Rob Ryan to join Buffalo Bills defensive staff

[SackExchange]

OK, OK, I buy into it now. The barometer for a "good" season is the playoffs.

The 2010 Seahawks at 7-9 had a good season. The 2008 Patriots at 11-5 did not.

Got it!

 

[SackExchange]

I'm over Rex Ryan. If we build on what we accomplished this season then he will end the season behind us.

Yes, he will, just like he did this year.

 

[TebowCan'tThrow]

I don't care what Rex Ryan says or does. He had his team fired up twice this year and was below average the rest of the year. Just like he did with the Jets for every year past '10. I enjoyed and appreciated him as a coach in the beginning, but became tired of his bluster after that. We should have beat them both times, but coaching and execution were lacking and they still had a chance late. We had a great season with 3 parts to the season...a fast 4-1 start, a crushing middle 1-4 and an improbable run at the end. Making the playoffs is what really matters and we didn't, but you can still have a good season. We had a great season with a below average for most of his career QB which was fun to watch. We had a rookie HC. I liked Rex, but I no longer care what he does in the the NFL. He will be a coordinator soon or analyst.

 

[Mainejet]

So fans were "VERY proud" of the 2009 team that went 9-7 in Rex's first year, but under Bowles in 2015, going 10-6 was (you fill in the blank).

YES exactly. Different season and MUCH more in terms of accomplishments. It certainly gave us hope for 2010. Most fans were thinking SB. In this case? Most fans are hoping Bowles can get into the playoffs in 2016. For you to even compare the two is absurd anyway. The 2009 team had the number 1 defense with Revis in his prime. This years team won 5 straight games but ultimately fell short of the playoffs and hugely disappointed all of the fans on the final day.

 

[SackExchange]

YES exactly. Different season and MUCH more in terms of accomplishments. It certainly gave us hope for 2010. Most fans were thinking SB. In this case? Most fans are hoping Bowles can get into the playoffs in 2016. For you to even compare the two is absurd anyway. The 2009 team had the number 1 defense with Revis in his prime. This years team won 5 straight games but ultimately fell short of the playoffs and hugely disappointed all of the fans on the final day.

Are you speaking on behalf of all Jets fans, or is this you, as a Rex lover and Bowles hater?

 

[flgreen]

I keep thinking that every year but they keep finding ways to win at least 12 games. Hopefully it does happen soon. I would like to beat brady before he leaves though. I mean, win the division over him and of course go on to the superbowl. No way we can ever even the score or even come close since they have been kicking our ass for 15 years

we beat them this year. before that what were we 6-22 against them. I think. they had beaten us 9-11. Just the odds said we had to beat them sometime.

Have faith CH. The most important person on a football team is the GM. He's the guy that feeds the HC talent. For almost 20 years the Jets have had book keepers selecting the talent. Their drafts, and FA have looked like book keepers were doing them.

Woody seems to have finally gotten it right. He hired a proven scout to run his team, and has a competent book keeper in Jackie Davidson to make magic with the numbers. If Macc is what I think he is the team will shortly have a lot of talent and depth on it. They will be able to use what the Pats have done. "Next man up". And get good results.

Of course the wild card is Brady. With a lot of luck, (pacts with Satan and a good amount of HGH, Brady may be the GOAT.

Pray for Petty, he has the tools, all the Jets need is divine intervention.

 

[flgreen]

So fans were "VERY proud" of the 2009 team that went 9-7 in Rex's first year, but under Bowles in 2015, going 10-6 was (you fill in the blank).

You just made 13's point. It was making the play offs, and then putting a few more wins together that caused the Jets, and their fans, to have what amounted to a premature ticket tape parade in times square celebrating Revis Island.

It wasn't the season record they were celebrating, it was making the play offs, which enabled the team to have a few more games they could win. Just look at these cry babies.

 

[SackExchange]

You just made 13's point. It was making the play offs, and then putting a few more wins together that caused the Jets, and their fans, to have what amounted to a premature ticket tape parade in times square celebrating Revis Island.

It wasn't the season record they were celebrating, it was making the play offs, which enabled the team to have a few more games they could win. Just look at these cry babies.

I said it sarcastically.

Basically, celebrating 9-7 and lambasting 10-6 makes no sense to me. Sure, the Jets got in the playoffs with the lesser record, but that is more a reflection on the conference being weaker than it does any major Jets accomplishment.

And this is from someone who was at that last home game in the old stadium against the Bengals. It remains one of my favorite Jets memories.

But saying 9-7 is wonderful and 10-6 is disappointing because it was easier to get into the playoffs that year than this year just seems ludicrous to me.

 

[LGM]

Have faith CH. The most important person on a football team is the GM. He's the guy that feeds the HC talent. For almost 20 years the Jets have had book keepers selecting the talent. Their drafts, and FA have looked like book keepers were doing them.

Woody seems to have finally gotten it right. He hired a proven scout to run his team, and has a competent book keeper in Jackie Davidson to make magic with the numbers. If Macc is what I think he is the team will shortly have a lot of talent and depth on it. They will be able to use what the Pats have done. "Next man up". And get good results.

