Writers of Pro Football Prospectus 2008

Most Recent FO Features


» Weight and Injuries

NFL football is a violent game, and traumatic injuries are unfortunate but unavoidable. But are bigger players more likely to be hurt than their smaller peers?

11 Jan 2007

The Week in Quotes: January 10, 2007

compiled by Alex Carnevale


"That's the responsibility of the home team. They can prepare those balls and they still have to pass muster with the officials. But that home team can really knock the slickness off the ball -- that should be done. I've been talking about these balls for years and years. The more we can hold onto the football, the better the game you have. It's almost like placing a factor in the game to create a little ambiguity."

-- Cowboys owner Jerry Jones, on the ball that slipped out of Tony Romo's hands on what would have been a potential game-winning field goal.

"Obviously the reason I dropped it ... it was a slick ball. It doesn't matter, though. You still have to catch it."

-- Cowboys QB Tony Romo

"When I did play, we were 5-2. We were 4-5 when I didn't. Do the math. Not to say that I was the main reason for that, but I'm looking at numbers. Men lie. Women lie. Numbers don't. Jay-Z said it best."

-- Cowboys special teamer Keith Davis (Dallas Fort Worth Star-Telegram)


"I don't think there was anything there to be called a relationship. He was my coach and I was a player. I respected him as such. I wouldn't say there were any bad times at all. I'm sure there were frustrated moments on both of our parts. We both want to win. I wanted to send that guy out on a high note. A number of times I told guys if we win the Super Bowl I want to see the guy go out the right way. I feel bad that didn't happen."

-- Cowboys wideout Terrell Owens, on Bill Parcells.

"I live with unresolved things, I really do. The ambiguity of not having things resolved is my life."

-- Jerry Jones

"I don't think about that right now but I would imagine I would end up doing that."

-- Tony Romo, on whether or not he's still planning on playing in the Pro Bowl.


"It was a great move by Coach Reid. There was some criticism about it and there are some what-ifs that could still come up. But what if you kick a game-winning field goal?"

-- Eagles special teams coach John Harbaugh, on bringing back Koy Detmer to hold for David Akers.

"I know why I didn't try to be a field-goal kicker. I would have peed myself."

-- Eagles CB Sheldon Brown, on the Akers kick that sent the Giants home.

"I definitely think David swings a little better with Koy. I don't think there's any way to minimize what working together seven years does for their confidence."

-- Harbaugh (Philadelphia Inquirer)


"We spoke briefly after the game. He said he was fine. He just said, 'That's an awfully good football team.'"

-- Chargers head coach Marty Schottenheimer, on what his son, Jets offensive coordinator Brian Schottenheimer told him after the Jets' humiliating season-ending loss versus the New England Patriots.

"That's what our defense is based on -- getting after the quarterback and forcing him into bad decisions. The problem with that is you have Tom Brady, who doesn't make too many bad decisions."

-- Chargers LB Shawne Merriman (San Diego Union Tribune)


"He rumbled and rumbled and rumbled, but if I picked it up it would have been over."

-- Patriots DE Richard Seymour, on the lateral DT Vince Wilfork recovered that allowed the Patriots to go up by two scores.

"I don't care. I have that ball and I'm going to take that ball home, as a matter of fact, so it doesn't matter."

-- Patriots DT Vince Wilfork, on lack of TV coverage of his recovery.

"He was aware of the situation. I saw what was happening but I was thinking they were throwing a bubble screen, then there's going to be a double pass. I was going through my reads. I'm making sure the wide receivers are blocking and not slipping through. Vince can run, people would be surprised. He's a better athlete than everyone standing here. He can catch punts, he can run. Vince is a very good athlete."

-- Patriots safety Artrell Hawkins

"I expected there to be a little more trickeration, halfback passes or reverse passes."

-- Hawkins, on the Jets offense.


"I just really don't have the time to coach, I don't think I want to coach. But there may be some way I can stay involved in the team. The team is like my family now. I feel more so like a big brother figure to most of the players here."

-- former Jets RB Curtis Martin

"Not to speak against any other coaches, but the Jets got the best coach that was out there. If I owned a team, Eric would be my head coach. I don't know how many coaches they could've got that would have been better, regardless of who was available or not."

-- Martin (Slam! Sports)


"I told Ty after the game that I would be glad to introduce him at the Hall of Fame. I could do the introduction for him. One of the reporters asked me if I was going to invite Ty Law to dinner. Well, I think he should invite me to dinner. That would be more appropriate."

-- Colts QB Peyton Manning

"Obviously those were poor throws. It was kind of rare, two kinds of miscommunications between Marvin and I, both of which were my fault. In nine years, I can't think of how many times that has happened. But he and I were just not on the same page and that is my fault."

-- Manning (Cushing Daily)

"No. No. Trent had 18 plays in the first half. Eighteen plays. It was hard for anybody. We couldn't run it, couldn't pass it, couldn't do anything."

