KEEP SIGNING NO NAMES!

[jbeachboy]

14 hours ago, Jetster said:

We've been looking for a QB forever & at the same time ignoring the position.If Macc thinks Trubisky can be a QB in this league give it a go. Nothing else matters & any Jet fan commenting on QBs like their Nostradomus makes me laugh. Show me the posts where you were jonesing for Carr or Dak in past drafts. We need a f*cking QB, so if we take one THIS YEAR and blow, and take another one like Darnold next year we go into 2018 with Trubisky-Darnold-Hackenberg! Best thing that could ever happen to us & greatly enhances our chances for a franchise QB. Talk about competition! This is all about 2019 and beyond or what I like to call after Bellibrady.

exactly, 3 way competition, now you have 2 solid prospects with trubisky and darnold, with hack as 3rd

[Bocajetfan]

16 hours ago, jdeacon said:

If Sam doesn't come out I would be completely happy with Rosen. How many years are there 2 potential blue chip qb prospects available? You have to hope atleast 1 of the 2 will be available for us next year, or even better Hack turns into a legit Qb and we are one year ahead in the rebuild.

Manning/Leaf was a great year for 2 Blue Chippers ?

[The Crusher]

18 hours ago, Villain The Foe said:

 

Soy. 

Mayonnaise 

[Villain The Foe]

36 minutes ago, The Crusher said:

Mayonnaise 

That was wrong of you! lol. 

[The Crusher]

1 minute ago, Villain The Foe said:

That was wrong of you! lol. 

No way in hell you didn't know we would end there. LOL

[Villain The Foe]

5 minutes ago, The Crusher said:

No way in hell you didn't know we would end there. LOL

haha! I should have known. 

I wanted to say "Pesto" but that would have been a damn lie! lol. 

[jetrider]

On March 24, 2017 at 4:46 AM, Villain The Foe said:

It Would be hilarious if Darnold decides to stay in college and not declare. It will teach teams not to "suck" for anyone. Then again this is a jets team that would probably want to nosedive 2 consecutive seasons for this dude.

If the jets are trying to suck for him, then their draft picks better be the offensive line this year. 

Because he met Todd Bowlfinger and didn't get a word he said.

[johnnyjet]

On 3/24/2017 at 8:29 AM, BroadwayJoe12 said:

People were saying the same things about Geno, about Cook from Michigan state last year, about Watson this year, nobody was saying anything about Dak.  Darnold might stay or he might implode, who knows. You draft a QB in the first if you think he's got the ability to be the guy and do so until you're right. 

I don't recall anyone saying suck for Geno, Geno sucks, that I heard. The guys you mention are not blue chip prospects. They are prospects and a reach. 

[johnnyjet]

Suck for Sam, rot for Rosen, same sh*t. 

[johnnyjet]

Tank for trubinkski.....not so much. 

[Paradis]

On 3/24/2017 at 4:46 AM, Villain The Foe said:

It Would be hilarious if Darnold decides to stay in college and not declare. It will teach teams not to "suck" for anyone. Then again this is a jets team that would probably want to nosedive 2 consecutive seasons for this dude.

If the jets are trying to suck for him, then their draft picks better be the offensive line this year. 

Good thing it's only the message-board peanut gallery who think that Darnold is the only thing going since wet cooch. 

Josh Allen, Josh Rosen, Luke Falk, Lamar Jackson AND Sam Darnold could all come out next year. People need to stop acting like it's Darnold or death. Next year has the potential to be loaded. That's just a fact. This year was always going to be 2013 staring EJ Manuel and Geno Smith. 

[Sperm Edwards]

10 hours ago, Paradis said:

Good thing it's only the message-board peanut gallery who think that Darnold is the only thing going since wet cooch. 

Josh Allen, Josh Rosen, Luke Falk, Lamar Jackson AND Sam Darnold could all come out next year. People need to stop acting like it's Darnold or death. Next year has the potential to be loaded. That's just a fact. This year was always going to be 2013 staring EJ Manuel and Geno Smith. 

