Jets vs Pats Round 3

After a tight playoff win last night, the Jets go to Foxborough to play the Patriots - site of their 45-3 loss earlier in the year. Now for some observations and predictions:

Jets are 2-1 vs the top 2 seeds in the AFC this year
Tom Brady is 1-2 vs "Ryan brothers" coached defenses this year
Jets are 2-2 vs Patriots last two years
The last time the Patriots scored less than 30 points was in November, vs Cleveland!
In their two losses this year the Patriots only scored 14 points
The Jets have lost only 1 game this year when they score a TD on offense

The Jets will use the 45-3 loss as motivation to show that "nobody shows them any respect" and "nobody thinks they can win." What will be hilarious is how the Patriots will feel the same way! We will also hear a lot of "we haven't done anything yet" and "they have a good football team over there."

The following quotes will be food for the media "I didn't come here to kiss Belichick's rings" and "Peyton Manning studies more than Tom Brady."

And so, here's how it boils down.

When the Jets have the ball: They need to score. They should expect to need to put up 30 points. The Patriots like to take away the things you do well, so they will stuff the box with 8 and dare Sanchez to beat them. Interestingly, the Jets ran against 8 in the box against Indianapolis. In addition, the Pats will probably try to shut down Edwards and make Keller and Holmes do the heavy work. I wouldn't be surprised if the Jets try to do a few misdirection things with formations like they did with Pittsburgh where they get in run heavy formations and try some play action. No drops!

When the Patriots have the ball: They will score. The key is keeping them to FG's but an aggressive Belichick showed that he's willing to go for it on 4th & short in the last meeting (even when up by 30+). The defense did a good job creating 3rd & longs vs Indy, and will have to do the same here. The Jets are built for beating the Colts, but less so for the Pats. NE is going to show a lot of heavy run formations and then pass to their pass happy TE's. In the game vs the Colts, the Jets also used a lot of DB's and again, it wouldn't be surprising if they did the same here. The Jets would probably be content to let NE to run against them because that plays to their strengths and it means they're shutting down the pass.

Special Teams: The Jets have a better chance of breaking a big return but also a better chance of missing a FG or shanking a punt (12 yd punt?)

So who will win? Patriots are big favorites here. Jets have to execute perfectly and fool Brady with formations in order to win this one.

Additional footnote: You know the "home unbeaten streak" of New England, and the "interception-free streak" of Tom Brady? Apparently this doesn't include last year's playoff game where they lost and Brady threw 3 INT's.

Tom Brady's in a car accident

If you were the guy (Ludgero Rodrigues) who hit Tom Brady's car in an accident, would you need to consider moving? Or are you really lucky? At least Brady wasn't hurt. Had it been more serious, you and Steve Bartman would have a lot to talk about.

Jets season is over...

You know, I just saw this statement on Facebook from a Patriots fan after they blew the game against Indianapolis:

"ARRRRGGGGHHHH!!! And this is why I can't stomach Pats games. :P"

-Was this person SERIOUS? What recent Patriots game has been hard to stomach? Please. The Pats are still handily in first place in the AFC East, certainly going to the playoffs and are firing on all cylinders. Oh, boo hoo, you haven't won the Super Bowl since 2004. What misery it must be watching the Patriots. Try watching a Jets game. That's a team that couldn't even miss a tackle on purpose.

Looks Like Another Tough Year For Patriots-Haters

After a brief year to celebrate the Patriots' defeat in the Super Bowl and missing out on the 18-0 season, it looks like the Patriots are up to their old tricks -- secretly dominating the game but losing, only to have the opponent make seemingly a minor miscue (running back a normal kick off with the hands team on the field) lead to a turnover and a touchdown (fumble). I don't think I can handle too many more of these. Good thing I'm working during the Patriots / Jets game.

Old and Slow

It's halftime, the Jets are up and I'm nervous they're going to blow it.