-- Herman Edwards, on the ineptness of his offensive unit. (KBSD6.com)


"It may not appear that way by how I played this year, but I'm ready to go on and do something else. And I'm excited about it, I really am. I'm not going to regret not being a football player anymore."

-- Giants RB Tiki Barber, after the last game of his career.

"He's one of the greatest players I ever played with. It was just an honor to be around him -- him giving me advice on being a professional on and off the field. My first few years were kind of wild and he took me aside and gave me good wisdom and I took that to heart. People that have passion and heart are going to succeed in this league. He's definitely done that. He's not the fastest guy or the strongest guy or the biggest guy, but he has twice the size of heart as other guys in this league."

-- Giants TE Jeremy Shockey


"Everybody has to change when you're 8-and-8 and out."

-- Giants LB Antonio Pierce

"We learned a little too late this season to shut up."

-- Pierce

"I know you are in a mood, and been that way most of the year, where it's all negative. But it's not all negative. There you go again ... It was 23-20. What do you expect me to say?"

-- Giants head coach Tom Coughlin (New York Daily News)

"It's frustrating to be in position to win a game and not win that game. It's very frustrating. You can point to many things and I can also point to some outstanding plays. Let's face it, we had a first-and-30 and still got a touchdown. Who wants to talk about that one? Let's not lose track of the good things as well."

-- Coughlin


"It's like the difference between painting by the numbers and having a blank canvas. When you're painting by the numbers, the green paint goes on the number four. The yellow goes on the number six. That's kind of what's happening here. He thought he was getting the blank canvas, where he could create something from the ground up."

-- Redskins team source, on Al Saunders' arrival to the Joe Gibbs show.

"What does he actually do anymore?"

-- Redskins player, on Gibbs.

"The good thing about what we do as opposed to when I was doing NBC analyst work was that [as an analyst] I didn't know. Did I do a good job? I didn't know because nobody was keeping score. How do you keep score in that environment? Here, we keep score."

-- Gibbs (Washington Post)


"We won 11 games last year, and we had something. Was it the most innovative offense in history? No, but it worked and we liked it and we did it well. Then we went from playing to learning. We went back to the point where we had to think through everything and we're making the same mistakes now that we made in OTAs [organized team activities in the offseason] and preseason, and it's not because we're not trying. We're a hard-working group of guys and we have plenty of talent, but everything changed on us. That was the most frustrating thing of all. It's still really frustrating. We needed to add a receiver and tweak a few things, but instead it's like starting over. It really felt like we were starting all over."

-- unnamed Redskins player

"[Defensive coordinator] Gregg [Williams] can be stubborn. He believes he's the one who will make guys do things they haven't done before. He will say, 'Adam Archuleta might not be able to play in pass coverage, but he will for me,' or, 'LaVar Arrington can't do these things, but he will do them for me.'"

-- unnamed NFL assistant

"Over half the teams around the league have players who have called me about getting back with us and miss the opportunity to be coached the way we coach."

-- Gregg Williams (Washington Post)


"They give away draft picks like they're nothing. It's unbelievable. Look at [trades for linebacker Rocky] McIntosh, [Brandon] Lloyd and [T.J.] Duckett -- that's six draft picks right there, almost all in the top four rounds, and at best two of those guys will be back there next season. And they got virtually no production out of any of them the entire season when they're trying to get to the Super Bowl. You can't do that."

-- longtime NFL GM (Washington Post)

"Lloyd is a 2, 2 ½. Plus, he's a pain in the ass."

-- rival GM, on WR Brandon Lloyd

"What I saw is that he's not coachable. He would go off on [wide receivers coach] Stan Hixon all the time and say, 'Bro, that's not how it's done!' right to his face. And we would kind of laugh, like not because it was really funny, but it was funny in that uncomfortable sense of, 'I can't believe he just said that.' "

-- Redskins player, on Lloyd.

"A fat, underachieving running back."

-- rival GM on T.J. Duckett


"You can't go out with the same type of people that you used to run with. You have to pick and choose who are your friends, who your real friends are. It's easy to decipher who they are. When I go home, I told my mother that when the sun goes down I'm inside. I'm inside somewhere. I'm not driving around or anything like that."

-- CB Ellis Hobbs, on the drive-by shooting of Broncos CB Darrent Williams.

"You don't try to drop your old friends. What you have to do is get them on your program. Let them understand that we're in a different situation now. If you want to be around me ... They have to understand that you're not in the same light anymore. There are things that I can't do."

-- Hobbs


"They gave me a great opportunity this year to play and I hope they give me an opportunity next year to carry the team. There is not any doubt in my mind the Giants running back of the future is standing right here in front of my locker."

