Benjamin Allbright claims word is Jets likely to draft a first round QB

[LWC611]

12 minutes ago, Villain The Foe said:

Sure. I wouldnt be surprised if its a defensive lineman. 

I would not be either.  The way things shake out on draft night, a very good one may fall to us, and they would be the BPA.

[Matt39]

Who?

[Sperm Edwards]

7 hours ago, Lil Woody said:

I'm priobably giving our guys WAY too much credit. But this is standard pre-draft posturing. You leak how interested you are in a player.  You hope people jump you to take him.  Then you get the player you really want to slide.

 

Wasn't it roughly this time last year that the leaks came out how gay Maccagnan et al. were for Hackenberg? 

[UnitedWhofans]

4 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Wasn't it roughly this time last year that the leaks came out how gay Maccagnan et al. were for Hackenberg? 

I thought it was when he came in for his draft visit.

As for this, he is speculating that we are taking a QB and that we are high on Trubisky and Watson. Nothing new to see here.

[Bcess]

5 hours ago, Mogglez said:

I'd flip on Maccagnan like a flip of a switch if we reached on this QB class.  Trubisky is the only 1st round talent I'm really curious on, and even then it reeks of Sanchez 2.0. 

Boi, this better be a fuccin' smokescreen.  Wait.  Until.  Next.  Year.

Why couldn't they draft a ab iin the first round this year and next

[Dcat]

7 hours ago, Lil Woody said:

I'm priobably giving our guys WAY too much credit. But this is standard pre-draft posturing. You leak how interested you are in a player.  You hope people jump you to take him.  Then you get the player you really want to slide.

 

If there is one thing we've learned about Mac and his staff...  they don't reveal much to the press unless they want a message to be there intentionally. There have been multiple occasions when the media had no idea what they were doing and Mac has surprised everyone. In that regard, he has been the anti-Rex/Tanny regime.  

I don't understand how people don't know this already.  Now this doesn't mean the Jets won't take a QB in rd 1, but I wouldn't be banking on any "media rumors" circulating because Mac doesn't leak much that is actual.  More likely smokescreen material.

[The Crusher]

54 minutes ago, DetroitRed said:

Exactly.

The organization is all in to " suck for Sam ." I am completely on board


Sent from my iPad using JetNation.com mobile app

Welcome. At this point it's almost believable they intend to at least give it a shot.

[FTL Jet Fan]

What a job these guys have huh, how easy is it to state that a team is interested a specific player that they have a need at. Don't see anything leaking out unless it's intentional given the FO's track record. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[JETSfaninNE]

8 hours ago, Gas2No99 said:

If the Jets draft Watson or Trubisky @#6, I'll be the FIRST to eat crow and admit I was DEAD wrong. I just don't see it happening unless it's an owner mandate. Just seems like a tool of a "sports writer" who was tired of playing with himself at midnight decides to tweet at 12:10 am on a Wednesday something that a few local articles have already covered & it's just regurgitating the SAME "Jets like Trubisky" headline that is NOT earth shattering and about as credible as one of ol' Joe WIlly 12's tall tales about his neighbor with the magic free Jets tickets. That was a run-on sentence. 

I think its speculation, funny how his news comes on the heels of the announcement that Jets were one of a few teams having private workouts with Trubisky.  I would love if Trubisky fell too us in the 2nd round.  

Didn't we take Mark Sanchez with the 6th overall pick too?  Whats with the Jets and the 6th overall pick, they love getting that pick lol

[ZachEY]

1 hour ago, HessStation said:

you guys are gullible.

Sure hope so.  Because, overdrafting a project QB sounds oddly familiar.

[whodeawhodat]

1 hour ago, Stonehands said:

If we draft a QB at #6, I will lose the remaining hope that I have that our front office has some sort of plan.  We have drafted QB's the last two years and still don't know anything about them, so why would you draft a third guy out of a weak QB draft when you have so many other needs?  The answer is that you don't, unless you are lost.  

there is a school of thought that says you keep drafting Qbs until you have one.  I am pretty pretty sure that is Maccs thinking as well.  That and building a pipeline of LBs.

