What Is Wrong With Jansen?

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Has anyone else noticed that Jon Jansen looks like he has lost a step, or two, or three? He looks slow and not particularly powerful. According to a New York Times article (see link below), Bill Parcells has noticed Jansen's "slippage."

BTW, the Times article is long, but worth reading.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/29/sp...=1&oref=slogin

[illdefined]

off the top, i'd say he's not partcularly suited to sustained pass protection 5yd play after 5yd play. he likes going forward not backward, he's been saying it forever.

[Crat92]

He went to Michigan! Go Bucks!

[Big C]

the achilles injury probably took some power out of him

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by Big C

the achilles injury probably took some power out of him

I thought about that, but it's been two years now.

[MTK]

He's off the roids

[GTripp0012]

Our whole line has been inconsistent this season. Inconsistent is the key word, because it's not like they have played poorly. We have a solid offense. Our problems offensively happen when someone on the OL lets up a key sack or commits a holding penalty in a crucial situation killing a drive. That's just them being inconsistent. If they were the unit they were last year, we would have a top 5 offensive unit, easy. But it's not all that bad just yet. They are all healthy at least, and at the beginning of the season, that was our biggest worry.

[SmootSmack]

He misses his best friend Ramsey

[JWsleep]

His thumbs aren't broken?

[illdefined]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Our whole line has been inconsistent this season. Inconsistent is the key word, because it's not like they have played poorly. We have a solid offense. Our problems offensively happen when someone on the OL lets up a key sack or commits a holding penalty in a crucial situation killing a drive. That's just them being inconsistent. If they were the unit they were last year, we would have a top 5 offensive unit, easy. But it's not all that bad just yet. They are all healthy at least, and at the beginning of the season, that was our biggest worry.

um, they are the exact same unit as last year. and 'consistency' is what precisely what makes a unit "good" or not. as are things like "letting up a key sack" or commiting penalties.

i swear your posts are like jedi mind tricks, GTripp: "no guys, our offense is really good. really!"

you're convinced we have a good offense! maybe we're good on some obscure stat sheet (read the WP article), but the team doesn't have the shutdown defense we've had for years to keep the scores low, and suddenly they've been exposed to not be good ENOUGH.

everyone believes we have the talent to be a much greater offense, but who needs to use all available talent when we can get decent stats using only half the team's potential?

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by illdefined

everyone believes we have the talent to be a much greater offense, but who needs to use all available talent when we can get decent stats using only half the team's potential?

I think we both believe that if we put Campbell in and asked him to do the same things Brunell is doing, there is absolutely no reasonable way our offense could improve. So I think what you really are asking for is an offensive philosophy change to use JC's strengths to maximize our offensive potential.

Well, I really don't believe we have the potential to be too much better than we are. If you look at the offenses that are better than us (FO's efficiency metric), they really do out-talent us.

Indianapolis, Philadelphia, New York Giants, San Diego, St. Louis, New England.

Indy, Phili, St. Louis, and New England all have premier QBs plus weapons. New England runs a similar offensive system to us, and have a great runner in Maroney. They lack a complete back like Portis, and a weapon on the outside like Santana, but they have a bunch of capable recievers like us and use their two TE system effectively. St. Louis has all the weapons Bulger could desire with Holt and Jackson. McNabb is having his best season as a pro right now. And Indy...is Indy.

New York has Barber and Shockey to go with Toomer and Burress, and the Chargers play Gates and Tomlinson every week, plus Philip Rivers is rapidly becoming a great pro.

Did you really expect our offense to be far better than any of these offenses? I really don't think we are only using half our potential. You make a great point when you point out that our offense is built to complement a great defense, which we don't have. But it seems like the easiest solution to this would be to improve the defense. If my theroy is right (or even if it isn't), and the personel we carefully selected to dominate opposing offenses is taking an otherwise mediocre defense and making it shitty, it seems like it should be the DEFENSIVE philosophy that changes, not the offense.

Sure an offensive philosophy change might result in increased production, but when you look at what we were last year, and now what we were this year, adding only no. 2 recievers while losing our blocking TE (arguably no upgrade at all), its REALLY difficult to be dissapointed in the offense. It's not like they are turning it over and putting the D in bad situations. They are moving the ball, scoring when they have good field position, pinning the opponent deep through ball movement and punting when they are given bad field position. And then of course, you watch nameless 31 ranked offense go right down the field on us, either getting points, or putting us in horrid field position.

My central point is this: it seems stupid to take a defensive problem, and try to beat it by improving the offense. Possible, yes. But quite illogical and if we changed our offensive philosophy, I have a hard time seeing an improved offense this season at least.

[illdefined]

i wasn't just talking about JC. i was talking about Lloyd and Randle El.

do you think we're using them to their potential? or is anyone not named Moss and Cooley (who are still being underutilized) doomed to David Patten's fate?

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by illdefined

i wasn't even talking about JC. i was talking about Lloyd and Randle El.

do you think we're using them to their potential? or is anyone not named Moss and Cooley (who are still being underutilized) doomed to David Patten's fate?

OK, take Lloyd and Randle El. What do they bring to the table offensively that, say, a random rookie WR couldn't bring to us? Are we underutilizing them? Yeah, but only because this is a team with Moss and Portis already. They both (Lloyd and El) get about 2 balls a game. But that's what happens when you have 7 different offensive weapons. They ALL get underutilized. Doesn't matter what you do. The reason they don't touch the ball nearly as much as Moss does is because Moss is a special player after the catch. Randle El and Lloyd aren't special players. They are decent NFL recievers who if open should get the ball thrown to them. And they do. But I guess if that makes them "underutilized", then yes I would say they are. It's an impossibility to take Moss, Portis, Cooley, Lloyd and Randle El and use them all to their ability. Peyton Manning as the QB, it still doesn't happen.

I don't really see it as a problem though.

[hesscl34]

It's his 10th year, he's tired of losing...

[illdefined]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

OK, take Lloyd and Randle El. What do they bring to the table offensively that, say, a random rookie WR couldn't bring to us? Are we underutilizing them? Yeah, but only because this is a team with Moss and Portis already. They both (Lloyd and El) get about 2 balls a game. But that's what happens when you have 7 different offensive weapons. They ALL get underutilized. Doesn't matter what you do. The reason they don't touch the ball nearly as much as Moss does is because Moss is a special player after the catch. Randle El and Lloyd aren't special players. They are decent NFL recievers who if open should get the ball thrown to them. And they do. But I guess if that makes them "underutilized", then yes I would say they are. It's an impossibility to take Moss, Portis, Cooley, Lloyd and Randle El and use them all to their ability. Peyton Manning as the QB, it still doesn't happen.

thats a terrible argument. all the offenses you mentioned that were 'better' than us had more than 2 offensive weapons. you telling me Randle El isn't good at YAC?

Peyton Manning had 3 TDs yesterday, none of them to Harrison, all of them to Wayne, his number 2. you may consider Lloyd and ARE only "decent", but then what makes Ladell Betts so great in Brunell's eyes?