Broncos or Mets, which team collapsed the most?

[Stopanimalabuse]

It's funny because in the local media the Jets' collapse is getting all of the attention, while the Broncos and Bucs are not getting much if any attention. The Broncos lost to the Bills, Chiefs, and Raiders, and got crushed to the Chargers. Their quality of opposition was about as easy as you can get, so I think it's just as bad as the Mets losing to the Marlins and Nationals constantly two years ago. What do you think?

[db44]

Of course it's all Jets. Regions always focus on their local teams first and foremost.

The Jets had Brett Favre, who led them well up until the end. Their faltering was way more shocking I'd say. Their three last losses losses came against the Dolphins, Seahawks and 'Niners. Two of three were just as easy to beat as the teams you listed, and losing to Miami at home with everything on the line is unacceptable to the Jets nation. The Jets had the benefit of hosting a warm-weather team at home and couldn't get it done. The Broncos played on the road, in a warm San Diego, contrasted to the cold and show they had been experiencing in the Mile High City. The Broncos had factors against them, the Jets had everything in their favor.

Incidentally, the last loss before those mentioned above was to the Broncos, so the Jets couldn't even beat the team you're comparing them to. The Jets also lost to the Raiders, so don't go pointing fingers there.

But overall, the Mets collapse was the worst, because it was the second-straight year they were pathetic down the strech. A month-long collapse in baseball, with 25 games or so, is worse I think than a three-game one. As a daily game, to lose in such a fashion two years in a row is sad.

[Stopanimalabuse]

Of course it's all Jets. Regions always focus on their local teams first and foremost.

The Jets had Brett Favre, who led them well up until the end. Their faltering was way more shocking I'd say. Their three last losses losses came against the Dolphins, Seahawks and 'Niners. Two of three were just as easy to beat as the teams you listed, and losing to Miami at home with everything on the line is unacceptable to the Jets nation. The Jets had the benefit of hosting a warm-weather team at home and couldn't get it done. The Broncos played on the road, in a warm San Diego, contrasted to the cold and show they had been experiencing in the Mile High City. The Broncos had factors against them, the Jets had everything in their favor.

Incidentally, the last loss before those mentioned above was to the Broncos, so the Jets couldn't even beat the team you're comparing them to. The Jets also lost to the Raiders, so don't go pointing fingers there.

But overall, the Mets collapse was the worst, because it was the second-straight year they were pathetic down the strech. A month-long collapse in baseball, with 25 games or so, is worse I think than a three-game one. As a daily game, to lose in such a fashion two years in a row is sad.
I don't think San Fransisco was playing poorly at the end of the year though. They had a coach and quarterback who actually looked competent. The Jets' collapse was longer than 3 games. 4 games would be a quarter of the season, so collapsing in a quarter of the season like the Jets did does look bad. I was more embarassed by last year's collapse, as that was a record. The 2008 collapse wasn't that bad, but doing it two years in a row makes it even worse. I guess you could say the Mets' was worse.