To QB or not QB

[thadude]

13 minutes ago, rangerous said:

i totally agree with this.  and that mmqb article about hack proves this out.  if a qb is the bpa then mac is going to draft the guy.  i think what people seem to misunderstand is that there is positional bias so the players can be judges on an equalized value basis. 

We haven't had a good qb since 1998 Vinny.  This franchise does not have the luxury of saying "hey let's wait till 2020 to draft a qb!"

[thadude]

15 minutes ago, HessStation said:

And for good reason. That doesn't validate your strongman that everyone thinks next year is '83. 

It's been 6 years since my team even sniffed the playoffs I now have to endure watching McClown and Bryce Putrid get benched to watch the ultimate embarrassment of Wackinturd throw 7-9 interceptions in a game because we might have a 5% chance at Darnold

[HessStation]

8 minutes ago, thadude said:

It's been 6 years since my team even sniffed the playoffs I now have to endure watching McClown and Bryce Putrid get benched to watch the ultimate embarrassment of Wackinturd throw 7-9 interceptions in a game because we might have a 5% chance at Darnold

A 1% chance at Darnold and then him becoming the next Peyton Manning is still better than Watson/Kizer/Trubisky being the next Peyton Manning. 

 

The entire point of Aaall this is playimg percentages and best bets....

[thadude]

2 minutes ago, HessStation said:

A 1% chance at Darnold and then him becoming the next Peyton Manning is still better than Watson/Kizer/Trubisky being the next Peyton Manning. 

 

The entire point of Aaall this is playimg percentages and best bets....

If Watson/Kizer/Trubisky are so bad then they should solidify our chances at Darnold

 

 

I'm not even disagreeing about Watson and Trubisky if anyone uses a high first round pick on either of those guys I have Enron Stock to sell them

[HessStation]

4 minutes ago, thadude said:

If Watson/Kizer/Trubisky are so bad then they should solidify our chances at Darnold

 

 

I'm not even disagreeing about Watson and Trubisky if anyone uses a high first round pick on either of those guys I have Enron Stock to sell them

Than the disagreement between us is, that I would rather a player that will help the QB we take next year...or god forbid Hack can maybe just maybe play. And yes I'm begging for 1-15. And yes I think the chance of them going 1-2 wins is as good if not better than any QB in this draft becoming a HOFer. And yes I realize even Darnold or Rosen or whoever isn't a sure thing. And that there is no such thing. But if they are ever going to win anything gotta roll the. Dice a bit and get a little lucky for once. I'd rather that the plan than perpetual medicrocy 

[Warfish]

2 hours ago, Paradis said:

You've asked the same stupid question 8 times warfish -- and keep getting the same answer. Some people believe in quality over quantity.

If you presume to know the "quality" of a college kid transitioning to the Pro game, might I suggest you're in the wrong line of work posting to a fanboard.  You should be an NFL GM.

2 hours ago, Paradis said:

There's no empirical data to suggest adding sh*tty QB's to a sh*tty roster eventually translates to finding one. Cleveland's a glaring example why.

On the contrary, Cleveland is an example of passing QB's they should have taken, and taking QB's they should have passed on.  I.e. improper analysis.

2 hours ago, Paradis said:

Just accept that some people don't think there's a point in adding one of these lesser people to the team.

Of course I accept it, but the fact is you've not answered the question I asked.  Simply sperging "quality over quantity" is not, in fact, an actual solution.

So I'll be more direct in my response, WHO specifically is your "quality" and how are you assuring we (the Jets) can acquire said quality player?

 

[Warfish]

1 hour ago, HessStation said:

Picking a prospect with a better risk reward at a less important position and then seeing what you have in the two slim chances you already have, especially the one you wasted a second round pick on last year....and then if or when you're comfortable with the fact neither slim chance you already have on the roster isn't going to be a star, you pick a QB in 2018 which basically every draft expert is telling you is a much better year to take a QB especially early in the first round. 

