Poll: Rooting for wins? Or Tank?

[Gastineau Lives]

2 hours ago, Maxman said:

I heard, and I have no way to verify this, that the tankers all only have one testicle. Not collectively, I heard they have one testicle each.

Again, I hate to pass this along because it is something that people are saying but I just don't know for sure.

Maybe @Gastineau Lives can shed some light on this situation for us. 

 

 

 

Your cak is soft like a marshmallow.

[King P]

All I'm gonna say is it's obvious that most of the anti-tank crowd does not follow the draft and/or understand how it works.

If you want to cheer for your team no matter what, that's fine. But please, for the love of God, don't use bullcrap (media) talking points to regarding the draft to justify why having a better pick doesn't matter.

[Fantasy Island]

3 hours ago, detectivekimble said:

Which is fine, but then you get to pick again.  Right now, the Jets are the best of the bad teams.  That's not a good thing.

Which means we are better than Miami and NE

[jamesr]

That's a low blow, Max. My one testicle and I are very upset at you.
You'll be hearing from my urologist.

I read somewhere that you can have two testicles next year.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk

[DetroitRed]

On 10/4/2017 at 8:54 PM, Maddog45 said:

We're beating the browns and I lead the tank mob , that says something

Actually , I lead them.  We are losing to the Browns. Its their home game, and thats huge in the NFL. Browns are not going 0-16.  

With that loss, coupled with a Niners victory, Jets are right back in the mix for the #1 overall.

[Gastineau Lives]

1 hour ago, DetroitRed said:

Actually , I lead them.  We are losing to the Browns. Its their home game, and thats huge in the NFL. Browns are not going 0-16.  

With that loss, coupled with a Niners victory, Jets are right back in the mix for the #1 overall.

This guy gets it.

[Maddog45]

2 hours ago, DetroitRed said:

Actually , I lead them.  We are losing to the Browns. Its their home game, and thats huge in the NFL. Browns are not going 0-16.  

With that loss, coupled with a Niners victory, Jets are right back in the mix for the #1 overall.

Jags would smack the browns ... they're offense is trash your crazy if u think they beat our defense , gotta be realistic . I hope for L all the way , I hope we do lose.

[Maddog45]

2 hours ago, DetroitRed said:

Actually , I lead them.  We are losing to the Browns. Its their home game, and thats huge in the NFL. Browns are not going 0-16.  

With that loss, coupled with a Niners victory, Jets are right back in the mix for the #1 overall.

These players are gonna be idiots and play way fired up because they're .500 , beat browns and back to the soj against pats

[T0mShane]

Anti-tankers are soft as baby sh*t. Afraid to do what must be done. You're like Rick at the outset of The Walking Dead--filled with blind hope in the face of overwhelming contradictory evidence. Eventually you'll end up like Rick, too: a quivering, disillusioned mound of jello haunted by the realization that your life is shot because you didn't have the courage to do what had to be done when there was time to do it. Be more like Shane. Shane could net you Rosen and Sean Payton. Ricking it gets you Minkah Fitzpatrick and three year extensions for Bowles and Maccagnan. Don't be Rick. Don't Rick it.

[TuscanyTile2]

32 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

Anti-tankers are soft as baby sh*t. Afraid to do what must be done. You're like Rick at the outset of The Walking Dead--filled with blind hope in the face of overwhelming contradictory evidence. Eventually you'll end up like Rick, too: a quivering, disillusioned mound of jello haunted by the realization that your life is shot because you didn't have the courage to do what had to be done when there was time to do it. Be more like Shane. Shane could net you Rosen and Sean Payton. Ricking it gets you Minkah Fitzpatrick and three year extensions for Bowles and Maccagnan. Don't be Rick. Don't Rick it.

Yes, people also don't get that a FQB will also very likely mean a top notch coach as well.  How enticing would this job be with a young FQB, a ton of cap space, and some really good players already here.  All that plus the chance to be a winner in the NY market.

[Bugg]

39 minutes ago, TuscanyTile2 said:

Yes, people also don't get that a FQB will also very likely mean a top notch coach as well.  How enticing would this job be with a young FQB, a ton of cap space, and some really good players already here.  All that plus the chance to be a winner in the NY market.

