Has anybody seen Rusty?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from digger0862. Show digger0862's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?

    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?:
    Forgive my basketball analogy ... but at some point you need a bench. No team is equally good at offense and defense in the modern NFL. It hasn't been that way since the end of the Cowboys/Niners era and the salary cap. But at some point you have to recognize that the other unit needs to step up. Brady had half the tools he has now in the playoffs, and he managed to step up and get a win when the defense stumbled against elite offenses back in the day. I think this team just needs the "D" to "play" elite once or twice in the playoffs to get through a 3 to 4 team gauntlet.  Thankfully, I think the addition of Carter and Anderson might be enough to add that potential against teams like Baltimore and the Jets, who NE has been inconsistent against on account of their dominant defenses. 
    Posted by zbellino

    All good points and I agree with all of it. The defense stunk it up in the playoffs against the Ravens but I thought they did a good job for the most part against the Jets last year. Our offense and special teams gave the Jets short fields and the defense didn't step up on those occasions, but I didn't blame the D for the loss.

    I guess what I'm really saying is that my expectations are already low for the defense so the offense has to win the game for us. If they don't then I blame the offense, if that makes any sense. lol
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsLifer. Show PatsLifer's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?

    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?:
    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty? : That is essentially my reaction to the whole crowd.   Scoring 21 points against an elite defense isn't world beating ... but it's an accomplishment.  Giving up 28 or 33 to a terrible offense like Baltimore or the Jests is very bad.  Then my other reaction is even simpler ... if the defense was so good, or even acceptable, after that loss, why did BB change the entire scheme and fire/demote 5 of the starters?  It is blatantly obvious he didn't like how the defense performed ... because he handed Meriweather, Sanders, TBC, and Warren their hats and demoted Cunningham. And then switched to 43.
    Posted by zbellino


    Fair and honest points. But also lets be honest about those 21 points. 14 of them came before the last 2 minutes, the other TD came basically when the game was just about decided..I think with 2 minutes or less to go. Our Offense as prolific as it was, should have not been held to 3 points in a half, and basically shut out until very late in the game.

    I will agree that the Defense was bad as well. Giving up 28 points to the Jets crappy offense is nothign to write home about..however, 14 of those 28 points were off Pats miscues. 1, the Brady INT that was returned to the Pats 7 yard line, and the 2nd which was the muffed fake punt. Erase both of those errors and we possibly have a different outcome. Sure the D let them score in each situation, but the offense and ST didn't do them any favors by giving the Jests great field position.

    I think in the end it was a total team meltdown, led by one of the worst coaching exhibitions of BB's tenure. Bad decisions all the way around. And, if that outcome prompted BB to switch his defense, I'm good with that. The problem is we are still faced, even after firing 5 starters, with a mediocre defense at best.  
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?

    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?:
    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty? : Only if they play worse than they have to this point. The offense carries this team, not the defense.
    Posted by digger0862



    You really think letting Sanchez look like Rodgers doesn't put the blame on the D?

    The D let the jets score 9 points more than the average we allowed.

    The O scored 2 points more than the average the jets' allowed.

    The D allowed 6 points more than the jets' average score.

    The O scored 11 points less than it's average scoring.

    Looks like the D failed on two of two measures and at least the O exceeded the norm given up by the jets.



    Allowing 14 points in the 4th quarter is what killed us. And in no case should the D be blamed without mentioning the O-line. Five sacks is pathetic at home in a playoff game.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?

    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?:
    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty? : Fair and honest points. But also lets be honest about those 21 points. 14 of them came before the last 2 minutes, the other TD came basically when the game was just about decided..I think with 2 minutes or less to go. Our Offense as prolific as it was, should have not been held to 3 points in a half, and basically shut out until very late in the game. I will agree that the Defense was bad as well. Giving up 28 points to the Jets crappy offense is nothign to write home about..however, 14 of those 28 points were off Pats miscues. 1, the Brady INT that was returned to the Pats 7 yard line, and the 2nd which was the muffed fake punt. Erase both of those errors and we possibly have a different outcome. Sure the D let them score in each situation, but the offense and ST didn't do them any favors by giving the Jests great field position. I think in the end it was a total team meltdown, led by one of the worst coaching exhibitions of BB's tenure. Bad decisions all the way around. And, if that outcome prompted BB to switch his defense, I'm good with that. The problem is we are still faced, even after firing 5 starters, with a mediocre defense at best.  
    Posted by PatsLifer


    PatsLifer .... recheck your facts. 