Serious question:

Say for the sake of argument, after the 2017 college season, Darnold still looks like the real deal but he decides to return for his senior season. Or what if we end up with the 2nd overall pick due to a tie breaker, and the #1 team isn't moving out of the #1 spot no matter what you offer them. They've turned down your offer of our next 4 first round picks plus prima nocta with any/all of your daughters, future granddaughters, and nieces.

Among the rest, 1-2 of them look like mid-2nd or 3rd rounders (one gets over-drafted just based on being a QB, and goes around #24 overall). Others: one tears his shoulder up and you don't know if it'll heal right or not; one simply had a bad 2017 season; another is a problem-child clearly headed for turning into Manziel II.

So now you're the GM of a team that won 3 games last year and 5 games the year before that. Petty and Hackenberg have both shown that they're not starting QBs. What do you do? Who is your starting QB in 2018? (It takes me this long to ask a question lol)

[greenwave81]

7 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Serious question:

Say for the sake of argument, after the 2017 college season, Darnold still looks like the real deal but he decides to return for his senior season. Or what if we end up with the 2nd overall pick due to a tie breaker, and the #1 team isn't moving out of the #1 spot no matter what you offer them. They've turned down your offer of our next 4 first round picks plus prima nocta with any/all of your daughters, future granddaughters, and nieces.

Among the rest, 1-2 of them look like mid-2nd or 3rd rounders (one gets over-drafted just based on being a QB, and goes around #24 overall). Others: one tears his shoulder up and you don't know if it'll heal right or not; one simply had a bad 2017 season; another is a problem-child clearly headed for turning into Manziel II.

So now you're the GM of a team that won 3 games last year and 5 games the year before that. Petty and Hackenberg have both shown that they're not starting QBs. What do you do? Who is your starting QB in 2018? (It takes me this long to ask a question lol)

That was my point, in a roundabout way, with a post in the QB or not to QB thread...

You can only draft what players are available in front of you at that point in time.  I was only trying to make the point that I would understand if Macc picked a QB this year at #6 since the opportunity to do so would be in front of him.  Hell, he may have his pick of the entire QB class.  Maybe no one pans out, maybe one does...if he feels some QB this year has the ability, mind, size, intangibles whatever..I would understand if he selected them this year because 'next year' is always a crapshoot, QB is so important, and having too many QB's wouldn't be a bad problem to have.

[Paradis]

Serious question:
Say for the sake of argument, after the 2017 college season, Darnold still looks like the real deal but he decides to return for his senior season. Or what if we end up with the 2nd overall pick due to a tie breaker, and the #1 team isn't moving out of the #1 spot no matter what you offer them. They've turned down your offer of our next 4 first round picks plus prima nocta with any/all of your daughters, future granddaughters, and nieces.
Among the rest, 1-2 of them look like mid-2nd or 3rd rounders (one gets over-drafted just based on being a QB, and goes around #24 overall). Others: one tears his shoulder up and you don't know if it'll heal right or not; one simply had a bad 2017 season; another is a problem-child clearly headed for turning into Manziel II.
So now you're the GM of a team that won 3 games last year and 5 games the year before that. Petty and Hackenberg have both shown that they're not starting QBs. What do you do? Who is your starting QB in 2018? (It takes me this long to ask a question lol)

A lot of what you said there is just idle conjecture. It's unlikely that 4/5 prospects torpedo and no others come into light the way Trubisky has. There's no way an office can operate under those kinds of contingencies. Going into this season Watson was something of a possible franchise name, and that was basically it - and this is where we are. Next year there's better weather. That's all you can plan for.

Outside of all this speculation is the fact that the present options just don't present any likely solutions given our situation (if you're Mike). You risk everything and put your job and team in an incredibly fragile state by adding one of these mystery QBs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jetrider]

20 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Serious question:

Say for the sake of argument, after the 2017 college season, Darnold still looks like the real deal but he decides to return for his senior season. Or what if we end up with the 2nd overall pick due to a tie breaker, and the #1 team isn't moving out of the #1 spot no matter what you offer them. They've turned down your offer of our next 4 first round picks plus prima nocta with any/all of your daughters, future granddaughters, and nieces.