Lets be clear, drafting a QB (any QB) in the 2017 does not mean we cannot "see what we have" in Petty and Hack.

But lets be clear here, we've seen some what we have in Petty....and it's fragile and thoroughly unimpressive.  Not enough to cut, yet, but certainly enough to start evaluating his chances as slimmer than slim.  In point of fact, I'm not going to be shocked if/when Petty is cut this preseason.

As for Hack, what we know is that he deemed so unready, and so fragile of mind, than his GM and Head Coach refused to play him even in the stunningly pressure-free final game of 2016, with Petty hurt, Geno hurt, and Fitz bordering on worst QB in NFL history.  We know Hack was barely able to hold a football in preseason of that very same year.  We know the word out of Jets FO (and yes, perhaps it was a now-fired coach) that Hack is a bust-in-progress.  

We have very little reason to expect franchise QB level play from Petty or Hack.  Adding another QB raises the chances, and helps keep developmental prospects in the pipeline, so if/when Hack and Petty fail, we have more bodies in-place, with a year under our system, to try out in 2017....rather than hoping/praying we draft Darnold (which we may not be able to do) and are forced to start him day 1.

Those saying "suck for Darnold" are, IMO, taking an uninformed view.  The players will not do it.  Bowles will not do it.  And being the drop dead worst team int he NFL is hard, far harder than simply cutting a few veterans and starting a few kids.  Remember, Cleveland is still in the NFL too, and if we want Darnold, so does everyone else.  We saw as bad a team as we've seen in decades last year.....we still draft 6th, not first.  Putting all your hope in a future-Darnold-to-Jets is, I'm sad to say, a longshot and a perfect example of poor SOJ planning.

[JetFaninMI]

8 hours ago, dbatesman said:

We have no answer at the most important position in sports, but if we get a shot at one this year we should turn it down and wait for Darnold, because that's a workable plan that definitely doesn't depend on a million things breaking exactly right. Also Petty and Hackenberg, come on folks, one of them is bound to work out. A nurse comes to my house and velcros my shoes for me every morning

LMFAO

[JetFaninMI]

I don't see the problem with drafting a QB in the 1st round. I want Watson not Trubinsky. There is depth at the other need positions and you can easily pick up at starter at CB, RB, or OL in the 2nd and/or 3rd rounds. If they take a TE or WR in the 1st I am okay with that but would be pissed if they took a CB, S, or DL in the 1st. Especially with Mac's track record in the draft. Drafting Watson doesn't mean that they can't draft a QB next year it just means that they see Petty as a bust. Let Hack, Watson and McClown be the guys going into camp with the idea that McClown starts the first part of the year and the better of the two younger QB's takes over at or just before mid-season. If they fail to impress then you go from there. Drafting a QB in next season's draft isn't a sure thing either. Darnold may not come out, injuries can happen etc. It's all moot anyway. Knowing Mac Lattimore will be the pick and we will all be researching hamstring injuries  all season long.

[Paradis]

21 minutes ago, Warfish said:

So I'll be more direct in my response, WHO specifically is your "quality" and how are you assuring we (the Jets) can acquire said quality player?

I would hate to be a fly on the wall at your house when you argue with your wife. Assuming there's a female creature capable of dealing with you on daily basis.

There is no who this year. That's the point. Let's recap because you have a learning disability. 1) there's this thing called calculated risk -- and like 2013 when buffalo was the only team desperate enough to draft EJ Manuel -- this year, there's just as much cause for concern IMO. Just because we need a QB doesn't mean you "just take one"... CLE is guilty of not going after The lucks, wentz and staffords, and instead settling for Weedens, and Quinns; a category Kizer, Trubisky are at a high risk of joining. If YOU were a GM who believed these guys were Quinn bound, then you wouldn't waste ANY fcking picks in round 1 on them. That's it. That's all.

In fact, you increase your chances of getting fired next off-season by increasing the number of sh*tty QBs on your team  You want a correlation. There's your correlation. 