-- Brandon Jacobs, Giants RB (Giants.com)

"I remember the first time I saw my father get hit by a chair. I was like, 'Ha, ha. It's a fake.' Then I went backstage and found it was a real metal chair. It might be (scripted) entertainment, but those guys put in a lot of preparation for their shows. One mistake and you could be out for two months."

-- Ohio State LB James Laurinaitis. His father was Animal in the WWE tag team The Road Warriors. His uncle "Johnny Ace" is Vince McMahon's underboss and director of personnel at WWE. (New York Daily News)

"You don't know your first Pro Bowl. You play like it's a regular season game and then people start looking at you, saying, 'What the hell is wrong with you? Slow down.' It just worked out that way. It's fine."

-- Tiki Barber (Giants.com)

"Some of the [Florida] parents told me what it costs to go watch this game. It's nuts. They've got to pay for a hotel, and their [sons] are the ones doing the work. There are so many things that could be done for the players. A parent should be able to see their son play football."

-- Florida coach Urban Meyer

"I am very honored to be granted the opportunity to discuss a potential position with the New York Giants. After careful consideration, and for personal reasons, I am continuing in my current role with the New England Patriots."

-- Scott Pioli, New England director of player personnel.

"He's a football player who is making a nice living. But he is not making the kind of money that people think."

-- Willis McGahee's attorney, Howard Rudolph. McGahee has "a $720,000 home near Buffalo and a $665,000 condo at The Residences at The Ritz-Carlton in Coconut Grove. He lists three vehicles -- a BMW, Porsche and Infiniti -- plus $719,000 in jewelry."
(Miami Herald)

Send quotes to quotes at football outsiders dot com

Posted by: Alex Carnevale on 11 Jan 2007

70 comments, Last at 15 Jan 2007, 4:23am by Peter Libero


by dryheat (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 12:07pm

The WWE has a director of Personnel? Has Pioli turned them down too?

by MCS (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 12:22pm

Looks like someone got the word of the day calendar for Christmas.

Jerry Jones word of the day. . . ambiguity.

by Rich Conley (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 12:44pm


Way over my head.

by BlueStarDude (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 1:09pm

Keith Davis is worse in run support than Pat Watkins and got burned just as many times - just that the plays weren't as high profile. Watkins played solid down the stretch when he was reinserted into the starting lineup. Though I suppose Davis might have been able to play better than Roy Williams did in the second half of the season.

by JJcruiser (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 1:17pm

"plus $719,000 in jewelry.�

What the heck does a man need with $719,00 of jewelry? Don't these guys know what mutual funds are?

“Well, I think he should invite me to dinner.� -- Peyton Manning

That's the funniest thing I've ever heard Manning say.

by NF (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 1:19pm

Somewhat unrelated:

Watching Jeremy Shockey play on a bad ankle on Sunday, and the play where his helmet comes off and he is still thrashing around trying to pick up the extra yard, really makes me think that if Shockey dropped the arrogant cocky player act and let his play on the field speak for him instead of the other way around, he could be one of the most respected tight ends in the league for his passion and resilience. The problem with him is that he sets up his passion by thinking he's getting back at people who want him to fail, and this extends to off the field. Compounding that, he also didn't grow up in an environment that would be expected to be conducive to becoming an emotionally-balanced adult.

Jeremy Shockey does seem to be a lot more mature now than he was when he came into the league. The only major incident involving him off the field that I can think of this season was when he called out Coughlin after the loss to the Seahawks.

Side note: The New York Post has an anonymous quote from a player on the Giants claiming that the injuries that have afflicted the team for the last two seasons are due to the teams workout regimen, and that a preseason back injury to Eli was directly caused by a weight-lifting exercise.

by B (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 1:36pm

Ty Law, Hall of Famer? I think it's a bit of a stretch. He was never the best at his position, never changed or innovated the game. He's been to a few pro-bowls, but that's about it for accolades.

by Rich Conley (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 1:48pm


B, Ty Law most definitely was the best at his position for quite a while. It wasnt until he busted his foot in 2003/2004 that he dropped off.

Watching Ty Law from about 98-03 was like watching Bailey now. Absolutely no one even threw to his side of the field.

Ty Law is the reason the NFL changed the passing rules after 2003. Hes never been the same since he broke that foot though.

by JJcruiser (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 1:56pm


I gotta agree that he's at least worthy of consideration. I don't know that he dominated his position for many years, but that's not true of most HoFers. And the guy won three superbowls (two of which he was a critical part both during and in getting to it in the first place). The guy caught more Manning passes than Harrison in the 03 playoffs, and while he's slowing down, that doesn't mean everyone who slows down in their career doesn't deserve consideration.

by MJK (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 1:56pm

Re 7:

Umm, I disagree. You can argue that Ty Law was the best at his position for a couple of years...at least '01 - '03. While he wasn't the best player on his team, he was certainly one of them (pre-injury), and he's still playing well (statistically, at least) past his prime. Plus he did change the game--thanks to him and a couple of other players, the defensive contact rules had to be re-written, because his style of play was stifling offenses to much. Not to say he was the only one doing it, but his name was certainly at the top of the list.