An interesting note that I saw this morning - apparently a Jets player anonymously said that the Patriots were "old and slow" but didn't want to take credit for fear of "bulletin board material." How does saying that anonymously make it any less bulletin board material. It still can read, "Jets: Pats are old and slow."

Jets vs Pats 2008

If the Jets win, I predict the following statements from NFL analysts:
1) The Jets are now the team to beat in the East
2) What a difference Brett Favre is to the team (and how Chad Pennington could not have made some throw in the game)
3) It just shows how valuable Tom Brady is

If the Pats win, I predict the following statements from NFL analysts:
1) Football is a team game
2) The road to the AFC East goes through New England
3) Defense wins championships
4) Brett Favre is still learning the system
5) That's why Bill Belichick is a hall of fame coach

I think this is going to be a close, defensively oriented game. For the Jets to win they will need their offensive line to get a good running game going against the Patriots, who are vulnerable in that area. On the flip side, they will need to stifle New England's run game with their own revamped defense. Biggest non-injury fear - Brett Favre is perplexed by the Belichick defensive schemes.

Patriots "Spygate"

I thought this whole Spygate thing with the Patriots was resolved. Now we're hearing that the NFL has made a deal with former Patriots "cameraman" Matt Walsh, and that depending on what he says, there may be further penalty. Well, let's just get to the bottom of this and then move on! Enough dragging of the feet, and let's just get all the answers. As much as I would love for the NFL to find out that the Patriots were doing all sorts of illegal stuff and severely punish them for it, I suspect the case is more along the lines of them doing some sort of borderline wrong stuff and it probably had little effect on anything. So let's just get it over with. Maybe if we can find out what they did before the Draft this weekend, they can be penalized appropriately.

Wow

I can't believe it. The Giants have won the Super Bowl!

-Have you ever seen so much pressure on Tom Brady?
-The Patriots committed a surprising number of false starts.
-Why did the Patriots go for it when they had the chance for the 49 yard FG?
-How lucky were the Giants on two plays? First, the Tyree catch from the Manning escaped sack. Second, the fumble that got batted away from Bradshaw, while it was a penalty, it could have easily been a turnover.

What an amazing game.

Girlie Man?

Of course, the NY Post is always trying to stir things up, so it should never be taken seriously at all. On the other hand, I can't help but notice how absurd it has been getting lately.

Last week after the Giants beat the Cowboys, the paper claimed credit on the front cover because their "Jessica Simpson look-alike" distracted Tony Romo.


Obviously absurd, and I'm sure the paper was just doing it as a joke... It's a joke, isn't it?


Today's Post is getting even sillier:



Article excerpt:

"FLOWERY TOM A POSY PATSIE
- BLOOMS IN HAND, BRACE ON FOOT IN VILLAGE CALL TO GISELE
January 22, 2008 -- Tom Brady hasn't been brutally beaten down by the Giants yet - but at least the petal-pushing flower boy is limping.

The cocky quarterback for the undefeated* New England Patriots was caught hobbling to the West Village home of his gal pal, Gisele Bundchen, yesterday - carrying a box of pretty little posies."

That's right! Every time they refer to the Patriots as undefeated, they're adding an asterisk. In fact, the asterisk is the number one reason to hate the Patriots, in case you need 10 reasons.



Oh that crazy NY Post, joking once again, right? The readers are in on the joke, right?

Right???

Are we going to war with Iran? (and other thoughts)

A few thoughts:

1) Are we trying to go to war with Iran? New sanctions today? I didn't even realize we traded anything with them! The markets aren't looking so good, the Canadian dollar is worth as much as the US dollar, we're entangled with Iraq and Afghanistan and now we're acting tough towards Iran? It seems like we're nearing a critical point these days where things can go totally south, really fast.

2) Looks like the Red Sox are going to win the World Series. I am completely envious of the Boston sports scene, and the fact that it's the Red Sox / Patriots makes it even worse. With the Red Sox, are they the "new Yankees?" I thought this the other day and then suddenly Bill Rhoden of the NY Times read my mind and wrote a column about it. Unfortunately I never wrote that thought down anywhere and have no proof that it happened first. But think about it - big payroll, recent success, low key manager, fans with unattainable expectations and national popularity... you get the picture.

