idzik.. just how bad was he at drafting players ? ? ?

[#27TheDominator]

7 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

again, did it affect our cap?  who cares what the amount was, it was a 1 year deal.  Harris being cut had absolutely nothing to do w/ Fitz.

this year it appears our season is over before it begins but in hindsight so was last year, 2014, 2012, 2007, 2005.  we'll see what happens.

Last year we were coming off a 10-6 season and the coaching staff and our new player personnel people had time to install their systems.  Why the **** should we have taken a step back?  

More importantly, how can something be "over before it begins" in hindsight? 

[jgb]

isn't that all arguments on message boards?
 
I love when people whine about others discussing things rather than try to participate.

You confuse "whine" with "bemusement." Sad way to approach message boards. Pity.


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

[nyjunc]

2 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

Last year we were coming off a 10-6 season and the coaching staff and our new player personnel people had time to install their systems.  Why the **** should we have taken a step back?  

More importantly, how can something be "over before it begins" in hindsight? 

how? we had a cupcake sched in 2015 where everything broke perfectly, that wasn't going to happen again.  I thought we could be better but go 8-8 or 9-7.  unfortunately we took a HUGE step back.

Knowing what we know now we can clearly see last year was over before it started.

2 minutes ago, jgb said:

 

You confuse "whine" with "bemusement." Sad way to approach message boards. Pity.


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

 

No, it was whining.

[jgb]

No, it was whining.

Thank god you're here to tell me what I think. Wish I could have you on every voir dire


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

[#27TheDominator]

7 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

how? we had a cupcake sched in 2015 where everything broke perfectly, that wasn't going to happen again.  I thought we could be better but go 8-8 or 9-7.  unfortunately we took a HUGE step back.

Knowing what we know now we can clearly see last year was over before it started.

No, it was whining.

Knowing what I know now every ******* year since '69 was over before it started.  What a moronic concept.  

[nyjunc]

6 minutes ago, jgb said:

 

Thank god you're here to tell me what I think. Wish I could have you on every voir dire


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

 

I'm here to help.

do you not understand how silly it is to post what you posted?  ALL of our arguments on here are our opinions(and also very silly). 

[nyjunc]

Just now, #27TheDominator said:

Knowing what I know now every ******* year since '69 was over before it started.  What a moronic concept.  

you need to rub one out, you are too tense.

[sirlancemehlot]

On 7/11/2017 at 0:48 AM, Mogglez said:

That's great and all but Idzik's first draft was 2013 sooooooo......

Right. I was showing that Tannenbaum had a sh*te draft before Idzick. See, people are blaming this bad roster on Idzick and the fact is Tanny, Idzick, and Mac all had bad drafts. You can't put it on one guy. Of the three, Idzick was the better manager. 

[Sperm Edwards]

1 hour ago, phill1c said:

Ah, the power play...not unexpected. I would argue I'm not on anyone's leash. I would also submit that my arguments are no different than those who rebut my arguments or who make arguments that I rebut. It appears that only I am subject to being chastised about not following these "easily-followed rules".  I see a lot of arguments posted that start with disallowed topics and I see no admonishments. It appears to me that "easily-followed" rules are selectively enforced and especially when I break them. As it is, I generally talk and move on. I realize that it's a football forum and that I probably won't convince those not open to being convinced. And, of course, I have a real life outside of this forum. My god, if I didn't--and the Jets were something that was really important to me--I think I would Just End The Season (so to speak). I think in the end you're better off with me than without me, but, really, I'm not in charge of that so I'm going to be myself in any event.

Now on to the football-related part of your post:

              "There is no shortage of comments on this board - and repeated in this thread - that state Maccagnan had to spend this money..."

The only issue is that I DIDN'T MAKE THEM!! So, if you're rebutting MY argument, you can't use other peoples' arguments as if they are mine. Pretty simple notion: don't attribute others' arguments to me because 1) I'm not defending other people's arguments; I'm making and defending only mine, and 2) It's hard to know why you say what you say when you refer to arguments I haven't made.

