphasize one game. I just like the possible sign, particularly in tandem with some of the points Myers makes. (Though I am not sure I agree with him about going for the TD there at the end).
But with all "it's early," SSS type disclaimers, I am heartened by the fact that Bowles looks a little less solid than the very early returns might have suggested. If I was a Jets fan, I would very much like his "it's about us, not them," approach, and that he's so opposite of the man he replaced. But I would also be a little concerned about some of these data points. Not to the point of giving up on him in any way; but still concerned.
http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football/jets/myers-jets-loss-train-rex-ryan-coaches-todd-bowles-article-1.2433407
My focus isn't so much on the Rex side of that coin. In fact, the notion of exalting Rex over anyone is mouth vomit inducing.
But I do like the Bowles part of the conversation. When the season started, I worried that the Jets had finally gotten it right. And, of course, it's early, and Bowles might turn out to be an excellent head coach. There are aspects of Bowles that already seem to be very strong.
But, as detailed by Myers (which I will not repeat, as they are easily read in the link) and based on some of my own observations, I think there are some signs that he might be a little over his skis at this stage of his head coaching career.
Many in NY commented after the loss to the Pats that we would see a lot of what Bowles and the Jets were about when they traveled cross country to play the Raiders after such a dispiriting result. Would Bowles have them up and ready for that game? And judging by the many missed tackles throughout that game, and in particular the second and fourth Raiders TDs (long strikes with multiple whiffs along the way), it sure looked like that team wasn't quite ready.
The point is not to overemphasize one game. I just like the possible sign, particularly in tandem with some of the points Myers makes. (Though I am not sure I agree with him about going for the TD there at the end).
But with all "it's early," SSS type disclaimers, I am heartened by the fact that Bowles looks a little less solid than the very early returns might have suggested. If I was a Jets fan, I would very much like his "it's about us, not them," approach, and that he's so opposite of the man he replaced. But I would also be a little concerned about some of these data points. Not to the point of giving up on him in any way; but still concerned.
Deadspin posts video of what the game looked like for colorblind fans. Holy crap, it looks like one team is playing.
http://deadspin.com/stupid-nike-uniforms-wreaking-havoc-on-colorblind-nfl-f-1742272136
http://deadspin.com/stupid-nike-uniforms-wreaking-havoc-on-colorblind-nfl-f-1742272136
I'm color blind, I mentioned it in the first page of the game thread last night. It was unwatchable from my perspective. I can't believe there was nobody at any point at either Nike or on either of the teams who wasn't in the same boat to bring this up before. Although I guess it wouldn't have been obvious to me until I saw both uniforms on the field at the same time.
Bowles royally screwed the pooch in the 4th quarter, and kept compounding his mistakes
1) Down 22-10, facing 4th and 5 ish, he should have kicked the FG. There were still 15 minutes left, anything could happen
2) Down 22-17, again facing 4th and 5 ish, ~ 3 minutes left, he should have kicked the FG. They have a great D, they would have had 3 timeouts plus the 2 minute warning. You have an awesome defense, take the 3, get the ball back, and win the game on a FG
I think there was one other thing he blew but I can't remember
1) Down 22-10, facing 4th and 5 ish, he should have kicked the FG. There were still 15 minutes left, anything could happen
2) Down 22-17, again facing 4th and 5 ish, ~ 3 minutes left, he should have kicked the FG. They have a great D, they would have had 3 timeouts plus the 2 minute warning. You have an awesome defense, take the 3, get the ball back, and win the game on a FG
I think there was one other thing he blew but I can't remember
Seems more like Bowles was just simply worse than Rex, who was his usual shitty self. Strictly speaking, I guess that's out-coaching. The gulf between BB and the rest becomes more apparent every week. *That's* why the Giants have any chance. Because Coughlin won't fuck up like that. He may not have the defensive horses, but he's unlikely to make you scratch your head.
I have less problem with that one. The Jets were on a roll and had the chance to go ahead. As much as their D had indeed been stoning the Bills, there's no guaranty you'll be in the position to go ahead again. I liked the aggressiveness even though I fully understand your point.
I think criticism of Bowles is premature. He inherited a team going backwards, and a locker room still infected with the stink of the over-hyped blowhard. He inherited Geno and Fitz as his QBs, then had to deal with the $600 knockout.
He's a first time HC who seems to have done a great job steadying the ship. Even those 4th down calls show a willingness to take risks and open himself up to criticism if they don't work out, rather than do the mindless cookie cutter thing all the time.
There would be tons of criticism here if he kicked when down 22-10 or 22-17 (especially the latter w/ 3 min left) and the Jets went on to lose by a couple. And oh by the way, the Jets were using a kicker who was cut by the Texans after missing 2 XPs earlier this season.
I think many preseason predictions had the Jets finishing last and Bowles has already exceeded expectations (though they still could finish last). No first year coach (or any coach) is going to make every call right in every late game situation and he seems to be off to a very good start.
And if he continues to improve I'll be hating every minute of it.
He's a first time HC who seems to have done a great job steadying the ship. Even those 4th down calls show a willingness to take risks and open himself up to criticism if they don't work out, rather than do the mindless cookie cutter thing all the time.
There would be tons of criticism here if he kicked when down 22-10 or 22-17 (especially the latter w/ 3 min left) and the Jets went on to lose by a couple. And oh by the way, the Jets were using a kicker who was cut by the Texans after missing 2 XPs earlier this season.
