Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

NY Jets Week One Starting Quarterback: Geno Smith


145 posts in this topic

Posted · Report post

Have Geno learn on the job.  If we had a GOOD QB, I would be along the lines of sitting him.  But we don't...what the hell can Geno learn from Sanchez besides 'do everything exactly the opposite of what I do'?  Seriously...start Geno.  We need to see how he does in games where there is pressure.  Not games against freaking draft bowl opponents like Cleveland and Oakland...

 

Sanchez is a broken man...end of story

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Have Geno learn on the job. If we had a GOOD QB, I would be along the lines of sitting him. But we don't...what the hell can Geno learn from Sanchez besides 'do everything exactly the opposite of what I do'? Seriously...start Geno. We need to see how he does in games where there is pressure. Not games against freaking draft bowl opponents like Cleveland and Oakland...

Sanchez is a broken man...end of story

He can watch from the side and get a feel for the speed of the game.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I guess...but why are we obsessed with him 'sitting and learning'?  5 months ago, if people knew we were going to get Geno, would anyone be talking about 'sitting and learning'?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

the reason why he dropped to 39 is cause he's not ready for prime time. . . JMO. He has talent, but he has to be brought along carefully.

 

Besides isn't handing a job to a player that he didn't earn a mistake they made with Sanchez? If Geno doesn't legitimately beat out Mark, he doesn't deserve to start. 

 

Totally agree.  

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

So by the author's own figures, Sanchez was 9-9 his first two years in games he threw 30 or more times.

 

Not great, not terrible.  Of course, back then he had people to throw to.

 

Sanchez was actually good in maybe 2-3 of those 18 games (and even then he wasn't good start to finish, as he is/was pretty famous for).  The D and special teams and ground game won most of those games for us & Sanchez went along for the ride. And that doesn't even count that two of those losses the D gave up 10 points or less.

 

But dressing up history, to make Sanchez sound better in hindsight than he actually was, is hardly the point of the thread.  If Geno can't beat out Sanchez, he shouldn't be starting.  It's as simple as that.  

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

sanchez

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

the reason why he dropped to 39 is cause he's not ready for prime time. . . JMO. He has talent, but he has to be brought along

Just curious where that Russell Wilson kid dropped to? Guess he wasn't ready to start either.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

i am on the fence with this one. heart says please start geno, can't stomach another season with sanchez. head says let this team work out some kinks before throwing the kid to the wolves. if geno is even or slightly better than sanchez in camp and still doesn't start despite undoubtedly having much more upside, will tell us a lot about rex's confidence level on keeping his job.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Just curious where that Russell Wilson kid dropped to? Guess he wasn't ready to start either.

He actually proved himself to the coaches in the training camps. If Geno can do that start him. Don't see it happening though.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

From all accounts I've read so far, and by the coaches comments, it would appear to be too close to call right now. That tells me he's at least AS good as Stinky Sanchez right now.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Besides isn't handing a job to a player that he didn't earn a mistake they made with Sanchez? If Geno doesn't legitimately beat out Mark, he doesn't deserve to start. 

 

I'll agree with this. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

From all accounts I've read so far, and by the coaches comments, it would appear to be too close to call right now. That tells me he's at least AS good as Stinky Sanchez right now.

 

That's not hard to do.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I don't think we should fear starting Geno right away because of Sanchez.  QB's who have what it takes to play in this game don't get "ruined" because they start from Week 1.  Sanchez didn't work because he sucked.  That would have been the case whether we started him Week 1 of 2009 or Week 1 of 2011.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

 

I don't think we should fear starting Geno right away because of Sanchez.  QB's who have what it takes to play in this game don't get "ruined" because they start from Week 1.  Sanchez didn't work because he sucked.  That would have been the case whether we started him Week 1 of 2009 or Week 1 of 2011.

 

Correct - see Matt Leinart case file.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I don't think we should fear starting Geno right away because of Sanchez.  QB's who have what it takes to play in this game don't get "ruined" because they start from Week 1.  Sanchez didn't work because he sucked.  That would have been the case whether we started him Week 1 of 2009 or Week 1 of 2011.

 

I get what you're saying, and I don't think there needs to be this definitive stance that Geno absolutely cannot start week one no matter what.  That said, I think it's a different story if the coaching staff feels he isn't quite ready yet, and still needs some work on the basics of being able to effectively play the position at the NFL level.  As others have said, if he can't even beat out Sanchez in camp, that would be a pretty strong indication that he's not quite ready.  Trust me, I'd like nothing more than to never have to see Sanchez on the field for the Jets ever again, but at this point the Jets' focus when it comes to the QB position needs to be more about what they feel is best for Geno than anything else.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Meh, I'm not so sure about this one.  In the long term I don't think anyone would argue with this theory, but for week one in it is far from a sure thing.  The simple reason why is that this team, at QB, has absolutely become all about doing what is best for Geno Smith.  If they believe that Geno isn't going to be ready for week 1 and that throwing him out there anyway has the potential to hurt him more than it helps, they'll suck it up and throw Sanchez to the wolves for a while until they think Geno is ready.  Forget Rex, guys like Idzik and Mornhinweg aren't going to be willing to see this team start repeating the mistakes made before they were around.  The Jets gave Sanchez the starting job on a silver platter in his rookie year, with absolutely no real competition or need for him to earn the job, a decision I think they have no intention of repeating with Geno.