Of course the wild card is Brady. With a lot of luck, (pacts with Satan and a good amount of HGH, Brady may be the GOAT.

Pray for Petty, he has the tools, all the Jets need is divine intervention.

Tammila will be 39 on Aug 3 and thus in her 40th year when the 16 season starts


Neither Satan Incarnate the owner or Head Coach Lucifer or her domintrix Jizabella or her "body coach and her boyfriend Alejandro and not even drug dealer Gronk's illegal synthetic weed can cheat THAT clock

Sent from my LG-H811 using Tapatalk

 

[flgreen]

I said it sarcastically.

Basically, celebrating 9-7 and lambasting 10-6 makes no sense to me. Sure, the Jets got in the playoffs with the lesser record, but that is more a reflection on the conference being weaker than it does any major Jets accomplishment.

And this is from someone who was at that last home game in the old stadium against the Bengals. It remains one of my favorite Jets memories.

But saying 9-7 is wonderful and 10-6 is disappointing because it was easier to get into the playoffs that year than this year just seems ludicrous to me.

Well you've seen the light apparently. Yes, 9-7 is wonderful when it leads to the kind of celebration shown above, and AFCC game, and 10-6 is a fun season, but disappointing when the season is over and the pats are still playing.

 

[SackExchange]

Well you've seen the light apparently. Yes, 9-7 is wonderful when it leads to the kind of celebration shown above, and AFCC game, and 10-6 is a fun season, but disappointing when the season is over and the pats are still playing.

I've seen the light? My position hasn't changed in the least.

You and others are arguing that a team that goes 7-9 and makes the playoffs has a better season than a team that goes 11-5 and misses the playoffs.

To me, that is losing the forest for the trees.

 

[flgreen]

I've seen the light? My position hasn't changed in the least.

You and others are arguing that a team that goes 7-9 and makes the playoffs has a better season than a team that goes 11-5 and misses the playoffs.

To me, that is losing the forest for the trees.

Of course you've seen the light.

"OK, OK, I buy into it now. The barometer for a "good" season is the playoffs.

The 2010 Seahawks at 7-9 had a good season. The 2008 Patriots at 11-5 did not.

Got it!"

I rather suspect that 99.99% (I left it at that instead of 100% because clearly you don't feel that way) of Jets fans would rather have had a 9-7 season, and waiting for their second play off game this week end, then have gone 10-6 and making plans to go fishing this week end as I am.

As much as I like fishing I would much rather be screaming at the TV 1 pm Sunday. I know you don't understand that.

 

[SackExchange]

Of course you've seen the light.

"OK, OK, I buy into it now. The barometer for a "good" season is the playoffs.

The 2010 Seahawks at 7-9 had a good season. The 2008 Patriots at 11-5 did not.

Got it!"

I rather suspect that 99.99% (I left it at that instead of 100% because clearly you don't feel that way) of Jets fans would rather have had a 9-7 season, and waiting for their second play off game this week end, then have gone 10-6 and making plans to go fishing this week end as I am.

As much as I like fishing I would much rather be screaming at the TV 1 pm Sunday. I know you don't understand that.

Are you asking if I would prefer the Jets made the playoffs than not made the playoffs, the answer is obviously yes, I'd rather they were playing this weekend.

But what we have been talking about is what constitutes a "good season."

At this point, I find it a moronic argument to say that having

1. a lesser record in a worse division/conference makes you a better team or gives you a "good" season because you made the playoffs in a weaker division/conference, but

2. a better record in a better division/conference makes you a worse team or gives you a "worse" season because you did not make the playoffs in a stronger division/conference.

The 2008 Patriots played in a division with a combined record of 38-26, and the team had an 11-5 record.

The 2010 Seahawks played in a division with a combined record of 25-29, and the team had a 7-9 record.

I'd use sarcasm here, but it would be lost. I don't understand how anyone can think the Seahawks were a better team or had a better season because they got a playoff berth by virtue of being in a horrible division.

The playoffs are great, and they are a fantastic goal to have. But to use them as the sole indicator of whether a season is good or not is just insane.

 

[flgreen]

Are you asking if I would prefer the Jets made the playoffs than not made the playoffs, the answer is obviously yes, I'd rather they were playing this weekend.

But what we have been talking about is what constitutes a "good season."

At this point, I find it a moronic argument to say that having

1. a lesser record in a worse division/conference makes you a better team or gives you a "good" season because you made the playoffs in a weaker division/conference, but

2. a better record in a better division/conference makes you a worse team or gives you a "worse" season because you did not make the playoffs in a stronger division/conference.

The 2008 Patriots played in a division with a combined record of 38-26, and the team had an 11-5 record.

The 2010 Seahawks played in a division with a combined record of 25-29, and the team had a 7-9 record.

I'd use sarcasm here, but it would be lost. I don't understand how anyone can think the Seahawks were a better team or had a better season because they got a playoff berth by virtue of being in a horrible division.

The playoffs are great, and they are a fantastic goal to have. But to use them as the sole indicator of whether a season is good or not is just insane.

Leaving all the spin out of cherry picked analogizes , I am taking it that you do agree that if a team goes 9-7, and makes a run in the play offs, it is a more successful season, then going 10-6 and going home.

