Keep this in mind regarding Hackenberg

[Tinstar]

35 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

Yay!  It's all Franklin's fault.  All that is nice, but it still doesn't scream "all he does is win" to me.  I'm not knocking Hackenberg for his record, I just don't see 21-17 as something to indicate that he has a knack for making plays when they need to be made to allow his team to win.  

I never said all he did was win .  I said he manages to win games somehow despite his horrible stats .  Is it not true that Penn State didn't have a losing season while Hackenberg was the QB despite what he was playing with /against and his terrible stats ?

[PepPep]

It seems like Jet fans have divided into two factions when it comes to the Hack pick (for the most part).

1. Hack played poorly in his last 2 seasons at Penn State. He did not do well enough to even earn a backup role against very pedestrian competition while a rookie on the Jets. This pretty much sums up why its justified to argue that he was a reach in the second round and why he will most likely turn out to be a bust and we shouldn't think otherwise until we see something to the contrary. I.E. The Hack sucks faction. I would add that there are fair criticisms about Hacks inaccuracy and footwork and mechanics that this faction believes are either unfixable or will take years to change. 

2. Hack was a stud prospect coming out of high school. He was a stud playing in a Pro System his freshman year. His numbers and play suffered b/c of sanctions at Penn State and a poorly implemented system change that did not suit his strengths. The Jets scouted him closely and took him in the 2nd round b/c he has all the tools and characteristics you look for in a Franchise QB. Because f the importance of the position and Hacks great upside, taking him in the bottom of the 2nd round was not a reach. He is not a bust and we shouldn't think so until we see something to the contrary. I.E. The Hack is our future Franchise QB faction.

The truth is somewhere in the middle. Yes, Hack clearly has the talent, yes, the system change at Penn State clearly hurt his play, the sanctions clearly caused him to take a beating and hurt his numbers (including wins/losses). Yes, there were some good things we saw in preseason. But it's also true that Hack is still very young and has a lot to work on- he is maddeningly inconsistent, especially when it comes to accuracy. He can come up to the line of scrimmage and read the defense, but he clearly is not used to what NFL defenses throw at you on a game to game basis, he needs to improve his footwork and pocket awareness. He was drafted as a 'project'. Macc made this pretty clear, which is why he 'red-shirted' him. Was he a reach? It depends. He may have been. But you really don't know what other team would have scooped him up had the Jets passed. If he turns out to be a bust, the argument for him being a reach becomes more legit. If he turns out to be a stud, he will turn out to be a steal. It's all a matter of perspective.

But the bottom line is, we really don't know yet. He's really not played enough for anyone to definitively say whether or not he is, well, 'good'. It's silly to assume anything from anonymous comments or practices in his rookie year or lack of playing time or a couple of great drives he had or just from his 'potential'. He simply needs to continue working, improving and he needs to get a legit shot to earn the starting role (which I think you will see THIS season). Stay tuned.

Personally, I like the pick, b/c I like Hack as a prospect. I like that he has a high football IQ, he is a gym/film rat, he is a good leader, has good work ethic, and has the 'talent' you look for in a Franchise QB (size, arm strength and ability to 'make all the throws'). Now, you can argue that about a lot of QB prospects that did not amount to much. But you can (obviously) say that about a lot of QBs that DID turn out to be studs. We really don't know yet. But I don't believe taking him in the bottom half of the 2nd round was a 'reach'. If you believe there is a QB with that kind of potential and checks a lot of the intangibles boxes, because of the nature of the position, you don't pass on him until the bottom half of the 3rd or even 4th round, despite where he is projected to go. Because we all know how accurate those projections are, right? You don't take that chance. But again, like I said, its all a matter of perspective. I think, in this case, Macc stayed true to his board and Hack was high enough on it to go in the second round. 

[section314]

2 minutes ago, PepPep said:

It seems like Jet fans have divided into two factions when it comes to the Hack pick (for the most part).

1. Hack played poorly in his last 2 seasons at Penn State. He did not do well enough to even earn a backup role against very pedestrian competition while a rookie on the Jets. This pretty much sums up why its justified to argue that he was a reach in the second round and why he will most likely turn out to be a bust and we shouldn't think otherwise until we see something to the contrary. I.E. The Hack sucks faction.

