How does not starting Petty hurt the Jets?

[RESNewYork]

11 minutes ago, 68JET11 said:

He's proven he has no control over the offense. He hired an 83 year old OC that was out of football for however long it was. He even stated like Rex, he should attend more offensive meetings. I don't think he really knows how to evaluate the QB position and that he's playing the vets because that's the safe choice. Again, Macc only drafts the players in this management setup. The blame goes on Woody for setting it up that way. The normal progression is to have the HC report to the GM. Since Bowles doesn't have to answer to Macc, he starts who he wants and only Woody or now Chris can fire him.

So lets imagine this is true.

Morton, Bates, assistants, scouts, whoever, go to Bowles and tell him, Petty gives us the best chance to win games. Bowles, who is on the hot seat decides no, I'm going with McCown? Because he's safer?

And what is a safer choice at QB exactly?

[68JET11]

19 minutes ago, 56mehl56 said:

Petty played in games where the team had checked out for various reasons including the fact that Petty was playing. He may still stink , just like Hack may stilll stink but to say either has had a fair chance is certainly open for debate.

Agree completely...

[RESNewYork]

9 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

Because they cut and traded Gilchrist and Pryor.

Exactly. If McCown wasn't on the roster who would be starting? The better QB between Petty and Hack. Why did Mac sign McCown? Assume because it was insurance in case Hack or Petty weren't ready

[Beerfish]

14 minutes ago, RESNewYork said:

Players develop year to year

Which means what?  What do you want to see to start next season.  What is this team going to look like at the QB position.

[68JET11]

11 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

Because they cut and traded Gilchrist and Pryor.

Some people get it...

[slats]

21 minutes ago, RESNewYork said:

Doesnt starting McCown tell you what they believe they have Petty? A QB that is not at that level yet. Because if Petty was at that level, he would logically be starting? 

Isn't it more the fans need to see with their own eyes what Petty is? Not the coaches or management.

And since Petty is not at that level yet, is it not assured they will bring in another QB next year? Either draft or FA or both

It tells me what they believe, but they won't know until they give him some real live action. 

Bottom line, playing McCown does nothing for the future of this team, but playing Petty (or Hack) at least might. 

[RESNewYork]

Just now, 68JET11 said:

Some people get it...

Again if McCown wasn't on the roster who would be starting? The better QB between Petty and Hack. Why? Because the coaches want the best player to play. Why did Mac sign McCown? Assume because it was insurance in case Hack or Petty weren't ready.

 

[68JET11]

4 minutes ago, RESNewYork said:

So lets imagine this is true.

Morton, Bates, assistants, scouts, whoever, go to Bowles and tell him, Petty gives us the best chance to win games. Bowles, who is on the hot seat decides no, I'm going with McCown? Because he's safer?

And what is a safer choice at QB exactly?

I guess maybe only you know the answer to that... I'm not saying Petty or Hack are the answer, but we'll never know and last years Petty 4 games is not an example because like 56 Mehl stated the team had already checked out for the season.

[JetFreak89]

4 minutes ago, RESNewYork said:

So lets imagine this is true.

Morton, Bates, assistants, scouts, whoever, go to Bowles and tell him, Petty gives us the best chance to win games. Bowles, who is on the hot seat decides no, I'm going with McCown? Because he's safer?

And what is a safer choice at QB exactly?

Multiple people, including myself have already answered this question. It seems you started this thread just to show how obstinate you could be. Your original ? was how can not playing Petty hurt the Jets now, or in the future. Posters have answered how not playing Petty hurts the Jets in the future.

Is there a way that Petty plays so well that we don't draft a QB in April? No. But his play could affect WHERE we draft a QB in the draft. 

[RESNewYork]

Just now, 68JET11 said:

I guess maybe only you know the answer to that... I'm not saying Petty or Hack are the answer, but we'll never know and last years Petty 4 games is not an example because like 56 Mehl stated the team had already checked out for the season.

I don't have the answer. That's why I asked what is a safer choice at QB? 

[56mehl56]

18 minutes ago, Warfish said:

So we're back to "Fair Chance" and "with Weapons".

Sigh.

I'm frustrated too Mehl, but at some point these kids need to show something, regardless of so-called "fair chances" and "weapons".

Endless excuses will not solve the QB problem.

My point is everyone knows we're going nowhere this season. I'll make two assumptions 1) Bowles/Mcags are safe 2) the Jets do not plan of having McCown start next year.

Its my belief that McCown started to help stabilize the offense especially with alll the new and young players involved. Its like he was an onfield coach helping to implement Morton's O. Now is the opportune time to roll in the younger QB's . They need to have an answer what direction to go next season. If neither QB makes strides , we need a Vet and a drafted QB next season. If one steps up and shows promise then there are different decisions to be made. 