[Augustiniak]

1 hour ago, Larz said:

I bet we trade down 3 times, still get our guy and add a pro bowl pass rusher !

i concur.  the jets may well take a qb in the first round, but they may be able to do this while picking up extra picks.  

[Tinstar]

16 minutes ago, JETSfaninNE said:

I think its speculation, funny how his news comes on the heels of the announcement that Jets were one of a few teams having private workouts with Trubisky.  I would love if Trubisky fell too us in the 2nd round.  

Didn't we take Mark Sanchez with the 6th overall pick too?  Whats with the Jets and the 6th overall pick, they love getting that pick lol

The Jets are probably going to have private workouts with just about every draft able QB they is  .

[Jet Blast]

8 hours ago, Lil Woody said:

I'm priobably giving our guys WAY too much credit. But this is standard pre-draft posturing. You leak how interested you are in a player.  You hope people jump you to take him.  Then you get the player you really want to slide.

 

You're half right. This is standard pre-draft posturing. But not to get another team to jump us, but rather, to get another team to trade up for our pick. Mac has already let it be known that he wants to trade down... unless... that statement was standard pre-draft posturing. This stuff will make your head hurt, if you let it.

[JETSfaninNE]

1 minute ago, Tinstar said:

The Jets are probably going to have private workouts with just about every draft able QB they is  .

I would hope so!

But the timing of Albrights speculation comes on the heels of these tweets yesterday, could be a smokescreen or it could be smoke.

 

 

[Lil Woody]

6 minutes ago, whodeawhodat said:

there is a school of thought that says you keep drafting Qbs until you have one.  I am pretty pretty sure that is Maccs thinking as well.  That and building a pipeline of LBs.

And like any line of reasoning, there has to be wiggle room to adjust based on the draft class.I don't believe in taking a QB in every draft just to take one. You end up with a lot of bad QBs that way because the position is always overdrafted and you are then always chasing lesser talent in each round. That's how you end up with a Tajh Boyd, Greg McElroy type on your roster. It's burning a pick. Like buying a scratch off and hoping that will provide for your retirement because you were too stupid to manage your own money intelligently and you are all out of ideas and time and hope. Scout QBs intesnely every single year (even when you have a FQB) and take your shots when you believe in the kid. 

[Jet_Engine1]

7 hours ago, Mike135 said:

Any Jews available?

Mitch Trubisky. Duh. 

 

LOL. If they draft one of these future afterthoughts and then blow the chance at Darnold, or refuse to draft him next year because "we're set at QB", I'll probably huff and puff about it on the interweb for years to come. Pleasese spare me the aggravation. Do the right thing.

[C Mart]

Never heard of this guy..What's a good way to get your name out there this time of year? Link a 1st Round QB to the Jets..

 

Oops..

Benjamin Allbright‏ @AllbrightNFL Mar 14

I'm told Dontari Poe is "very excited" about his impending visit w/ the #Dolphins. They were always near the top of his list. Now about $

[Tinstar]

1 minute ago, JETSfaninNE said:

I would hope so!

But the timing of Albrights speculation comes on the heels of these tweets yesterday, could be a smokescreen or it could be smoke.

 

 

The jets have a genuine interest in Trubisky and Watson I believe, but the workouts are a way of finding out if someone other than those 2 are work considering with a later pick . 

[Integrity28]

Man, I thought Rex was good at milking extra years of employment out of this franchise. Draft a developmental QB every year, and you basically operate on a "the QB is 2 years away from being ready" schedule of employment. 

They've taken Jetsy to a new level.

[BroadwayJoe12]

I just don't see how Watson isn't the pick. He has every single thing you look for in a potential QB, especially the not a head-case, nut-job like the rest of the clowns we've either drafted or watched get drafted. You need a guy who's played a lot in college, played well in college, played well in big games, has the physical attributes and isn't going to be showing his penis to the interwebz and getting thrown off of planes. That's why, I can already guarantee that the pick will not be Watson. 

