Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 76

Thread: The problem with this whole QB "thing"

  1. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by Paradis View Post
    I don't even know why i try. It's the same squad of Jackals- draft! draft! draft! QuuuuuBeee!

    no sense of roster management or longterm viability
    Are you honestly saying...If the scouts and GM really like a QB....Let's say they really like Manuel and think he has a legit shot to be a top 10 NFL QB - and he's there at 39 - they should pass on him because it wouldn't be smart roster management?

  2. #42
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    7,078
    Quote Originally Posted by Beerfish View Post
    No problem at all with this line of thinking, but if we choose Barkley for instance in the 2nd round, he is going to be our QB for 4 years. (Might not start this year). Teams do not draft a Qb this year early and then toss them aside after a year if they do not like what they see. There are a lot of ways to get a QB and the dart board theory is not the best way to do it.

    You can try and get upgrades via trade or draft so if we decided to go with Barkley then you had better be right that he is going to be a really good starter because you will commit to finding out for a number of years, not just one.
    No. He will not be the QB for 4 years if he sucks.

    And if they are in a position to draft a superstar QB next year, they will draft him and trade Barkley.

    Having too many QBs is not a problem. It's a wonderful position to be in. I'm surprised you don't see it that way.

  3. #43
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    the 80s
    Posts
    8,183
    Quote Originally Posted by fidelioion View Post
    Are you honestly saying...If the scouts and GM really like a QB....Let's say they really like Manuel and think he has a legit shot to be a top 10 NFL QB - and he's there at 39 - they should pass on him because it wouldn't be smart roster management?
    No! I totally think that IF they thought that, then sure. take him... but i don't think such a guy exists. This is the worst QB class i've seen in the last 10 years.

    Dreamers remark, and i quote "...just take Barkley or Glennon for the love of god" sums exactly what i'm vehemently against. That sentiment and mentality is not what winning franchises do. When climb to the top of the corporate ladder, you don't find VPs and Ex. Directors wearing desperation cologne.

    So we don't NEED to draft a QB. Should we? maybe in the later rounds. Never hurts to have a going on deck. What we need to be looking at is a 3 year plan.

  4. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by johnnysd View Post
    I find this thread incredibly silly.

    We do NOT have a viable QB. The solution to that is not to keep playing him or sign a broken down veteran.

    a rookie cannot play worse than Sanchez. Period.

    All of the top QB candidates have some scouts that think they will be franchise QBs, but all of them see weaknesses that could prevent that from happening. That does not mean, especially with the new salary scale for rookies, that you pass over the opportunity to draft one of these QBs.

    There is no guarantee for next years draft. Everyone thought Barkley would be a Top 5 pick last year. I think the Jets MUST draft QB.
    Exactly, most QB prospects have strengths and weaknesses, some of them pan out, some don't. Yes, there is no Luck or Peyton type of prospect this year, but I bet that there will be a couple guys taken who end up as long-term starters in this league. You don't need Rodgers or Brady to win a SB. You can have an inconsistent guy who is top 10 and still win. Giants and Ravens have proved this last couple years.

    Our QB situation is beyond awful. Many measurables actually rated Sanchez in the mid-30s among QBs that played last season even though there are only 32 teams. Do people not realize how unacceptable that type of production is from your team's most important player? And Garrard as a solution? The same guy who couldn't even make it through the Phins training camp? I mean we are literally bottom of the barrel and people are scoffing at the notion of trying to improve it through the draft. All because they assume there will be 20 hypothetical stud QBs just waiting to be taken in 2014.

  5. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by Paradis View Post
    I don't even know why i try. It's the same squad of Jackals- draft! draft! draft! QuuuuuBeee!

    no sense of roster management or longterm viability
    It comes to opinion...

    Out of all of the QB's in this draft, percentages suggest that at least one of them will be pretty good. Many will undoubtedly bust, but one of them will probably be pretty good. It comes down to us finding that QB.