If you get a young primo QB, the big time NFL and college coaches will be taking a long hard look at  this job. Or you get more Bowles and probably a retread QB like Kirk Cousins or some lesser draft pick that won't be much better than Petty. It doesn't solve every problem to tank; look at the Colts and Luck and the Bolts and Rivers. But it does solve the most important variable. It means you get a good young QB at a relatively low cap number for a few years. Or you can go out on the market and overpay for someone else's sloppy seconds.

I now fully expect to be breaking furniture on draft day as the Jets sign some old QB for a ridiculous cap number coupled with  a defensive pick (and not a cover CB nor a pass rusher,of course)and 2-3 more years on the Bowles/Maccagnan treadmill of mediocrity. All this cap room means practically nothing when you have small-minded people running the show. Really what was the rush to sign McCown at all, and overpay the living sheet out of it in the process?

Which is EXACTLY how you pick a safety over Deshaun Watson. Telling you now; may be Watson goes down like RG3, but I think he's gonna more than figure it out. And that decision is going to look a lot like Pryor over Derek Carr. We've had risk averse scared pussy GMs worried about what can go wrong if you pick a QB rather than what can be accomplished if it goes well. 

That nobody in the Jets organization right now is nailing McCown to the bench to find out what they have in the other 2 guys is a disgrace, mismanagement of the highest order. And Mccown played like crap in the 2nd half last week anyway. Basically this braintrust(this collection of morons really) is allowing Bowles to drive the Jets' future into the mountain. They've been doing much the same thing spare some brief points of goodness for going on a half century. Why change? 

[Gastineau Lives]

1 hour ago, T0mShane said:

Anti-tankers are soft as baby sh*t. Afraid to do what must be done. You're like Rick at the outset of The Walking Dead--filled with blind hope in the face of overwhelming contradictory evidence. Eventually you'll end up like Rick, too: a quivering, disillusioned mound of jello haunted by the realization that your life is shot because you didn't have the courage to do what had to be done when there was time to do it. Be more like Shane. Shane could net you Rosen and Sean Payton. Ricking it gets you Minkah Fitzpatrick and three year extensions for Bowles and Maccagnan. Don't be Rick. Don't Rick it.

This, totally this. What's the Walking Dead? That's a tv show, no?

[Gastineau Lives]

19 minutes ago, Bugg said:

If you get a young primo QB, the big time NFL and college coaches will be taking a long hard look at  this job. Or you get more Bowles and probably a retread QB like Kirk Cousins or some lesser draft pick that won't be much better than Petty. It doesn't solve every problem to tank; look at the Colts and Luck and the Bolts and Rivers. But it does solve the most important variable. It means you get a good young QB at a relatively low cap number for a few years. Or you can go out on the market and overpay for someone else's sloppy seconds.

I now fully expect to be breaking furniture on draft day as the Jets sign some old QB for a ridiculous cap number coupled with  a defensive pick (and not a cover CB nor a pass rusher,of course)and 2-3 more years on the Bowles/Maccagnan treadmill of mediocrity. All this cap room means practically nothing when you have small-minded people running the show. Really what was the rush to sign McCown at all, and overpay the living sheet out of it in the process?

Which is EXACTLY how you pick a safety over Deshaun Watson. Telling you now; may be Watson goes down like RG3, but I think he's gonna more than figure it out. And that decision is going to look a lot like Pryor over Derek Carr. We've had risk averse scared pussy GMs worried about what can go wrong if you pick a QB rather than what can be accomplished if it goes well. 

That nobody in the Jets organization right now is nailing McCown to the bench to find out what they have in the other 2 guys is a disgrace, mismanagement of the highest order. And Mccown played like crap in the 2nd half last week anyway. Basically this braintrust(this collection of morons really) is allowing Bowles to drive the Jets' future into the mountain. They've been doing much the same thing spare some brief points of goodness for going on a half century. Why change? 

Yas, butt Sam Darnold is not Andrew Luck, so yer dum.

We can't possibly have some good building blocks for the future and go 2-14 at the same time in the NFL. Look at the Chargers, they suck at every position and are 0-4. Giants too. Not one good player on that whole team. And they have established guys, never mind young guys that show potential yet still wind up losing as a unit. Can't happen.

