Content available exclusively for subscribers
Time for some Sunday night Jets’ Website Whispers – more of the good stuff. In this edition, we delve into a couple of topics, including the 3-4, 4-3 issue, and a misconception thrown out about the Jets’ old offense . . .
A “story” late last week can best be described with this Daily News headline – “NY Jets say they may scrap 3-4 defense at times in favor of 4-3 setup.”
This is really much ado about nothing.
They have mixed in the 4-3 in the past.
I reached out to a guy who chronicles the Jets defensive looks in each game.
“The Jets gave a 4-3 look occasionally during the Rex years,” said the chronicler. “But I think what often happened is that the 4-3 look came about because Bryan Thomas or Calvin Pace would line up in a 3-point stance, so it was one of those 3-4 personnel, 4-3 alignment situations.
“That headline, ‘Jets say they may scrap scrap 3-4 defense at times…’, is misleading. When you scrap something, you’re throwing it out entirely. You can’t scrap something a little bit,
in my opinion. That is one of those headlines that sounds like it is delivering more than it really is. Jets scrap 3-4? Holy crap! No, actually they may be reducing the amount of their 3-4 looks but they’re not getting rid of it altogether. At least I don’t think so.” . . .
Jenny Vrentas did a long Sunday story on the Jets’ new offense.
In the article, Santonio Holmes said something that caught my attention.
“It gives (Sanchez) options now,” Holmes told the Star-Ledger. “He doesn’t have to stare down one receiver to get him the ball. He can throw the ball wherever he wants to, based on the coverage.”
What?
Brian Schottenheimer is now being accused of forcing Sanchez to stare down one receiver?
That is preposterous.
The Jets were running the same offense as the San Diego Chargers. Phillip Rivers surveys the field and sprays the ball over the place to a myriad of weapons. That is the B-Schotty offense.
The Jets did the right thing moving on from Schottenheimer to Tony Sparano. It was time for a change.
But to act like B-Schotty was forcing Sanchez to throw it to his first read, is putting the cart before the horse.
That issue is on Sanchez, not Schottenheimer.
Mark has a telegraphing problem. We all know that.
What offensive coordinator in their right mind would promote that sort of approach with his quarterback?
That is not true.
“That is disingenuous,” said one New York football scribe aobut the Holmes’ quote. “I saw the one-on-one (with Vrentas and Holmes). He looked like he was double-parked. I’m sure he just wanted to get her off his back, so he said whatever she was looking for. How the heck would he know Sanchez’s reads when he often didn’t know his own routes?”
And honestly, from everything that I’ve gleaned from talking to different people around the league; the reads in Tony’s offense are simpler than Schottenheimer’s.
Sanchez should perform better with Tony’s approach – less bells and whistles – more basic football. Rex Ryan and Mike Tannenbaum know this, and that is why Tony was hired. This offense is a much better fit for Sanchez than the old one.
But there is no way the old offense was promoting one-read passes.
(Premium will return on Tuesday by 9 pm.)