Jump to content

Sperm Edwards

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Sperm Edwards

  1. Probably this one trick pony just needed a QB with a rocket arm like Teddy Bridgewater (and like Josh McCown before Darnold). But even with such gunslingers, he’d never have a high catch percentage. For example, he’d be incapable of catching 15 of 18 passes thrown his way (15 of 17 if you exclude garbage time) while maintaining his 15 yards/rec rate. Because I have it on good authority, from Jets fans showing off their smartitude here, that Robby Anderson was, is, and always will be just a #3 WR at best.
  2. I don’t think that’s the problem. The problem is which guys they hire, not meddling. Like I said above: Douglas is already here, and for better or worse (hopefully better) he’s going to be for at least 2-3 more seasons. So that’s baked into the cake whether the Johnsons are frontmen or not. The only other hire there is to make is the HC. A good HC isn’t going to see Woody or Chris Johnson’s inability to hire a good HC as a reason to not come here; that’s putting the cart before the horse. The problem will be which guy they hire, not what they do or don’t do if they hire the right guy.
  3. They should totally hire Nick Fury
  4. I think that’s overstating by a lot, but it’s definitely got more talent than when Gase interviewed here. Not to mention doubling up on 1st round picks for the upcoming 2 seasons and not being cap-strapped into sitting out free agency. And yes, if he is still what he was before he basically took 2 years off, they will be getting back Mosley. The big deciding factor might be whether or not the team is still wedded to Darnold if he has a terrible year all season long, and we are sitting with the #1 pick this coming April, or if a new HC will have to give him another year tryout (when a year after that the same replacement opportunity may not be there). A HC isn’t going to be the GM, but I take for granted who’s going to be his QB is a major part of the decision. It’s very possible that Darnold’s presence was a far greater HC draw after year 1 than it’ll be after year 3. The real solution is to not get worked up, and to just presume it’ll be a disaster every year. You ought to know better by now.
  5. His argument (like Bowles before him) was that they have to execute anyway (e.g. a QB sneak with inches or a foot to go, when everyone on the field, in the booth, and at home knows that’s what you’re doing). So I don’t totally disagree with that, but when there’s a vulnerability in the defense that you didn’t know would be there before calling the play in, then the QB has to be able to audible out of a covered play. I can understand exceptions like if you’re dealing with your backup QB or a raw rookie who barely grasps the playbook as it is, but that isn’t the case here. I mean, if you’re going to do that, then just go no-huddle every down and call in the plays when they’re lined up like Kelly used to. It’s not a good long-term plan because you’re going to keep getting killed on TOP, but on a given play it beats having zero ability to audible, where the only possible way out of a covered play is to burn a TO.
  6. All true, but there are things to consider: there are only so many of these HC jobs that open up, and it isn’t too frequent that it’s with a team that’s coming off serious success (e.g. SD after they fired Marty...to then waste the league’s best young roster on Coach Pockmark lol). Candidates know they have to take a job when the iron’s hot, or you can get something of a reputation that there’s obviously some reason no one hires you as HC year after year. One down year as coordinator, or your HC gets fired and you get thrown out with the bathwater, and just like that you missed your chance. Darnold will still be seen by many as an ultra-talented QB who just needs better coaching + another year of experience + another year of roster improvement There’s always an attraction to a team coming off major disappointment: it’s a lot easier to look better. The Jets sucked last year, but even a bad team can go 7-9 and convince so many that the team’s coaching is on an upward trajectory since it’s still a marked improvement over going 3-13. Well we’re headed for 3-13 the way things look now... While it’s not enough to succeed yet, there is some young talent on the team (Darnold aside, since he’s very eye-of-beholder). When Bowles was fired the cupboard was so bare & the only names anyone gave a damn about were Darnold and a freaking safety. The rest of the names were huge disappointment draft picks (Leo W, D.Lee) and FAs (T.Johnson). I mean the team needed 5 starting offensive linemen. If they fire Gase after just 2 years - both of them billed as rebuilding years not contending years, like after firing Bowles after 2018 (however deservedly) - then firing the next HC will be a much bigger PR problem if they fire the next one in less than 4 years. So a 2021 new HC won’t likely get the rug ripped out from under him quickly (which is surely how Gase will see it). Quickly fire a HC once, then it’s on that failure coach; do it twice, then this is a disloyal/fickle front office who makes promises it won’t see through. The fans (rightly) see the Johnson family as a root cause of failures. But it’s less likely that a HC will see it that way. Whether it’s a Johnson or an ex-GM/HC as head of football operations, Douglas has at least 3-4 more years as GM either way. Johnsons are a problem to fans because of the HCs they hire, but the HC himself won’t see it that way.