[slats]

24 minutes ago, Bugg said:

That nobody in the Jets organization right now is nailing McCown to the bench to find out what they have in the other 2 guys is a disgrace, mismanagement of the highest order. And Mccown played like crap in the 2nd half last week anyway. Basically this braintrust(this collection of morons really) is allowing Bowles to drive the Jets' future into the mountain. They've been doing much the same thing spare some brief points of goodness for going on a half century. Why change? 

This is the most grievous offense. I'd much rather lose with Petty or Hack at the helm than win with McCown, and (sorry, but) winning with Petty or Hack would be even better. Winning behind McCown is a lose-lose scenario: they're learning nothing about the young QBs on their roster, and hurting their chances to improve the position simultaneously. 

Problem is that there is no brain trust. There's no clear sign of a grand master plan. Mac overpaid McCown, and Bowles is playing him. They're both to blame. 

[slats]

2 hours ago, T0mShane said:

Anti-tankers are soft as baby sh*t. Afraid to do what must be done. You're like Rick at the outset of The Walking Dead--filled with blind hope in the face of overwhelming contradictory evidence. Eventually you'll end up like Rick, too: a quivering, disillusioned mound of jello haunted by the realization that your life is shot because you didn't have the courage to do what had to be done when there was time to do it. Be more like Shane. Shane could net you Rosen and Sean Payton. Ricking it gets you Minkah Fitzpatrick and three year extensions for Bowles and Maccagnan. Don't be Rick. Don't Rick it.

How exactly are you doing what must be done by rooting for loses? 

As the season was starting, and the experts were all calling the Jets the worst team in the league, I had contentedly resigned myself to a long season that would hopefully be rewarded with a franchise QB. Now, lo and behold, it appears those brilliant experts were off the mark. The Jets may not be a good team, but they're not the worst team in the league, either. This seems to have deeply upset people not just resigned but excited about the Jets having the worst record in football. We get all these threads and posts seeking others' thoughts and prayers for the precious tank, "you're rooting the wrong way, hurting our chances to get a USC QB with mediocre numbers who may not declare for the draft anyway!" It's superstitious silliness. 

Outside of my annoyance with McCown starting at QB, I'm having one of my most laid-back, relaxed football seasons ever. I root for them to win every week while I'm sitting in from the of TV watching the games, and content when they lose because I understand the draft implications - while also understanding that whichever way I root has absolutely no effect on the result of the game whatsoever. When it looked like the McCown and the Jets were determined to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory against Jax, I was literally laughing out loud at the TV (granted, I'd had a solid half pint of bourbon by that point). It was the tragi-comedy that being a Jet fan is on full display. But then when they pulled it out after all the momentum had been against them for about the last 20 minutes of play, I was happy and proud of them. 

In the end, what's gonna happen is gonna happen. If they get to 2-12, 3-11, I could see myself quietly hoping they finish out the season with loses. But trouncing the hated fish in September? I'm supposed to root against that? Or be upset about it? No, I don't think so. 

[Gastineau Lives]

3 minutes ago, slats said:

How exactly are you doing what must be done by rooting for loses? 

As the season was starting, and the experts were all calling the Jets the worst team in the league, I had contentedly resigned myself to a long season that would hopefully be rewarded with a franchise QB. Now, lo and behold, it appears those brilliant experts were off the mark. The Jets may not be a good team, but they're not the worst team in the league, either. This seems to have deeply upset people not just resigned but excited about the Jets having the worst record in football. We get all these threads and posts seeking others' thoughts and prayers for the precious tank, "you're rooting the wrong way, hurting our chances to get a USC QB with mediocre numbers who may not declare for the draft anyway!" It's superstitious silliness. 

Outside of my annoyance with McCown starting at QB, I'm having one of my most laid-back, relaxed football seasons ever. I root for them to win every week while I'm sitting in from the of TV watching the games, and content when they lose because I understand the draft implications - while also understanding that whichever way I root has absolutely no effect on the result of the game whatsoever. When it looked like the McCown and the Jets were determined to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory against Jax, I was literally laughing out loud at the TV (granted, I'd had a solid half pint of bourbon by that point). It was the tragi-comedy that being a Jet fan is on full display. But then when they pulled it out after all the momentum had been against them for about the last 20 minutes of play, I was happy and proud of them. 