    And QB, is BY FAR, the most important position on the field. Not even close anymore with today's NFL.

    I think Manuel can legitimately be a top 10 QB and I'd go out of my way to draft him. No team can succeed without a good QB, and the position should be treated extra special because of that.

    It's all a waste of time unless we have a good one.


    I think they will all bust for the most part outside of Manuel, perhaps Geno is decent. But that isn't good enough and I don't want Geno. Also want to throw in that there is a small chance Glennon turns into a very good QB. He's the only other guy who makes me say maybe sometimes.

  6. #46
    Quote Originally Posted by fidelioion View Post
    Are you honestly saying...If the scouts and GM really like a QB....Let's say they really like Manuel and think he has a legit shot to be a top 10 NFL QB - and he's there at 39 - they should pass on him because it wouldn't be smart roster management?
    If Idzik is truly trying to set Rex up to fail this year I think that is the case. Not sure if that is what he is really saying with that though it is just how I interpret it. If Idzik drafts a QB it means Rex may get a pass this year as he is grooming a new QB. Seems to me most of the people saying we are playing Sanchez are the ones who think this is Idziks big plan to suck. Thing is no one is thinking well if he does this and Sanchez does put up 85+ QBR what then. Seems like a bigger gamble to play him IMO then it does to just draft a better prospect. Glennon, Barkley, Geno, and Nassib are all better prospects at this point given Sanchez's ability to handle the game mentally.

  7. #47
    Quote Originally Posted by Paradis View Post
    No! I totally think that IF they thought that, then sure. take him... but i don't think such a guy exists. This is the worst QB class i've seen in the last 10 years.

    Dreamers remark, and i quote "...just take Barkley or Glennon for the love of god" sums exactly what i'm vehemently against. That sentiment and mentality is not what winning franchises do. When climb to the top of the corporate ladder, you don't find VPs and Ex. Directors wearing desperation cologne.

    So we don't NEED to draft a QB. Should we? maybe in the later rounds. Never hurts to have a going on deck. What we need to be looking at is a 3 year plan.
    Actually think Bradford's draft was worse. I disliked Bradford and beyond him was a joke.

    This year is legitimately full of 2nd rounders. One guy in Geno who's a mid first in a normal world.

  8. #48
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    7,078
    Quote Originally Posted by Paradis View Post
    Not really. We made our bed this year, any QB we take should be no more than a late round developmental guy. Makes more sense to take a shot a blue chip franchise quarterback next year...

    "meh meh meh, maybe they're won't be one..."

    Ya, maybe. But there's certainly not one this year.
    Please, please stop saying there is no good QB in this years class as if is a stone cold fact.

    It's your opinion and your opinion means jack sh!t in the grand scheme if things, your opinion means nothing more or less than mine or anybody else's.

    It does not make more sense to take a shot at a blue chip QB prospect next year because you don't know for sure if there will be a blue chip QB prospect next year. That's like saying I'm not going to bang this girl tonight because Ill find a hotter one tomorrow night.
    Last edited by TheMikeIsHot; 04-23-2013 at 02:12 PM.

  9. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by Paradis View Post
    No! I totally think that IF they thought that, then sure. take him... but i don't think such a guy exists. This is the worst QB class i've seen in the last 10 years.

    Dreamers remark, and i quote "...just take Barkley or Glennon for the love of god" sums exactly what i'm vehemently against. That sentiment and mentality is not what winning franchises do. When climb to the top of the corporate ladder, you don't find VPs and Ex. Directors wearing desperation cologne.

    So we don't NEED to draft a QB. Should we? maybe in the later rounds. Never hurts to have a going on deck. What we need to be looking at is a 3 year plan.
    You cant possibly believe no one in this class is worth a 2nd rounder. There is too much talent in this group to believe that. Your talking hacks like Pat White and Clements have gone in the 2nd man.