[RESNewYork]

1 minute ago, JetFreak89 said:

Multiple people, including myself have already answered this question. It seems you started this thread just to show how obstinate you could be. Your original ? was how can not playing Petty hurt the Jets now, or in the future. Posters have answered how not playing Petty hurts the Jets in the future.

Is there a way that Petty plays so well that we don't draft a QB in April? No. But his play could affect WHERE we draft a QB in the draft. 

You believe Petty has a chance to affect where the Jets select a QB? You believe they are going to risk taking a QB prospect higher, for a player that currently, is not good enough to beat McCown.

And I have no intentions of being obstinate. I was just trying to lay out how I, not anyone else, my opinion the logic behind the decisions being made.

[56mehl56]

5 minutes ago, RESNewYork said:

Again if McCown wasn't on the roster who would be starting? The better QB between Petty and Hack. Why? Because the coaches want the best player to play. Why did Mac sign McCown? Assume because it was insurance in case Hack or Petty weren't ready.

 

My assumption is they signed McCown a vet with experience with 10+ different OC's and systems so that he could help bring along Morton's system and act as a tutor on the field. Throwing Petty and Hack on the field from the get go  may have resulted is growing pains and frustration and potentially losing the team for the 2nd straight season all while raising questions about Morton and Bowles. Now the system is in place the new players have adapted and bought in it makes for a much smoother transition.

[MDL_JET]

1 minute ago, RESNewYork said:

You believe Petty has a chance to affect where the Jets select a QB? You believe they are going to risk taking a QB prospect higher, for a player that currently, is not good enough to beat McCown.

And I have no intentions of being obstinate. I was just trying to lay out how I, not anyone else, my opinion the logic behind the decisions being made.

At what point was Petty actually given a shot to beat McCown this off season? The whole focus of the off season was to see what they had in Hack and if improved or not. 

[68JET11]

5 minutes ago, RESNewYork said:

I don't have the answer. That's why I asked what is a safer choice at QB? 

There is no safe choice, but since the purge it would make complete sense to some of us that starting the young guy is better then starting the old guy. If the young guy tanks, you have the old guy there to pick up the pieces. It's widely known that this was not going to be a year we made the SB or even the playoffs. Again, I'm not for tanking, and I'm giving Bowles some props here for having the team playing above what I think we all could have expected, as I've wanted him fired for the last 2 seasons, but it's not far enough as he still is stubborn when it comes to offense.

[68JET11]

7 minutes ago, 56mehl56 said:

My point is everyone knows we're going nowhere this season. I'll make two assumptions 1) Bowles/Mcags are safe 2) the Jets do not plan of having McCown start next year.

Its my belief that McCown started to help stabilize the offense especially with alll the new and young players involved. Its like he was an onfield coach helping to implement Morton's O. Now is the opportune time to roll in the younger QB's . They need to have an answer what direction to go next season. If neither QB makes strides , we need a Vet and a drafted QB next season. If one steps up and shows promise then there are different decisions to be made. 

Great post.

[RESNewYork]

42 minutes ago, nycdan said:

You are assuming Bowles has command of  logic when most of his in-game decision making proves the opposite.

I agree it would take a person with no command of logic to start the 2nd best QB on your roster, when you need to win games to save your job. 

[68JET11]

Just now, RESNewYork said:

I agree it would take a person with no command of logic to start the 2nd best QB on your roster, when you need to win games to save your job. 

You should stop posting in your own thread...  Does anyone have a banner we can start lol... No offense dude, just having a laugh. It's always good to debate.

[#27TheDominator]

24 minutes ago, RESNewYork said:

Again if McCown wasn't on the roster who would be starting? The better QB between Petty and Hack. Why? Because the coaches want the best player to play. Why did Mac sign McCown? Assume because it was insurance in case Hack or Petty weren't ready.

So they cut and trade guys at safety so they can start rookies, but sign a sh*tty placeholding career backup just in case at the most important position in the sport? Why do we need "insurance"?  When will they be ready?  When will they be the best player?

[nycdan]

McCown is averaging 229 yards per game with 7 TDs and 6 INTs.  He does have a very high completion % (just over 70%).  He's also sacked an average of 3 times per game which is among the most in the league.  Across most statistical measures, he is average or just below average.  But here's the thing - you look to a veteran QB to do a few things better than a young one and ball protection is one of them.  McCown's 6 INTs is bad.  His 19 sacks is very bad (4th worst in league).  His 6 fumbles is awful.  This is a guy who has limited upside to lead a game-winning drive, and who fails to do the one thing you expect most from a veteran QB which is 'protect the ball'.  

So tell me again why it's so vital we watch him continue to do what he's doing rather than give Petty a chance to see if he can do better?  Maybe Petty fails again and we go back to McCown, but in that case, will we have really lost anything of value?  And if Petty plays like he did against the Giants, we will have won something substantial.  Low risk, high reward.  Personally, I like those odds.