    7 points came off of turnovers, by the punting team.

    The INT resulted in a nothing. 

    The TD was a standalone TD on a 54 yard drive, featuring a 37 yrd pass to Braylon Edwards and then a seven yard run. 

    It's the reason why BB has done crazy things like going for it on 4th down late in games instead of kicking FGs ... he hasn't trusted that "D" to hold small leads, and he shouldn't because they have been a bad pass defense the last few seasons. 

    The second TD came from the blown fake punt .... which like the 4th and a gillion in the Superbowl ... was a terrible idea. The blown 4th down play against Indy I could live with ... that "D" wasn't stopping Manning, and it was better to put it in the O's hand with one yard to go for a win. Though, I would have preferred a QB sneak.  

    Lastly, there was no garbage time in that game. The Jets contested that drive to the end. The game wasn't out of reach when NE got the ball. A two score lead isn't garbage time .... people throw that word around too much.

    Again ... blame what you want, but the writing is on the wall. The defense that played that season and that game basically no longer exists ... BB gave it its walking papers -- pink-slipping half the starters, and changing the entire scheme.

    The offense is the exact same. 
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?

    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?:
    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty? : All good points and I agree with all of it. The defense stunk it up in the playoffs against the Ravens but I thought they did a good job for the most part against the Jets last year. Our offense and special teams gave the Jets short fields and the defense didn't step up on those occasions, but I didn't blame the D for the loss. I guess what I'm really saying is that my expectations are already low for the defense so the offense has to win the game for us. If they don't then I blame the offense, if that makes any sense. lol
    Posted by digger0862

    There are lots of fans who agree with you. So in that way, it makes sense.

    But I disagree.

    If NE plays Baltimore in the playoffs and scores 21 points, they are scoring almost a TD MORE than the average team against a defense of that caliber. It's an above average score.

    If they allow 28 points, they are allowing something close to a TD MORE than most teams allow Baltimore, which means it's below average. 

    When was the last time NE lost a game where the defense held a team beneath 21? It hasn't happened in a long time. Even against elite defenses you can dial NE up for around 20-24 points, most of the time. 

    In order to make through the playoffs, the defense is going to have to make that one stick. Even the supposedly "unstoppable" Aaron Rogers Packers had to win playoff games by the scores of 21-16 and 21-14 last season. 

    Their offense sputtered. But their defense picked up the tab against defensive teams like Philly and the Bears. 

    It will take at least one game like that to win the Superbowl, because the playoffs generally feature only teams with elite defenses or elite offenses. 

    If you don't have faith that the defense can't make 21 points stick against the Jests, the Ravens, or the Bears (or some other great "D" team with a weak "O") then just wrap it up now. Because they will have to ... those are the kind of teams you see in the playoffs, and even the mighty Packers struggle to score against those teams some times. 

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from digger0862. Show digger0862's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?

    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?:
    You really think letting Sanchez look like Rodgers doesn't put the blame on the D? The D let the jets score 9 points more than the average we allowed. The O scored 2 points more than the average the jets' allowed. The D allowed 6 points more than the jets' average score. The O scored 11 points less than it's average scoring. Looks like the D failed on two of two measures and at least the O exceeded the norm given up by the jets. Allowing 14 points in the 4th quarter is what killed us. And in no case should the D be blamed without mentioning the O-line. Five sacks is pathetic at home in a playoff game.
    Posted by BabeParilli

    The Jets only had one scoring drive starting in their own territory. All 4 of the Jets TD drives totaled 5 minutes. They had a time of possession of 25 minutes. So, 80% of the time that the Jets had the ball the D did their jobs. The red zone D was horrible, though, that's where the D could have won the game for us but didn't.

    It's a team game so in the playoffs you need all of the parts to play well or you will fail. The D was not totally to blame for the loss. You mentioned the O-line allowing five sacks. Receivers had critical drops. The special teams set the Jets up for easy TDs at the end of the second and fourth quarters.

    Obviously, I wish we had a better D. We would dominate and win multiple super bowls. I still think we can win with this D as long as the other facets of the team play well.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from qball369. Show qball369's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?