  7. Any coach can make the argument that, on any given play, they’d have been successful if they’d executed. It’s a wonderful way to white-out any/every lapse in judgment. “If we blocked the mike...” “If we’d seen & picked up the blitz...” “If he’d thrown it to his other read...” ”If he’d shown a little patience...” ”If he’d just run & not been so patient...” ”...then my play was the right one to call there.” We just didn’t execute, lol. No doubt there’s truth to that in any errant throw, missed block, dropped pass, or route option not run, that ends up in a loss of down or possession. Likewise, plays can’t be called as though the talent level is what one wishes it to be rather than what it is. If Gase was stealing signs and knew for a fact the D was going to line up as they did, of course he’d call something different to exploit it (as would any coach/coordinator). That’s the whole freaking point of giving one’s QB the ability to audible out of something covered, or into something clearly not covered to make the execution easier. Calling plays is much easier when one has superior talent, and can make anyone who talks a great game look like he can also walk the walk. It seems that’s Adam Gase; just like that was Paul Hackett; just like lots of guys who get it all on paper & can even wow you with their dizzying amount of knowledge if you sit with them, but are still just failures when they’re making the call in real time, with no one managing them from above to swat away the significant percentage of stupid ideas. That’s the problem with lots of “ideas” guys; they think every idea they have is like a work of art.
  8. So you’re saying Mims wants to have someone crap on his chest? That’s what you’re saying?
  9. All this is true. In fairness, one of the reasons a 1st round pick gets a higher likelihood of success - in addition to the obvious: being a better prospect outright - is the massively longer leash and opportunity a 1st round QB is given. Further, a mid/late round pick is far more likely to be drafted by a team already set with its starting QB (if not a starting QB in whom the team has already invested heavily). When a team drafts a QB in round 1, it’s unusual to be buried behind a veteran the team wants to keep as the QB1 for the next few years at least. He’s drafted for one purpose: to hopefully unseat him by year 2 at the latest.
  10. Receivers don’t make a bad QB into a good QB; they make his job easier, and make the team better, but the tail doesn’t wag the dog. I’m hardly in the making-excuses-for-Darnold corner. He needs to play far better than he has. He - like Sanchez and Geno - were drafted to make others around them better, not have his own success gauged purely by the play of others. There were plenty of plays just in the game this past Thursday where you’d see one of these two superior QBs make getting rid of the ball, in the face of an unblocked blitzer, look like a routine formality. Likewise there are other receivers who have only looked good on the receiving end of good QBs and are quickly out of the league without them. None of these things mean: in a strong WR draft class, do not draft more than 1 WR when the team needs more than 1, weeks after a weak FA WR class. Instead draft a backup QB who’s right now effectively the team’s 4th string QB behind not just Darnold & Flacco, but also Mike White.
  11. You’re crazy lol Seriously, I’m generally happy with the job Douglas has done, but I’m not ecstatic. “Generally happy” is still a massive leap forward from his predecessor, but it doesn’t mean I have to do my part to circle the wagons to defend every move he’s made. You in particular were balls deep in favor of drafting 2 WRs. Now that Douglas only drafted one, you’re defending it even in the face of using a day 2 pick on a cock-blocking endeavor or on a designed career backup. The only way this pans out is if Morgan looks awesome to the point where he’s permitted to challenge Darnold for the starting job; this would result in either overtaking Darnold outright, or moving him for a much higher pick later. See, the strategy to forgo improving oneself by trying to block others is only a smart move if it’s successful. IMO it’s hard enough to hit on 50% of one’s picks without throwing away one of the higher-percentage ones on purpose.
  12. I keep reading this thread title and read it as poo nuggets. Do I need to see someone about this?