 

At this point Sanchez is still around simply to be a potential placeholder, and that's only because the hope of Garrard being that guy didn't work out for them.  Sanchez has no long-term future with this team, but as much as I hate the idea of ever seeing him out on the field again, there's still a chance the team could feel it is in their best interests to go with him first, not because of what he brings to the table, but simply because it might be the right decision for Geno.  This so-called "competition" isn't really designed to show the team which is the better QB, it's designed to show the team whether or not Geno is ready to be a starting QB in the NFL right now.  That will be the one and only thing that will drive this team's decision-making process.

 

This.

 

:sign0098:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

week 2 is thursday night @ NE. that could be a career ruiner for a not yet ready rookie. 

 

Agreed.  I think the tough early schedule will be a big part of their decision making process, which will tilt it in favor of Sanchez.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Agreed.  I think the tough early schedule will be a big part of their decision making process, which will tilt it in favor of Sanchez.

Or perhaps they will do a revolutionary  thing for the NFL, and let the best player start

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Or perhaps they will do a revolutionary  thing for the NFL, and let the best player start

 

Yep, could be.  I think this season and the following offseason is going to be very interesting.  We'll see which young players are gonna help us going forward, what kind of GM Idzik proves to be, whether Rex stays or goes, and at least start finding out whether Smith is the answer at QB or not, if not making that determination.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Just curious where that Russell Wilson kid dropped to? Guess he wasn't ready to start either.

 

That "where he dropped to" line of thought is getting old.  Usually if a QB is taken later in round 1 it's because some team traded up to grab him.  Otherwise that part of the draft is largely filled with teams that already have their starting QBs.  In a deep draft where trading down didn't net teams nearly as much as it did in the past, a lot of team stayed pat instead of trying to accumulate picks that weren't there.  Some teams were willing to take less (like Dallas & Buffalo), but most were not.

 

Sometimes you gamble correctly, that the QB you want will still be there, and sometimes you don't and someone leapfrogs you (as this happened to us with Favre).

 

So while, as a generality, better players were better prospects with fewer red flags and therefore get taken higher.  But that doesn't mean that players taken slightly lower are less talented.  Everything is about risk, since there are lots of talented players (some who will pan out and some who will not).  Geno had some warning signs as I understand it (couple of choke games, texting in draft meetings) and lots of teams stayed away earlier-on.  That's understandable, especially since GM job security isn't that great for a lot of teams (especially for losing teams who could use a QB). Taking a QB that early doesn't merely mean you like the QB.  It means you are betting 2-3 seasons on him since QBs don't get rotated on & off the field like with other positions.  

 

This notion that some shortcomings in a few games in college mean this is the individual's ceiling, and that he's destined to have a worse career than someone else, is ridiculous.  Smith will be a success or a failure based on his ability, not based on some GMs' assumed risks with their first round picks.  But it's not like he dropped to round 4 (nor would he have), and people who use this rationalization on players seldom bring up all the 1st round busts or massive reaches that teams draft year after year.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

 But it's not like he dropped to round 4 (nor would he have), and people who use this rationalization on players seldom bring up all the 1st round busts or massive reaches that teams draft year after year.

 

It also should be noted that all draft classes are not equal. Russell Wilson fell to 3 in a QB class that was the best since 1983. Geno was the supposedly best (actually 2nd selected) QB in a class that was unpredictable at best. Not all drafts are equal. When people compare who got picked where it neglects context of the individual draft. The NBA draft recently had an "off" crop. Another example, Vernon Gholston wouldn't have been a top 6 pick in a normal quality draft.

Edited by bitonti
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

It also should be noted that all draft classes are not equal. Russell Wilson fell to 3 in a QB class that was the best since 1983. Geno was the supposedly best (actually 2nd selected) QB in a class that was unpredictable at best. Not all drafts are equal. When people compare who got picked where it neglects context of the individual draft. The NBA draft recently had an "off" crop. Another example, Vernon Gholston wouldn't have been a top 6 pick in a normal quality draft.

 

No one would have been surprised if he went in the top 10, or even #1.  Frankly it was more surprising that he fell as far as he did.

 

With QBs, it's a lot for a GM when they're drafting early.  It's not like other positions that can be rotated in & out of the lineup.  Take one early and you're more or less committing to that guy as your starter for at least 2 years.

 

As such, a guy like Wilson was a low risk, and no matter what people say I will never believe he would have been taken in round 1 in a weak QB class like this one.  Never.  No GM is going to do take a 5'10" tall QB in round 1 & assume that type of risk to his career.  But round 3? Even if he only becomes a career backup it's not ideal but there are worse ways of using a 3rd round pick.  Starting him over Flynn wasn't risky because they were both already on the team for weeks & weeks & Carroll started who he felt was the better of the two.  If a prototypical QB busts it can be rationalized & you say no one has a crystal ball.  But if you draft a shrimp and he isn't all that you look like the acme of idiots and you'll never get another GM job ever again, and it will be held against you for the rest of your career/life.