[Paradis]

38 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Lets be clear, drafting a QB (any QB) in the 2017 does not mean we cannot "see what we have" in Petty and Hack.

As for Hack, what we know is that he deemed so unready, and so fragile of mind, than his GM and Head Coach refused to play him even in the stunningly pressure-free final game of 2016, with Petty hurt, Geno hurt, and Fitz bordering on worst QB in NFL history.  We know Hack was barely able to hold a football in preseason of that very same year.  We know the word out of Jets FO (and yes, perhaps it was a now-fired coach) that Hack is a bust-in-progress.  

We have very little reason to expect franchise QB level play from Petty or Hack.  Adding another QB raises the chances, and helps keep developmental prospects in the pipeline, so if/when Hack and Petty fail, we have more bodies in-place, with a year under our system, to try out in 2017....rather than hoping/praying we draft Darnold (which we may not be able to do) and are forced to start him day 1.

Those saying "suck for Darnold" are, IMO, taking an uninformed view.  The players will not do it.  Bowles will not do it.  And being the drop dead worst team int he NFL is hard, far harder than simply cutting a few veterans and starting a few kids.  Remember, Cleveland is still in the NFL too, and if we want Darnold, so does everyone else.  We saw as bad a team as we've seen in decades last year.....we still draft 6th, not first.  Putting all your hope in a future-Darnold-to-Jets is, I'm sad to say, a longshot and a perfect example of poor SOJ planning.

BTW, i walked circles around you in this discussion already. It's easy for a know-it-all like yourself to lay down draft logic, but your house isn't riding on this thing. You still get to go work on monday morning if Mike loses his job as GM of the Jets.

There's a TON of trip wires that lead to Mike being FIRED if he drafts a QB at #6 and it doesn't work out in 2017. Juggling Hackenberg and Trubisky (who is nowhere near ready to be starting games) has virtually no margin for error, and little chance of immediate success. Stupid move UNLESS they believe unequivocally he's THE GUY... in which case he needs to be fired lol

[HessStation]

32 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Lets be clear, drafting a QB (any QB) in the 2017 does not mean we cannot "see what we have" in Petty and Hack.

But lets be clear here, we've seen some what we have in Petty....and it's fragile and thoroughly unimpressive.  Not enough to cut, yet, but certainly enough to start evaluating his chances as slimmer than slim.  In point of fact, I'm not going to be shocked if/when Petty is cut this preseason.

As for Hack, what we know is that he deemed so unready, and so fragile of mind, than his GM and Head Coach refused to play him even in the stunningly pressure-free final game of 2016, with Petty hurt, Geno hurt, and Fitz bordering on worst QB in NFL history.  We know Hack was barely able to hold a football in preseason of that very same year.  We know the word out of Jets FO (and yes, perhaps it was a now-fired coach) that Hack is a bust-in-progress.  

We have very little reason to expect franchise QB level play from Petty or Hack.  Adding another QB raises the chances, and helps keep developmental prospects in the pipeline, so if/when Hack and Petty fail, we have more bodies in-place, with a year under our system, to try out in 2017....rather than hoping/praying we draft Darnold (which we may not be able to do) and are forced to start him day 1.

Those saying "suck for Darnold" are, IMO, taking an uninformed view.  The players will not do it.  Bowles will not do it.  And being the drop dead worst team int he NFL is hard, far harder than simply cutting a few veterans and starting a few kids.  Remember, Cleveland is still in the NFL too, and if we want Darnold, so does everyone else.  We saw as bad a team as we've seen in decades last year.....we still draft 6th, not first.  Putting all your hope in a future-Darnold-to-Jets is, I'm sad to say, a longshot and a perfect example of poor SOJ planning.

Your entire premise is, take the uninformed route bc nothing's a sure thing. Even though every draft expert on the planet has said next year's QB class will be A LOT better than this year's and everyone on the planet knows the Jets are going to suck in 2018. So even though most draft analysts are saying there isn't a QB worth taking that early, take one anyway...bc according to you, we can't, nobody can tell anyway. It's all just a crap shoot. But keep telling me the people looking at the draft objectively and and the season realistically and using the tools and assets around them by the experts closest to the game are making the uninformed decision. 