Not saying he's a lock, or even that he should be in, but I think one can make a decent argument at least.

by Charles the Philly Homer (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 2:01pm


You mean he's never been the same since pass interference started being called. The man had a collection of WR wallets larger than anyone else in the league. You know, from the mugging. Get it?

by The MOOSE (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 2:02pm

I told Ty after the game that I would be glad to introduce him at the Hall of Fame.

I can see him ending with this now...

"And as I have so many times during my career, I'm going to now turn it over to Ty Law."

by roguewit (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 2:25pm


LOL. Now *that* would be the funniest thing #5 ever heard Manning say.

by StrangeDavid (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 2:34pm

Re #12 - beautiful. I'm passing that along to my fellow Colts fans here in Indy. Frustrating, but FUNNY.

by Joe (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 2:45pm

the Jets’ humiliating season-ending loss versus the New England Patriots

It's asinine comments like this that give FO the rep of being a Pats homer site. There was nothing humiliating about the game - the Jets got outplayed by a better team. The pick six made the final score seem worse than it should've been. The Jets were in the game until the fourth quarter, it wasn't like they got blown out.

by Blair (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 3:19pm

Re: #5

All that platinum and ice IS Willis McGahee's retirement fund.

Obviously he just took more money management classes regarding commodities trading than mutual funds.

by Zac (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 3:28pm

Re: 3. I thought maybe that was a reference to "Entourage" (which I've never seen), but IMDB doesn't show any nicknames like that.

by bsr (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 3:33pm

#15 Maybe they just don't like the Jets. Who can blame them really. Seriously though, it was kinda humilitating. 40-16 is a lopsided victory.

by billsfan (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 3:47pm

6: The problem with him is that he sets up his passion by thinking he’s getting back at people who want him to fail, and this extends to off the field.

It helps that so many people want him to fail.

by Marko (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 3:48pm

"What the heck does a man need with $719,00 of jewelry? Don’t these guys know what mutual funds are?"

You can't wear shares of mutual funds as an earring or as necklace. Well, maybe you could print your holdings on a piece of paper and put it in one of those plastic ID holders that you can wear around your neck, but that would look really dorky.

by Sean (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 4:01pm

Re 18: It was a one-score game with six minutes left in the fourth quarter. The final score is indicative in the sense that a final basketball score is indicative after the winning team shoots free throws to open the gap at the end.

Agreed that the editorializing around the Jets this year has been nothing short of bizarre.

by Are-Tee (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 4:07pm

"#15 Maybe they just don’t like the Jets. Who can blame them really. Seriously though, it was kinda humilitating. 40-16 is a lopsided victory."

Good thing for the Jets that wasn't the actual score.

by Frank (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 4:10pm

Re 18: Not to mention it was actually 37-16. When you don't bother to get the basic facts right it pretty much kills your argument.

by Rich Conley (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 4:13pm


The actual score at the end was closer to the play on the field than you'd think. Take a look at the game DVOA.

NYJ had 4 first downs, IIRC, in the first half, compared to the patriots 15. The game was a blowout in everything but the score. The jets made 2 plays in the first half, the Cotchery TD, and the dillon fumble. Theyre lucky it wasnt 28-0 at the half, and not 17-10.

by CaffeineMan (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 4:29pm

re: 15

Yeah, I thought that "humiliating" comment was over the top. If I were a Jets fan, I'd be frustrated and disappointed, but not humiliated.

But, attributing that comment to "Pats homerism" is a little over the top as well. :) Sounded to me that Alex was just trying a little too hard to be dramatic.

by Joe (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 4:45pm

Re 25: I agree that the FO folks aren't Pats homers, but if they really want to shake the label, they need to stop making comments like that. It only hurts their credibility.

by Sean (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 4:48pm

Re 25: It's been an all-season thing. Just about every week has a shot at the team in one column or another.

Re 24: It's hard to ring up 7 first downs on your drive when you get it all in one play. The Jets have hit the Patriots up for three touchdowns this season of 45 yards or longer. Those are either three flukes or an indication that they were successfully attacking a matchup. (That's not counting PI calls, either.)

I know it makes Patriots fans warm and fuzzy to feel like they were in control all the time and weren't in danger of losing, but it ain't so. The statistical difference in the first half tells you more about the respective gameplans than anything else.

by Zac (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 5:00pm

Re 27: The Jets have hit the Patriots up for three touchdowns this season of 45 yards or longer. Those are either three flukes or an indication that they were successfully attacking a matchup.

Well, winning on 3 plays and losing on the other 147 (or whatever it is) isn't so good. I'm leaning towards fluke.

by Rich Conley (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 5:01pm

Sean, DVOA says the Pats were 45%, the jets -13%, thats a pretty sound drubbing.