More globally, here's my problem with your logic: you have a anti-Maccagnan bias. And every single argument you make that has him as a topic you start with that bias and work your way back. That's the opposite of unbiased thinking. And it leads to faulty logic and attributing arguments to others that they didn't actually make and other bizarre rants that make a discussion with you difficult to maintain.

Also, your anti-Maccagnan bias prevents you from accurately assessing the particular topics you argue. You see, not every move a GM makes is going to result in a tangibly positive result. Some moves are foundational. Some are for the near-term. Some are made to placate the fan base. I'm sure there are other reasons that I haven't mentioned. Also, because I don't know the full plan, where the team is in that plan, I'm going to temper criticism and adulation accordingly. Most importantly, I'm not going to let my frustration with past results play a large role in my assessments.

Your assessments seem to have only ONE facet: to prove how bad Maccagnan is. No disrespect intended, but it seems kinda ludicrous to have so much animosity invested in a GM of a football team, when it's all about entertainment. It's not 'real'. There's no hard-and-fast science to it. I mean, I get it, you're a moderator on this forum, so, clearly, discussing the Jets is very very very important to you. But maybe you've lost some perspective as to the importance of the specific arguments you're making and how there generally can't be a right or a wrong that can be proved. And definitely you don't seem open to the possibility that you could be wr, wr, er, incorrect. Just like me sometimes, you could benefit from maybe a marijuana gummy or a cognac.

Anyway, peace be with you...

How about I respond the way you responded to me? So your stance is therefore:

1. Maccagnan did something = smart
2. Maccagnan didn't do something = smart

It's not a power play. You've unleashed more personal attacks than per post than others - save the one grudge-holding poster who repped you, who un-coincidentally has been banned about 20 times - and we've hidden plenty of yours without saying much of anything to you. Now I'm saying it. 

So now you can get back to repeating your straw man arguments of accusing people of straw man arguments you believe they'd make if you posted this or that. lol

[phill1c]

58 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

How about I respond the way you responded to me? So your stance is therefore:

1. Maccagnan did something = smart
2. Maccagnan didn't do something = smart

It's not a power play. You've unleashed more personal attacks than per post than others - save the one grudge-holding poster who repped you, who un-coincidentally has been banned about 20 times - and we've hidden plenty of yours without saying much of anything to you. Now I'm saying it. 

So now you can get back to repeating your straw man arguments of accusing people of straw man arguments you believe they'd make if you posted this or that. lol

To points 1. and 2.: Again, NO, my original argument on this thread was about Idzick. Apparently you were arguing with someone else about Maccagnan and--because of your obsession with proving Maccagnan incompetent--you responded to my argument with some rant about Maccagnan. The point is that your debate tactics and logic is poor: you cant start with a preconceived notion and move forward from that; not and have it be anything close to the appearance of objectivity. Instead, you have to start from center and go where the evidence leads you. And, really, at some point you have to acknowledge that you're so invested in a position to the detriment of discussion AND to your own credibility. [See phill1c and Geno Smith]

Regarding personal attacks: While I respect your authority on this forum, I assert that you've got it backwards: I've been the recipient of more attacks than most. And, I think, because enough people don't agree with my opinions, you and the other moderators let it go. Moreover, if you hide something from me and don't say anything about it, it really doesn't exist for me, does it? And since I don't have access to hidden posts--mine or others--I can't verify the accuracy of your claims. I do know that posters have started threads that are mostly political and definitely have an inherent racial viewpoint and that appears to be ok, but me merely responding in dissent of the thread's thesis is somehow breaking the rules? People can call me stupid or worse and that's ok but me responding in kind is somehow wrong? Let's just say I think you have a ways to go before you can say you've fairly and objectively enforced the rules against political argument and personal attacks on this forum.

As to your last point, I have no interest in posting rebuttals to arguments people haven't made. that's your thing. There's plenty of posted opinion to discuss without making up opinions people haven't actually posted in a thread. Everyone is guilty from time to time, but that's why they have the quote feature. Am I a Maccagnan supporter? Yes. But I was solely responding to comments made about Idzick. And I certainly haven't had a recent opinion on Maccagnan having to spend money for free agents during his first  offseason. That's a whole other discussion that I haven't participated in lately.