[Lil Woody]

4 minutes ago, BroadwayJoe12 said:

I just don't see how Watson isn't the pick. He has every single thing you look for in a potential QB, especially the not a head-case, nut-job like the rest of the clowns we've either drafted or watched get drafted. You need a guy who's played a lot in college, played well in college, played well in big games, has the physical attributes and isn't going to be showing his penis to the interwebz and getting thrown off of planes. That's why, I can already guarantee that the pick will not be Watson. 

Tim Tebow fits your criteria.  Watson's poor accuracy and ball placement would be the reason he falls.  Guy throws Fitztragic level off the mark deep balls and is very hit or miss at hitting the WR in stride.  Thing of how Geno Smith looked in year 2 but with a worse long ball. He will dime the occasional throw downfield but it won't be consistent.  If that stuff can't be fixed with coaching, he's gonna be an INT machine. I'm sure plenty of big game players and good teammates and model citizens missed out on the NFL because the players skills are all that really matters.

[Dcat]

12 minutes ago, BroadwayJoe12 said:

I just don't see how Watson isn't the pick. He has every single thing you look for in a potential QB, especially the not a head-case, nut-job like the rest of the clowns we've either drafted or watched get drafted. You need a guy who's played a lot in college, played well in college, played well in big games, has the physical attributes and isn't going to be showing his penis to the interwebz and getting thrown off of planes. That's why, I can already guarantee that the pick will not be Watson. 

Watson lacks accuracy and arm strength.  He may go round 1 this year, but hard to see him as a "franchise" QB all too easily.  I like Trubisky more but I seriously doubt the jets go QB in round 1.

[kmnj]

if mac drafts a qb in round one another reason why he should be fired because he used a second round pick on a terrible draft pick last year and if he picks a qb it is admitting this failure

 

 

[slats]

4 hours ago, CrazyCarl40 said:

In a strong QB class, these guys wouldn't sniff the first round. This is a weak QB class and neither are worth the number 6. 

I suspect a major reason these two juniors are coming out is because someone told them they'd be lucky to be third rounders next year. 

[ChuckkieB]

I don't know about this. Based on the McCown signing, it seems that Mac wants Petty and Hack to fight it out for the starting job.  Drafting a QB in the first round would meant that Mac is admitting a mistake with Hackenberg, and I'm not sure that he's willing to do that, at least not yet.  That being said, if he believes there's a QB in this draft that he thinks can be a day one starter and is available at #6, I'm all for drafting him!

[whodeawhodat]

25 minutes ago, Lil Woody said:

And like any line of reasoning, there has to be wiggle room to adjust based on the draft class.I don't believe in taking a QB in every draft just to take one. You end up with a lot of bad QBs that way because the position is always overdrafted and you are then always chasing lesser talent in each round. That's how you end up with a Tajh Boyd, Greg McElroy type on your roster. It's burning a pick. Like buying a scratch off and hoping that will provide for your retirement because you were too stupid to manage your own money intelligently and you are all out of ideas and time and hope. Scout QBs intesnely every single year (even when you have a FQB) and take your shots when you believe in the kid. 

every year QBs are taken that contribute to a team. Even years with "weak classes" of Qbs.  The whole draft is little more than a scratch off lottery imo.  If it was an exact science a team would exist that never misses on a pick.  you play the percentages, estimate how skill sets will translate from college to the pros and cross your fingers that your guys can take their game to the next level.

[prime21]

You can't compare a college defense to an NFL defense but if you were picking one that plays on such a high level then it would be Alabama.

Watson threw for over 400 yards in each championship game vs Alabama.  Saban had to be better prepared for him this year after facing him the year prior yet he still went out there and threw for 420 and the winning drive.   

The kid has some deficiencies but he is able to excel using his strengths.   That's the sign of a good QB.

[Rangers9]

Mac seems to be in that group that believes you keep drafting Qbs until you get a good one. The definition is what is a good one. Do you consider a Qb like Tannenhill a franchise level Qb and someone worth investing in. He isn't a bad Qb. Or a guy like Bortles. EJ Manuel was obviously unsuccessful. But if we do draft a Qb what does that mean for the guys currently on the roster. Would they carry 4 Qbs including 3 guys who are young players two of whom have never played in an NFL game. Where is the playing time for all of these Qbs. You figure Petty is either ready or not to play substantially unless the Jets just consider him a backup. The Jets have drafted more Qbs than any franchise in recent years. My hope is that we do trade back and accumulate picks to build depth and have some quality on the O-line, STs etc. You need that to win, too. 