 

[Warfish]

58 minutes ago, Paradis said:

I would hate to be a fly on the wall at your house when you argue with your wife. Assuming there's a female creature capable of dealing with you on daily basis.

20 happy years and counting so far, how your love life these days?   Not going so well if your constant anger and attitude is any indication...

Quote

There is no who this year. That's the point.

So your answer then is "dur, I don't know, like someone will come, like eventually, right?"  Great plan.

It's fine to be critical of others plans my friend, but you should really try to have a plan of your own to offer up.

"Wait and maybe something something later" is not a plan.

 

35 minutes ago, Paradis said:

BTW, i walked circles around you in this discussion already. It's easy for a know-it-all like yourself to lay down draft logic, but your house isn't riding on this thing. You still get to go work on monday morning if Mike loses his job as GM of the Jets.

Cool story bro.  You keep telling yourself how awesome you are.

And really, are you losing your job if Macc gets fired?  ****s sake, what an odd line of argument that is.

 

[Warfish]

26 minutes ago, HessStation said:

Your entire premise is, take the uninformed route bc nothing's a sure thing. Even though every draft expert on the planet has said next year's QB class will be A LOT better than this year's and everyone on the planet knows the Jets are going to suck in 2018.

So just to be clear, you expect none of the vaunted class of 2018 to fall back, get hurt, or in any way lower their status from today.

And you expect we have the #1 pick.

Thats alot of presumption.  Seems like that plan could easily go wrong.  One more win than expected, one QB gets hurt, one QB goes the "not as well regarded as expected" route, etc.

But be at ease, because I think Macc will follow your advice not mine, and he will not go QB this draft.  Of course, he's the same guy who draft Hack, so yeah.  

Quote

So even though most draft analysts are saying there isn't a QB worth taking that early, take one anyway...bc according to you, we can't, nobody can tell anyway. It's all just a crap shoot.

It is, absolutely, and anyone who thinks otherwise isn't paying attention.  The only way to increase the odds is to increase the # of QB's you cycle through.

But hey, if you're happy with Hack in 2017, and maybe 2018 if we suck just a little too little, then yeah, solid plan.

And just to be clear, I don't require a QB be picked early, but I do strongly support picking A QB this draft somewhere.  Even a 7th rounder is better for the future of this team than wasting a roster spot on McCown.

 

[Jetsplayer21]

As long as they don't waste another top 10 pick on a corner ?

[HessStation]

31 minutes ago, Warfish said:

So just to be clear, you expect none of the vaunted class of 2018 to fall back, get hurt, or in any way lower their status from today.

And you expect we have the #1 pick.

Thats alot of presumption.  Seems like that plan could easily go wrong.  One more win than expected, one QB gets hurt, one QB goes the "not as well regarded as expected" route, etc.

But be at ease, because I think Macc will follow your advice not mine, and he will not go QB this draft.  Of course, he's the same guy who draft Hack, so yeah.  

It is, absolutely, and anyone who thinks otherwise isn't paying attention.  The only way to increase the odds is to increase the # of QB's you cycle through.

But hey, if you're happy with Hack in 2017, and maybe 2018 if we suck just a little too little, then yeah, solid plan.

And just to be clear, I don't require a QB be picked early, but I do strongly support picking A QB this draft somewhere.  Even a 7th rounder is better for the future of this team than wasting a roster spot on McCown.