[Sperm Edwards]

13 minutes ago, phill1c said:

To points 1. and 2.: Again, NO, my original argument on this thread was about Idzick. Apparently you were arguing with someone else about Maccagnan and--because of your obsession with proving Maccagnan incompetent--you responded to my argument with some rant about Maccagnan. The point is that your debate tactics and logic is poor: you cant start with a preconceived notion and move forward from that; not and have it be anything close to the appearance of objectivity. Instead, you have to start from center and go where the evidence leads you. And, really, at some point you have to acknowledge that you're so invested in a position to the detriment of discussion AND to your own credibility. [See phill1c and Geno Smith]

Regarding personal attacks: While I respect your authority on this forum, I assert that you've got it backwards: I've been the recipient of more attacks than most. And, I think, because enough people don't agree with my opinions, you and the other moderators let it go. Moreover, if you hide something from me and don't say anything about it, it really doesn't exist for me, does it? And since I don't have access to hidden posts--mine or others--I can't verify the accuracy of your claims. I do know that posters have started threads that are mostly political and definitely have an inherent racial viewpoint and that appears to be ok, but me merely responding in dissent of the thread's thesis is somehow breaking the rules? People can call me stupid or worse and that's ok but me responding in kind is somehow wrong? Let's just say I think you have a ways to go before you can say you've fairly and objectively enforced the rules against political argument and personal attacks on this forum.

As to your last point, I have no interest in posting rebuttals to arguments people haven't made. that's your thing. There's plenty of posted opinion to discuss without making up opinions people haven't actually posted in a thread. Everyone is guilty from time to time, but that's why they have the quote feature. Am I a Maccagnan supporter? Yes. But I was solely responding to comments made about Idzick. And I certainly haven't had a recent opinion on Maccagnan having to spend money for free agents during his first  offseason. That's a whole other discussion that I haven't participated in lately.

I don't have any ways to go before enforcing the site's rules that have been in effect for over a dozen years: you have been over the line before, and you went over the line with me in this thread. You could drop this any time. 

Despite your attempted deflection, your original response to me was in regards to Maccagnan, not Idzik. Don't go lumping me in with your battles with other posters lol.

[nyjunc]

1 hour ago, sirlancemehlot said:

Right. I was showing that Tannenbaum had a sh*te draft before Idzick. See, people are blaming this bad roster on Idzick and the fact is Tanny, Idzick, and Mac all had bad drafts. You can't put it on one guy. Of the three, Idzick was the better manager. 

of what 3? Tannenbaum, Macc and Idzik?  what? Tannebaum built 2 SB caliber teams(3 if he didn't foolishly make the move at QB in 2008).  Idzik was a disaster that set us back, he's not why we suck right now but he's part of the reason why.  he went all in on the 2014 draft and that draft set us back years. of course you can overcome bad drafting, we did it in 2015, but it will eventually catch up with you.

Idzik had a good plan, he just couldn't execute.  I have much more faith in Macc to execute and certainly much more in tannenbaum who built yet another playoff team in Miami.

[phill1c]

16 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I don't have any ways to go before enforcing the site's rules that have been in effect for over a dozen years: you have been over the line before, and you went over the line with me in this thread. You could drop this any time. 

Despite your attempted deflection, your original response to me was in regards to Maccagnan, not Idzik. Don't go lumping me in with your battles with other posters lol.

the issue I have is not with when the rules went into effect. My point, which not surprisingly you don't seem willing to grasp or acknowledge, was that I feel they aren't enforced fairly or objectively.

I think you have me confused with someone who would feel a need to deflect. I'm not. Again, my original response was to someone else, a poster who claimed victory for his argument about Idzick's performance, claiming that the lack of a rebuttal was somehow proof that his comments were correct. I presented a bulleted list in dissent. It was then that you went on a rant about Maccagnan and Snacks or Maccagnan and needing to spend money, which was not MY argument. That was the first I recall having a dialog with you on this thread.

