How did it work out for the Jets???we didn't "squeak" by the raiders we really whooped them in all aspects of the game. Go on NFL.com right now and check team stats.. we're on top in everything except Passing & Receiving. They scored in garbage time on us for their only pass to go more than 15 yards the whole game. But who cares that's the raiders.. watch my boys dominate the trenches this game. BTW Geno Smith went head to head and beat Brady and Brees last year with practice squad WR's. Just hope that weak o-line & d-line doesn't turn y'all into this year Falcons of last year.. just sayin.
How did it work out for the Jets???
A win is a win is a win. Once cannot help but like what one saw in the last 35 minutes of this game.
As for the criticisms of Rodgers, be it the sacks or dumping balls (on plays going nowhere), this was an 18 point come-from-behinder with a stat line as follows:
25-42; 60.0%; 346 yds; 8.2 yds./pass; 3 TDs; 0 INTs
Of course, when it comes time once against to highlight his "poor" 4th. quarter come-from-behind stats, this game won't be included seeing as it was accomplished by the 3rd. quarter.
Complaints regarding falling short of perfection in an outstanding performance, with no run game support to boot, reflects an ignorance of what side the bread is buttered on and the volume of butter thereon.
I would note that once again, as we saw in abundance last season in Rodgers' absence, the defense perks up when confidence in the ability to win is justified and sags when it is less so. There's an obvious correlation that plausibly merits a conclusion of causation...the defense knows where the butter is.
I agree with you - absolutely no reason to be a negative nelly regarding Rodgers. However - none of us can deny it - some of those sacks he took yesterday ... he simply is very stubborn about not throwing the ball away most of the time. Is this why we lose games? No, but I think I've come to accept that this is just how he is and how he's always going to be. I don't mind sacks in terms of losing yardage. What I mind, are injuries and getting beat up, when in come instances, it can be avoided or made less frequent.
This team needs to get better in the situational offense, whether it's on Rodgers or McCarthy our O checked out once we went up by 7 points. Vet quarterbacks have no business taking back to back sacks up by 7, why didn't we keep it on the ground we were starting to run over them?
We had 80 yards rushing on 22 carries (3.6 avg.), hardly what I would call running over another team.
I had the drive sequence wrong but on the very next drive we picked up 14 yards in two carries by Lacy against a Jets defense that was playing the run. In that situation conventional widsom would dictate attempting to establish the running game. Besides, as well as he played throughout the day Rodgers needs to know that he can't take sacks and let the Jets back in the game.
I agree with your take on running the ball in the fourth quarter, I just don´t think we ran it pretty well. BTW Rodgers didn´t play well all day long, he started 10-of-21 for only 112 yards before finally starting to improve during the last drive in the first half.
In terms of the whole Fire Capers mentality, I wonder if the pro-Fire folks believe that Capers started calling a better game in the second half or if the players themselves just started playing better?
I think it's because eitherI think it had more to do with the Jets changing their play calling. They were killing the Packers with the read option-- the blueprint that has been proven by the 49ers (and now the Seahawks). I saw no improvement in containment on any type of misdirection play.
But then, the Jets stopped running these types of plays... I don't recall the read-option a single time in the second half.
Why?
Not that I am complaining, but... Why?
That's what I was afraid of.We might be watching a blowout
captainWIMM, did you lose another bet? A lost bet explains your signature but what about that new avatar??!! That can’t be voluntary, can it? Either way, should we be concerned?