Writers \ Bloggers
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by win4ever

  1. I'm not saying he's great at all. I'm just saying he's better than Fitz.
  2. Again, how many starts did he get the last two years? I've also posted numbers showing that Geno was better than Fitz up until this point in their careers (First 900 passes or so). 11-18, 57.5%, 3.1 TD%, 4.2 INT%, 6.9 Y/A, 185.7 Y/G, 71.5 ratings in ages 23 and 24 (Geno Smith) 10-17, 59.5%, 3.2 TD %, 3.5 INT%, 6.1 Y/A, 199.7 Y/G, 73.1 ratings in ages 23 and 24 Who is the second guy?
  3. An example of the league underpaying someone because of a lack of exposure. What does Drew Brees and Matt Stafford have anything to do with the Jets QB situation? My whole point is this, Geno Smith, if given a chance to start last year and been able to stay healthy, he would make more than Ryan Fitzpatrick. His lack of starts and injury means he has to take a one year contract where he can prove his value if he gets a shot. Same thing with Edleman, or even Tyrod taking a chance to prove things if they get a shot. It doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things because I doubt GMs are going to read these posts and reevaluate their thinking, but I refuse to accept that Ryan Fitzpatrick was the right choice for the team last year, based on the contracts that they got this year, when both of them took pay cuts, and only one of them actually played for any significant time last year. If Geno had played even 5 games, and still got less money, then I would have absolutely no problem.
  4. So the league was wise to ignore Edleman's first 13 starts?
  5. So he is now a known commodity with 1 start over 2 years? In 2013, Julian Edleman signed a contract for one year and 765,000, after starting a grand total of 13 games prior in 4 combined seasons. The same season, the Pats themselves paid Danny Amendola 28 million over 5 years. Who's the better player? Heyward-Bay got 2.5 million. Who's the better player? So if NFL teams established him as a bust with his contract, were they right?
  6. So then, why did teams pass on Taylor? Again, so why did teams pass on Taylor?
  7. Nope, one is unknown because of a lack of exposure like Tyrod, the other was established. You can go on with Stafford or Peyton or Brees as examples but they are different because they were stars before they got injured, or in Stafford's case hypothetically injured.
  8. How many starts in the last two years? Now, I'm not sure he will get the playing time. But assuming he gets 4+ starts, I'll say he makes more than Fitz is making this year.
  9. Again, established vs. non established. That's like saying Gronk, still getting money even with injuries, because he's already established.
  10. Tyrod didn't get more money, he got the similar AAV, which just means that both of them got less money because there was a lack of exposure. In fact, if we learned anything from the negotiations last year with Fitz, players want similar money with less years because then they can rework the deal next year. You argued that the NFL sides with Fitz because he got more money, and I countered with Shaun Hill. The league last saw Geno Smith fully in 2014, which is exactly why he didn't get the money that Fitz did.
  11. Drew Brees was an established QB when he hit free agency, with the Chargers with the Chargers sitting first round pick Philip Rivers for two years for him. Yes, he got injured, but Brees was coming off two years where he threw for over 64% with 27 and 24 touchdowns. Are you really comparing that situation to Brees as to why Geno wouldn't get money?
  12. You said the reason Tyrod didn't get money was because there was a lack of starts, implying that the greater exposure through starts would have led him to more money, right? So if you can use the lack of starts for Tryod not getting money, why can't Geno use the lack of starts the last two years as his reason? My whole point was that Geno didn't get paid more because he didn't start the last two years, aside from one game. Tyrod didn't start for Baltimore either, therefore limiting his value as well. So Tyrod explains my point that a lack of exposure leads to limited contracts, plus an injury. You also countered with Matt Stafford, but that again goes into established star status instead of the guys we are talking about. How would any team know how good/bad Tyrod was without exposure? In the same theory, how would anyone know about Geno without recent starts? Yes, good young QBs will make money, but they also have to be play. If Geno played the second half of this season and still got that contract, then I wouldn't contest it. But I'm not judging Geno vs. Fitz based on the contract they received because Bowles was too scared to bench a QB one year, and then Geno got hurt in the first game he played this year.
  13. How many NFL starts did Fitz have when he signed? How many NFL starts did Geno have when he signed?
  14. In 2015, veteran Shaun Hill got a 2 year $6 million contract. Same year, youngster Tyrod got a 3 year, $3,3 million contract. Who would you rather have? The old veteran career back up? Or the young guy with potential? So why didn't Tyrod get a bigger contract? Geno got $850K because he's coming off an injury and sitting for essentially two years.
  15. Matt Stafford is an elite QB, on pace to earn quite possibly the biggest QB contract in history (more thanks to timing, but still) and you are comparing him and Geno's situation? Why not use Tyrod Taylor then? Back-up QB, gets to the Pro-Bowl, has basically the same AAV as Geno is making this year when he first signs, and then gets a contract?