2. Hack was a stud prospect coming out of high school. He was a stud playing in a Pro System his freshman year. His numbers and play suffered b/c of sanctions at Penn State and a poorly implemented system change that did not suit his strengths. The Jets scouted him closely and took him in the 2nd round b/c he has all the tools and characteristics you look for in a Franchise QB. Because f the importance of the position and Hacks great upside, taking him in the bottom of the 2nd round was not a reach. He is not a bust and we shouldn't think so until we see something to the contrary. I.E. The Hack is our future Franchise QB faction.

The truth is somewhere in the middle. Yes, Hack clearly has the talent, yes, the system change at Penn State clearly hurt his play, the sanctions clearly caused him to take a beating and hurt his numbers (including wins/losses). Yes, there were some good things we saw in preseason. But it's also true that Hack is still very young and has a lot to work on- he is maddeningly inconsistent, especially when it comes to accuracy. He can come up to the line of scrimmage and read the defense, but he clearly is not used to what NFL defenses throw at you on a game to game basis, he needs to improve his footwork and pocket awareness. He was drafted as a 'project'. Macc made this pretty clear, which is why he 'red-shirted' him. Was he a reach? It depends. He may have been. But you really don't know what other team would have scooped him up had the Jets passed. If he turns out to be a bust, the argument for him being a reach becomes more legit. If he turns out to be a stud, he will turn out to be a steal. It's all a matter of perspective.

But the bottom line is, we really don't know yet. He's really not played enough for anyone to definitively say whether or not he is, well, 'good'. It's silly to assume anything from anonymous comments or practices in his rookie year or lack of playing time or a couple of great drives he had or just from his 'potential'. He simply needs to continue working, improving and he needs to get a legit shot to earn the starting role (which I think you will see THIS season). Stay tuned.

Personally, I like the pick, b/c I like Hack as a prospect. I like that he has a high football IQ, he is a gym/film rat, he is a good leader, has good work ethic, and has the 'talent' you look for in a Franchise QB (size, arm strength and ability to 'make all the throws'). Now, you can argue that about a lot of QB prospects that did not amount to much. But you can (obviously) say that about a lot of QBs that DID turn out to be studs. We really don't know yet. But I don't believe taking him in the bottom half of the 2nd round was a 'reach'. If you believe there is a QB with that kind of potential and checks a lot of the intangibles boxes, because of the nature of the position, you don't pass on him until the bottom half of the 3rd or even 4th round, despite where he is projected to go. Because we all know how accurate those projections are, right? You don't take that chance. But again, like I said, its all a matter of perspective. I think, in this case, Macc stayed true to his board and Hack was high enough on it to go in the second round. 

Great and objective post. I, too, think Hackenberg is going to be really good, and will probably be the starter by week 6, at the latest. Your last two sentences really hammer home your point. Let's hope Macc is right....I, for one, think he is.

[ChuckkieB]

Look, I hope that Hackenberg is legit and becomes a viable starter for the Jets in 2017 but I just don't think it's going to happen.  And if the Jets plan is to bring him along and start him at some point in 2017, they're rolling the dice on having a season more putrid than in 2016, and I'm not sure that a coach and GM who are presumably on the hot seat are going to let their jobs ride on a completely unproven Christian Hackenberg.  We shall see...

[C Mart]

1 hour ago, #27TheDominator said:

Yay!  It's all Franklin's fault.  All that is nice, but it still doesn't scream "all he does is win" to me.  I'm not knocking Hackenberg for his record, I just don't see 21-17 as something to indicate that he has a knack for making plays when they need to be made to allow his team to win.  

Did you even read some of the other points Dierk wrote..Where did he write it's all Franklin's fault? Good lawd.

[#27TheDominator]

14 minutes ago, C Mart said:

Did you even read some of the other points Dierk wrote..Where did he write it's all Franklin's fault? Good lawd.

I am sorry that I don't want to participate in the "Let's make excuses for Hackenberg" thread.  Tin Star claimed that he had a knack for making plays that let his team win games.  I pointed out that his college record was decidedly mediocre.  IIRC, they had a top 25 recruiting class his freshman year and many the scholarships were reinstated well before he left.  I can understand citing the sanctions as reasons he wasn't perfect or winning national championships, but is that sh*t supposed to make me impressed that he beat Kent State, Buffalo, Akron and UMass? 