  13. Meh, my brother you do way more than your fair share of complaining (and so do I and everyone else here -- except Pac, who's perfect). Repeatedly classifying it as "whining" only when other people are being critical it isn't a very compelling argument. It's also a sign you're resorting to insults because @Beerfish has at least a partly valid point so you're deflecting as a defense mechanism. For more in depth analysis you'll have to consult @TeddEY. We were paper-thin at WR in a deep WR draft, and we took just 1 at that position among his 9 picks. Worse still, IIRC you were not only advocating drafting 2 WRs this year, you were advocating it so we should start 2 of them, which is quite wishful thinking. A day-2 pick is way too high for cock-blocking someone else when one's own team has so many starter needs. Playoff teams have the luxury of doing that; not teams who are just emerging from a half-decade of Maccagnan (which itself followed 2 years of Idzik) and need help everywhere. Who cares if BB wanted him? He isn't a savant at drafting, and whiffs way more than he hits. He also drafted Kevin O'Connell in round 3. And he just drafted Stidham; with your logic we should have blocked that filthy creep from drafting him, too. The only way that's a good pick is if he starts wiping the floor with Darnold and becomes our FQB, or at least is so promising-looking that we're not going to draft a QB the following year if Darnold falls flat on his face in '20 or '21. Otherwise it was dumb. If Douglas drafted Morgan because he thinks he'll be a valuable player for us, even if he ends up being meh, fine. If it was a pure cock-block move - and particularly if he turns into meh - then not fine. Fight me!!
  14. This topic needed cleaning up, too? On page 1? C'mon. Even if you're not better than that, try / pretend to be for a day.
  15. that was my first thought, too I think people in favor drafting 2, because we needed 2, had it right but for the wrong reason. Draft 2 because we need to hit on 1. Expecting to start 2 rookie WRs is stewpid, but ask Arizona if they regretted going back to the well at that position to draft Boldin after they burned a 1st rounder on Bryant Johnson.
  16. Yeah this is why you don't put all your eggs in 1 basket by expecting to go 1-for-1 at such a must-fill position
  17. 3) Not yet shown why we should have burned a #3 overall pick on him -- a pick that could have been parlayed into more than we got for Jamal Adams. Or perhaps draft someone who can get into the backfield. If he pans out and starts generating pressure up the gut, then awesome. This team could sure do with turning an area of weakness into an area of strength with a player already on the roster.
  18. The part of Darnold’s (and the Jets’) season that too often gets overlooked in the wrong way was the 3-game mono stretch. The “if Darnold didn’t get mono” too often gets blanketed with presumptions of good play in those games. The likelihood is he’d have had an outright embarrassing outcome in at least 1 of those 3 games: he lucked out of humiliating himself in the first Pats game, when their D was looking like the 2000 Ravens revisited (except arguably better). Beyond that, neither the offense around him nor his own play was nearly consistent enough to expect 2 out of 2 good outings against Cleveland and Philadelphia, and perhaps not even 1 of 2. It seems unlikely he’d have prevented Garrett from running through Beachum like he wasn’t even there, nor does it seem likely he wouldn’t have roughed the passer just because it was Darnold. This is further before Osemele’s & Kalil’s seasons weren’t mercifully ended inside. The only thing that masked their pass rush a little was Falk throwing nothing but dumpoffs all game. I take for granted that Darnold would have made more deep attempts and there’s every reason to believe at least a couple of those passes would have ended in turnovers, either by strip sacks or picks. Maybe he’d have had a good game on the road against the Eagles, as their D was nothing to brag about, but a big part of the reason for that was that they faced better QBs/offenses than Darnold & the Jets. Not to mention he’d have been fresh off a NE whooping and he didn’t exactly bounce back immediately after that in the NE game he did participate. He wasn’t out there messing things up all by himself, as Maccagnan did him no favors with the sorry-ass team around him. But while they still have to play the games before counting the outcomes, there’s every chance we’d have still gone 0-3 in that stretch with the QB and offense in general looking pretty bad throughout. Yet people still glossed over those 3 games as though the presumption is we’d have gone at least 2-1 behind excellent QB play. With him in the lineup the Jets still lost to 2 winless teams plus only eked out a 16-point showing against a playoff team resting its starters in a meaningless game for them. The talent around him, and the protection in particular, is better on paper. He clearly has the tools, which made him such a hot prospect in the first place, but I’d like to see him put it together - against stiffer competition that isn’t pre-weakened - in spite of a meh cast, since that’s what’s expected from such a steep investment.
  19. Seriously, the guy threw 50 TDs in his first season as a starter but wouldn't have been worth a damn here because Darnold wasn't awesome that year. Anderson was coming off a sure 1000-yard season before Petty came in to relieve McCown. So presumably Mahomes wouldn't have gotten as much out of Anderson as Josh McCown got out of Anderson, and the proof is that Darnold didn't. Plus returning Enunwa (for as long as he was on the field). And Herndon's 500 yds in '18 was clearly his ceiling rather than hundreds of yards short of what he might have put forth with better QB play. Also lost in the argument is that just maybe the Jets would/should have addressed the WR and OL positions in the draft if they had 4 more high picks in 2018 for the likes of Chubb, Sutton, Chark on the table with our two 2nd round picks; never mind if our brain-dead GM hadn't then wasted his first post-Darnold pick on another underwhelming DT while