 

[jetrider]

37 minutes ago, Warfish said:

 Macc and Bowles have shown they are 100% unwilling to go risky at QB.  

 

19 minutes ago, johnnysd said:

I truly believe that if we had a proper organizational structure and Bowles reported to Mac that Petty or Hack would likely be starting right now

We might have different QBs as well. It doesn't matter how much Macc likes a top tier QB, if Bowles puts defense at the top of the draft board, that's what Macc follows. Offense waits.

Macc didn't hire Bowles, he has no authority over Bowles. Nobody here seems to grasp that. Thread after thread, post after post, there's the same moronically twisted notion that Macc built a roster behind Bowles' back contrary to Bowles' needs. It's Bowles' team, Bowles' vision. Macc is the triggerman. Bowles is football, Macc is money management. There was a clear "same page" emphasis made by Woody when both were hired. Macc is not the runaway train he's painted to be. If Macc hired his own HC and overrode his decisions, it would be fair to blame Macc for everything he's unfairly blamed for now. His job is to make Bowles' plan work. Because of that, Macc is sandbagged by Bowles as much as certain players are.

[#27TheDominator]

Just now, nycdan said:

McCown is averaging 229 yards per game with 7 TDs and 6 INTs.  He does have a very high completion % (just over 70%).  He's also sacked an average of 3 times per game which is among the most in the league.  Across most statistical measures, he is average or just below average.  But here's the thing - you look to a veteran QB to do a few things better than a young one and ball protection is one of them.  McCown's 6 INTs is bad.  His 19 sacks is very bad (4th worst in league).  His 6 fumbles is awful.  This is a guy who has limited upside to lead a game-winning drive, and who fails to do the one thing you expect most from a veteran QB which is 'protect the ball'.  

So tell me again why it's so vital we watch him continue to do what he's doing rather than give Petty a chance to see if he can do better?  Maybe Petty fails again and we go back to McCown, but in that case, will we have really lost anything of value?  And if Petty plays like he did against the Giants, we will have won something substantial.  Low risk, high reward.  Personally, I like those odds.

 

This one is easy.  Maybe the young guys are getting sacked more in practice.  Maybe, as expected, the Jets o-line sucks donkey balls.  If the Jets d-line is getting sacks in practice it is obvious there is a problem since they get no push.  Hackenberg and Petty have certainly seemed to get sacked more than McCown over the course of his career/preseason.

[68JET11]

Did RES go to bed, RES you should read what nycdan just wrote, it's quite interesting... Oh wait, us who don't think Petty or Hack should be playing are void of complete (what was the word you used) LOGIC ?  

[68JET11]

3 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

This one is easy.  Maybe the young guys are getting sacked more in practice.  Maybe, as expected, the Jets o-line sucks donkey balls.  If the Jets d-line is getting sacks in practice it is obvious there is a problem since they get no push.  Hackenberg and Petty have certainly seemed to get sacked more than McCown over the course of his career/preseason.

But that's expected of a young QB, because his internal clock is not game ready... not from a VET is what was trying to be said.

Let me rephrase, it's not expected, but happens more often with younger QB's then VETS...

[nycdan]

3 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

This one is easy.  Maybe the young guys are getting sacked more in practice.  Maybe, as expected, the Jets o-line sucks donkey balls.  If the Jets d-line is getting sacks in practice it is obvious there is a problem since they get no push.  Hackenberg and Petty have certainly seemed to get sacked more than McCown over the course of his career/preseason.

Here is the only data I have to cite that I think is of use.

McCown sacked 19 times this year in 194 attempts.  Roughly 10% of the time (ouch!).

Petty in preseason this year was sacked twice in 48 attempts.  Roughly 4% of the time.

To be fair (and I do try to be with numbers), McCown was not sacked in his 12 attempts in preseason this year.  

Very hard to compare these numbers for a lot of reasons, but Petty doesn't seem to be a sack magnet.  

By comparison, Hack was sacked 9 times in 74 attempts this preseason.  About 12%.

All I'm saying is Petty looked intriguing this presesason.  I'd like to see if he can do it in games that count.

[August]

Don't worry we're gonna have this same argument a year from now when Brian Hoyer is our starting quarterback.

[nycdan]

6 minutes ago, 68JET11 said:

Did RES go to bed, RES you should read what nycdan just wrote, it's quite interesting... Oh wait, us who don't think Petty or Hack should be playing are void of complete (what was the word you used) LOGIC ?  

I clearly questioned Bowles' logic, not anyone on the boards.  But if you want to make it about you, feel free.

[Beerfish]

16 minutes ago, RESNewYork said:

I agree it would take a person with no command of logic to start the 2nd best QB on your roster, when you need to win games to save your job. 