[Charlie Brown]

5 hours ago, Joejet said:

Hack had a bad Sophomore and Junior season period.  There was no Senior season.  Unless you want to consider his year with the Jets as his senior season and then yes he also had a bad senior season.

You are right.... I will alter my post accordingly!!  Thanks  

[section314]

32 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

I am sorry that I don't want to participate in the "Let's make excuses for Hackenberg" thread.  Tin Star claimed that he had a knack for making plays that let his team win games.  I pointed out that his college record was decidedly mediocre.  IIRC, they had a top 25 recruiting class his freshman year and many the scholarships were reinstated well before he left.  I can understand citing the sanctions as reasons he wasn't perfect or winning national championships, but is that sh*t supposed to make me impressed that he beat Kent State, Buffalo, Akron and UMass? 

Kinda of like the college version of Fitz beating Browns, Colts, Cowboys and Titans in 2015, huh? 

[Charlie Brown]

1 hour ago, PepPep said:

Personally, I like the pick, b/c I like Hack as a prospect. I like that he has a high football IQ, he is a gym/film rat, he is a good leader, has good work ethic, and has the 'talent' you look for in a Franchise QB (size, arm strength and ability to 'make all the throws'). Now, you can argue that about a lot of QB prospects that did not amount to much. But you can (obviously) say that about a lot of QBs that DID turn out to be studs. We really don't know yet. But I don't believe taking him in the bottom half of the 2nd round was a 'reach'. If you believe there is a QB with that kind of potential and checks a lot of the intangibles boxes, because of the nature of the position, you don't pass on him until the bottom half of the 3rd or even 4th round, despite where he is projected to go. Because we all know how accurate those projections are, right? You don't take that chance. But again, like I said, its all a matter of perspective. I think, in this case, Macc stayed true to his board and Hack was high enough on it to go in the second round. 

Nice post..

In fact a few of us said that Hack would be our second or third round pick and I don't think that it was a mistake.  I wanted him drafted.

What concerned me was the fact that the Jets had 4 QBs on the roster which meant that Hack didn't get many reps, nor does it seem from published reports that they had a plan outside of those limited reps to intensively work with him.

This caused the real concern of many out here and there started to be a drum beat of "if Hack wasn't even good enough to get back-up reps behind the worst QB in the NFL how bad is this guy?"

Then you have the coaching leaks that said that Hack is awful and that he can't throw a football into the ocean.  So many posters are saying Hack has a lot to show them despite the Jets clear mandate that this was a red shirt year for him.

Also him being developed doesn't mean that we can't also get a quality starter such a Tyrod Taylor or Glennon should either be available and be cost effective.

[Scott Dierking]

4 hours ago, T0mShane said:

Should also be pointed out that Joe Montana played in the Cotton Bowl while suffering from the flu and Hackenberg had the flu once and still aced his Chem midterm, which became the inspiration for the wonderful film Brian's Song.

GangGreenGirl just called. She said she would like to give back your sense of humor. Apparently it has been missing

[Scott Dierking]

3 hours ago, #27TheDominator said:

I am sorry that I don't want to participate in the "Let's make excuses for Hackenberg" thread.  Tin Star claimed that he had a knack for making plays that let his team win games.  I pointed out that his college record was decidedly mediocre.  IIRC, they had a top 25 recruiting class his freshman year and many the scholarships were reinstated well before he left.  I can understand citing the sanctions as reasons he wasn't perfect or winning national championships, but is that sh*t supposed to make me impressed that he beat Kent State, Buffalo, Akron and UMass? 

And you would be wrong on the scholarship reinstatement

[jetfuel]

17 hours ago, TuscanyTile2 said:

Start at 2:20.  Then listen to the post-pick conversation:

http://www.daikhlo.com/watch/yt_kBxVaifI1NY

I like the way you think ... fingers crossed ... Tom Brady was a joke of a pick at the time too, although in the 6th round was considered worth the risk - time will tell with Hack

[thadude]

13 minutes ago, jetfuel said:

I like the way you think ... fingers crossed ... Tom Brady was a joke of a pick at the time too, although in the 6th round was considered worth the risk - time will tell with Hack

Hack stinks

[Greensleeves]

10 hours ago, LIJetsFan said:

My recollection was that Marino was the best QB by far coming out that year and that the gambling issue was the cloud that hung over his head.  The Jets picked before Miami that year and the fans in the room were stunned that we passed on him.  