[Warfish]

If they draft a QB at #6, I'm fine with it.  I prefer Trubisky, but if it's Watson, or even Herr Kaizer, so be it.

The idea we can simply "suck for Darnold" is laughable.  There is absolutely no way to ensure we are picking high enough for that next year, nor that Darnold makes it to that draft as healthy or as highly coveted as he is by some fans today.

If the team is in a position now to draft a QB they think can be a franchise QB, they should consider taking him.  Because there is no sure-fire way to make sure we're in that position next year, or that an option is available where we pick next year.

And again, selecting a QB now, and another next year, is absolutely possible.  No, it's not efficient, but all that matters in the NFL is the QB position, and until you have one, the rest, frankly, matters very little no matter how good it is.

Look were we are today:

1. We have a 2nd round pick QB, Hackenberg, who thus far has shown very little positive.  He will get (or should get) first crack at the #1 job in 2017.  Even if it means we suck.

2. We have Petty, a 4th rounder (if I recall).  He got some opportunity, and played mostly poorly, and could not stay on the field.  He's disposable as a long term asset if superior prospects are available.

3. We have the joke that is McCown. A 37 year old loser with no future of any kind.  100% Disposable.  

So it's not like we have three future Joe Montana's sitting at QB already.  We may be the single weakest team in the NFL at QB, with (basicly) one prospect who thus far looks like a possible bust in Hack.

If a possible franchise QB is available at #6, you take him.  No CB or DT or LB or TE, no matter how good, matters like a QB.  And we'll have the rest of the draft to pick supporting youth to build the roster.

A QB every year till we find one that sticks.  

Now.......with all that said, I think the Jets "interest" is 100% smoke.  I think we go CB at #6, and heavy on Defense (yes, yet again).  And we roll with McCown at #1 QB, and maybe (if we're lucky) Hack get some time late in a lost season.  And we go into 2018 still asking "is Hack a possible they guy?"  Because SOJ.

 

[Paradis]

The front office has never let on about anything in advance... so this guy is just having fun creating a narrative.

Mike isn't going to draft a QB at 6 because he'd basically be putting his job on the line -- hooking his fate to how well that QB performs in year 1... not over the next 2-3 years, now.  Not gonna happen IMO

[BroadwayJoe12]

When did accuracy and ball placement become the new buzz-words for if-you've-watched-his-tape?

[Paradis]

12 minutes ago, Warfish said:

If they draft a QB at #6, I'm fine with it.  I prefer Trubisky, but if it's Watson, or even Herr Kaizer, so be it.

The idea we can simply "suck for Darnold" is laughable.  There is absolutely no way to ensure we are picking high enough for that next year, nor that Darnold makes it to that draft as healthy or as highly coveted as he is by some fans today.

If the team is in a position now to draft a QB they think can be a franchise QB, they should consider taking him.  Because there is no sure-fire way to make sure we're in that position next year, or that an option is available where we pick next year.

And again, selecting a QB now, and another next year, is absolutely possible.  No, it's not efficient, but all that matters in the NFL is the QB position, and until you have one, the rest, frankly, matters very little no matter how good it is.

Look were we are today:

1. We have a 2nd round pick QB, Hackenberg, who thus far has shown very little positive.  He will get (or should get) first crack at the #1 job in 2017.  Even if it means we suck.

2. We have Petty, a 4th rounder (if I recall).  He got some opportunity, and played mostly poorly, and could not stay on the field.  He's disposable as a long term asset if superior prospects are available.

3. We have the joke that is McCown. A 37 year old loser with no future of any kind.  100% Disposable.  

So it's not like we have three future Joe Montana's sitting at QB already.  We may be the single weakest team in the NFL at QB, with (basicly) one prospect who thus far looks like a possible bust in Hack.

If a possible franchise QB is available at #6, you take him.  No CB or DT or LB or TE, no matter how good, matters like a QB.  And we'll have the rest of the draft to pick supporting youth to build the roster.

A QB every year till we find one that sticks.  