But, to be sure, I'm dropping it now because, like with many of your arguments, you appear invested at a level the won't allow dissent or compromise. Good day, Sir!!

[#27TheDominator]

2 hours ago, phill1c said:

the issue I have is not with when the rules went into effect. My point, which not surprisingly you don't seem willing to grasp or acknowledge, was that I feel they aren't enforced fairly or objectively.

I think you have me confused with someone who would feel a need to deflect. I'm not. Again, my original response was to someone else, a poster who claimed victory for his argument about Idzick's performance, claiming that the lack of a rebuttal was somehow proof that his comments were correct. I presented a bulleted list in dissent. It was then that you went on a rant about Maccagnan and Snacks or Maccagnan and needing to spend money, which was not MY argument. That was the first I recall having a dialog with you on this thread.

But, to be sure, I'm dropping it now because, like with many of your arguments, you appear invested at a level the won't allow dissent or compromise. Good day, Sir!!

He's saying don't call people dick.  Can you understand that or are you going to claim that I am saying something you didn't actually say? 

[dbatesman]

1 hour ago, nyjunc said:

he went all in on the 2014 draft and that draft set us back years.

Curious as to a.) what it means to go "all in" on a particular draft; b.) why this is a bad strategy; c.) what you would have done instead.

[nyjunc]

5 minutes ago, dbatesman said:

Curious as to a.) what it means to go "all in" on a particular draft; b.) why this is a bad strategy; c.) what you would have done instead.

a) he took over in Jan of 2013(or feb) and was making all his moves w/ an eye on the 2014 draft.  he didn't sign many players, didn't spend much, allowed our FAs to leave to get comp picks and stockpiled 12 draft picks.

b)it's not bad at all, I liked his plan, it was his execution that was lacking.

c)I liked the plan not the execution. missing on that draft w/ that many picks that he prepared 2 offseasons for really set us back.

[Mogglez]

6 hours ago, sirlancemehlot said:

Right. I was showing that Tannenbaum had a sh*te draft before Idzick. See, people are blaming this bad roster on Idzick and the fact is Tanny, Idzick, and Mac all had bad drafts. You can't put it on one guy. Of the three, Idzick was the better manager. 

As much as I hated Tannenbaum, he found Revis, Harris, Mangold, Brick, Powell, Austin Howard, Matt Slauson, Leon Washington, and plenty of other home grown players.

Macc, in 3 years, selected Leo, who is arguably the best player we've drafted since Revis (I think he'll be better) and Jamal Adams, who is looking like he might be another player of that caliber.  His drafts have been ok.  Despite the circle-jerk around here, the fact is that he's done a decent job in the later rounds and has absolutely nailed 2 of his 3 first rounders as they are looking like they might be special players.  Jury is out on guys like Mauldin, Lee, and Jenkins but I like Mauldin as a rotational guy, Lee is a raw and talented player who has flashed, and Jenkins, IMO, will be a Bryan Thomas type for us.  Something I'd gladly take for a 3rd rounder.  Macc's definitely done things that I've disagreed with (Marcus Maye over Dalvin Cook) but for the most part, there are young pieces here and quite honestly, I'm content so far.  I was pissed going into Day 3 of this year's draft but I think this will be a class I was wrong to judge so early.  Bowles is more of an issue for me than Macc.  If he successfully lands us a franchise QB, whether that's Hack or someone next year, even JoeWilly12 will be polishing his jewels.  It's all that matters.

Idzik was a f*cking trainwreck. There was nothing positive about him.  Zero.  12 picks in one of the most talent loaded draft classes in years and f*ckface landed us one decent player.  Oh, and he supposedly ran the building like Area 51 and it was a totally toxic environment.  F*ck him.  He was horrible.  I hope he sh*ts his pants every single day for the rest of his life.