And you approve of this, as in you are more interested in bowels saving his job than the new york jets improving long term and winning the big one.

[#27TheDominator]

2 minutes ago, August said:

Don't worry we're gonna have this same argument a year from now when Brian Hoyer is our starting quarterback.

#youthmovement

[greenwave81]

McCown is averaging 229 yards per game with 7 TDs and 6 INTs.  He does have a very high completion % (just over 70%).  He's also sacked an average of 3 times per game which is among the most in the league.  Across most statistical measures, he is average or just below average.  But here's the thing - you look to a veteran QB to do a few things better than a young one and ball protection is one of them.  McCown's 6 INTs is bad.  His 19 sacks is very bad (4th worst in league).  His 6 fumbles is awful.  This is a guy who has limited upside to lead a game-winning drive, and who fails to do the one thing you expect most from a veteran QB which is 'protect the ball'.  
So tell me again why it's so vital we watch him continue to do what he's doing rather than give Petty a chance to see if he can do better?  Maybe Petty fails again and we go back to McCown, but in that case, will we have really lost anything of value?  And if Petty plays like he did against the Giants, we will have won something substantial.  Low risk, high reward.  Personally, I like those odds.
 

+ 1000

[#27TheDominator]

7 minutes ago, nycdan said:

Here is the only data I have to cite that I think is of use.

McCown sacked 19 times this year in 194 attempts.  Roughly 10% of the time (ouch!).

Petty in preseason this year was sacked twice in 48 attempts.  Roughly 4% of the time.

To be fair (and I do try to be with numbers), McCown was not sacked in his 12 attempts in preseason this year.  

Very hard to compare these numbers for a lot of reasons, but Petty doesn't seem to be a sack magnet.  

By comparison, Hack was sacked 9 times in 74 attempts this preseason.  About 12%.

All I'm saying is Petty looked intriguing this presesason.  I'd like to see if he can do it in games that count.

Yeah.  I had looked those numbers up too.  I think Hackenberg in particular would be sacked a ton and a half.  Petty I am less sure of, but I think he showed the same issues last year, when his sack % was 9, basically double Fitzpatrick's.  I think your numbers are higher than what I had because you are going by "attempts"  We are more concerned with "dropbacks" which at a minimum would be attempts + sacks.  pro football reference has McCown at 8.9%, identical to Petty last year when our line was arguably better.

[JetFreak89]

32 minutes ago, RESNewYork said:

You believe Petty has a chance to affect where the Jets select a QB? You believe they are going to risk taking a QB prospect higher, for a player that currently, is not good enough to beat McCown.

And I have no intentions of being obstinate. I was just trying to lay out how I, not anyone else, my opinion the logic behind the decisions being made.

For the sake of argument, let's say Petty ends the season with 10 starts and stats of 62% comp percentage, 20 TD's, 5 INTs, 2 Fumbles, 2,600 yards. The Jets win 5 of the games. 

Is that enough to justify not using our first round pick on a QB? Possibly. Is it likely to happen? Probably not. But no one (not you, not me, not Bowles, Mac) knows for ABSOLUTE certainty that it couldn't. 

[Philc1]

2 minutes ago, JetFreak89 said:

For the sake of argument, let's say Petty ends the season with 10 starts and stats of 62% comp percentage, 20 TD's, 5 INTs, 2 Fumbles, 2,600 yards. The Jets win 5 of the games. 

Is that enough to justify not using our first round pick on a QB? Possibly. Is it likely to happen? Probably not. But no one (not you, not me, not Bowles, Mac) knows for ABSOLUTE certainty that it couldn't. 

Jets have to draft a qb next year in round 1.  Not doing so is a fireable offense

[nycdan]

15 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

Yeah.  I had looked those numbers up too.  I think Hackenberg in particular would be sacked a ton and a half.  Petty I am less sure of, but I think he showed the same issues last year, when his sack % was 9, basically double Fitzpatrick's.  I think your numbers are higher than what I had because you are going by "attempts"  We are more concerned with "dropbacks" which at a minimum would be attempts + sacks.  pro football reference has McCown at 8.9%, identical to Petty last year when our line was arguably better.

I'm loathe to use last years numbers for either guy for a variety of reasons.  Really a completely different roster in a very unstable situation where we had vets who were 'taking sides'.  I'm prepared to give Petty a pass on last year based on how he looked in week 3 of the preseason this year.  I may be in the minority on that, which is fine.  It's all opinion anyway and mine isn't in the small group of opinions that actually matter.

[Beerfish]

8 minutes ago, Philc1 said:

Jets have to draft a qb next year in round 1.  Not doing so is a fireable offense

These guys are working on their 9 lives of fireable offenses.

Drafting a lousy ILB in the 1st round

Reaching badly for a shot Qb in the 2nd round.

Going S, S in the 1st two rounds when premium positons are on the board for the taking.