|
Post by HawkeyeJet on Jul 28, 2016 10:50:02 GMT -5
You say that as if the Bills have an elite roster and an elite coach. They have neither. Neither do the Jets. They have pretty much the same team and staff as last year and so do we. So what's going to reverse 0-2 to 2-0? The Jets don't have pretty much the same team or staff though. The Bills somehow got younger and slower at LB this offseason, so I absolutely invite Rex to play Cover Zero all game and have his LBs matched up one on one with Enunwa, Forte and Amaro. The Jets punting and overall special teams hopefully will be better too, both of which had large negative impacts on both games last year. The Bills won't have their 2nd RB, who killed the Jets last year.
|
|
|
Post by HawkeyeJet on Jul 28, 2016 10:51:37 GMT -5
Nothin will change. Rex will play Fitz as he always has. Cover zero because he has no respect that the ball is goin deep, he will press Marshall and Decker at the line and let their defensive front wipe out our shit O-line and make Fitz get the ball out quick. Eventually Fitz will get desperate and start forcing throws resulting in multiple critical turnovers It's the same way Rex has always beat Fitz, throw in the odd muddy coverage and Fitz never has an answer for it. In fact this is how I expect every defense we face to play us again, difference is the Cards and Hawks aren't the Browns and Titans. This is the way every defense should attack Fitz, you think Sherman and Patrick Peterson are lettin Marshall exploit matchups this year? Every game we lost last year was against good defenses that can execute this game plan. Bills,Texans etc. That's why their main running backs are Forte and Powell. Good luck covering those guys with LBs.
|
|
|
Post by The Tax Returns Are in Kenya on Jul 28, 2016 10:56:11 GMT -5
Neither do the Jets. They have pretty much the same team and staff as last year and so do we. So what's going to reverse 0-2 to 2-0? Nothin will change. Rex will play Fitz as he always has. Cover zero because he has no respect that the ball is goin deep, he will press Marshall and Decker at the line and let their defensive front wipe out our shit O-line and make Fitz get the ball out quick. Eventually Fitz will get desperate and start forcing throws resulting in multiple critical turnovers It's the same way Rex has always beat Fitz, throw in the odd muddy coverage and Fitz never has an answer for it. In fact this is how I expect every defense we face to play us again, difference is the Cards and Hawks aren't the Browns and Titans. Only difference I see is adding Darron Lee who hopefully ![](https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS7dHz3FrSbFse1c_vfms39IUsQ_Xd6xyMC44UKu1IXItVNdDO4) can cover Tierod Taylor. Special teams is a giant ![](https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT8StYipgU0dNcoWDGOkUsp8Hz3c75wQ2kCv56FbfxLBP3zrCuptw) there may be some improvement there over giving them great field position with shanked punts but that remains to be seen
|
|
|
Post by Harrier on Jul 28, 2016 10:58:59 GMT -5
This is the way every defense should attack Fitz, you think Sherman and Patrick Peterson are lettin Marshall exploit matchups this year? Every game we lost last year was against good defenses that can execute this game plan. Bills,Texans etc. That's why their main running backs are Forte and Powell. Good luck covering those guys with LBs. With safeties down in the box as usual, he will either be on his ass in a millisecond or forte will be running into a loaded box like ivory was all year. Thats what I hate about Fitz, zero ability to punish and back a defense off you with the deep ball, we get suffocated as an offense and resort to screens to Powell over and over again, and again that won't happen this year against better defenses like it did against shit like the Giants.
|
|
|
Post by HawkeyeJet on Jul 28, 2016 11:12:40 GMT -5
That's why their main running backs are Forte and Powell. Good luck covering those guys with LBs. With safeties down in the box as usual, he will either be on his ass in a millisecond or forte will be running into a loaded box like ivory was all year. Thats what I hate about Fitz, zero ability to punish and back a defense off you with the deep ball, we get suffocated as an offense and resort to screens to Powell over and over again, and again that won't happen this year against better defenses like it did against shit like the Giants. You attack their LBs with quick passing game. Generally speaking, Football 101 says you attack man blitzes with the short passing game, not deep. Powell was inactive for both games against the Bills last year. He was our only RB capable of being a factor in the passing game last year. Him and Forte will cause huge matchup issues for teams that try to blitz us and cover those guys 1 on 1 with LBs.