2a) I never understood Mets fans who root for the Red Sox just to spite Yankees fans.

2b) I have also never understood the recent fad of rooting for the Red Sox because they're the anti-Yankees. That bugs me to no end - if you're going to be anti-mainstream, you can't root for the same team as everyone else!

2c) The Patriots are good, huh? They haven't scored less than 99 points in a game (give or take 70). They rely on a passing attack. The defense seems to allow relatively many points - I'm guessing that it's because they play a "prevent" style most of the time. Hmm. High scoring offense + passing attack = "finesse offense" right? I'd like to make that label stick. I suspect they will adjust to the cold weather well, but I think that might be their only challenge to going undefeated.

2d) Thinking about it the other day - it obviously pains me that the Red Sox are in the World Series and incredibly hot against Cleveland, the same team that shut down the Yankees. First, because I think the Yanks had a good shot at actually beating Boston, and second because it looks like they're on their way to another hot streak + title a la 2004. Here's hoping David Ortiz boots a few ground balls and Kevin Youkilis gets lost in the outfield while playing at Coors.

2e) You'd never realize the Yankee facial hair rule until you watch Boston on a regular basis. Even a hardcore fan has to admit that the Red Sox have their own roving police lineup. Goatees are the "official facial hair" of the Sox: Kevin Youkilis, Jason Varitek, Mike Lowell, Josh Beckett, Eric Gagne, Eric Hinske and JD Drew are all among the white dudes with goatees.

2f) I don't mind the Yankees being knocked out and the Jets stinking so much but the Knicks just add insult to injury. I have to admit, however, that last season was really entertaining off the court. I hadn't followed the Knicks so closely in years!

2g) Will the next Jets / Miami game be for the #1 pick overall? I suppose that's a bit of a stretch right now, but it could be. The Jets have actually been surprisingly close in every game. That sort of makes the misery worse.

3) Joe Torre got fired. Well, actually, he didn't get re-hired. Sort of a crummy way to end it all, huh? Too bad, I think it would have been nice to part ways with him on good terms!

4) Back to politics: a few words on the Presidential contenders...

4a) Rudy Giuliani - Can this guy go one minute without mentioning 9/11? Can he go 30 seconds without mentioning either 9/11 or Hillary Clinton?

4b) Mitt Romney - Just seems like such a businessman. The funny thing with him is he's changed positions on social issues as much as Giuliani (see: gun control) but for some reason he gets more flack for it (see: not involved with 9/11).

4c) Fred Thompson - That didn't last long, huh?

4d) John McCain - He goes to Bob Jones University after criticizing it, then says that Mitt Romney changes his mind too much. Once a maverick, now part of the establishment.

4e) Mike Huckabee - He seems like a nice person who I don't agree with very much. But he also lost a ton of weight, which has to be commended.

4f) John Edwards - Trying to offer a more liberal viewpoint than Obama or Clinton and comes up pretty flat. I think the group of people that were inspired by him back in '04 are now lined up behind Obama. My lasting memory of him is when he awkwardly mentioned Dick Cheney's lesbian daughter back in the 2004 VP debates.

4g) Joe Biden - I wonder why his campaign hasn't gained as much traction. He's always on the Sunday AM talk shows and has a ton of experience. It must be because he talks too much.

4h) Bill Richardson - Summary of his campaign: he said on Meet the Press that he roots for both the Red Sox and Yankees. Some would say Hillary did the same thing in her hypothetical "rooting for both sides" if the Cubs and Yankees made the World Series. Can someone tell politicians that nobody cares what teams they root for as long as they just stick to one? Rudy is a Yankees fan and I don't think it will cost him any Massachusetts votes.

4i) Barack Obama - I think this guy could actually bring some ideas to the table and take action if he got elected. At this point, however, seems more style over substance.