 

No I don't expect anything. What I'm saying is, I would rather watch Hackenberg and Petty play this year. Because there were no FA's, Because the team is going to suck anyway, Because one was picked in 2nd round and had a full year to sit and learn. Becasue the other is going into a 3rd year with no excuses. I would rather them not draft a QB with the 6th pick overall this year, because almost every expert is saying none are worth the risk that high, any of the three top prospects would be considered not ready or with no higher ceiling than young QBs we already have, Because it would cloud up an already 3 man QB roster and take reps away from the two young QBs on the team, Because if they took a QB at 6 this year it would all but kill or severly lessen the likelihood of them taking a QB next year...because it would be embarrassing to take a QB in the second then early first then early first round three years in row...the team would look as incompetent as they are and the media and fanbase would lose its mind and would be unfair to the two no three players on the roster, all young and needing reps and direction. I would wait to take a QB in 2018, Because by then they'll have a better idea what they have in either Hackenberg or Petty, Because the 2018 class is supposed to be much better than this year, Because the Jets are almost definitely going to suck in 2018. Because that's your best chance of every winning anything...ALTHOUGH NO sh*t NOTHING IS A SURE THING.

 

 

Also, taking a QB in the mid late rounds this year makes ZERO sense and is a horrible idea imo. 

[Paradis]

23 minutes ago, Warfish said:

20 happy years

Good

23 minutes ago, Warfish said:

 and counting 

For 

23 minutes ago, Warfish said:

so far

you

23 minutes ago, Warfish said:

how your love life these days? 

5 kids. I'll let you speculate from there.

 

23 minutes ago, Warfish said:

So your answer then is "dur, I don't know, like someone will come, like eventually, right?"  Great plan.

It's fine to be critical of others plans my friend, but you should really try to have a plan of your own to offer up.

"Wait and maybe something something later" is not a plan.

 

My answer isn't dur, i told you what my answer is (hark back to the learning disability part). We have 3 QBs on the roster, we'll see how things shake out this year, and revaluate with better options than presently available to us. 

Plan?.... if you're talking about a plan at #6 -- I'd assume mike will have a board of actual best available players. Something looks like Adams, Williams, Fournette, Allen, Cook.

 

23 minutes ago, Warfish said:

And really, are you losing your job if Macc gets fired?  ****s sake, what an odd line of argument that is.

Is it really? Really.. Is it...? 

Is it really odd to say that someone might not do something because it increases their chances of getting fired? 

Is it really?

Really?

[SickJetFan]

Suck for Sam............then superbowl and Disney world

Draft Watson or (whatshisname...does it matter)............then superbowl and Disney world

Fire bowels and Mac............1st glee then superbowl and Disney world

Are you people football fans or little girls that believe in fairy fart dust.

You know winning isn't everything some of you old farts around here should know that by now....trying IS everything.

[Paradis]

29 minutes ago, Warfish said:

So just to be clear, you expect none of the vaunted class of 2018 to fall back, get hurt, or in any way lower their status from today.

And you expect we have the #1 pick.

Again, learning disability. 

there's at least 5 QBs presently in that conversation. Chances are 1-2 will tumble and another 1-2 who we don't know about it, will rise. Any way you look at it Hogan, there's more options than pretending Trubisky started more than 3 meaningful games, and Watson doesn't have Brett Huntley written all over him. 

[flgreen]

4 hours ago, SickJetFan said:

1st off thesis not a religious post. Looks like it is recent but I cannot tell.  What I find interesting if it is recent he sure is moving that shoulder good don't you think?

 

 

Just checked, yep Miles McPherson appears April 9th 2017 at Baylor Stadium.   So it seems you are correct on two things, 1) It is recent 2) Petty does seem to have a lot of motion in that left shoulder.   That is very good news.  I was really concerned Petty wouldn't be able to throw at the OTA's and fall way behind in development in the new system.