  10. #50
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    the 80s
    Posts
    8,183
    Quote Originally Posted by TheMikeIsHot View Post
    And if they are in a position to draft a superstar QB next year, they will draft him and trade Barkley. Having too many QBs is not a problem. It's a wonderful position to be in. I'm surprised you don't see it that way.


  11. #51
    Quote Originally Posted by Paradis View Post
    No! I totally think that IF they thought that, then sure. take him... but i don't think such a guy exists. This is the worst QB class i've seen in the last 10 years.

    Dreamers remark, and i quote "...just take Barkley or Glennon for the love of god" sums exactly what i'm vehemently against. That sentiment and mentality is not what winning franchises do. When climb to the top of the corporate ladder, you don't find VPs and Ex. Directors wearing desperation cologne.

    So we don't NEED to draft a QB. Should we? maybe in the later rounds. Never hurts to have a going on deck. What we need to be looking at is a 3 year plan.
    Agreed - Don't just draft someone for the sake of drafting a QB but also don't NOT draft someone just because you want to wait until next year.

  12. #52
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    7,078
    Quote Originally Posted by Paradis View Post
    Ah so you're the upset, temperamental woman in this picture who is refusing to listen to logic.

    Glad you cleared that up hahaha

  13. #53
    Quote Originally Posted by TheMikeIsHot View Post
    Please, please stop saying there is no good QB in this years class as if is a stone cold fact.

    It's your opinion and your opinion means jack sh!t in the grand scheme if things, your opinion means nothing more or less than mine or anybody else's.

    It does not make more sense to take a shot at a blue chip QB prospect next year because you don't know for sure if there will be a blue chip QB prospect next year. That's like saying I'm not going to bang this girl tonight because Ill find a hotter one tomorrow night.
    There were people saying last year that Wilson could not play in the NFL, the year before that Kaepernick was a terrible reach in the 2nd and not an NFL QB, once upon a time that Rodgers was a reach as a top 5 pick and should not even be taken in the 1st round. God only knows what they were saying about Brady, assuming anyone even knew who he was. People say a lot of things about prospects that turn out to be terribly untrue. The same will hold of this year's crop of QBs when a couple rise up and surprise.

  14. #54
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    the 80s
    Posts
    8,183
    Quote Originally Posted by TheMikeIsHot View Post
    Please, please stop saying there is no good QB in this years class as if is a stone cold fact.

    It's your opinion and your opinion means jack sh!t in the grand scheme if things, your opinion means nothing more or less than mine or anybody else's.

    It does not make more sense to take a shot at a blue chip QB prospect next year because you don't know for sure if there will be a blue chip QB prospect next year. That's like saying I'm not going to bang this girl tonight because Ill find a hotter one tomorrow night.
    I said that based on my belief that no blue chip exits this year, and there may some next year. Its a definite no, followed by a maybe. that's what i mean by certain. that's what operating under the ideology of. I personally don't want a glennon, or a nassib. The andy dalton's and kevin kolbs of the NFL rarely win championships.

    Is that so insane? I don't think so.

  15. #55
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    7,078
    Quote Originally Posted by Paradis View Post
    I said that based on my belief that no blue chip exits this year, and there may some next year. Its a definite no, followed by a maybe. that's what i mean by certain. that's what operating under the ideology of. I personally don't want a glennon, or a nassib. The andy dalton's and kevin kolbs of the NFL rarely win championships.

    Is that so insane? I don't think so.
    It's not insane, it's an opinion and I respect yours.

    I am not a big fan of either of those guys either, to be honest. But if they did pick one of them, it doesn't mean they are married to him for 3-5 years.

    If your blue chipper is available next year, they can get him if they want him bad enough.

    Drew Brees and Brett Favre are both SB winning QBs taken atop the 2nd round. Kaepernick might win one soon. They were far from perfect prospects yet good enough to be selected in the top 50.

    It does happen. Will it for the Jets? Who the fuk knows.

  16. #56
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    the 80s
    Posts
    8,183
    Quote Originally Posted by TheMikeIsHot View Post
    It's not insane, it's an opinion and I respect yours.