4j) Hillary Clinton - She's come a long way, but some people just absolutely hate her. Why? It's true, she doesn't seem like a very nice person, but most of these candidates don't. From what it seems like, she is one of the hardest working candidates in that she is always preparing and rehearsing and never makes a mistake while in a public appearance. As it turns out, back in 1993 she didn't shy away from introducing some pretty radical legislation. If you think about it, that sort of change rarely happens any more. My only fear is that the Republicans seem so eager to use her as a target, and that if she becomes the nominee, all the hate directed towards her will lead to another Republican President.

5) On flip-flopping. It's noted as such a negative, but people change their minds all the time - especially on non-moral issues. Consider that the popularity of the Iraq war has completely changed since it started. Does that mean most of the US public has flip-flopped on this issue? Or have we just received more information? Why is there a double standard for our leaders changing their minds? In fact, I would suggest that the best leaders do change their minds when confronted with overwhelming evidence against their original position.

6) While we're talking about the Presidency... Everyone says, "Whoever wins Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina will be a force to contend with." Why is this? The populations of these states are tiny and don't necessarily represent microcosms of the US in terms of opinions or priorities. Then with the primaries - all the jockeying for position on the political calendar is ridiculous. It's really pathetic how states like Michigan and Florida trying to move their primaries up so they can become relevant and reap the benefits of campaign dollars.

7) Fox News: I've watched about five minutes of it in the last week and can't stand it. Bill O'Reilly had a Democratic strategist on last night and they were talking about the California fires. O'Reilly was upset Democrats in Congress were trying to use Iraq as a reason that there was not enough National Guard support. He says, "I'm no expert, but there's enough support for the firefighters." Wait - if he's no expert, then how does he know if there's enough support? Then a week ago, Hannity and Colmes had family members of murder victims on and they were talking about how the convicted murderer needed a bone marrow transplant and how it was preposterous that the state would pay for his transplant and medical care (roughly $300,000). So instead we let him die in prison? At best, that's euthanasia and at worst that's cruel and uncivilized.

8) Full circle here. Would we actually attack Iran to prevent them from getting nuclear weapons? That seems a little scary to me. By the way, what do Osama bin Laden, nuclear weapons and military dictatorship have in common? They're all in Pakistan! Yay!

Boos and Illegal Cameras

Two more quick notes about the game yesterday:

-Many people have noted that the Giants Stadium crowd booed Chad Pennington when he limped off the field, including the ol' Wacky Chinaman. It's pretty embarrassing. While this is expected in a city like Philadelphia, it's not expected in New York. Perhaps it should be. New York fans, while considered to be educated, passionate, use whatever adjectives you want, have recently shown that they have a very short memory. The phenomenon has gotten worse and worse over time. At first I thought it started with the Mets fans, who had two recent cycles of big spending and underperforming. Most notably, Mike Piazza was getting booed towards the end of his Met career (despite being basically the best Met ever aside from Tom Seaver) and Carlos Beltran getting booed on opening day at home in his second year as a Met. But Yankee fans showed they are not immune to this sort of stupidity, booing Derek Jeter a few years back after his slow start. A-Rod heard the jeers from the crowd regularly last year despite winning the MVP the year before. Like I said, I don't know if this is something new or if it's just something I am noticing more often, but booing Chad Pennington isn't a huge surprise. However, just because it's not a surprise doesn't make it right. I have a theory that sports radio may be to blame, because it is the source of all kinds of outrageous opinions, but for now it's just a theory.

-Apparently the Patriots had some sort of camera on the sidelines that might have been used to steal the defensive signals of the Jets. Apparently this isn't the first time they've run into this sort of problem. As much as I would love to believe that this is why the Patriots beat the Jets so easily, I have a lot of trouble with this accusation. If it were true it would make the Patriots seem unbelievably insecure. Too unbelievably. They've beaten the Jets repeatedly in recent years and are on paper a better team. Why would they feel the need to cheat? There's also no way they could have maintained the sort of success that they have had even if they had stolen signs or whatever. Why were they doing something similar in Green Bay last year? Who knows, but I also don't think that the Green Bay people should have said anything until the investigation was complete. Was there something fishy going on? Perhaps, but I doubt it is as serious as it sounds in the news stories.