Again, Thats one play your counting on. How about all the 3 and outs in the first half from the jets, followed by 12 play drives by the Pats. The game was pretty one sided.

I honestly dont get how you can think a 21 point loss isnt atleast embarrasing.

by Zac (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 5:01pm

The first paragraph was supposed to be in quotes. Sorry for the mistake.

by SGT Ben (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 5:01pm

"Re 25: I agree that the FO folks aren’t Pats homers, but if they really want to shake the label, they need to stop making comments like that. It only hurts their credibility.

:: Joe — 1/11/2007 @ 2:45 pm

And yet, we all keep coming back to read what they have to say, giving them the credibility they are supposedly losing.

by CaffeineMan (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 5:09pm

What makes me feel warm and fuzzy is that the Patriots took the best shots the Jets had, stayed patient, didn't make mistakes, and put the game out of reach at the end. It was a tough game against an opponent that not only knows the Pats schemes in particular, but also has played them multiple times. Not to mention the rivalry aspect. I expected the Jets to play "above their DVOA" against the Pats, especially by exploiting matchups. But what also makes me feel warm and fuzzy is that the Pats weren't surprised by what the Jets did, as they were in the last game. And according to DVOA, the Jets actually played worse than their DVOA's in all three phases of the game. Both their weighted DVOA's and their regular season DVOA's, which are lower.

by bsr (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 5:22pm

#23 - Yeah those 3 points really kills my point. Now that I know that they ONLY lost by 21 points I see the logic no longer works. /sarcasm. Maybe it just means my memory isn't as good as it used to be.

#26 - Joe, maybe your just a Pats hater and think that anything Anti Jets has to be Pro Pats. Maybe they are a Miami or Buff fan. You automatically attributing it to Pats homerism speaks more of your own bais.

#27 - I felt they were in control as soon as they scored on the oppening drive. However, I didn't feel like the game was in hand until they went up 10 in the third. After that I had no doubt the Pats would win given the Jets difficulty scoring in the red zone. Watching the replay last night only confirmed it. On the series were NYJ scored their last field goal, I noted that the entire defensive line was out until the jets entered the red zone. At that point they all came back in and were literally tossing around the Jets oline.

by el plaga (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 5:27pm

“What I saw is that he’s not coachable. He would go off on [wide receivers coach] Stan Hixon all the time and say, ‘Bro, that’s not how it’s done!’ right to his face. And we would kind of laugh, like not because it was really funny, but it was funny in that uncomfortable sense of, ‘I can’t believe he just said that.’ “

remember this the same team that let michael westbrook beat the hell out of stephen davis in the middle of practice. This season is by no means that crazy to me and i'm a redskins fan.

They had some injuries and a record low amount of turnovers. That bad luck won't figure to happen again next year. 11-5 baby

by BillWallace (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 5:38pm

Why can't the Pats have pretty much blown out the Jets and it still not be humiliating?

If the Jets had been favored and at home, that would be humiliating. Losing by 20 on the road when you're a heavy underdog? Disappointing, not really humiliating.

by Rich Conley (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 5:39pm

"They had some injuries and a record low amount of turnovers. That bad luck won’t figure to happen again next year."

They had a lot of injury because Gibbs didnt like the way they were playing, and increased the number/length of practices. I'd say the injuries most likely will happen again.

by dryheat (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 6:10pm

Those are either three flukes or an indication that they were successfully attacking a matchup.

And the answer is three flukes. The pass to Cotchery, where he wasn't down by virtue of landing on top of Scott, and short passes to Coles and Cotchery, that became long passes when the corner/safety missed the tackle. So 3 passes which were designed to gain about 12-15 yards apiece ended up going for 45-75. Pennington didn't even hit his guys in stride.

by Sean (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 6:13pm

Re 29:If Team A has an offensive possession where they hand off to their running back on every play and he gets 4 yards on every carry and they go eighty yards and score, they're going to have a terrific DVOA. If Team B gets the ball at the twenty and hands it off three times, 1 yard on first down, 1 yard on second down and then a 78 yard touchdown on third down, they'll have a poor DVOA. I understand why that is- the first form of offensive production is much easier to sustain and therefore likely more indicative of a better offense over the course of a full season. But that's less of a definitive mark for how a single game is going. The reality would be that the game would be 7-7 and each coach would call the game appropriately.

I mean, let's look at the good old fashioned pre-DVOA measurement of how a game went- yardage.