[T0mShane]

1 hour ago, Mogglez said:

There was nothing positive about him.  Zero.  12 picks in one of the most talent loaded draft classes in years and f*ckface landed us one decent player.

 

Wellllllll, let's just jump in the ol' wayback machine and peek in on how some historically great drafting teams fared in that "most talent loaded draft class in years..."

 

Pats:

1.29 Dominique Easley

2.30 Jimmy Garoppollo 

4.5 Bryan Stork

4.30 James White

4.40 Cam Fleming 

6.3 Jon Halapio

6.22 Zach Moore

6.30 Jemea Thomas

7.29 Jeremy Gallon

 

Saints:

1.20 Brandin Cooks

2.26 Stanley Jean-Baptiste 

4.26 Khairi Fortt

5.27 Vinnie Sunseri

5.29 Ronald Powell

6.26 Tavon Rooks

 

Broncos:

1.31 Bradley Roby

2.24 Cody Latimer

3.31 Michael Schofield

5.26 Lamin Barrow

6.31 Matthew Paradis

7.27 Corey Nelson 

 

Chiefs:

1.23 Dee Ford

3.23 Phillip Gaines

4.24 De'Anthony Thomas

5.23 Aaron Murray

6.17 Zack Fulton

6.24 Laurent Duvernay-Tardif

 

Falcons:

1.6 Jake Matthews

2.5 RaShede Hagemann

3.4 Dezmon Southward

4.3 Devonta Freeman

4.39 Prince Shembo

5.7 Ricardo Allen

5.28 Marquis Spruill

7.38 Yawin Smallwood

7.40 Tyler Starr

 

Cowboys:

1.16 Zack Martin

2.2 Demarcus Lawrence

4.19 Anthony Hitchens

5.6 Devin Street

7.16 Ben Gardner

7.23 Will Smith

7.33 Ahmad Dixon

7.36 Ken Bishop

7.39 Terrence Mitchell

 

Seahawks:

2.13 Paul Richardson

2.32 Justin Britt 

4.8 Cassius Marsh

4.23 Kevin Norwood

4.32 Kevin Pierre-Louis

5.32 Jimmy Staten

6.23 Garrett Scott

6.32 Eric Pinkins

7.12 Kiero Small

 

Giants:

1.12 Odell Beckham Jr

2.11 Weston Richburg

3.10 Jay Bromley

4.13 Andre Williams

5.12 Nat Berhe 

5.34 Devon Kennard

6.11 Bennett Jackson

 

Steelers:

1.15 Ryan Shazier

2.14 Stephon Tuitt

3.33 Dri Archer

4.18 Martavis Bryant

5.17 Shaq Richardson 

5.33 Wes Johnson

6.16 Jordan Zumwalt

6.39 Daniel McCullers

7.15 Rob Blanchflower

[T0mShane]

Tl;dr version: just because Allen Robinson went at the bottom of Round Two, that doesn't mean the 2014 draft was chock-full of Hall of Famers just waiting to be plucked off the tree. The super-savvy Jaguars, who out-foxed Idzik for Robinson, used their first two picks on Blake Bortles and Marqise Lee, ffs.

[sirlancemehlot]

51 minutes ago, Mogglez said:

As much as I hated Tannenbaum, he found Revis, Harris, Mangold, Brick, Powell, Austin Howard, Matt Slauson, Leon Washington, and plenty of other home grown players.

Macc, in 3 years, selected Leo, who is arguably the best player we've drafted since Revis (I think he'll be better) and Jamal Adams, who is looking like he might be another player of that caliber.  His drafts have been ok.  Despite the circle-jerk around here, the fact is that he's done a decent job in the later rounds and has absolutely nailed 2 of his 3 first rounders as they are looking like they might be special players.  Jury is out on guys like Mauldin, Lee, and Jenkins but I like Mauldin as a rotational guy, Lee is a raw and talented player who has flashed, and Jenkins, IMO, will be a Bryan Thomas type for us.  Something I'd gladly take for a 3rd rounder.  Macc's definitely done things that I've disagreed with (Marcus Maye over Dalvin Cook) but for the most part, there are young pieces here and quite honestly, I'm content so far.  I was pissed going into Day 3 of this year's draft but I think this will be a class I was wrong to judge so early.  Bowles is more of an issue for me than Macc.  If he successfully lands us a franchise QB, whether that's Hack or someone next year, even JoeWilly12 will be polishing his jewels.  It's all that matters.