Don't know if Petty is ever going to be any good, but he flashed just enough last season IMO that he deserves a fair shot in OTA's, and camp.  If he doesn't show anything, move on, but he has improved in the last 2 camps, would love for the kid to take another step forward 

[SR24]

A lot can change in a year, Hack was projected to be the #1 qb in his class after the 2015 draft and look what happened. We can't just bank on tanking for a kid who could get hurt, could regress etc. However I don't really like any of these qbs in this draft except for Brad Kayaa I think his game will transition well into the NFL big arm, good size and a good football iq. If Kayaa is there when we are selecting with our 2nd 3rd round pick I would take him in a heartbeat. At #6 I'm only looking at 3 players- Jamal Adams,Malik Hooker and OJ Howard. I'm also looking for the trade back but it seems unlikely with the lack of superstar qbs in the draft. My ideal first 3 rounds would look something like

1st- OJ Howard-Alabama

2nd-Sidney Jones-Washington or Jalen Tabor- Florida

3rd- Antonio Garcia-Troy

3rd Comp Pick- Brad Kayaa.

 

[SickJetFan]

6 minutes ago, flgreen said:

Just checked, yep Miles McPherson appears April 9th 2017 at Baylor Stadium.   So it seems you are correct on two things, 1) It is recent 2) Petty does seem to have a lot of motion in that left shoulder.   That is very good news.  I was really concerned Petty wouldn't be able to throw at the OTA's and fall way behind in development in the new system.

Don't know if Petty is ever going to be any good, but he flashed just enough last season IMO that he deserves a fair shot in OTA's, and camp.  If he doesn't show anything, move on, but he has improved in the last 2 camps, would love for the kid to take another step forward 

I am prepared to write off Petty in a NY minute if he sucks but from what I saw happen last year I think he has a shot and I think they will give him a chance.

 

[HessStation]

The only guy with any point of differentiation from Hackenberg or Petty in this QB class is Watson and that's only becasue of his intangibles. So if I had to choose one guy it's Watson. No, I don't want to take Watson but I'm saying if there's a QB in this class that might just have the, It Factor, it's Watson. Besides that, do your ******* job and develop the two decent young prospects you already have...you either have a pleasant surprise or you Draft Darnold and ******* prosper bitchez.

[Paradis]

54 minutes ago, HessStation said:

The only guy with any point of differentiation from Hackenberg or Petty in this QB class is Watson and that's only becasue of his intangibles. So if I had to choose one guy it's Watson. No, I don't want to take Watson but I'm saying if there's a QB in this class that might just have the, It Factor, it's Watson. Besides that, do your ******* job and develop the two decent young prospects you already have...you either have a pleasant surprise or you Draft Darnold and ******* prosper bitchez.

You're wasting your time with warfish, he's not willing to acknowledge the logic (has his ego ever been malleable?). I love how it's widely acknowledged that 2 (arguably 3) super QB needy teams are all projected to pass on the lack-lustre class, but guys like fish think we better take them. If every expert in the universe thinks SF should pass on Trubisky, maybe we should too. But fck me, right? 

One good thing about selecting a QB at #6 -- it would mean we'd be getting rid of the guy who's dumb enough to that. Maybe it'll be blessing after the Hack-debacle. The only way Mike M. survives drafting a QB at #6 would be if that guy was the truth, in which case, GREAT. 

win-win for us.

[thadude]

Why do people think Watson will be good in the NFL?  He's a less athletic, smarter version of Vince Young coming out of college

 

Watson will be ok initially(like VY) then defenses will figure him out and he'll end up as a backup(like VY)

[thadude]

1 hour ago, HessStation said:

The only guy with any point of differentiation from Hackenberg or Petty in this QB class is Watson and that's only becasue of his intangibles. So if I had to choose one guy it's Watson. No, I don't want to take Watson but I'm saying if there's a QB in this class that might just have the, It Factor, it's Watson. Besides that, do your ******* job and develop the two decent young prospects you already have...you either have a pleasant surprise or you Draft Darnold and ******* prosper bitchez.

It's a bad draft class but there are easily 6-8 Qb's that will be drafted in rounds 1-6 who are significantly better than both Petty and Hackenberg

[Paradis]

Just now, thadude said:

It's a bad draft class but there are easily 6-8 Qb's that will be drafted in rounds 1-6 who are significantly better than both Petty and Hackenberg

that's not saying much. But then again, the guy who's responsible for drafting those two is the one with the finger on the trigger. I hope he's learned. 