  16. There's actually a conspiracy theory that states the Titanic was actually it's sister ship, which was damaged in a collision with a Navy ship and facing heavy losses. So the company repainted it the Titanic and then sunk the ship on purpose for insurance money to keep company afloat. Similar to how Fitz took over after the starter was damaged in Geno, and led to a disaster, lol. Geno Smith got less money because he basically hasn't played the last two years. But no point in spinning the wheel here again, time to just move on I guess.
  17. Can he? Sure Will he? Probably not. The odds are stacked against him for a couple of reasons: Contract: Hackenberg is in his second year, which means that if he's good, the Jets will get two seasons of good QB play while getting great value on the contract. This would of course mean that they have to pay him before his 4th year and get a long term contract. Petty is in his third year, thus the Jets would only get one good year of under-paid performance (if he's good) thus it makes more financial sense for the Jets to push Hackenberg and give him the shot over Petty if all things are close. Style: Gailey's system was easier to read, and somewhat similar to the college system Petty ran, where he made a lot of reads at the line, and depended on one on one match ups. It wasn't nearly as wide open, but the QB responsibilities were similar. Morton most likely won't have the same system, which means he has to learn a new system that is completely different than the one he ran in college and the first two years in the NFL. I do think he should be the No. 2 QB on the depth chart because we gain absolutely nothing by starting McCown this year.
  18. I think the biggest difference between Gronk and Amaro was that, Gronk was a good blocker even in college, so there wasn't much of a transition needed. Amaro was a horrible blocker, and spent most of his time at WR. Not only that, he ran a limited route tree at college because of the system, so he had the same issues that someone like Chad Hansen faces with the need to learn all the routes, even from the slot. I think TE should be graded on a curve based on their blocking skills, but we seemed to miss that completely. Someone like Legget is pretty close to Amaro (slower) but with better hands, and he dropped much further this year, mainly because he wasn't the featured receiver on his offense. My issue with the whole thing was that, they drafted a glorified receiver. If Amaro had been a good blocker in college, where he came from a traditional system, I would have been completely fine with the pick because we were thin at that position too. However, we pretty much had no one at WR besides Decker, and we ignored it in the deepest draft going after a guy that you really had to stretch to think he would make the transition to an in-line blocker. If they picked say Latimore, and he failed, I would be able to live with it better because at least they made the right decision. I don't blame Idzik for the Milliner pick, because it was a need pick and the top rated guy by most people at the position. The WR position was different that year, because you could get a top tier guy later than usual because of the depth. Someone like Cooks goes top 10 in this year's draft, and Allen Robinson definitely goes in the first round. And when they made picks, it was guys rated much lower as well. Saunders wasn't projected anywhere near where he was picked, neither was Evans. Same thing with Pryor, because he was a hard hitting SS in a league cutting down on hard hits and relying more and more on passing. If Dix was picked and he fell on his face, I would at least understand the logic behind the pick because it made sense at the time. That was a weird draft for QBs because things fell differently than usual. I have no idea why Houston passed on Carr, because it fell to them perfectly. Clowney was a prospect they couldn't pass up, kinda reminded me of the Bush/Williams draft where they went with Williams. I think the issue there was that O'Brien fell in love with Mallet while being on the Pats and thought he was a hidden gem he could mold. He was wrong.
  19. They were the original hot take/first report thing that we so despise now. Both came off with strong opinions and would talk down to people that disagreed, but they worked perfectly because they were so passionate about it. It worked for the market, because it was a love/hate market. Chances are if you were a Jets fan, you hated the Giants. Knicks fan? Hated the Nets. Yankees fan? Hated the Mets. Rangers fan? Hated Islanders and Devils. And vice versa. So they could appeal to pretty much all the crowds because if they were complimenting your team, obviously you cared. If they were trashing any of the other teams, you liked it as well because a high amount of people hated the other fan bases. So for 2/3 scenarios (loving your team, and hating your rival) you loved the show, which is why people kept tuning in over and over again. And they had diverse approaches, with Mike being the big picture "I know more than you" approach, with Chris being the in the moment guy with a "I care more than you" approach. Their personalities played off each other, and they would convince people of their knowledge because they chose the content. I used to listen to them a lot, and really valued their opinions until somewhere around 2007/2008. Mike was a proclaimed big Yankees fan, and the Yankees promoted Phil Hughes and then later Joba Chamberlain. Most general Yankee fans didn't know who they were in depth, but heard some rumblings. Mike had absolutely no idea who they were. Both times had to bring in an MILB guy to fill them in, and at that moment I figured, it's pretty much all an act. They just gravitate towards the push button issues, rather than actually be knowledgeable of the teams they follow. It's the same formula that ESPN has tried on TV, one calm guy that thinks he knows more than you (Wilbon, Bayless, etc) and one guy who is just passionate (Kornheiser, Stephan A. Smith) and hoping people go back and forth and root for both people at different times. It doesn't work quite as well because if you are a Yankee fan, most likely you don't HATE say the Padres, or if you are a Jets fan, you don't despise the Cardinals in the same way, so it's easier for people to call out BS. Mike had connections, that was the big thing about him, because this is before the internet was big, and twitter became the instant go to place. He knew rumors, which made it worth it to listen to him. I always thought he was behind in terms of actual game knowledge, probably because they had to concentrate on so many levels of sports and stories. Russo had the hysterics, he was bound to lose it at times. I mostly always hated the callers because it was the same idiotic thing, over and over again. Like today would be "First time, long time, I love your show Mike and Chris, would really like to know if the Jets would entertain trading for Andrew Luck, maybe we can give them a first and Bryce Petty, I'll hang up and listen" type calls that are just stupid.