In the end, what's gonna happen is gonna happen. If they get to 2-12, 3-11, I could see myself quietly hoping they finish out the season with loses. But trouncing the hated fish in September? I'm supposed to root against that? Or be upset about it? No, I don't think so. 

 

[Bugg]

1 hour ago, slats said:

This is the most grievous offense. I'd much rather lose with Petty or Hack at the helm than win with McCown, and (sorry, but) winning with Petty or Hack would be even better. Winning behind McCown is a lose-lose scenario: they're learning nothing about the young QBs on their roster, and hurting their chances to improve the position simultaneously. 

Problem is that there is no brain trust. There's no clear sign of a grand master plan. Mac overpaid McCown, and Bowles is playing him. They're both to blame. 

Yup. McCown is Fitzpatrick all over again. What's the point? He's not getting you into the playoffs, and he won't be your starter next year. Don't care at all about "best chance to win"; and it's not even true.  Especially since he spent most of Sunday's 2nd half desperately trying to give the game away. 

[PepPep]

On 10/4/2017 at 8:28 PM, Long Island Leprechaun said:

I think after Cleveland the reality is going to set in. The assumption here is that we have a choice. The schedule becomes brutal after Cleveland with only the Saints and Chargers looking like they could go either way. But if the Jets beat Cleveland and upset the Pats, I'm all in. It would be criminal not to root for them at that point, even if the future is ostensibly on the line.

After the Browns the schedule does get tougher but the Jets can still beat teams like Miami, Buffalo, NO, Chargers, and Bucs. Even the Pats are not looking as invincible as they usually do and the Jets as division rivals tend to play them tough. 

I'm not predicting a bunch of wins and I'm not predicting a full on implosion. I'm just saying there's still a handful of games that the Jets have a great shot at winning.

From the beginning of the season I have said that the Jets cna win, at best 8 games and at worst 4 games. I never predicted they would go winless or make the playoffs. So, to me, all of this tanking talk was funny, b/c the Jets were never really goig to get the #1 overall pick. As funny as it may sound, they are too good for that to happen.  

[TuscanyTile2]

I still think if we go 3-13 we have a shot at either the #1 or #2 pick.  But we might've already beaten 2 teams (and possibly 3 after this week) that we could potentially be in a tie-breaker with.  I'd be interested in knowing what the records were of the teams picking #1 overall in the past decade or so have been.  I tried searching for this but I think it's going to require a manual lookup and I'm too lazy.  I would think 3-13 could still do the trick.  But I'm getting prepared to start getting prepared to accept that Alex Smith is our next QB. 

[Long Island Leprechaun]

28 minutes ago, TuscanyTile2 said:

I still think if we go 3-13 we have a shot at either the #1 or #2 pick.  But we might've already beaten 2 teams (and possibly 3 after this week) that we could potentially be in a tie-breaker with.  I'd be interested in knowing what the records were of the teams picking #1 overall in the past decade or so have been.  I tried searching for this but I think it's going to require a manual lookup and I'm too lazy.  I would think 3-13 could still do the trick.  But I'm getting prepared to start getting prepared to accept that Alex Smith is our next QB. 

On the other hand, Alex Smith has grown as a QB and his team is the best team in football right now. Even if we win 6-7 games, we may still have access to a very good QB in the draft. It just won't be Rosen or D'Arnold, if D'Arnold even comes out.

[bealeb319]

I'm telling you, we are not. The Jets are a good matchup for them. They play good run defense and they will be able to run the ball on us. Book it.

Just out of curiosity. We shut down fournette who is one hell of a running back prospect who on the browns is going to run on us harder than he did? Not staying they won't but I don't think anyone is as talented as him on their roster. Their saving grace might be that ealy is out?