If not, then this draft is the perfect death-kneel 

[thadude]

1 minute ago, Paradis said:

that's not saying much. But then again, the guy who's responsible for drafting those two is the one with the finger on the trigger. I hope he's learned. 

If not, then this draft is the perfect death-kneel 

Mac is the worst Qb evaluation person I have ever seen

 

 

Biggest reason he'll be fetching coffee in Houston this time next year

[HessStation]

28 minutes ago, thadude said:

It's a bad draft class but there are easily 6-8 Qb's that will be drafted in rounds 1-6 who are significantly better than both Petty and Hackenberg

Yeah no not really. 

[adb280z]

11 hours ago, Tinstar said:

Let me ask you this question .  let's say that Hackenberg gets the nod this year, and goes out and looks the part of a franchise QB in the making . Let's also say that despite that, the Jets still end up with the top pick in the 2018 draft and Sam Darnold declares and is your consensus #1 over all pick .

Should the Jets trade this pick, draft this player or take another position because you believe that position is already filled on your team ?

 

If Hack is the starter and the Jets are still picking #1 it's because he sucked and isn't the QB of the future.

[jetrider]

28 minutes ago, thadude said:

Mac is the worst Qb evaluation person I have ever seen

Bowles is even worse at developing one.

If I'm committing 1st Round money to a 1st Round player, I want the surest player at a position of need.

Taking a QB for the sake of taking a QB is poor strategy, especially knowing he'll be in the hands of a terrible HC and an unproven OC.  

 

 

[HighPitch]

Just now, jetrider said:

Bowles is even worse at developing one.

If I'm committing 1st Round money to a 1st Round player, I want the surest player at a position of need.

Taking a QB for the sake of taking a QB is poor strategy, especially knowing he'll be in the hands of a terrible HC and an unproven OC.  

 

 

You wouldn't be taking one for the sake of taking one. You take one because you need one. We need. Repeat again till found

[greenwave81]

Ahh...I can see both sides of this argument.

First, remember you can only draft a QB you want when you have the opportunity to do so...say, you might want Darnold next year, but there is no guarantee you'll even have that opportunity even if you were willing to trade your entire draft and some of next years.  So, what I would say is that IF the QB that Macc feels is worth the risk is there at 6, by all means take him.  If he pans out, no one other than NYJ internet board posters who are wanna be GMs is going to care. (and yes, Macc should be held accountable for that pick IF it doesn't work out but that is a multi (2-3) year process).  Macc ain't going anywhere for the next 2-3 seasons anyway...Bowles? Not so sure...I woulda fired him after last season, but that's another story.

Second, drafting a QB at 6 doesn't preclude the NYJ giving Petty and Hack EVERY opportunity this season, gets the newly drafted QB a year in the system and you can still draft another QB next year if needed.  The days of huge SB for high DP QB's like with Sanchez are gone...until you find a QB that should be taken advantage of.

I understand passing on potential impact players and taking another QB will be problematic to some, but not having a QB in todays game is a death knell and keeps you in a constant state of mediocrity as we've seen where fans would kill for a 'game manager'  which is only going to get you so far in today's NFL.

[greenwave81]

47 minutes ago, thadude said:

Mac is the worst Qb evaluation person I have ever seen

 

 

Biggest reason he'll be fetching coffee in Houston this time next year

Who'd he pass on other than Dak (as did 31 other NFL GM's for multiple rounds) that you would have rathered have?

Mariota and Winston went 1-2 in 15, no one else has amounted to anything to my recollection...Goff and Wentz went 1-2 in 16, costing their teams a lot of DP's int he process.

You can only draft who's available in front of you, no?

 

[jetrider]

3 minutes ago, HighPitch said:

You wouldn't be taking one for the sake of taking one. You take one because you need one. We need. Repeat again till found

No. You take a 1st rounder because he's the real deal - a solution - not because you need one/anyone.

We need a legit superstar not a shed full of backups.