Here are the totals for the four games this weekend:
Ind- 435 KC-126
Sea- 332 Dal-284
Phi- 323 NYG-305
NE- 358 NYJ-347

If you looked at those numbers, you would say there were three close games and one blowout. And you would be pretty much right. The Jets kept the score and the field position manageable for most of the game. They made the Pats drive the length of the field on most of their scoring drives, and in each case they forced the Pats to make plays on third down to keep drives going. (And to New England's credit, they made those plays.) Meanwhile, the offense was able to move the ball enough to keep within reach. Kansas City had a good defensive gameplan, too- they took away the receivers and forced Indy to run the ball or to throw checkdowns. But their offense was completely unable to threaten Indy, so eventually the score built up and built up and finally got away from them. The Jets didn't have that problem. I would be more inclined to think that the Cotchery play was a fluke if the Jets hadn't marched up and down the field in the third quarter (or if the Pats weren't 29th in the league against #2 receivers). What made the Cotchery play important was that he was able to score on it from distance, as the Jets offensive line was getting beaten to the point where it would have been very difficult to score in the red zone. Basically, Cotchery's effort was a four-point play. But it's not like the Jets didn't get in close- they kicked field goals of 28, 21 and 37 yards.

It's ironic that you are hung up on the idea that if not for two plays the Pats could have been up 28-0 seeing as the Pats weren't able to get up by two scores until they got a long fumble return by a nose tackle returning a failed lateral on a play where everyone else thought the pass was incomplete. Talk about random.

Re: 32

You should feel good about the performance. The Pats played exceptionally well, and they were able to adjust and handle the Jets pass rush (which, I should add, I'm not surprised about). They had to play the best game of any of the winning teams this weekend and they went ahead and did. In particular, the performance of their defensive line was just overwhelming. Even if the Pats lose this weekend, I suspect that D-line will do it's job (as indeed they did last year against Denver).

by bsr (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 6:20pm

"If you looked at those numbers, you would say there were three close games and one blowout. And you would be pretty much right."

No you wouldn't. Two of the games were double digit wins. The yardage was not indicative of points production in the jets/pats game.

by Bobman (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 6:28pm

#3 I concur, Rich, I have no idea either. To quote the immortal Henry Blake from M*A*S*H, they go over my head to much I'm getting athlete's scalp.

#12, I am laughing hard enough to piss my pants. That was great.

Disappointed they did not include the Dungy "prediction" quote: "Well, I don't expect to hold him to 25 yards on 12 carries." BTW, he tried the same line again in the presser this week and when everyone laughed, then joked, "well, it worked last week." Coach Rushmore cracks a smile, and I missed it.

by MarkB (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 6:40pm

Let me get this straight. "Making a team drive the length of the field" before they score on you is a good thing? Substitute "Letting" for making and it makes a little more sense. The Jets played a good game, and I certainly wouldn't call it a humiliation. The Pats totally humiliated the Colts two years ago in the playoffs. The Pats took care of business last week.

by el plaga (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 6:48pm

re 36:
They had a lot of injury because Gibbs didnt like the way they were playing, and increased the number/length of practices. I’d say the injuries most likely will happen again.

springs and portis got hurt the first preseason game, after the redskins were the last team to start training camp and had the least amount of two a days.

if the redskins suffer injuries again it will be random luck not how gibbs run practices.

by Eric P (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 7:03pm

The only people affiliated with the Jets who should feel humiliated after last weeks games are some of the fans and media members. The "Mangini is in Belichick's Head" and the "We beat you last time. This time will be worse." crowds were out in full force all week before the game. To them I say: "Na Na, Na Na Na!"

by Eric P (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 7:07pm

I should add that, IMO, "making" or "letting" (whichever you choose) the other team take 12-14 plays to score is not only worse in DVOA for use as a predictive tool for the rest of the season, it's worse for your team during that game. 4th quarter avalanches like what happened to the Jets are often products of those 12-14 play drives in the first 3 quarters simply wearing the defense out. Particularly a team with limited depth like the Jets.

by Pat on the back (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 7:09pm

On the Ty Law HOF front, he was considered a top 2 CB in the league at least 2 years when SI voted him all-pro. If memory serves (which is no sure bet), '96 or '97 he beat out a still in his prime Deion Sanders for the award.

Although, on a personal note, I do need him to make the hall of fame so I have an excuse to wear my baby blue "All-Star" #24 LAW Jersey again without it being a halloween costume of Ali G.

by Joe (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 7:17pm

#33: The quote specifically says "versus the New England Patriots". That's what makes it look like a Pats homerism. I'm not saying Alex wrote it because he is a Pats homer or that FO as a group are Pats homers. I'm just saying that comments like that are why the site has a reputation for being Pats homers, especially since it is higly debatable as to whether the loss was actually "humiliating".

by Pat on the back (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 7:18pm

And while I don't think the Jets were humiliated, I do think they got drubbed pretty well. Their scoring consisted of 2 second half FG drives, a missed tackle, and a fumble.

Onto theoretical, not suggesting any comparison between Jets and Pats, just sports philosophy:

Just like in Basketball and Rugby, it is not uncommon for a weaker team to keep the score close in the first half only to get absolutely submarined in the second. In most sports, individual or otherwise, more points are scored in the second half because players get tired and unequal opposition gets balanced out. Sure, this tends to be somewhat muted in football because the team with the lead sometimes tries to kill the clock rather than run up the score, but the latter stages of contests generally register more scoring/less drama of unbalanced contest.