Among the rest, 1-2 of them look like mid-2nd or 3rd rounders (one gets over-drafted just based on being a QB, and goes around #24 overall). Others: one tears his shoulder up and you don't know if it'll heal right or not; one simply had a bad 2017 season; another is a problem-child clearly headed for turning into Manziel II.

So now you're the GM of a team that won 3 games last year and 5 games the year before that. Petty and Hackenberg have both shown that they're not starting QBs. What do you do? Who is your starting QB in 2018? (It takes me this long to ask a question lol)

Won't happen. Not in Hollywood. No LA kid with star power will turn down instant fame and fortune to stay in school and risk it all for nothing. 

[Paradis]

59 minutes ago, greenwave81 said:

having too many QB's wouldn't be a bad problem to have.

Unless none of them are any good - in which case you - you lose your job. 

Better to have less sh*t stuck to your name, than a lot... which is why GMs tend to pick their shots.

[greenwave81]

Just now, Paradis said:

Unless none of them are any good - in which case you - you lose your job. 

Better to have less sh*t stuck to your name, than a lot... which is why GMs tend to pick their shots.

Guess I should have said what I meant...'having to many GOOD QBs wouldn't be a bad problem to have' lol.

I'm just enjoying the thought processes in these 'draft' threads regarding: Is there a position that is NOT worth drafting at with the #6 pick (or say a top ten pick) like OG, RB, S, RT etc.  I can understand that the primary goal is getting an impact player, but I also see the point of view where it is argued that you have a better chance of getting say an all-pro OG or S with a later pick than say getting an impact edge rusher or QB.

Which is why I don't envy Macc...he's gonna get killed no matter who he drafts lol as half the fan base at least here thinks say drafting a TE at 6 is verboten, and another half thinks that drafting say Trubisky is 'reaching' even though he plays the most important position on a team.  Interesting.

[thadude]

12 hours ago, Paradis said:

Good thing it's only the message-board peanut gallery who think that Darnold is the only thing going since wet cooch. 

Josh Allen, Josh Rosen, Luke Falk, Lamar Jackson AND Sam Darnold could all come out next year. People need to stop acting like it's Darnold or death. Next year has the potential to be loaded. That's just a fact. This year was always going to be 2013 staring EJ Manuel and Geno Smith. 

And half those guys will probably be busts and Darnold is a junior

[Sperm Edwards]

2 hours ago, Paradis said:

 

A lot of what you said there is just idle conjecture. It's unlikely that 4/5 prospects torpedo and no others come into light the way Trubisky has. There's no way an office can operate under those kinds of contingencies. Going into this season Watson was something of a possible franchise name, and that was basically it - and this is where we are. Next year there's better weather. That's all you can plan for.

Outside of all this speculation is the fact that the present options just don't present any likely solutions given our situation (if you're Mike). You risk everything and put your job and team in an incredibly fragile state by adding one of these mystery QBs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

It's no more conjecture than thinking a team of 53 players will collectively tank at will, knowing they'd be getting their walking papers after their task is done, Major League style.

You also have dodged the question:

The QB you dream of is not available to you, as neither the players nor the HC are going to willingly tank. They'll stink, but win just enough to ruin your best laid plans. Then a couple of others, a year from now, aren't nearly the prospects you thought they would be (as commonly occurs). The last one you kinda-sorta like isn't close to being worthy of the #2-4 overall slot you find yourself in, and someone else grabs him before your 2nd round pick comes up.

It is not far-fetched. I'm asking what you would do.

[Sperm Edwards]

2 hours ago, jetrider said:

Won't happen. Not in Hollywood. No LA kid with star power will turn down instant fame and fortune to stay in school and risk it all for nothing. 

Returning for his senior year is only 1 possible reason, but whatever the reason is, say he is unavailable to you.