Yes?

 

[SackExchange]

Leaving all the spin out of cherry picked analogizes , I am taking it that you do agree that if a team goes 9-7, and makes a run in the play offs, it is a more successful season, then going 10-6 and going home.

Yes?

My initial post: "No. I think winning 10 games during the season makes one more successful than winning 9 games."

EDIT: "I am correcting and clarifying this. I do think that a 9-win team can be more successful than a 10-win team if they make a deep playoff run. But I think in general, the 10-win team had a more successful regular season and is probably the better of the two teams. Because the regular season is a marathon, and the playoffs a sprint, I believe the regular season is a more accurate indicator of how "good" a team is. In the playoffs, a hot team or a lucky bounce or a bad call can change everything. In the regular season, those often even out in time.

That is not to say that the playoffs are irrelevant. Of course the playoffs are relevant. But qualifying can be often arbitrary, dictated by division/conference strength.

If a team goes 9-7 and gets hot, like the Jets did under Rex in his first season or the Giants did when they beat the Pats in the SB, it is an extremely successful season. But I think both the Jets and Giants have had better teams that have not gone as far in the playoffs."

 

[SackExchange]

Let me ask you this: Are we talking about how good a season is, or how successful a season is? I do not believe the two are necessarily the same.

I thought we were talking about whether the Jets had a "good season." I'd say they had a good season, but it could have been more successful.

 

[flgreen]

My initial post: "No. I think winning 10 games during the season makes one more successful than winning 9 games."

EDIT: "I am correcting and clarifying this. I do think that a 9-win team can be more successful than a 10-win team if they make a deep playoff run. But I think in general, the 10-win team had a more successful regular season and is probably the better of the two teams. Because the regular season is a marathon, and the playoffs a sprint, I believe the regular season is a more accurate indicator of how "good" a team is. In the playoffs, a hot team or a lucky bounce or a bad call can change everything. In the regular season, those often even out in time.

That is not to say that the playoffs are irrelevant. Of course the playoffs are relevant. But qualifying can be often arbitrary, dictated by division/conference strength.

If a team goes 9-7 and gets hot, like the Jets did under Rex in his first season or the Giants did when they beat the Pats in the SB, it is an extremely successful season. But I think both the Jets and Giants have had better teams that have not gone as far in the playoffs."

Fair enough.


A football is a very odd shaped object, and takes very weird bounces. It is a major factor in games. In the end when looking back 20+ years people often remember who won a Super Bowl, but, with out google, don't know, or care what the season records were for respective teams..

No one cares. It's the Championship that matters

 

[jetgreen13]

Are you asking if I would prefer the Jets made the playoffs than not made the playoffs, the answer is obviously yes, I'd rather they were playing this weekend.

But what we have been talking about is what constitutes a "good season."

At this point, I find it a moronic argument to say that having

1. a lesser record in a worse division/conference makes you a better team or gives you a "good" season because you made the playoffs in a weaker division/conference, but

2. a better record in a better division/conference makes you a worse team or gives you a "worse" season because you did not make the playoffs in a stronger division/conference.

The 2008 Patriots played in a division with a combined record of 38-26, and the team had an 11-5 record.

The 2010 Seahawks played in a division with a combined record of 25-29, and the team had a 7-9 record.

I'd use sarcasm here, but it would be lost. I don't understand how anyone can think the Seahawks were a better team or had a better season because they got a playoff berth by virtue of being in a horrible division.

The playoffs are great, and they are a fantastic goal to have. But to use them as the sole indicator of whether a season is good or not is just insane.

...am i stuck in a freaking twilight zone episode??

i can't believe you are still on this one man campaign trying to convince JFU making the playoffs & winning the super bowl is nice & all..... but.....

"just insane??" LOLz yeah, to you!!

jeezbus!!

 

[SackExchange]

Fair enough.


A football is a very odd shaped object, and takes very weird bounces. It is a major factor in games. In the end when looking back 20+ years people often remember who won a Super Bowl, but, with out google, don't know, or care what the season records were for respective teams..

No one cares. It's the Championship that matters

I agree with that. But more often than not, the best team does not win the championship.

More often than not, though, the best team does end up with the best record.

"You are what your record says you are." Weird bounces, bad calls, tough breaks, a hot player, that can happen in the playoffs. Over the course of a 16-week season, though, those bounces, calls, and hot streaks even out, which reaffirms what Parcells said.

So, yes, I want the Jets desperately to win a SB. But I'm not about to say 10-6 was a bad season because they didn't make the playoffs, whereas if they had played in the NFC East or AFC South, they would have won the division with that record.

Four teams went 10-6 this year. Three qualified for the playoffs. Were those three 10-6 records that much better than the Jets to where they had good seasons, and the Jets didn't?

 

[SackExchange]

...am i stuck in a freaking twilight zone episode??

i can't believe you are still on this one man campaign trying to convince JFU making the playoffs & winning the super bowl is nice & all..... but.....

"just insane??" LOLz yeah, to you!!

jeezbus!!

I apologize for you not understanding what I'm trying to say.