Idzik was a f*cking trainwreck. There was nothing positive about him.  Zero.  12 picks in one of the most talent loaded draft classes in years and f*ckface landed us one decent player.  Oh, and he supposedly ran the building like Area 51 and it was a totally toxic environment.  F*ck him.  He was horrible.  I hope he sh*ts his pants every single day for the rest of his life.

Tanny was a poor team manager/contract manager.  Constantly peddling away draft picks, giving bad, bloated contracts, and picking up some really awful free agents like Jason Taylor and Tim Tebow.  And in his first two years he signed Andre Wadsworth, traded a 6th for Patrick Ramsey, Andre Dyson 11.5 million contract, Kimo Von Oelhoffen, Anthony Clement, Kevan Barlow...then in '08 traded a 3rd, 3rd and 5th round picks for Kris Jenkins and Brett Favre...the same year drafting the likes of Vernon Gholston and Eric Ainge...Then in 2009 traded a 5th rnd. pick and a 2010 4th rnd. pick to the Eagles for Lito Shepherd whom they then signed to a 27 mil. contract...leaving the Jets 3 total picks in 2009...and it gets worse from there.  He had good drafts with Mangini at the helm.  But overall he sucked pretty bad.

[Mogglez]

35 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

Tl;dr version: just because Allen Robinson went at the bottom of Round Two, that doesn't mean the 2014 draft was chock-full of Hall of Famers just waiting to be plucked off the tree. The super-savvy Jaguars, who out-foxed Idzik for Robinson, used their first two picks on Blake Bortles and Marqise Lee, ffs.

Hindsight is 20/20.  At the time the class was hyped as super deep, especially at WR, and we waited until the 4th round, where the failures were, to select our first one.  You know, despite WR being the best value/biggest need and having a young QB that we supposedly believed in so much, that we passed on the others.

If it were up to me our first two picks would have been Derek Carr, Teddy Bridgewater, or Garoppolo in the 1st, Allen Robinson in the 2nd, and DeVonte Freeman or Richard Rodgers in the 3rd. That start alone would have us right on a better track than today. 

This place is the only spot I see ANYONE, defend the trainwreck that was John Idzik.  That draft was all-time awful.  Just like the rest of his tenure.  Also, I get your point, but putting the Patriots and Falcons on your list of "historically great drafting teams" doesn't help your case at all.  Up until last year, everyone thought Dimitroff was getting sh*tcanned for his drafts that failed to put a competent OL in front of Matt Ryan.  

[phill1c]

6 hours ago, #27TheDominator said:

He's saying don't call people dick.  Can you understand that or are you going to claim that I am saying something you didn't actually say? 

I'm not claiming anything because, really, to me your opinion is somewhat...unimportant. Are you his dad or something?

[T0mShane]

2 minutes ago, Mogglez said:

This place is the only spot I see ANYONE, defend the trainwreck that was John Idzik. 

This is the only spot where people talk about the Jets without parroting everything Manish Mehta installs in their brain stem.

I will agree, however, that drafting a strong safety in the first round is dumb.

[Mogglez]

11 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

This is the only spot where people talk about the Jets without parroting everything Manish Mehta installs in their brain stem.

I will agree, however, that drafting a strong safety in the first round is dumb.

Well it's a good thing that Jamal Adams isn't just a strong safety and not a player remotely close to as bad as Calvin Pryor was coming out.  Again, this is the only place where anyone will disagree with the Adams pick (although I know I would have seen half the contingency that b*tches about it over here complaining over at the cesspool JI became if it were still alive so I can't really blame JN for that).

Gonna need bigger b8 for this fishy Shaneykins. 