[Paradis]

Guess I should have said what I meant...'having to many GOOD QBs wouldn't be a bad problem to have' lol. I'm just enjoying the thought processes in these 'draft' threads regarding: Is there a position that is NOT worth drafting at with the #6 pick (or say a top ten pick) like OG, RB, S, RT etc.  I can understand that the primary goal is getting an impact player, but I also see the point of view where it is argued that you have a better chance of getting say an all-pro OG or S with a later pick than say getting an impact edge rusher or QB. Which is why I don't envy Macc...he's gonna get killed no matter who he drafts lol as half the fan base at least here thinks say drafting a TE at 6 is verboten, and another half thinks that drafting say Trubisky is 'reaching' even though he plays the most important position on a team.  Interesting.

 

 

 You're just scratching the surface of the GM political Game of thrones. I guess you have to consider not only who the best player is to help the team, but also who the RIGHT player is for the team...

 

take Fournette for example; personally I'm not totally in love with the guy, but consider the chess piece that he represents. Based on his prestige the blowback is minimal, the returns a running back are likely immediate, and he's a franchise face (on a team with few if any) AND he takes the heat off the QB.

 

now pretend you're Mac.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

[Paradis]

It's no more conjecture than thinking a team of 53 players will collectively tank at will, knowing they'd be getting their walking papers after their task is done, Major League style.

You also have dodged the question:

The QB you dream of is not available to you, as neither the players nor the HC are going to willingly tank. They'll stink, but win just enough to ruin your best laid plans. Then a couple of others, a year from now, aren't nearly the prospects you thought they would be (as commonly occurs). The last one you kinda-sorta like isn't close to being worthy of the #2-4 overall slot you find yourself in, and someone else grabs him before your 2nd round pick comes up.

It is not far-fetched. I'm asking what you would do.

The situation you're painting isn't likely enough to even merit a postulation. With 5 QB's on the radar, and a probable 1-2 more to surface, it's unreasonable for you to ask me what I do if 6 of them became unavailable/undesirable. What if the Jets moved cities next year? If PHI can trade up for Wentz, we can trade up for someone. If our record made that completely unattainable then something's working at qb.

 

In the fantasy-version of life where we somehow win enough games to not be picking near the top but still need a qb in a draft where 5-6 QB fall off the map? I rinse and repeat. Keep building the farm for the next year. Taking someone undesirable at 6 this year doesn't circumvent the minefield you've just made in your sandbox.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Paradis]

And half those guys will probably be busts and Darnold is a junior

You're trolling, but even so, none of that change the landscape of unlikelihood currently staring at us in this class.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sperm Edwards]

8 hours ago, Paradis said:

The situation you're painting isn't likely enough to even merit a postulation. With 5 QB's on the radar, and a probable 1-2 more to surface, it's unreasonable for you to ask me what I do if 6 of them became unavailable/undesirable. What if the Jets moved cities next year? If PHI can trade up for Wentz, we can trade up for someone. If our record made that completely unattainable then something's working at qb.

 

In the fantasy-version of life where we somehow win enough games to not be picking near the top but still need a qb in a draft where 5-6 QB fall off the map? I rinse and repeat. Keep building the farm for the next year. Taking someone undesirable at 6 this year doesn't circumvent the minefield you've just made in your sandbox.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wentz was different because he was not viewed as a sure thing the same way that Darnold is being viewed today. People are talking of him here more like Andrew Luck, where there was a 0% chance of trading up, hence the requirement to suck-for-[him] in advance. Wentz wasn't even the 1st pick in a draft where the #1 player was said to be more ready now but had a more limited ceiling (and was viewed as maybe the 7th or so overall a month or two before). 

I'm not advocating for or against anyone specific this year, as I don't watch much college ball and have hardly watched these kids. All I'd be mostly doing is regurgitating what others have said about any of them, which would make it someone else's opinions rather than my own.

What I do know is things rarely turn out just the way they're planned. Especially if a crucial part of the plan is to get an entire team, as well as his hanging-by-a-thread HC, to buy into a preseason plan of losing on purpose. It's not that the Jets are going to be so good this year; they're not. It's that there are often enough weak teams on a given year's schedule, that even a bad team with a handful of good players can still win 8 games plus a legit shot at more.  

It is rare to see draft classes like 2012 (let alone 1983).