|
|
|
Post by Harrier on Jul 28, 2016 11:19:28 GMT -5
With safeties down in the box as usual, he will either be on his ass in a millisecond or forte will be running into a loaded box like ivory was all year. Thats what I hate about Fitz, zero ability to punish and back a defense off you with the deep ball, we get suffocated as an offense and resort to screens to Powell over and over again, and again that won't happen this year against better defenses like it did against shit like the Giants. You attack their LBs with quick passing game. Generally speaking, Football 101 says you attack man blitzes with the short passing game, not deep. Powell was inactive for both games against the Bills last year. He was our only RB capable of being a factor in the passing game last year. Him and Forte will cause huge matchup issues for teams that try to blitz us and cover those guys 1 on 1 with LBs. So that's it then. A team that plays cover zero and loads the box you just "attack their LB's?" Well what if they have good coverage backers which a lot of teams we face this year do? You act like it's ok not to be able to throw the ball deep, like no one will have an answer for our regurgitated screen game, I'm not buyin that, it worked against shit teams like the Giants and Titans, not against the Texans or Bills. Bilal Powell doesn't give us two wins against the Bills.
|
|
|
Post by HawkeyeJet on Jul 28, 2016 11:36:12 GMT -5
You attack their LBs with quick passing game. Generally speaking, Football 101 says you attack man blitzes with the short passing game, not deep. Powell was inactive for both games against the Bills last year. He was our only RB capable of being a factor in the passing game last year. Him and Forte will cause huge matchup issues for teams that try to blitz us and cover those guys 1 on 1 with LBs. So that's it then. A team that plays cover zero and loads the box you just "attack their LB's?" Well what if they phave good coverage backers which a lot of teams we face this year do? You act like it's ok not to be able to throw the ball deep, like no one will have an answer for our regurgitated screen game, I'm not buyin that, it worked against shit teams like the Giants and Titans, not against the Texans or Bills. Bilal Powell doesn't give us two wins against the Bills. I'm not going to continue to go back and forth with you. I'm not sure you know what the stuff you are complaining about means schematically. If your answer to people "loading the box" and blitzing like crazy is to throw the ball deep, then you don't understand why the defense does it in the first place, so what's the point of discussing it. There are absolutely times where lack of a deep game might hurt us, against teams that run defenses like the Bills, it isn't one of the big issues.
|
|
|
Post by Harrier on Jul 28, 2016 11:53:06 GMT -5
So that's it then. A team that plays cover zero and loads the box you just "attack their LB's?" Well what if they phave good coverage backers which a lot of teams we face this year do? You act like it's ok not to be able to throw the ball deep, like no one will have an answer for our regurgitated screen game, I'm not buyin that, it worked against shit teams like the Giants and Titans, not against the Texans or Bills. Bilal Powell doesn't give us two wins against the Bills. I'm not going to continue to go back and forth with you. I'm not sure you know what the stuff you are complaining about means schematically. If your answer to people "loading the box" and blitzing like crazy is to throw the ball deep, then you don't understand why the defense does it in the first place, so what's the point of discussing it. There are absolutely times where lack of a deep game might hurt us, against teams that run defenses like the Bills, it isn't one of the big issues. Nice cop out. You obviously are not understanding my point so are deciding to question my knowledge on the whole subject, anyway I will try again. I said the best way to beat Fitz is to play a cover zero, jam the receivers at the line and commit the extra safety to the blitz and force Fitz to get the ball out quick. Your answer to that is to dump the ball off to forte and Powell with screens to exploit their LB's coverage and that's fair enough but I'm askin you what happens when some of the backers in question can drop back and you know actually cover? Rex often shows blitz but then gets some LB's to bail and drop back in coverage. I never said the deep ball was an answer to the blitz, that's a totally separate issue, I'm was making an extra point that teams will play us the same way if we cant punish them for playing a cover zero or a single high safety with the deep ball Two separate issues. One how to play Fitz, second how a defenses attacks us with the absence of a deep threat.
|
|
|
Post by greenwave on Jul 28, 2016 12:10:57 GMT -5
I'm not going to continue to go back and forth with you. I'm not sure you know what the stuff you are complaining about means schematically. If your answer to people "loading the box" and blitzing like crazy is to throw the ball deep, then you don't understand why the defense does it in the first place, so what's the point of discussing it. There are absolutely times where lack of a deep game might hurt us, against teams that run defenses like the Bills, it isn't one of the big issues. Nice cop out. You obviously are not understanding my point so are deciding to question my knowledge on the whole subject, anyway I will try again. I said the best way to beat Fitz is to play a cover zero, jam the receivers at the line and commit the extra safety to the blitz and force Fitz to get the ball out quick. Your answer to that is to dump the ball off to forte and Powell with screens to exploit their LB's coverage and that's fair enough but I'm askin you what happens when some of the backers in question can drop back and you know actually cover? Rex often shows blitz but then gets some LB's to bail and drop back in coverage. I never said the deep ball was an answer to the blitz, that's a toataly separate issue, I'm was making an extra point that teams will play us the same way if we cant punish them for playing a cover zero or a single high safety with the deep ball Two separate issues. One how to play Fitz, second how a defenses attacks us with the absence of a deep threat. Exactly. The Jets had one of the most accurate QBs in NFL history, with good receivers AND a lethal back to throw to (C-Mart). How well did Pennington handle the loaded box then? Harrier is dead right - if you have no ability to throw the ball deep, teams with good secondaries will destroy you. It's really that simple. Thankfully, not all teams have great secondaries. That's how scrubs like Fitzpatrick can get to 10 wins with a loaded roster. Unfortunately, playoff teams usually DO have good defenses. Those teams will attack the Jets exactly as described. And we saw it last year!