  20. The worst part about that is, Enunwa was left on the practice squad for most of the year, open for another team plucking him off, which shows the vote of confidence they had on him. I never understood how they could pick all 12 guys, when there just isn't that much room to fit all these new guys in. I can understand passing on QB, Geno looked improved the last 4 games, and I could see them leaning away, since he did play with horrible receivers. The one thing I have no idea how to explain is why in God's name did we pick Pryor? He made no sense whatsoever. We needed a FS (with Dix still on the board) and we picked this idiot? Cooks or Dix there was the obvious choice. Then Jace Amaro over Allen Robinson, Moncrief? Amaro can't block much at all, so basically he's a WR in a TE's body, so why would we pick him over Robinson or Moncrief? I still don't get how someone rated Amaro over Robinson. Amaro ran a 4.6 at his pro day, while Robinson ran a 4.47. Robinson's vertical, 3 cone, broad jump, shuttle, everything blows him away. I get the curve for TE's if they can block at all because that's a different dimension. However, ones that can't block are just glorified receivers. I can understand someone like Evan Engram going high because he's a glorified receiver, but at least he can run fast and is much more mobile than some guy like Amaro. Idzik had the same fascination with David Nelson. Let's put a big slow guy out there that any LB on the opposing team can out run. Idzik failed that year at an incredible pace. He picked Milliner and that sucked because of injuries. But I can't blame him for that because the pick made sense, we had a need, and he was a top rated corner and athlete. I can't blame him for not seeing the injury history. However, his 2014 draft might have been one of the worst performances ever by a GM. He did everything right in adding the picks and then got schooled. Dix/Robinson or Cooks/Robinson and Idzik is still the GM, IMO.
  21. If they can keep him off, it'd work out for the Vikings, but I'm guessing it's going to be messy if Bridgewater can play and they intentionally leave him on the PUP. I heard he was already working out and stuff without braces, so it might be hard for them to argue, but it's conceivable. I would make an inquiry if he shows anything this year of being over his injury issue, although then I'm guessing the only way he would be able to show that is if Bradford sucked, or got injured. And that would mean, they would be reluctant to move on from Teddy, if the contract didn't toll. He definitely did show that he could be a decent QB before the injury and I was high on him coming into the draft as well. I think the only knock was really his arm strength. Assuming Hackenberg/Petty look like they aren't the answers next year, I really want the Jets to go in on QBs next year. Heck, I wouldn't even blame them if they repeated the safeties thing this year and picked two in the first two rounds. It's one of the more loaded drafts I've seen in a long time at QB. Hypothetically, let's say you are at pick 5. Darnold/Rosen/Allen are in the draft. Do you trade up to 3? Do you try to get Bridgewater or mega contract to Cousins? Do you pick a second tier guy? All this assumes Hackenberg/Petty are out of the picture. What would you do? If you are moving up, what would you give up? If you sign Cousins, are you willing to make him highest paid QB? Which second tier guy would you go for at 5? I think that's my biggest fear with the Jets next season, that they somehow win about 3-4 games, with both Hackenberg/Petty looking horrible. I expect Darnold/Rosen/Allen to test really well to cement the top three to the point that moving up from anywhere will be enormous.
  22. Honestly, if we miss out on the top three, and our QB options suck, I could see him coming in as an option. On a draft basis, Rudolph, Mayfield, Jackson, Browning, Rypien, Stiddart are all options in the second and third tier of QBs. I would roll with any of them and hope we can coach them up. On that topic, I'd fire Bowles before he gets to the locker room at the end of the season.
  23. From what I understand, why offer the pick? The Vikings declined his 5th year option, which means this is his walk year, coming back from a significant injury. Unless he lights it up and they franchise tag him, he will be a free agent. So if we go in the 6 win range and pick near the bottom half of the top 10, we can just sign him outright without the pick. His injury was pretty substantial, so I would like to see how he does coming back before making an investment.