That would be the sign of a GM who just wants PR and not building a winning team. Who trades for a guy they only keep for 9 games? And what constitutes good or bad? I mean Harvin has what, 22 receptions this year and people are complaining he isn't having a good season.
Last time I checked, Decker has what, 24 receptions and injury issues. So would the Jets cut him or trade him? Probably not, but Harvin has played 6 regular season games for Seattle and that's what they did to him.
The idea is for Harvin to be on the team next season and he probably will make $10 million or close to it. If Harvin goes on having a similar season as he's had and Decker goes on like he has, why would Harvin take less money than Decker makes?
I just think Jets fans live in a fantasy land where Harvin plays well and then renegotiates for no guaranteed money and $4 million a year. Yeah ok. The other scenario is the Jets cut him after the season, a season where they could go 6-3 from here on out and finish 7-9. So what was the point in trading for Harvin for 9 games on a losing team?
That's a weak argument. Patterson never played all preseason because he was injured, not because he went nuts. And wow. a guy who missed more games than he's played over a 9 year career is inured again. Sorry but Patterson was just a dumb move and using the "he went nuts" excuse is a lame argument. Patterson was a bad signing and people just can't admit that for some reason and try to blame it on him going nuts.
McDougle missed all of last year and was a 3rd round pick, who counts on that kind of guy to be your starting CB?
And Milliner was injured last year and stunk for most of the season.
So yeah, coming into the season hoping that those guys were going to be the ones starting, sorry but that's just a stupid GM.
The Cowboys have spent the past few seasons drafting OL in the first round and the guys turned out to be decent players.
The Jets drafted crap for the most part and the OL they did draft aren't very good. Plus they have a QB who can throw 30 TDs in a season. Yeah he seems to choke, as do the Cowboys, but the Cowboys lost games last year because the defense stunk, not the offense. I mean they lost a game after the offense put up like 45 points.
So who thought the Cowboys offense was no good? Nobody. It was the defense that sucked.
Marvin Lewis was the DC when Billick won a super bowl with the Ravens. And Harbaugh won a SB with the Ravens after Rex was out of Baltimore and the NYJ HC. So the truth is when Rex as DC or HC, he's never even gotten to a super bowl.
You do realize they were blown out 6 times last season and really got two gift wins. This season they didn't get a gift win yet so Sometimes you get lucky and some idiot pushes the QB out of bounds 10 seconds after he's out of bounds and sometimes a player leaves the QB alone and there is no penalty and the Jets lose. Plus, Idzik pretty much failed at drafting players, failed at signing free agents and never wound up fixing huge problems. I don't think they will finish 2-14 like many people do, but 5-11 or 6-10 is what this team is and what they really were last season. The problem is Idzik hasn't done anything to improve the team and the young talent is pretty much a disaster so far besides one guy. Amaro has potential as does Pryor, but when you have a ton of draft picks and a ton of money and wind up with mostly bad talent or guys who can't even make the team or stay healthy, it's a disaster waiting to happen.
The Pats cheated, got away with it, and it helped them win super bowls. And the NFL covered it up and destroyed the tapes. Nobody destroys tapes unless they are hiding something. It really is that simple. But the Pats have been to multiple super bowls since, been to many AFC Championship games and won plenty of division titles. So yeah they haven't won a super bowl since, but it's not like Peyton Manning has won 10 super bowls since 2004 or Aaron Rodgers wins every year either.
It is what it is, but it is odd that people ignore the fact Mangini was a part of the cheating Patriot organization and people welcomed him with open arms in NY when he became HC.
it is BS because the Patriots and Broncos are both younger than the Jets and yet still have QBs close to 40 years old. The Chargers and Colts are close to the Raiders in age and yet have QBs that are battling for the MVP. And the Chargers QB isn't young either.
And the Rams and Jags are the youngest teams in the NFL and stink while the Raiders are the oldest and still stink.
So yeah the Jets "youth" will get better as the season goes on, but somehow the Broncos, Pats, Chiefs, Browns, Bills, etc won't? All those teams are younger than the Jets.
The BS is the fact that age doesn't make a team win or lose, it's the players on the team.
What is this BS about young teams. Every team is young in the NFL now. The youngest team (Rams) is like 25 years old or something and the oldest is the Raiders at like 27.5 years avg age. So the excuse that "young teams" will get better as the season goes on goes for every damn team in the NFL now, not just the Jets.
It's not just about the QB. The Seahawks were terrible at finding a QB until Wilson beat out Matt Flynn. But they spend a lot of time trading for, signing, etc that "right" QB. But they were also building a good team. Idzik and the Jets so far aren't building anything so even if they get lucky next year and wind up with some great QB in the 3rd round, the team still stinks. And we hope the young guys get better, but so far most of Idziks' picks and signings have not been something where you can say "next year he will find some great players" and those guys will contribute as soon as possible.
Most of the picks in Seattle were because of Pete Carroll. The GM was more the money guy compared to the guy picking the players.
The truth is, Pete was hired first, and then he had a hand in picking the GM and had control of players being picked.
The Jets don't seem to want Rex to have anything to do with picking the players, they want Idzik and his staff doing that. Which means Seattle and the Jets are nothing alike in the way they are building a team.
When you go 18-1, it's more than just the QB. When you go 11-5 with a backup QB, it's not just Brady.
And it wasn't like Brady was great his first postseason. The Pats first super bowl run was won because they played great defense, not because Brady was great. He wasn't even as good as Sanchez in all honesty. But the Pats defense created turnovers and held one of the best offenses to 17 points. And their kicker made a huge kick in snow and another 48 yarder to win a super bowl. If Adam has one of those "wide left" moments, is Brady more like Kelly than Brady? Brady deserves a lot of credit for being great over the years, but lets be honest, he wasn't the HOF QB everybody thinks of him now those first few years.
I can't stand BB, but when you win something like 12 Division titles in 14 years, go 11-5 with a backup QB, the guy is obviously doing something right. And people make Rex out to be some kind of hero because he went to back to back AFC Championship games. The Pats have been to 3 straight AFC Championship games, was in a super bowl and came close to winning it, etc. So if the Pats have nobody but Brady, that's some pretty damn impressive coaching.