|
|
|
Post by Brady's a catcher on Jul 28, 2016 12:42:00 GMT -5
Right. We really have to play with a lead, also. Get a lead, let the defense do it's job, run the ball, don;t be in a position where we have to throw the ball.
|
|
|
Post by HawkeyeJet on Jul 28, 2016 13:06:56 GMT -5
I'm not going to continue to go back and forth with you. I'm not sure you know what the stuff you are complaining about means schematically. If your answer to people "loading the box" and blitzing like crazy is to throw the ball deep, then you don't understand why the defense does it in the first place, so what's the point of discussing it. There are absolutely times where lack of a deep game might hurt us, against teams that run defenses like the Bills, it isn't one of the big issues. Nice cop out. You obviously are not understanding my point so are deciding to question my knowledge on the whole subject, anyway I will try again. I said the best way to beat Fitz is to play a cover zero, jam the receivers at the line and commit the extra safety to the blitz and force Fitz to get the ball out quick. Your answer to that is to dump the ball off to forte and Powell with screens to exploit their LB's coverage and that's fair enough but I'm askin you what happens when some of the backers in question can drop back and you know actually cover? Rex often shows blitz but then gets some LB's to bail and drop back in coverage. I never said the deep ball was an answer to the blitz, that's a totally separate issue, I'm was making an extra point that teams will play us the same way if we cant punish them for playing a cover zero or a single high safety with the deep ball Two separate issues. One how to play Fitz, second how a defenses attacks us with the absence of a deep threat.
It's not a cop out. It's not that at ll. If you want to sit and talk x's and o's, I'm all for it, but it doesn't seem to do much good.
First, you are the one that started talking about Cover Zero and how Rex will run it because he doesn't fear our deep game, which is just plain stupid. Teams run cover zero to make you throw short, so if he has no fear of our deep game, why in the hell would he be running a defense to encourage the exact opposite? Why would he schematically try to eliminate an element of our offense that we already eliminate ourselves(in your eyes)? Wouldn't it make more sense to eliminate the quick passing game and make Fitz Patrick throw into coverage over the top? You go on to reiterate it in your post I just quoted. You say teams won't adjust and continue to paly us cover zero if we can't punish them with the deep ball. Again, eliminating the deep ball by making the QB throw quickly is part of the design of the defense. It's great to say throw it over the top and beat the one on one coverage, except the fact those deep routes take time to develop, time that the offense doesn't have(not just the Jets offense) to let develop. Against other defenses, or just in general, yes, not being able to stretch the field can be problematic at times(which I already said once), but against Cover Zero it is hardly the issue you seem to think it is.
Secondly, you keep putting words into my mouth that I didn't use. Where in this entire thread did I mention anything about the screen game? You realize there is passing schemes that utilize running backs in routes other than screen passes, right? Routes like angle routes, wheel routes, option routes, etc that put RB like Forte in an advantageous position against essentially any linebacker in the league in 1 on 1 coverage. Those are the matchups I'm talking about, not some variation of screen plays. You ask what is the gameplan against teams that have good coverage LB's. Now you are mixing and matching shit that doesn't exist a whole lot out there. How many team's run Rex Ryan's scheme(man blitz with cover zero as the backbone) with great coverage linebackers? I have no idea the exact number, but it's not many. If they exist, with excellent Corners too boot(which is a staple in Cover zero), then that's a hard defense to handle, regardless of your QB, because you are putting pressure on the QB with locking down all receiving options without anyone getting help.
I don't know what else to say on the matter. Other than go back and look at some of the RB receiving numbers, especially in Bills loses, and tell me Powell wouldn't have made a difference. Sometimes you need to have the pieces to beat a scheme, last year, with Chris Ivory, and the awful TE play we had outside of Enunwa, we played right into their hands. This year, we have better fits to exploit Rex's brand of defense. We have a better pieces in general to mask Fitz's weaknesses as well. I'm not going to say he's going to be great, I'm not sure he'll even be good, but his issues are far more with decision making and spats of inaccuracy than they are with his arm strength.
|
|
|
Post by Harrier on Jul 28, 2016 13:50:10 GMT -5
Nice cop out. You obviously are not understanding my point so are deciding to question my knowledge on the whole subject, anyway I will try again. I said the best way to beat Fitz is to play a cover zero, jam the receivers at the line and commit the extra safety to the blitz and force Fitz to get the ball out quick. Your answer to that is to dump the ball off to forte and Powell with screens to exploit their LB's coverage and that's fair enough but I'm askin you what happens when some of the backers in question can drop back and you know actually cover? Rex often shows blitz but then gets some LB's to bail and drop back in coverage. I never said the deep ball was an answer to the blitz, that's a totally separate issue, I'm was making an extra point that teams will play us the same way if we cant punish them for playing a cover zero or a single high safety with the deep ball Two separate issues. One how to play Fitz, second how a defenses attacks us with the absence of a deep threat.