I think many preseason predictions had the Jets finishing last and Bowles has already exceeded expectations (though they still could finish last). No first year coach (or any coach) is going to make every call right in every late game situation and he seems to be off to a very good start.
And if he continues to improve I'll be hating every minute of it.
I get it if it is 4th and 1, maybe 4th and 2. But it was 4th and like 5. And also, the Bills have a really good defense. IIRC the Jets gained 8 yards on first down there then went backwards. If I was Belichick, hell yeah I am going for it with my offense and my defense. If I am the Jets, I kick every time. If they have less timeouts, or time left, I agree with you. But 3 minutes with 4 clock stoppages is an eternity.
1) I think there is an argument for... 2) is more dicey.
If he kicked the FG, and they never got the ball back, would you have said it was a good move for them to kick it?
If he kicked the FG, and they never got the ball back, would you have said it was a good move for them to kick it?
Absolutely, and I would add their failure to go for 2 on the TD to make it 22-9.
If they had gone for 2 and made it, it's 22-11 and they're only down a FG and a TD + conversion. It's a somewhat risky play, but you're at home and finally clicking -- I think it was worth the risk.
I don't know. At least five times a game his players do something outrageously dumb, cut to Coughlin on the sideline hands on hips mouth agape. Delay of game penalties at home, early timeouts, horrendous personal fouls. That team makes a lot of unforgivable mistakes, even against the Patriots (Bradshaw scoring, just to name one).
It's too soon to be sure, but one way of looking at this could be that Bowles treats the current thinking that coaches are generally too conservative on 4th down much like a baseball GM who thinks the message of Moneyball is get players that walk a lot. IOW, he may be missing the deeper message that one must evaluate the situation in context and may not understand that not every kick on 4th & short-medium is a bad idea, just as high OBP is not always an undervalued attribute.
I think both decisions were correct. The first was 4th and 2, which they should pick up at least 50% of the time (its like a two point conversion but easier because you have more field to work with). Its probably pretty close to break even in terms of expected points on the drive (a little less than 3 in expectation for kicking the field goal, somewhere between 2.5-3 in expectation for going for it depending on assumptions regarding the likelihood of scoring a TD after picking up the first down). But given the game situation - the team was still going to be down two scores after kicking a FG and, importantly, scoring a TD created a situation in which they were not only down one score but could actually concede a FG later in the quarter and still only be down one score - then gambling on scoring a TD was the right move in my opinion.
The second to me is a no brainer. 4th and 4 from the 7 they might pick up somewhere around 33% of the time (guessing). If they pick it up, its either by scoring a TD or putting themselves in position to have a very high likelihood of scoring a TD (and burning some clock). And if they score a TD, they have a 50% chance of converting the 2 point conversion and making the Bills need a TD of their own to win outright in regulation. On the other hand, there is a very high likelihood that you won't get the ball back if you kick the FG or you'll get the ball back in a situation in which you are a huge dog to even get into FG range (30 seconds left deep in your own territory). If you avoid that situation, its because you stopped them on their first series and therefore still have >2:30 left on the clock, which is more than enough time to get a TD anyway (if they fail to convert the 4th and 4). A FG just doesn't do much for you there. Just ask Dan Quinn.
With the excellent Jets D and the not-great Bills O, my first reaction was to kick it. Not a hindsight call on my part (I watched the game on DVR this morning without knowing how the last few minutes went down)
Good post.
What do you think about going for 2 down 22-9 at the end of the 3rd quarter?
I know there's a lot of game left, but I don't think there's an enormous distinction between being down 12 and 13 if you don't make it.
Yeah, I agree he should have gone for two there. 12 versus 13 doesn't help you much but 11 matters a lot because youcan tie with 8+3 and if you concede a FG then you can tie with 7+7 rather than needing a two point conversion somewhere else anyway.
Wow I really disagree with both of you. I hate chasing points early. There was still an entire quarter of game at that point
Edit: and to be clear, much of my opinion on this game stems from the fact that the Jets have a great D and were likely to get several more possessions in the game
Edit: and to be clear, much of my opinion on this game stems from the fact that the Jets have a great D and were likely to get several more possessions in the game
Yup, that's exactly how I felt.
Our great and talented friends at ITP - particularly Chuck Zodda, who writes about special teams better than anyone I have ever read -- may have written about this, but have 2 point conversions seen an uptick as a result of the embrace of analytics? And is there an easy chart on when it makes sense to go for 2?
Edit: to respond to Tims -- I don't think it makes sense to willy nilly be aggressive, but I think that was a situation that merited it. Much like the Pats going onsides in the 1st quarter against the Skins (an imperfect analogy, as they may have seen something on film) could be interpreted as unnecessarily chasing points. What's the downside for the Jets going for it there?
Last edited:
Somebody has probably tracked changes in two point conversion attempts over time but I'm not sure who. I know there is a chart that coaches use for end of game scenarios (BB has referred to having some kind of chart before) but I think the real question regards what point in the game you start thinking in terms of that chart (ie, how much time left).
Totally agree with this. I was shocked they agreed with this decision on the broadcast. There was no particular reason to believe they'd score the touchdown even if they made the first down. Making the field goal puts them a touchdown and a field goal away from winning with more than a quarter to get it. Missing the first down leaves them two touchdowns behind. Making the first down means maybe you get the touchdown and maybe you save yourself from needing to make one extra field goal in 18 minutes.
- Status