• In 2009, before we traded up for Sanchez, that the following year's draft was viewed as a far better class. Not just Bradford, who was already locked in at #1, but also Clausen & McCoy. The latter two faded as prospects, and we now know it was with good reason.
• Two years after that was another supposedly really good QB class. In the end it was Cam Newton (attainable only if you naturally had the #1 pick, not by trade), and among the rest you'd have to do some serious hindsight cherry-picking as 6 QBs went in the first 36 picks and most of them sucked.
• In '99 there were 5 QBs taken in the top 12 picks (and another in the top 50). In the end, just the 2nd one taken had a good-great career. The 4th one taken started to look great before his talent just seemed to disappear when he turned 28. The rest were busts.

It is unserious to expect in any draft, let alone one a full year from now, there will be some 6-7 franchise QBs, or that you can today predict we'll cherry-pick the one we'd get. When the dust settles, history suggests the class is more likely to be just Darnold, plus maybe one other just-ok guy mixed in somewhere among 3-5 busts (or ones who faded into mid-round backup talent prospects).

[nicg4360]

Or another possibility...We suck so bad and tank like no team has tanked before and everyone gets their wish with the number one spot...But...Darnold sees just how pathetic this franchise is and pulls a Vick/Eli and refuses to play for the Jets. It's happened before. Be careful what you wish for.

Sent from my XT1635-02 using JetNation.com mobile app

[Sperm Edwards]

@Paradis you rep me after that post instead of arguing? 

Dammit to ****ing hell, I can hardly get a rise out of anyone anymore.

[Paradis]

1 hour ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Wentz was different because he was not viewed as a sure thing the same way that Darnold is being viewed today. People are talking of him here more like Andrew Luck, where there was a 0% chance of trading up, hence the require to suck-for-[him] in advance. Wentz wasn't even the 1st pick in a draft where the #1 player was said to be more ready now but had a more limited ceiling (and was viewed as maybe the 7th or so overall a month or two before). 

I'm not advocating for or against anyone specific this year, as I don't watch much college ball and have hardly watched these kids. All I'd be mostly doing is regurgitating what others have said about any of them, which would make it someone else's opinions rather than my own.

Me and you are a lot more in line than you know -- difference is I follow college/draft a lot closer. Wentz didn't come out thin air like some fcking magic show, he is exactly who Falk and Allen are in 2018, You're making my whole argument for me. Think about it like this, Wentz in 2015, are who Falk, Allen are today. Trubisky was not on the map and should have stayed for his senior year the way Allen and Falk did. Rosen and Darnold will be juniors, but they'll be advised to come out based on their draft stock. By the way Goff was miscasted as "the clear #1 choice" - He was QB#3 last year. I posted about it ad naseum last year if you care to check. 

And people need to slow their roll on Darnold. He's not Andrew Luck. Not yet. I wouldn't advocate for tanking for him, not do i think he's a savior yet. You're listening to the wrong people, We would be in very fortunate situation to have a shot at even Falk, Allen and Jackson -- forget Darnold and Rosen

 

1 hour ago, Sperm Edwards said:

What I do know is things rarely turn out just the way they're planned. Especially if a crucial part of the plan is to get an entire team, as well as his hanging-by-a-thread HC, to buy into a preseason plan of losing on purpose. It's not that the Jets are going to be so good this year; they're not. It's that there are often enough weak teams on a given year's schedule, that even a bad team with a handful of good players can still win 8 games plus a legit shot at more.  

It is rare to see draft classes like 2012 (let alone 1983).

• In 2009, before we traded up for Sanchez, that the following year's draft was viewed as a far better class. Not just Bradford, who was already locked in at #1, but also Clausen & McCoy. The latter two faded as prospects, and we now know it was with good reason.
• Two years after that was another supposedly really good QB class. In the end it was Cam Newton (attainable only if you naturally had the #1 pick, not by trade), and among the rest you'd have to do some serious hindsight cherry-picking as 6 QBs went in the first 36 picks and most of them sucked.
• In '99 there were 5 QBs taken in the top 12 picks (and another in the top 50). In the end, just the 2nd one taken had a good-great career. The 4th one taken started to look great before his talent just seemed to disappear when he turned 28. The rest were busts.