Baltimore picked Orlando Brown & Mark Andrews after that, Dallas drafted Gallup, etc.). Then a year later, the team may not have found itself "trapped" into drafting still another DT at #3 overall in 2019 if they didn't earn the #3 pick. Then in round 2 there were 3 WRs taken who started performing right away as rookies, but we had no 2nd round pick again that year. I still like Darnold, but that's irrelevant: you'd have to have brain damage to wish we still did what we did in 2017-2018 to end up with Adams + Darnold over Mahomes + a high 1st (which itself could have been parlayed down) + three 2nds. Perhaps more, since even if the Jets still earned a high 2018 pick they could have moved down a little to pick up still more picks to surround their young QB with an extra weapon or three. Or in addition to different use of the #1 pick in 2019, add in different use of the 3rd round picks he used on Polite + Edoga; or the pick after that used on Wesco. Point is there's no reason to believe that in the absence of the man making the terrible decision to draft a safety over two franchise QBs, a smarter GM would/should have also made better use of plenty other resources he squandered since that move (never mind the number of blunders before it).
  20. Name the players we missed out on. The biggest cash-in player in FA among non-slot WRs was Robby Anderson, followed by Perriman, from the 2020 UFA class. Teams don't typically let good outside WRs hit UFA. The best ones that are usually available are slot receivers and Crowder is no worse than those available. Thing is, "relying on a rookie" also means the rookie isn't going to be stuck behind a meh veteran whose experience makes him a better receiver this year. Then next year we don't really know if Mims can handle a starting role, so we sign some other low-ceiling veteran in his spot for the same reason as this year, and around & around we go. Let's see what he brings before we're already replacing him. In hindsight I'm sure at least one of the available UFA WRs will look like a great steal in hindsight, but we'll only know which in hindsight (e.g. Agholor). Douglas signed one would-be starter in Perriman and one spot-starter in Hogan. We all would prefer if the WR Fairy dropped an all-pro onto our lap, but there was none. Typically you have to draft them because teams rarely let them go, and even if they do they cost 1st rounders to pry loose for the privilege of offering the contract Adams wants. e.g. if the Jets rather than KC had signed Sammy Watkins it would have (rightly) been seen as a Same Old Jets type move, right along with Tru Johnson and plenty of other bust veteran deals. As far as edge rusher, NE is great because - in leaving the same cap room available we did - they let go of Jamie Collins and replaced him with Brandon Copeland? If that's a successful move it's because of coaching, not spending. The rest of this is nonsense, like the notion that the Jets are tanking to then trade Darnold. They could have quite easily traded him this year if that was the goal. Every year the team isn't going all-in doesn't make it a tanking effort. There's something in between, which is where they're at: not close enough to use more resources for the 2020 season while wanting to see what they've got before rushing to spend on players who might not be an upgrade or might not be more than a one-year bandaid.
  21. The biggest reason is the lack of extending draft picks made years ago, not the lack of going balls deep with the 2020 FA class. As much as some will whine about trading Adams for future picks having something to do with this, the reality is Seattle didn't bump his 2020 pay any more than the Jets. So the only other way is to outbid others for the players with whom their original teams were willing to part ways. Those players can still pay off in a big way, and several do every year, but it's not the norm. Usually we'll end up with the likes of Trumaine Johnson & Terrelle Pryor. But hey, at least it won't be cap space, which is somehow seen by some as an automatic good. The one I would have liked to see them grab is Conklin, but for all I know that would've blown up in the Jets' faces anyway. I would have been behind them extending R.Anderson - mostly out of concern the team might have seen fit to start 2 rookies as many wanted, and figuring he'd only get 1 yr guaranteed for skill anyway - but Perriman should be fine as a replacement. I didn't quite understand the unwillingness to part with him for a mid-round pick when we were all but mathematically eliminated, and then 2 months later an unwillingness to keep him with one guaranteed season, but hopefully it works out better this way and RA wouldn't have added so much more than Perriman to this year's payroll. Part of it, I'm sure, is the desire to give the rookies a bit more of a leg up while they're inexperienced, rather than keeping a higher-upside as a backup because right away a veteran's experience still makes him a bit better player. So, see what we've got in our lesser-priced players, and then fill in with more expensive veterans to fill in the blanks, rather than fill in with whatever vets we can get in here and then either position-draft around them or redundant-position-draft in spite of having them.

Content Partnership

Yes Network

Site Sponsor

MILE-Social - NJ Social Media & SEO company
  • Create New...