[T0mShane]

6 minutes ago, Mogglez said:

Well it's a good thing that Jamal Adams isn't just a strong safety and not a player remotely close to as bad as Calvin Pryor was coming out.  Again, this is the only place where anyone will disagree with the Adams pick (although I know I would have seen half the contingency that b*tches about it over here complaining over at the cesspool JI became if it were still alive so I can't really blame JN for that).

Gonna need bigger b8 for this fishy Shaneykins. 

Where else do you find Jets scholarship like this????

[Mogglez]

8 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

Where else do you find Jets scholarship like this????

I'd say the birthplace of Jets fandom which, is likely somewhere between the 8th and 9th circle.

[slats]

14 hours ago, phill1c said:

the issue I have is not with when the rules went into effect. My point, which not surprisingly you don't seem willing to grasp or acknowledge, was that I feel they aren't enforced fairly or objectively.

I think you have me confused with someone who would feel a need to deflect. I'm not. Again, my original response was to someone else, a poster who claimed victory for his argument about Idzick's performance, claiming that the lack of a rebuttal was somehow proof that his comments were correct. I presented a bulleted list in dissent. It was then that you went on a rant about Maccagnan and Snacks or Maccagnan and needing to spend money, which was not MY argument. That was the first I recall having a dialog with you on this thread.

But, to be sure, I'm dropping it now because, like with many of your arguments, you appear invested at a level the won't allow dissent or compromise. Good day, Sir!!

I can assure you that essentially every poster who has had their conduct here addressed by the mods in some way feels that the rules are enforced unfairly and unobjectively towards them. 

[neckdemon]

On 7/10/2017 at 1:36 PM, nyjunc said:

w/ 19 picks in 2 years Idzik selected just 2 real starters- Richardson who has been suspended numerous games and Enunwa who stepped up last year.  to say Macc's drafts have not been better is silly.

to be fair, my 13 year old son could have picked williams and adams. the jets got luck AF that both those guys fell to #6. they were no-brainer picks

[Smashmouth]

On 7/10/2017 at 0:17 PM, dbatesman said:

*current Jets regime enters third year, plans on starting sub-replacement-level players at QB1, WR1, OLT, EDGE, and CB1*

JETS FANS: lol remember Shaq Evans? that guy sucked

If this is the first year in a full rebuild and we still have next years draft and 80 mil to spend I don't think we are in that bad a shape. Obviously if you don't trust Macc that's another story but I'm thinking Bowles is the guy relaying what type of player he wants and what are positions of need in his schemes and that's where I don't trust whats going on, at all. 

I think Macc's hands were tied the last few years because our owner felt we had enough to win now via free agency so Macc spent our cap money on players we needed and I think he filled those spots nicely with what he had to choose from. 

2 keys for Macc's success... the owner needs to give him control and let him choose a Head Coach who works under the GM not as a equal. Its the only way to properly evaluate the guy.

Inside info on teams must be pretty common knowledge in NFL circles and its why a lot of GM candidates would not even interview with the Jets and that's a pretty tell tale sign. If this team is set up to tank just based on talent alone (which I think it is)  The single most Important thing the Jets can do this off season or mid season is get a real HC in here and they need to break the bank to do it. If that HC happens to be a guy like Jim Harbaugh then that's the type of guy who is capable of calling the shots (with Macc) the way Woody currently has the management structure laid out. 

I think Todd Bowles is in way over his head and has no idea how to run a football team. Its hard to evaluate a team with an Idiot for a HC and lord knows we have had our share of Idiots Dating back to Bruce Coslett. I think the only 2 coaches worth a sh*t in the last 25 years were Bill Parcells and Eric Mangini who basically got ****ed because Brett Favre got hurt and he had no answer at Back up.

[Smashmouth]

On 7/10/2017 at 3:49 PM, #27TheDominator said:

Why did Maccagnan have to "overspend in FA"?  Is there a reason he couldn't obtain more/better/younger players?  Is there a reason why Carpenter is the only acquisition we made that offseason that we don't wish was gone now?  Did Idzik leaving him cap space somehow force him to choose poorly?