It's not a cop out. It's not that at ll. If you want to sit and talk x's and o's, I'm all for it, but it doesn't seem to do much good.
First, you are the one that started talking about Cover Zero and how Rex will run it because he doesn't fear our deep game, which is just plain stupid. Teams run cover zero to make you throw short, so if he has no fear of our deep game, why in the hell would he be running a defense to encourage the exact opposite? Why would he schematically try to eliminate an element of our offense that we already eliminate ourselves(in your eyes)? Wouldn't it make more sense to eliminate the quick passing game and make Fitz Patrick throw into coverage over the top? You go on to reiterate it in your post I just quoted. You say teams won't adjust and continue to paly us cover zero if we can't punish them with the deep ball. Again, eliminating the deep ball by making the QB throw quickly is part of the design of the defense. It's great to say throw it over the top and beat the one on one coverage, except the fact those deep routes take time to develop, time that the offense doesn't have(not just the Jets offense) to let develop. Against other defenses, or just in general, yes, not being able to stretch the field can be problematic at times(which I already said once), but against Cover Zero it is hardly the issue you seem to think it is.
Secondly, you keep putting words into my mouth that I didn't use. Where in this entire thread did I mention anything about the screen game? You realize there is passing schemes that utilize running backs in routes other than screen passes, right? Routes like angle routes, wheel routes, option routes, etc that put RB like Forte in an advantageous position against essentially any linebacker in the league in 1 on 1 coverage. Those are the matchups I'm talking about, not some variation of screen plays. You ask what is the gameplan against teams that have good coverage LB's. Now you are mixing and matching shit that doesn't exist a whole lot out there. How many team's run Rex Ryan's scheme(man blitz with cover zero as the backbone) with great coverage linebackers? I have no idea the exact number, but it's not many. If they exist, with excellent Corners too boot(which is a staple in Cover zero), then that's a hard defense to handle, regardless of your QB, because you are putting pressure on the QB with locking down all receiving options without anyone getting help.
I don't know what else to say on the matter. Other than go back and look at some of the RB receiving numbers, especially in Bills loses, and tell me Powell wouldn't have made a difference. Sometimes you need to have the pieces to beat a scheme, last year, with Chris Ivory, and the awful TE play we had outside of Enunwa, we played right into their hands. This year, we have better fits to exploit Rex's brand of defense. We have a better pieces in general to mask Fitz's weaknesses as well. I'm not going to say he's going to be great, I'm not sure he'll even be good, but his issues are far more with decision making and spats of inaccuracy than they are with his arm strength.
Yeah I would love to talk some football with you man but like you say there's not much point, I respect your knowledge and opinion but clearly you don't mine which is fair enough. if I'm wrong I will be the first to admit it and I'm always open to be educated. I went for the simplistic description of my concerns and those are the lack of deep a threat and the way teams with good defenses execute a game plan against Fitz. Of course I am aware of different route concepts for RB's like the wheel route? Hell I watched us get beat enough with it by the Eagles etc. I was using cover zero as an example of a coverage which I consider a luxury you can use against a limited passin offense like ours. As you say Rex's defense is far more complex than just keying in on one particular coverage. I think that's why Rex has so much success against Fitz, he seems to struggle with the deciphering when he's gonna blitz and when he's showing blitz but is bailing out into coverage. Either way what you've said does not really alleviate my concerns, forte is a gamer with his hands and more of a home run threat but this will not be enough to mask the overall limitations of the QB in my opinion which is pretty much my point all along.
|
|
|
Post by Bing© in Buffalo Chairman on Jul 28, 2016 14:36:43 GMT -5
Serious question Bing. How are the Jets beating the Bills this year? Twice by scoring more points when the clock hits 00
|
|
|
Post by crossfire on Jul 28, 2016 17:01:29 GMT -5
Serious question Bing. How are the Jets beating the Bills this year? Twice by scoring more points when the clock hits 00 This guy gets it.
|
|
|
Post by Peebag on Jul 28, 2016 17:22:22 GMT -5
by scoring more points when the clock hits 00 This guy gets it. I'm guessing in the POOPCHUTE!
|
|