*****The Official 2007 J-E-T-S JETS JETS JETS THREAD******

[Veecee]

I found this interesting article, one that I completely agree with:

Jets have to sack their 3-4 defense for now
TOM ROCK | [email protected]
September 26, 2007

Eric Mangini said he's been part of "a lot of defenses that have allowed plenty of yards." Not exactly the type of thing that should be printed on the back of inspirational T-shirts. And it's far from comforting for Jets fans who just saw their team give up 424 yards against the Dolphins (who had gained a total of 607 in the previous two games).

Mangini's point was about points, that those are how a defense is measured. He does have some leverage for his argument. Some.

In 2001, the Patriots' first Super Bowl season, they allowed a whopping 334.5 yards per game, 25th most in the NFL, and held opponents to 17.0 points per game, which was sixth best. In that case, yes, yardage was irrelevant.

But in 2003 and 2004, the other two Super Bowl years in which Mangini was an assistant coach under Bill Belichick, the Patriots gave up 291.6 and 310.8 yards per game, respectively, both in the top 10 for those seasons. They were first and second in points allowed.

In 2005, Mangini's only year as a defensive coordinator, the Patriots' defense went back to giving up big yardage, allowing 330.2 per game, 26th most. That year, they also allowed 21.1 points per game, 17th most.

It's ludicrous to totally discount the relationship between yardage allowed and points scored. Are there anomalies? Sure. Are there teams that can bend but not break? Absolutely. Can some teams gear up when it counts the most, compensate for big plays with their own big plays, count on their offense to cover up defensive deficiencies? Yes.

Are the Jets one of those teams? No.

The Jets' defense is ranked 28th in yardage after three weeks ... and 27th in scoring. They've allowed a 47.3-percent third-down conversion rate, which ranks 25th. Teams have had 10 possessions inside the 20 against the Jets and scored seven touchdowns, with three field goals.

However you break it down, the Jets have a bottom-third defense. And bottom-third defenses don't win playoff games. They certainly don't win championships.

The troubling part is they have some top-tier talent that is being wasted in the 3-4 scheme. The Jets have essentially traded in the play-making capabilities of Jonathan Vilma, Shaun Ellis and Dewayne Robertson to make Bryan Thomas the key to the front seven (the same Bryan Thomas who, by the way, has four sacks in the nine games since he signed a late-season contract extension last December and was shut out of the statistics against the Dolphins).

The 3-4 defense works. We've seen it work. It's just not working with the players the Jets have right now. A year and a half after Mangini brought it to New York, there are no more excuses to be made about getting comfortable in it or learning the proper fits.

If the Jets and Mangini are so committed to the 3-4 defense, then they need to start feeding that scheme the proper players. Robertson as an undersized nose tackle is a failed experiment; there's a reason no other successful 3-4 team is without a 320-pound cornerstone. Vilma as a handcuffed inside linebacker is reaching that same proportion of disappointment. Neither is the fault of the players.

The Jets need to abandon the 3-4 as long as they have their current roster. If, during the upcoming offseason, they'd like to return to the 3-4 and make the necessary personnel adjustments, fine. It would be costly but fine. At least then, Jets fans would be able to get a fair sense of the scheme's potential.

Until that time, there will be more mismatched talent struggling to find a home in an inhospitable environment. And more arguments about yardage and points not being related.