The reason why Macc came in here and spent was 

1. he had too

2. his owner felt we could win now 

3. we had a good amount of vet players that probably had a 2-3 year window 

4. He spent money on FA's that were available to fill needs.

The guy was doing what he was instructed to do. He came in here and had Revis rammed down his throat by the owner then the HC proceeded to use that aging veteran in a way he could no longer be used, along with many of the other players. Then people wonder why this same Idiot HC lost the locker room and the team looked like they were going through the motions and missing assignments regularly. The Jets last year lost two heart breaking games early and this team basically mailed it in.

If people want to bash Macc for the Fitz debacle fine but what was the alternative ? Geno Smith ? If Macc let Fitz go after a very good year and a 10-6 record and we sh*t the bed exactly like we did Macc would have been getting destroyed much worse than making the decision he basically had to make.

[T0mShane]

10 minutes ago, Smashmouth said:

On 7/10/2017 at 4:49 PM, #27TheDominator said:

 

The reason why Macc came in here and spent was 

1. he had too

2. his owner felt we could win now 

3. we had a good amount of vet players that probably had a 2-3 year window 

4. He spent money on FA's that were available to fill needs.

Throws self in front of train

[phill1c]

 

6 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

Throws self in front of train

Trains sure aren't what they used to be

[slats]

19 minutes ago, Smashmouth said:

If people want to bash Macc for the Fitz debacle fine but what was the alternative ? Geno Smith ? If Macc let Fitz go after a very good year and a 10-6 record and we sh*t the bed exactly like we did Macc would have been getting destroyed much worse than making the decision he basically had to make.

One of the biggest mistakes Mac and Bowles made, if not the biggest one, was failing to self-scout accurately after that ten win season. They not only played the weakest schedule in the league that year, but they faced those weak teams in various states of injury depletedness seemingly every week. They were not a good team, and Fitzpatrick was not a good QB. He enjoyed the one healthy year of Decker and Marshall was an absolute beast for him turning inaccurate passes into TDs. Under the same circumstances, Geno could've easily produced similar results. In fact, it's almost good that he was sucker punched out of the starting job because Mac probably would've signed him to a $100M deal given the stupidity of the Fitzpatrick contract. 

[Smashmouth]

On 7/11/2017 at 2:06 PM, #27TheDominator said:

Meanwhile, we are supposed to praise Maccagnan for getting rid of awful contracts that he drafted. 

Meanwhile, Maccagnan signed Revis right back and paid him a ton after his play diminished.  Now, his play has diminished so much that we don't even have Revis on the team, yet Maccagnan agreed to keep paying him. 

The start?  These are the good old days? I guess after 2017 we may look at 5-11 as an impressive win record. 

so you think Revis was Maccs choice ? 

Also in the case of Revis ...in a zone system i think he can still excel .... man to man on a island like we were trying to use him as a 31 year old was nothing short of moronic. If anything with all the safety problems we were having he would have been better suited at that position than on an Island facing WR's much faster than him at this stage in his career with no help.

[NoBowles]

I love how the people who claim Idizk had a great plan, and bad execution, are the same people to say if you don't have a QB, you have nothing. Idzik had no plan, he did what any moron GM from this board did when he cut the Rex holdovers with big contracts. The contracts were designed for that by Tannenbaum, even he would have done it.

Idzik's plan at the QB position was to rely on Geno Smith. Let that sink in, Geno Smith. Yes, after seeing him suck something awful for a year, he passed on what looks like 3 franchise QB's, for a strong safety, because he had Geno Smith.

Thats a great plan? Please, many posters on this board have gotten so attached to their agenda, they are literally unreadable these days. I guess thats what years and years of crap football will do to you.

Bottom line is, we spend all this time arguing about Idzik, Maccagnan, Tannenbaum, Rex, Bowles, Geno, Fitzpatrick, etc., and none of it matters. A dead fish stinks from its head. We have one of the worst owners in professional sports, and nothing will ever change until he does.