    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?:
    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty? : Another point proven here. I absolutely don't delete my accoounts, I have been banned 3 total times now due to insecure people reporting me. As stated above, I ask why people like Zbellino, QBall, Hurlie, Shizzlie and all the other people who have been challeneged by me in the past, losing a debate and apparently embarrassed by it, align yourself with a troll. This is where it again proves that I am not in the wrong.  You are a troll. A Jets troll, but they align with you. Case closed on this aspect.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKingII


    Rusty -I have found a source that might help you:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megalomania

    You should read this with a mirror handy

    Rusty - I always write the posts I aim at you with smile on my face - you make me laugh Rusty - you desperately cling to the notion that you are absolutely right in every single thing you say - you have postured yourself as the Khan like superior intellect - but most smart people I know, while many might have ego's about their IQ's, they almost all are intellectually honest and realize that they don't know EVERYTHING and are occasionally wrong

    Nothing wrong with you passionately advocating your opinion(and that's what these posts are - no matter how much you believe everything you write is undeniable fact) - but your insufferable need for rightness does become a little tedious at times

    So - Rusty - can you outline for this board the debates you have had with me personally that you have won? Who decides who wins?

    Lastly - Rusty - I am not embarrased by anything that you have written in response to things I have written - you and I disagree on some things - we agree on others - and I am entertained by going back and forth with you about it - a fun way to kill time some slow days:)

    Good to have you back Rusty - the board wasn't the same without you
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from jcour382. Show jcour382's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?

    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?:
    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty? : That is funny. Thanks for the info.
    Posted by NYPat


    hes always posted on the bruins page...so whats your point vanessa??
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from jcour382. Show jcour382's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?

    id listen/read rusty on just about anything, right or wrong , agree or disagree, over 90% of the posters on this board.....

    someone needs to start a new thread on the blog postin awards... i think it may have been p-mike that did it last year... can wait to see this years award winners.
     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from rayclay. Show rayclay's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?

    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?:
    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty? : You're making my points for me.  I said he a better year, by far, over Revis's rookie year, which he did. The highest of high comedy is you looking like a moron making my case for me, over and over.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKingII


    What kind of metrics are being used to support a claim that McCourty had a better rookie year than Revis?  Is the quality of the rookie year the biggest determining factor of a player?  Why not the second year or third year?
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from JohnHannahrulz. Show JohnHannahrulz's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?

    The Jets got rid of what 5 or 6 players and picks to get Sanchez and he ain't that good. If the Jets fail to make the playoffs two years in row (starting this year) one of the primary reasons will be because Sanchez has not developed enough as a QB. I give some credit to Sanchez for making the occasional big play, but he is not the type of QB that wills his team to win (see: Brady, Manning, Rodgers, Roethlisburger, Brees, or even Ryan) which is what want when draft a QB in the top 5. I might also say that Flacco, Stafford, and Dalton are all better than Sanchez at this stage of their young careers.

    When the Jets get old, what happens then ?
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from BubbaInHawaii. Show BubbaInHawaii's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?

    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?:
    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty? : Forgive my basketball analogy ... but at some point you need a bench. No team is equally good at offense and defense in the modern NFL. It hasn't been that way since the end of the Cowboys/Niners era and the salary cap. But at some point you have to recognize that the other unit needs to step up. Brady had half the tools he has now in the playoffs, and he managed to step up and get a win when the defense stumbled against elite offenses back in the day. I think this team just needs the "D" to "play" elite once or twice in the playoffs to get through a 3 to 4 team gauntlet.  Thankfully, I think the addition of Carter and Anderson might be enough to add that potential against teams like Baltimore and the Jets, who NE has been inconsistent against on account of their dominant defenses. 
    Posted by zbellino


    Well there is a symbiotic/synergistic relationship between offense and defense. The teams that win the most games tend to have an offense that can carry the defense when needed and vice versa.

    Fort the past 2-4 years, I think one could argue that the offense has carried the defense more often than the defense carrying the offense.

    This year is the defense has inconsistently shown that they can carry the offense. The question is, when a playoff game is on the line - do you trust the defense enough to make a stop when we need to?

    I'm not quite there yet, but am hoping that the last 5 games...the defense can continue to improve.

    On the other hand, offense needs to know how to combat those situations when the spread offense is NOT working - and find other ways to score. Again, they have 5 games to work on some things.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?