 

Geno was in between.  The best QB in his class, but not one without warning signs.  Would he have dropped to round 4 a year earlier? A guy who was very much talked about as the #1 pick even after the combine was over? Not impossible, but I really doubt it.

 

And it's only the "best QB class since 1983" based on outcome.  On their respective draft days, the draft that was "THE QB draft" & the best since 1983 was 1999.  Hindsight has changed the drafts' respective rankings.

 

But in a DEEP QB draft, one billed as being far better than 2012 (at their respective times), Cade McNown was taken 10th in the country and Akili Smith was taken 3rd overall.  Don't tell me about what GMs know and what they don't.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

No one would have been surprised if he went in the top 10, or even #1.  Frankly it was more surprising that he fell as far as he did.

 

With QBs, it's a lot for a GM when they're drafting early.  It's not like other positions that can be rotated in & out of the lineup.  Take one early and you're more or less committing to that guy as your starter for at least 2 years.

 

As such, a guy like Wilson was a low risk, and no matter what people say I will never believe he would have been taken in round 1 in a weak QB class like this one.  Never.  No GM is going to do take a 5'10" tall QB in round 1 & assume that type of risk to his career.  But round 3? Even if he only becomes a career backup it's not ideal but there are worse ways of using a 3rd round pick.  Starting him over Flynn wasn't risky because they were both already on the team for weeks & weeks & Carroll started who he felt was the better of the two.  If a prototypical QB busts it can be rationalized & you say no one has a crystal ball.  But if you draft a shrimp and he isn't all that you look like the acme of idiots and you'll never get another GM job ever again, and it will be held against you for the rest of your career/life.

 

Geno was in between.  The best QB in his class, but not one without warning signs.  Would he have dropped to round 4 a year earlier? A guy who was very much talked about as the #1 pick even after the combine was over? Not impossible, but I really doubt it.

 

And it's only the "best QB class since 1983" based on outcome.  On their respective draft days, the draft that was "THE QB draft" & the best since 1983 was 1999.  Hindsight has changed the drafts' respective rankings.

 

But in a DEEP QB draft, one billed as being far better than 2012 (at their respective times), Cade McNown was taken 10th in the country and Akili Smith was taken 3rd overall.  Don't tell me about what GMs know and what they don't.

Nice Post. Spot on.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

That "where he dropped to" line of thought is getting old.  Usually if a QB is taken later in round 1 it's because some team traded up to grab him.  Otherwise that part of the draft is largely filled with teams that already have their starting QBs.  In a deep draft where trading down didn't net teams nearly as much as it did in the past, a lot of team stayed pat instead of trying to accumulate picks that weren't there.  Some teams were willing to take less (like Dallas & Buffalo), but most were not.

 

Sometimes you gamble correctly, that the QB you want will still be there, and sometimes you don't and someone leapfrogs you (as this happened to us with Favre).

 

So while, as a generality, better players were better prospects with fewer red flags and therefore get taken higher.  But that doesn't mean that players taken slightly lower are less talented.  Everything is about risk, since there are lots of talented players (some who will pan out and some who will not).  Geno had some warning signs as I understand it (couple of choke games, texting in draft meetings) and lots of teams stayed away earlier-on.  That's understandable, especially since GM job security isn't that great for a lot of teams (especially for losing teams who could use a QB). Taking a QB that early doesn't merely mean you like the QB.  It means you are betting 2-3 seasons on him since QBs don't get rotated on & off the field like with other positions.  

 

This notion that some shortcomings in a few games in college mean this is the individual's ceiling, and that he's destined to have a worse career than someone else, is ridiculous.  Smith will be a success or a failure based on his ability, not based on some GMs' assumed risks with their first round picks.  But it's not like he dropped to round 4 (nor would he have), and people who use this rationalization on players seldom bring up all the 1st round busts or massive reaches that teams draft year after year.

 

:good:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

I think if Geno is the better quarterback in training camp and the preseason, start him. I don't agree with the idea that he can be "ruined". There are plenty of quarterbacks that have not had stellar starts to their careers that have gone on to be quite the opposite of ruined.

 

Usually, in my perception at least, most guys  are "ruined" by (one or a combination of) three things:

 

1) They were ruined at birth by their own lack of skill and never had any skill to ruin in the first place.

 

2) Their offensive lines are mediocre to terrible.

 

3) They are asked to do too much.

 

I think Geno will be working with a good offensive line (top third of the league, perhaps). I also think the defense and running game will keep us in a position where he is not asked to carry the offense. Under these conditions combined with the throws you're asked to make in the WCO,  it would give Geno an better opportunity to learn on the job instead of holding a clipboard and a bag of popcorn and the Jets a chance to evaluate him fairly.

Edited by Gastineau Lives
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0