Now.......with all that said, I think the Jets "interest" is 100% smoke.  I think we go CB at #6, and heavy on Defense (yes, yet again).  And we roll with McCown at #1 QB, and maybe (if we're lucky) Hack get some time late in a lost season.  And we go into 2018 still asking "is Hack a possible they guy?"  Because SOJ.

 

Your logic is sound, but the situation isn't. Ultimately, the GM is risking too much by taking a QB at 6 IMO... None of them look to be an immediate winner on paper, and Mac would almost assuredly have to start said QB... His job would be tied to Trubisky/Hack's performance in 2017 and that's a death knell. He has a much better chance of keeping his job by building the roster, seeing what he has and worst case scenario, positioning himself in 2018 to go after better prospects.

It's science. 

[Warfish]

Just now, Paradis said:

Your logic is sound, but the situation isn't. Ultimately, the GM is risking too much by taking a QB at 6 IMO.

If the GM is truly "on the hot seat", this who debate is moot.  We'd sign Culter, start Cutler, and have McCown back him up.

If we don;t do that, it likely says the GM is not as on the hot seat as some of us fans think he is.

Just now, Paradis said:

None of them look to be an immediate winner on paper, and Mac would almost assuredly have to start said QB.

Why?  

Say we draft Trubisky.  In 2017, we start Hackenberg, #2 McCown, and #3 Trubisky.  No one is going to be burning down the gates to Jetsland over that, it's emminently reasonable.  We get to see what Hack is or isn't, and Trubs gets a year to sit and learn (which is NOT a bad thing).

Just now, Paradis said:

His job would be tied to Trubisky/Hack's performance in 2017 and that's a death knell.

His job is ties to whomever plays QB's performance.  You don;t get to keep being GM just because you refuse to bank on a young QB.  Be assured, hsi future right now depends only on Hack.....getting another gives him some room, not less room, to be retained.

Just now, Paradis said:

He has a much better chance of keeping his job by building the roster, seeing what he has and worst case scenario, positioning himself in 2018 to go after better prospects.

It's science. 

And when the Jets go 5-11, and pick 9th, the whole "bank on better prospects in 2018" concept is utterly destroyed, Hack has failed, and the Jets find themselves with no QB prospects on the roster and no ability to draft a QB prospect.  THAT, my friend, is how a GM gets fired.

[Augustiniak]

18 minutes ago, Paradis said:

The front office has never let on about anything in advance... so this guy is just having fun creating a narrative.

Mike isn't going to draft a QB at 6 because he'd basically be putting his job on the line -- hooking his fate to how well that QB performs in year 1... not over the next 2-3 years, now.  Not gonna happen IMO

i think it's much easier for mccags to justify trading back into the teens, perhaps trading back twice.  then if he takes a qb in the first round, he'll also have multiple extra picks for the value at #6.  i do not think they go qb at #6, mccags will not reach that much from the value.  

 

2 minutes ago, Warfish said:

If the GM is truly "on the hot seat", this who debate is moot.  We'd sign Culter, start Cutler, and have McCown back him up.

If we don;t do that, it likely says the GM is not as on the hot seat as some of us fans think he is.

Why?  

Say we draft Trubisky.  In 2017, we start Hackenberg, #2 McCown, and #3 Trubisky.  No one is going to be burning down the gates to Jetsland over that, it's emminently reasonable.  We get to see what Hack is or isn't, and Trubs gets a year to sit and learn (which is NOT a bad thing).

His job is ties to whomever plays QB's performance.  You don;t get to keep being GM just because you refuse to bank on a young QB.  Be assured, hsi future right now depends only on Hack.....getting another gives him some room, not less room, to be retained.

And when the Jets go 5-11, and pick 9th, the whole "bank on better prospects in 2018" concept is utterly destroyed, Hack has failed, and the Jets find themselves with no QB prospects on the roster and no ability to draft a QB prospect.  THAT, my friend, is how a GM gets fired.

it might be the best strategy to draft a qb and let all of them audition.  ultimately, mccags will only remain the gm if one of his drafted qbs becomes a viable starter, so it does make sense for both himself and the franchise to have more coals in the fire.