For example, in regression analysis of male tennis players that have split the 1st 2 sets that are ranked more than 10 or 15 places apart, the speed of the remaining sets generally picked up, and the margin of victory with in the sets increased by something like a game and a half (i.e. if the first two sets were 6-5, 5-6, the next two would be something like 6-4, 6-3, and the time per game and number of rallies for points dropped monotonically).

Though I read that tennis paper in econometrics sophmore year, so those numbers could be off.

by bsr (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 7:32pm

#46 Frankly Joe, I think that is pretty weak. At the most it might be a bit hyperbolic or over the top, but hardly homeristic by any stretch. It was a 21 point win. Sure some people might think that the game was a little closer then the score actually implied but at face value 37-16 is a drubbing and could be considered an embarrising loss in the playoffs.

And if I sound a bit annoyed, it is because I am. Not so much with you, but with any comments that might make the authors on this site think they are still being regarded as a Pat's site. I feel that they have already bent over backwards to not appear Pat's centric to the point of going the other way. You'll hardly ever hear a Pats players be lauded with praise, even the best players on the team. In my opinion, they cast a much more critical eye on pats players then others. So much so that when players have good games they are still pulled apart for the tiniest of flaws. Brady's game verse Jacksonville is a prime example of this, when he was faulted for *ahem* missing a pass, despite having one of the top ratings that week. But maybe that is just my own homerific baises showing through.

by Judy B. (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 8:32pm

"I know, it sounds ridiculous-the New England Patriots are the 3rd best team in football?"

by PantsB (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 8:36pm

#41 - the problem with that is the Jets didn't score after they 'drove down the field' Three FG and the semi-fluke TD were all the points the Jets got.

#43 is right. The NY media and fans were very confident in this game. "Humiliating" is appropriate because they were outclassed in every aspect of the game.

by Pat (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 9:18pm

The Pats totally humiliated the Colts two years ago in the playoffs.

That's hilarious - considering the Pats-Colts game from 2 years ago was about as close as this one through a half. It was only in the 3rd and 4th quarters that New England pulled away.

I'm wondering if in two years, this game will look like a "total humiliation" as well.

by Joe (not verified) :: Thu, 01/11/2007 - 11:10pm

#48: Again, if the authors don't want to be thought of as a Pats site, then they shouldn't make comments like that, plain and simple. It was totally unwarranted in the context of the quote and just comes off as chest-thumping for the Pats.

by jj (not verified) :: Fri, 01/12/2007 - 12:11am


How stinking low do you set your bar, Jets fans? If it was a 28 point loss, would it have been humiliating? How about 35?

If the Pats lose by 21 this weekend, which is certainly within the realm of possibilities, I will be humiliated.

But you Jets cows are munching your hay out in the pasture and don't give a crap that you just lost by TWENTY ONE POINTS, and your noodle arm QB is done for the year, and your season is over, and you don't have bragging rights about anything because you lost by TWENTY ONE POINTS.

What a loser culture. I will hang my head and admit we got beat down if we get pounded for 21 points this weekend.

You pathetic whining little mutts can't find anything better to do than yap for a bone.



by Peter Libero (not verified) :: Fri, 01/12/2007 - 12:24am

Homerism charges aside, I hadn't read this thread until just now but after I saw the quote I did think "humiliating?" They almost never use pejorative words like that in general, and I certainly didn't think an underdog on the road playing a superior team tough for most of the game qualified as "humiliating." It's semantics though, I don't think it should be considered evidence of homerism or bias on the part of the writers.

by Signor Sack (not verified) :: Fri, 01/12/2007 - 12:57am

Now #53 is some grade A homerism. :)

by Grouchy Bills Fan (not verified) :: Fri, 01/12/2007 - 3:26am

Even by the standards of blog comment threads, this whole homerism argument is boring. Of course, I'm biased.

by illegalleaping (not verified) :: Fri, 01/12/2007 - 5:34am

Re: the Wilfork fumble recovery, I thought the best quote of the week was from one of the SI articles: "How many yards did I go?'' Wilfork asked reporters. "Thirty-one? A lot of guys would have done the same thing if they were where I was. I'm a pretty good athlete, and I always like to do stuff other than playing nose tackle. But I was like, 'Man, that's a long way (meaning the end zone). Is it a touchdown yet?' I had to turn on the jets. Two hours later, still no touchdown.''

by Andrew (not verified) :: Fri, 01/12/2007 - 8:31am

Assuming 53 is a Pats fan, it's extra-funny to see him typing about loser culture. Either he jumped on the bandwagon 5 years ago, or he's been a fan of a team with an equally-loser culture from many years.