    I am not a big fan of either of those guys either, to be honest. But if they did pick one of them, it doesn't mean they are married to him for 3-5 years.

    If your blue chipper is available next year, they can get him if they want him bad enough.

    Drew Brees and Brett Favre are both SB winning QBs taken atop the 2nd round. Kaepernick might win one soon. They were far from perfect prospects yet good enough to be selected in the top 50.

    It does happen. Will it for the Jets? Who the fuk knows.
    And to be clear, it's not that a team should never gamble on a taking a QB in rounds 2 or 3, but our situation next year is going to be volatile. Guys like Glennon or Manuel truly do need (IMO) at least of full season of tutelage. And Rex and co. are going to have the hand forced to start these guys early if the teams implodes around Sanchez. I just don't see the 2013 Jets as an ideal situation to bring one of those fringe names in. I feel like at least with a Dysert or Scott, that the majority of fans/media would not expect them to see the field so quickly

  17. #57
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    7,078
    Quote Originally Posted by Paradis View Post
    And to be clear, it's not that a team should never gamble on a taking a QB in rounds 2 or 3, but our situation next year is going to be volatile. Guys like Glennon or Manuel truly do need (IMO) at least of full season of tutelage. And Rex and co. are going to have the hand forced to start these guys early if the teams implodes around Sanchez. I just don't see the 2013 Jets as an ideal situation to bring one of those fringe names in. I feel like at least with a Dysert or Scott, that the majority of fans/media would not expect them to see the field so quickly
    Um, remember the outcry for McElpistol to play?

    When the starting QB is trash, the backup immediately becomes a fan favorite... Until he proves that there's a reason why he was the backup.

    I want them to pick a guy who has the ability to be better than Sanchez. Scott and Dysert and the rest of those late round stiffs don't really give me that.

    The fact that the Jets are a mess actually takes some of he pressure off these kids to win right away, if they were given an opportunity this season.

  18. #58
    Let me see if I can clarify Paradis' point for some of you guys.


    A team has a position of need. They do their due diligence on all of the draft prospects at that position for the upcoming draft. They come to the conclusion that none of the prospects will be viable starters in the NFL.


    That team should not draft one of those prospects because "they're the best of the bunch" or "one of these guys has to wind up being pretty good." Every team has holes, and that's just a whole that will have to be filled at a later date.

  19. #59
    Quote Originally Posted by JB1089 View Post
    Let me see if I can clarify Paradis' point for some of you guys.


    A team has a position of need. They do their due diligence on all of the draft prospects at that position for the upcoming draft. They come to the conclusion that none of the prospects will be viable starters in the NFL.


    That team should not draft one of those prospects because "they're the best of the bunch" or "one of these guys has to wind up being pretty good." Every team has holes, and that's just a whole that will have to be filled at a later date.
    History says that conclusion would be very faulty. Also consider they don't have anything remotely close to a "viable starter" at QB currently on the roster.

  20. #60
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Long Island
    Posts
    13,518
    Quote Originally Posted by Beerfish View Post
    No problem at all with this line of thinking, but if we choose Barkley for instance in the 2nd round, he is going to be our QB for 4 years. (Might not start this year). Teams do not draft a Qb this year early and then toss them aside after a year if they do not like what they see. There are a lot of ways to get a QB and the dart board theory is not the best way to do it.

    You can try and get upgrades via trade or draft so if we decided to go with Barkley then you had better be right that he is going to be a really good starter because you will commit to finding out for a number of years, not just one.
    This is simply not true.

    In 2006 we drafted Kellen Clemens in the second round. He didn't play a down his rookie season, started 8 games in 2007, and didn't play a down in 2008. The next year we drafted Sanchez.

    So a second round pick got a whopping half a season to prove his worth before his team gave up on him.

    And nobody is saying to draft a QB for the sake of drafting one. You go by what your scouting department tells you. If they think one of these QBs is worth drafting early, then you do it. You don't worry about what the media says.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us