Where do you get this "reach" stuff is just beyond me.  

LOL. Your recollection is clearly off. How anyone would say Marino was the best QB coming out when his draft grade was so low and he threw 17tds and 23 picks his senior year is beyond me. He also threw over 20 picks the prior year. Elway was always the consensus #1.

[#27TheDominator]

10 hours ago, LIJetsFan said:

My recollection was that Marino was the best QB by far coming out that year and that the gambling issue was the cloud that hung over his head.  The Jets picked before Miami that year and the fans in the room were stunned that we passed on him.  

Where do you get this "reach" stuff is just beyond me.  

I don't think he was a reach, but nobody had him ahead of Elway either. 

1 hour ago, Scott Dierking said:

And you would be wrong on the scholarship reinstatement

What am I incorrect about?  So they didn't get back to 100%, but they didn't lose as many scholarships as initially stated.  They still had a recruiting advantage over the Akron Zips. 

[Greensleeves]

6 hours ago, Scott Dierking said:

Not sure how many times we need to go over this.

The program was absolutely decimated by recruiting sanctions and NCAA allowed defections. Some had said that it was worse than the death penalty

John Donovan was ill equipped to run the an offense that catered to Hack's needs. He was running quick bubble screens and tried to put him on the edge. 

As the NCAA limited schollys, the team had to limit areas where it recruited. The O-line took a beating. And played like it.

PSU just got back to 85 schollys last year. The also had a couple of good recruiting classes under Franklin. Those classes did not help Hack's team though. The fact that they won as many gams as they did, was frankly amazing. 

People would rather criticize a player they haven't seen yet than listen to reason. That O-line was the worst I've ever seen. The fact that he won more than he lost is a miracle. The fact that he didn't get seriously injured is beyond incredible. But let's look at stats, because stats are King. Yeah, Namath wasn't any good, blah, blah, blah, coming from people that never knew the rules at that time or had even seen him play in a game. Noone knows anything about Hack yet - he has never played in an NFL game. Thinking you do is actually funny. Marino threw a zillion picks his last two years (over 40) and he turned out fine. Amazing what a good line can do for a QB. 

[T0mShane]

4 hours ago, #27TheDominator said:

I am sorry that I don't want to participate in the "Let's make excuses for Hackenberg" thread.  Tin Star claimed that he had a knack for making plays that let his team win games.  I pointed out that his college record was decidedly mediocre.  IIRC, they had a top 25 recruiting class his freshman year and many the scholarships were reinstated well before he left.  I can understand citing the sanctions as reasons he wasn't perfect or winning national championships, but is that sh*t supposed to make me impressed that he beat Kent State, Buffalo, Akron and UMass? 

He beat UMass without Allen Robinson.

[Scott Dierking]

42 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

 

What am I incorrect about?  So they didn't get back to 100%, but they didn't lose as many scholarships as initially stated.  They still had a recruiting advantage over the Akron Zips. 

Yo are incorrect about them having any scholly's being reinstated while Hack was there. That is wrong.

If PSU would have played in the same conference as the Zips, that would have helped.

Many experts, including experts on this site said that PSU was essentially given a death penalty, that they would not recover from for a long time.

 

[#27TheDominator]

1 minute ago, Scott Dierking said:

Yo are incorrect about them having any scholly's being reinstated while Hack was there. That is wrong.

If PSU would have played in the same conference as the Zips, that would have helped.

Many experts, including experts on this site said that PSU was essentially given a death penalty, that they would not recover from for a long time.

FIne. You are the Penn State guy. I will defer.  Who the **** is an expert on this site?  Jason?  Bit?   None of it is relevant to my point.  

[Scott Dierking]

Just now, #27TheDominator said:

FIne. You are the Penn State guy. I will defer.  Who the **** is an expert on this site?  Jason?  Bit?   None of it is relevant to my point.  

Just look at these pages. There are many self appointed experts who will tell you exactly what will happen with the team and every player. Just ask them.

[Persiussa]

3 minutes ago, Scott Dierking said:

Just look at these pages. There are many self appointed experts who will tell you exactly what will happen with the team and every player. Just ask them.

It really is true, myself and everyone else is one of them.  I just wish people would acknowledge that projections are just predictions.  You can state your opinion but at least acknowledge that you have to let reality play out to see what actually happens. I want to give Hackenberg a chance to see what the reality will be.