    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?:
    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty? : The Jets only had one scoring drive starting in their own territory. All 4 of the Jets TD drives totaled 5 minutes. They had a time of possession of 25 minutes. So, 80% of the time that the Jets had the ball the D did their jobs. The red zone D was horrible, though, that's where the D could have won the game for us but didn't. It's a team game so in the playoffs you need all of the parts to play well or you will fail. The D was not totally to blame for the loss. You mentioned the O-line allowing five sacks. Receivers had critical drops. The special teams set the Jets up for easy TDs at the end of the second and fourth quarters. Obviously, I wish we had a better D. We would dominate and win multiple super bowls. I still think we can win with this D as long as the other facets of the team play well.
    Posted by digger0862


    This is what happens when you have a D that gives up tons of yards. With a short field they have less chances to get the turnover that saves their bacon time and time again. That D had more picks than anybody in the league, but zero off Sanchez in that game. If you don't do the one thing you do well, you are apt to lose.
     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?

    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?:
    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty? : Who were those players the Jets traded for the Sanchez pick?  Would you consider 4 playoff wins in his first two years willing his team to win?  How about 8 4th qtr comeback wins?  How about playing his best football in the playoffs?  The QB has 1 job, win games.  Sanchez has done that better than  most QBs in extremely small sample of a career. 
    Posted by KreepyKing


    Glad you like your QB.  Pats fans love him too.
    Two AFC title game appearances is quite an accomplishment in his 3 years. 
    You should be proud.
    Of course it doesn't compare to TBs 2 Super Bowl wins in his first 3 years of playing, but ....after so many years of drought, a couple of showers must be a welcome sight.
     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Rocky. Show Rocky's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?

    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?:
    The best part about your post is that in a league with a salary cap, equalizing teams ability to spend more than other teams, you are more concerned with the Jets paying Bart Scott to play for the Jets instead of the Pats paying Bodden, Ty Warren, TBC, Kaczur & Butler 10 million NOT TO PLAY for the Pats and Ocho another 5 to be a HUGE bust.  You just can't make this stuff up.  Speaking over overrated CBs, how's McCourty doing this year?  Didn't he have a better rookie season than Revis?  I guess that little pipe dream is over. And yet you continue to make proclamations about players during their first year.  Priceless!
    Posted by KreepyKing


    Can you please increase the font size so Rusty gets your point?  And change everything to all Caps? Thanks!
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?

    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?:
    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty? : Well there is a symbiotic/synergistic relationship between offense and defense. The teams that win the most games tend to have an offense that can carry the defense when needed and vice versa. Fort the past 2-4 years, I think one could argue that the offense has carried the defense more often than the defense carrying the offense. This year is the defense has inconsistently shown that they can carry the offense. The question is, when a playoff game is on the line - do you trust the defense enough to make a stop when we need to? I'm not quite there yet, but am hoping that the last 5 games...the defense can continue to improve. On the other hand, offense needs to know how to combat those situations when the spread offense is NOT working - and find other ways to score. Again, they have 5 games to work on some things.
    Posted by BubbaInHawaii

    I agree ... though the last bit I'm not really sure about, because I don't really understand what you mean bv "spread" ... spread as a formation, an overall strategy? 

    NE uses 2TEs and one RB about 61% of the time. So, saying that they play a base spread is, in fact, incorrect.

    They've only had 49 snaps on the year with an empty backfield ... if that's what you mean.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?

    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?:
    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty? : What does Brady have to do with Sanchez?   And why didn't you mention that he hasn't won a single playoff game in 3 seasons? 
    Posted by KreepyKing


    Oh, just comparing the first 3 years since you are soooooo happy with your QBs progression over that time.
    Quite the comparison, isn't it.
    Anyway, another reason why I did not mention Brady not winning a PO game in the past 3 years is because, it's only been 2.  That would be lying and I try not to do that.
    So enjoy your QB...I'm sure the rest of the league will too.  :)
     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Rodimus77. Show Rodimus77's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?

    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?:
    ummmm....noone seems to be aligning themselves with me.  i just came into this thread.  in fact only you and one of your new hockey buddies posted after me..
    Posted by WeDerrWEDAT


    Wow, nice avatar Wederr. That's hitting below the belt...even for a Jets fan. If memory serves me correctly, the other "New York" team was responsible for that! And if memory continues to serve me correctly, the Jets have yet to earn that opportunity in 42 years! Soon to be 43 in a couple of months. lol


    And welcome back Russ
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?

    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?:
    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty? : Phat Rex likely has a Sanchez jersey and posters on his wall. What an absolute geek.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKingII


    Yes, and I pretty sure his mom gets really PO'd every time she has to wash  that sticky stuff off all of it.

    Welcome home, Rus
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share