It is unserious to expect in any draft, let alone one a full year from now, there will be some 6-7 franchise QBs, or that you can today predict we'll cherry-pick the one we'd get. When the dust settles, history suggests the class is more likely to be just Darnold, plus maybe one other just-ok guy mixed in somewhere among 3-5 busts (or ones who faded into mid-round backup talent prospects).

The rest of your post is dispelled by your lack knowledge about what you're talking about (don't mean that in a condescending way)... I've already told you that Darnold is not the next holy grail (premature) and you should be excited about a handful of guys. We don't need the #1 pick. Anywhere in the top 15 should suffice. Sanchez is an example of why you don't take Trubisky..

And THANK YOU for bringing up the 2011 QB class. Cam newton was the only guy who should have been going in the first. Locker? Ponder? Gabbert? That's Watson, Trubisky and Kizer right there. I mean not literally - but you're making my argument for me. They should never have gone in the first. 

[Sperm Edwards]

Better...

bitch. 

[bealeb319]

Teams that sign big name players are usually the ones that have bad seasons. Hopefully some of these no name guys play with a chip on their shoulders and we win some games this season. What if Sam and Rosen both have really crappy seasons and fall dramatically in the draft which obviously is not unheard of...then your plan is to suck a whole year so we can draft the qb which mock drafts tell us is the best available?

Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

[stoicsentry]

I'm fine with going 0-16/1-15/2-14 every season until we finally get a chance at a can't miss QB. It's never happened for us.

[Sperm Edwards]

36 minutes ago, stoicsentry said:

I'm fine with going 0-16/1-15/2-14 every season until we finally get a chance at a can't miss QB. It's never happened for us.

1997

[HessStation]

On 3/27/2017 at 0:58 AM, Sperm Edwards said:

It's no more conjecture than thinking a team of 53 players will collectively tank at will, knowing they'd be getting their walking papers after their task is done, Major League style.

You also have dodged the question:

The QB you dream of is not available to you, as neither the players nor the HC are going to willingly tank. They'll stink, but win just enough to ruin your best laid plans. Then a couple of others, a year from now, aren't nearly the prospects you thought they would be (as commonly occurs). The last one you kinda-sorta like isn't close to being worthy of the #2-4 overall slot you find yourself in, and someone else grabs him before your 2nd round pick comes up.

It is not far-fetched. I'm asking what you would do.

You sir, have NO FAITH.

[Sperm Edwards]

22 hours ago, HessStation said:

You sir, have NO FAITH.

What on earth makes you say that?  

I know it's ridiculous that I shouldn't expect 50+ players, a HC who is (or should be) on the hot seat, as well as all the coordinators/coaches on his staff, would all collectively tank so their future replacements will benefit from the possibility of drafting a better QB prospect a year from now.

[HessStation]

15 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

What on earth makes you say that?  

I know it's ridiculous that I shouldn't expect 50+ players, a HC who is (or should be) on the hot seat, as well as all the coordinators/coaches on his staff, would all collectively tank so their future replacements will benefit from the possibility of drafting a better QB prospect a year from now.

I can feel it coming in the air tonight. I've been waiting for this moment all my life. 

[HighPitch]

On 3/24/2017 at 2:15 PM, Jetster said:

Such a great point. No way in hell was he saying draft him in the 1st OR 2nd round, so just like everyone who does mocks he got lucky say the name Dak Prescott. Its like Russell Wilson, if it leaked that Bradway was ALL OVER Wilson & we picked him in the 1st round (20/20 being what it is it would have been the Jets best draft pick since Namath), Jet fans would have LOST THEIR SH*T though Roger Goodell came to the podium in the 1st round & said "With the 16th pick in the 2012 draft the NY Jets select Russell Wilson Quarterback Wisconsin" LOL! I could just hear the boos & shaking heads, laughing.

That's why I don't give a sh*t anymore! Pick a freaking QB in round 1 & 2 for god sakes! Its not even WORTH watching anymore unless we find even a COMPETENT QB, the guy doesn't have to be a freaking superstar, just somebody who can take a snap, throw in the rain, run a bit & protect the stupid ball.

Lol fully agree.... But its sad