Sent from my LGUS991 using JetNation.com mobile app

[BRONX DUDE]

EMBRACE THE SUCK 

SUCK FOR SAM

SUCK FOR THE SOJF

[Maxman]

On 10/6/2017 at 7:40 AM, T0mShane said:

Anti-tankers are soft as baby sh*t. Afraid to do what must be done. You're like Rick at the outset of The Walking Dead--filled with blind hope in the face of overwhelming contradictory evidence. Eventually you'll end up like Rick, too: a quivering, disillusioned mound of jello haunted by the realization that your life is shot because you didn't have the courage to do what had to be done when there was time to do it. Be more like Shane. Shane could net you Rosen and Sean Payton. Ricking it gets you Minkah Fitzpatrick and three year extensions for Bowles and Maccagnan. Don't be Rick. Don't Rick it.

Because generally speaking, you always have the right answer lol.

[TuscanyTile2]

18 hours ago, Long Island Leprechaun said:

On the other hand, Alex Smith has grown as a QB and his team is the best team in football right now. Even if we win 6-7 games, we may still have access to a very good QB in the draft. It just won't be Rosen or D'Arnold, if D'Arnold even comes out.

I actually somewhat like Alex Smith but I just wonder if he's a Super Bowl caliber QB (at least on a team that needs a good QB to beat good teams - as contrasted to the 2001 Ravens or the Broncos from a couple of years ago).  I mean, if the Chiefs get the #1 seed and then lose in their 1st playoff game and he's mediocre against a good team then is he really the answer?  

[Joejet]

Sunday's much-mockable meeting between the New York Jets and the Cleveland Browns brings together two forlorn franchises, both of whom are expected to be in contention for the top pick in the 2018 draft, for a game dubbed by five-year-olds as "The Toilet Bowl." (That the Jets are .500 won't taint this tilt's stink.)

Both fan bases, and likely both front offices, see this season as something of a lost cause, as neither team is expected to make the postseason, and would rather see their teams "tank", for lack of a better word, to gain prime position to select the player/quarterback of their choosing. 

•  2017 SEASON: WEEK 5
    ▹ Rank: Trubisky will help Bears win immediately
    ▹ Top 25 rookies at Q1
    ▹ Brandt: 10 leading MVP candidates
    ▹ David Carr ranks 15 best offensive players
    ▹ Power Rankings: Lions surge; Falcons fall
    ▹ Nine bandwagons to jump on now!

But venerable Browns veteran Joe Thomas isn't so sure losing to ensure a coveted prospect is the best idea. 

"It's always fun for fans and the media to have that narrative because it gives you guys something to talk about," Thomas told Manish Mehta of the Daily News. "And for fans, I'm sure they enjoy the optimism of looking toward the future if they don't think that the present is bright. 

"But it seems like every year the player that you want to suck for ends up dropping and not being the top pick... or what you expected."

Take it from Thomas, who in his time in Cleveland has seen the Browns pick inside the top 10 five times -- and that's not even counting the times the franchise traded out of top 10 (cough, Julio Jones, cough). With those five selections, Cleveland picked cornerback Joe Haden (No. 7) in 2010 and Myles Garrett (No. 1) in 2017. But the team also picked Trent Richardson (No. 3) in 2012, Barkevious Mingo (No. 6) in 2013 and Justin Gilbert (No. 8) in 2014. Two of those dudes are out of the league, and Mingo is on his third franchise in as many years. 

 

 

 

As far as top-10 quarterbacks go, for every Matt Ryan and Matthew Stafford, there's a Jake Locker or Blaine Gabbert. Thomas is well aware of this history. 

"If you look historically at the draft at quarterbacks in the top 10," Thomas said, "about half of them flame out very quickly. So, there's no guarantee in the NFL that if you've got the No. 1 pick or you've got a top-five pick, that you're going to be able to draft a franchise quarterback. So, I'm not sure that the appropriate strategy is just to tank for a quarterback."

Loser beware, Jets and Browns.

 

[jamesr]

On 10/5/2017 at 9:57 PM, jamesr said:

One way or another there will be at least one 0-5 team after this weekend. Two if we win vs. the Clowns, and three max if SF lose to Indy.

3-2 with three 0-5 teams would pretty much rule out the #1 pick.

And three it is ... NYG, SF, Cleveland