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.
BrazilianSoxFan said:https://twitter.com/nyjets/status/662432108783280128
CaptainLaddie said:
The Jets have 10 starters in the 30-and-up age group, a few of whom are starting to show signs of wear and tear. Todd Bowles has to integrate some young players into the lineup to keep his team fresh for the second half.
Losers of 3 of 4 and now in a 3 way tie for the 2 WC spots.
It's clear Kraft poisoned these guys at half time in Foxborough
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.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
.
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.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
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.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.
Absolutely, and I would add their failure to go for 2 on the TD to make it 22-9.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
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).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.
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.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
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.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
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)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?
Good post.Just ask Dan Quinn.
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.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.
Yup, that's exactly how I felt.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.
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).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?
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.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