-Apparently the penalty for a team that does something like use an illegal camera to take photos during a game is loss of a draft pick or a fine. That doesn't seem like much to me. If it's such a big deal, the offending team should be forced to forfeit the game. However, I don't really know how a team could benefit significantly from this sort of gamesmanship. Who cares about fines and draft picks? Even the loss of one first round pick isn't the end of the world.

Patriots Win, Jets Lose, Let the Agony Begin...

The Jets lost to the Patriots today, 38-14 and really looked pretty beaten up throughout the game.

The game was totally over once the Pats returned a kickoff for 108 yards. You have to just tip your cap to Hobbs' return - I did not think he would have tried to run that back. Just goes to show how the day was going for the Jets. Kicker Mike Nugent spent the offseason bulking up, kicks a deep ball that he probably would have never kicked last year, and it gets run back for a record setting touchdown!

Well, my worst fears were confirmed as the lack of a left guard hurt the Jets this game. As you may recall, Pete Kendall had a contract dispute and got traded to the Redskins during the preseason. The lack of good protection affected Pennington and the running game. Here's a few things I noticed:

-First, the Pennington injury - shades of Vinny Testaverde going down in 1999 on opening day. One can blame this on Pennington's "lack of durability" all one wants, but let's face it - lack of a left guard was to blame here. The missed coverage came from the blind side. He was under pressure all day as well, it's impressive he passed as well as he did.

-The running game was in total disarray. The Jets didn't run much play action passing, which surprised me, but I suspect that the heavy pressure made it difficult to pull this off. Also a lack of running game - probably due to no holes being open. It was telling when Thomas Jones ran for about 10 yards in the second quarter and screamed and jumped in the air as if he had just scored a touchdown!

-Chad Pennington played very well in the passing game, but I was surprised about the fact that he only threw to Coles and Cotchery most of the game. Again, I blame the lack of a left guard here, as it didn't look like they ran much in a way of spread formations in order to keep Pennington protected.

Then there's the Patriots. They looked very good, although I wonder if the Jets offense had been more balanced if the game would have been closer. Pennington ended up passing pretty well, despite their pressure, and I think if the Jets had created some running lanes that they could have kept the Patriots off balance a little more. Randy Moss obviously is over his hamstring problem and Tom Brady looks like he's in great form despite his supposed shoulder problem. The Pats should be able to do very well in the passing game and put up points but I actually thought the Jets did reasonably well against the run. I was also surprised that it seemed like the Jets stuck with a three man rush against the Pats, and it didn't seem like they blitzed too much.

Overall, I'm surprised that the Jets got rid of Kendall so easily. The blind side of the QB was trusted to some novices and it looks like it's going to hurt in a number of ways. Now we have this injury to deal with as well. There are no favors in the Jets schedule either - they have Baltimore, Miami, Buffalo and the Giants coming up. Baltimore and Miami are going to be tough if the protection isn't there on the line, and then division game Buffalo will be intense, as will the inter-city battle vs the Giants. I think the Jets are more talented than the last three teams, but these games still seem pretty tough.

Moss to Patriots

What????

A fourth-round pick to the Raiders gives the New England Patriots WR Randy Moss. Sure, Moss has had all sorts of problems in the past, but I can't imagine there will be any trouble integrating him into the New England system. Now the Pats have an amazing receiver, huge deep threat, and it cost them hardly anything. This just seems unfair. With Indianapolis dismantled after the Super Bowl, it seems to me that the Pats are the team to beat once again by a long shot.

Meanwhile, the Jets have been rumored to be shopping WR Justin McCairens for a fourth round pick. I wonder if the Moss trade will have any impact on this. I think McCairens was a solid player, but for whatever reason has not done well under coach Eric Mangini. Will other teams demand less from the Jets for McCairens seeing that Moss went for a fourth rounder?