My money's on bandwagon. It's easy to rant about loser culture if you just jump onto which ever team is winning.

by Dan (not verified) :: Fri, 01/12/2007 - 9:57am

I didn't see many Redskins games this year, so I just took a look at the FO stats to see if they fit with the article on the Redskins. They don't.

Washington's offensive DVOA last year was 12th (11th passing, 9th rushing). This year they were 13th (13th passing, 12th rushing) - in other words, almost exactly the same. The defense, on the other hand, went from 4th in DVOA last year (3rd passing, 9th rushing) to 32nd this year (32nd passing, 19th rushing). In other words, they fell apart, especially against the pass.

So it appears that this long article on the struggles with putting Saunders in charge of the Redskins offense completely missed the main reason for the team's collapse, which was taking place on the other side of the ball.

by Eric P (not verified) :: Fri, 01/12/2007 - 10:50am

#58) It's easy to rant about bandwagon culture when your team hasn't won a thing in over 35 years, isn't it?

The fact is, a Pats fan would have to be at least 40 years old to have known a time when the Jets have been more succesfull than the Pats. The Pats have been to nearly 1 in every 4 superbowls played in the last 21 years. No appearances for the Jets. Whether you want to count regular season wins, division championships, playoff appearances, playoff wins, conference championships, whatever, you'd have to go awfully far back to find any significant time span where the Jets were a better team than the Pats. Since the vast majority of internet football message board posters are more than likely under 40, your cries of bandwagon are foolish and baseless.

by Eric P (not verified) :: Fri, 01/12/2007 - 10:53am

Bottomline: If your a Jets fan, your better off taking the same tack as Lions fans ("We suck and we know it") than you are throwing around bandwagon accusations at Pats fans. At least you won't make such a fool of yourself.

by Rich Conley (not verified) :: Fri, 01/12/2007 - 12:02pm

"and I certainly didn’t think an underdog on the road playing a superior team tough for most of the game qualified as"


The problem was, they didnt "play them tough." They got abused in pretty much every facet of the game. It was flukey that this game was close at the half.

Look at DVOA for the game. Jets -13%, Pats 45%. The Jets got manhandled in this game. People are getting too wrapped up in the fact that the score was close early on, when the play wasnt.

by Pat (not verified) :: Fri, 01/12/2007 - 12:41pm

#62: Well, given home-field advantage, that's very consistent with the Jets and Patriots DVOA all year. It's almost spot on for the Jets.

So I guess it depends on how you look at it: the Jets certainly didn't look like Kansas City, where they looked significantly worse than they did during the year. They were playing pretty much like they did all year. But they didn't look as good as the Patriots, definitely.

by Pat (not verified) :: Fri, 01/12/2007 - 12:43pm

#59: It's a three-part article. The previous article in the series was the defense.

The "the offense fell apart" part was because with all of the acquisitions, the offense was expected to significantly improve, not keep pace.

by jj (not verified) :: Fri, 01/12/2007 - 12:58pm

Yeah, I am a homer. I am proud to be a Pats fan.


I'm glad you losers are making excuses for losing by twenty one points because it shows just how low you set the bar for your team.



You thought a 3 point victory against us was your superbowl this year, and your team of perennial PRETENDERS thought beating us by 3 was the highlight of the season.



by throughthelookingglass (not verified) :: Fri, 01/12/2007 - 3:05pm

12-That's hilarious. Funniest thing I've seen in a long time.

Keith Davis is now one of my favorite players.

by Pat on the back (not verified) :: Fri, 01/12/2007 - 5:46pm

Note: I meant AP, not SI, all-pro.

by jj (not verified) :: Fri, 01/12/2007 - 6:10pm


The Pats were good in the 70's, and would have won some superbowls if they had Brady instead of Grogan, IMO.

They were good in the 80's for long enought to get to a superbowl. I don't think Brady could have helped against the Bears.....

They were good in the mid 90's all the way through today, and appear to be in good shape potentially into the future for as long or longer than the current Jets appear to be slightly above mediocre.

And the years we stunk, we admitted as much.


If we lose next week by anything more than a touchdown, I will consider our butts kicked. And lose we might, because the Chargers are good. Lord forbid we lose by a whopping twenty one points. WOW! THAT WOULD SUCK!

by DGL (not verified) :: Sat, 01/13/2007 - 2:08am

#63: You mean, The Jets are who we thought they were?

by Peter Libero (not verified) :: Mon, 01/15/2007 - 4:23am

62: Eye of the beholder, I suppose. Bill Simmons admits he was terrified through at least part of that game. The Jets were within a touchdown until the final play of the third quarter, and then narrowed it to a touchdown again in the fourth. I would have to say that's "in it" and "playing it tough," however they managed it. Yardage was close for the game, and when the Pats took over in the middle of the third (when the game was 17-13) it was 201 to 156 for the Pats.

I don't know why that's "abused," and while the final score was very lopsided, I don't think it was a humiliation for a road underdog.