Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by majf

  1. "Greatest Jet of all time" just means you liked him. That's fine. I liked Chad too. Before he broke down and started throwing those atrocious interceptions I had a high level of confidence in his decision-making and thought we always had a chance to win with him behind center.

    What I don't get is the love for Curtis Martin. His production was that of an average starting running back. Nothing special. He averaged 4.0 yards per carry for the Jets, which puts him 13th on the all-time Jets running back list (for those with more than 300 attempts). To put that into perspective, such tailback luminaries as Shonn Greene, LaMont Jordan, Joe McKnight, Bilal Powell, and Isaiah Crowell were more productive per attempt than Curtis. He had a lot of rushing yards, sure, but his rushing attempts per game were stratospheric.

    As for him being a warrior, I've heard that said about him ever since he started playing for us and I still don't know what that means. 90% of NFL players are warriors, in the sense that it takes a goodly amount of courage to play this crazy game at the pro level.

    My vote for greatest Jet is Joe Klecko. I just liked him.

  2. 35 minutes ago, Greensleeves said:

    We haven't had our own true FQB since the late 1960s and you want to get cute with the pic? Never in a million years. You must be under 20 and haven't had to endure what we have or you would never have suggested it, even if it is tongue in cheek.

    First of all, I was in high school when the Jets won SB III, so there's a good chance I've endured at least as much as you have.

    Secondly, I only posed a question. I did not suggest what the answer should be. I have every expectation that the Jets front office is working through a number of draft day scenarios and the one I posed is one possible scenario. Is it unreasonable to think the Browns might take Allen with the first pick? Is it unreasonable to think the Giants might give Eli another couple of years and take a high impact non-quarterback at #2? And if the Jets have Darnold and Rosen ranked above Mayfield, and they get a call offering a fairly high 2nd round pick, and what they give up is the possibility they will no longer be able to choose between those two QBs, and only be able to take the one that is left, so they do it? I was just asking folks to play GM for a moment. If the two QBs are rated very close to each other, do you not at least consider it?

  3. 39 minutes ago, UntouchableCrew said:

    "We promise we'll take Baker and not the two guys you want."

    Uh, okay.

    What, that's not enforceable? The league has to approve all draft trades, so that provision would be in there and the league could ensure it's complied with. Plus, how could any team that reneges on such a deal expect to negotiate any deal with any team in the future?

    • Like 1
  4. 5 minutes ago, nycdan said:

    Why would DEN even consider it?  If they wanted Mayfield, they would get him at 5.  And even if not, they would get Darnold or at worst Rosen.  Win-win-win.  No way they trade up for Mayfield.

    They would do it if they have Mayfield as their top QB and believe the smoke the Jets are putting out about their interest in Mayfield.

  5. Let's assume Cleveland takes Josh Allen with #1 and the Giants take Barkley (or Chubb) with #2. Let's also assume that wherever they had Allen on their draft board, the next two QBs on the Jets board are Rosen and Darnold (not necessarily in that order). Now Denver comes and offers #5 and their 2nd round pick (#40) to move up to #3. Let's also assume that they promise to take Baker Mayfield with that pick (and not to trade the pick to anyone else). Do you do that?

    On the one hand, you will have traded three 2nd round picks (and got back only one 2nd round pick) essentially to move up one spot. On the other hand, you get one of the guys you would have targeted at #3 and get a 2nd round pick to boot.

    The scenario is not outside the realm of reasonable possibility and make explain why the Jets interest in Mayfield is being puffed up.

    • Post of the Week 1
  6. 12 minutes ago, pointman said:

    I read this more than once, and still have no idea what it means.

    He means the Jets claimed off of waivers two TEs, a RB, and DB (Bowman, Parker, Pope, Roberts) and released players at the corresponding positions, that is, two TEs (Bostick, Davis), a RB (Williams) and a DB (McDougle). His second sentence simply means that the only TEs on the roster are ones who were just picked up and who were not on the roster previously (including through camp and preseason).

    • Upvote 1
  7. 7 minutes ago, PatsFanTX said:

    Dalton and Ryan would have been the best Jets QB since Namath.

    Hell, 90% of the board are still pulling their puds over what they think Fitz accomplished last year.

    Forgetting the fact that he was in the bottom 25% of all QB metrics last year.

    Not true. He was in the top 50% in total yards, TDs, and completions.

  8. 14 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

    You might want to look up what hes accomplished and see how many in the entire history of the NFL have reached the same level of accomplishment.  

    If you think that Luck is somewhere between Tannihill and Flacco this is pointless.

    I'm open-minded. I did look it up, and, having done that, I have no idea what you meant. I already referenced a quantitative measure of performance (QB rating), which shows Luck to be average among active starting QBs. As for post-season success, which many point to as a measure of QB worth, I only need look to Flacco, who is 6-3 in the postseason (vs. Luck's 3-3), not to mention his SB win. I'm not going to look up what other QBs in the "entire history of the NFL" have accomplished, but if Flacco has accomplished more than Luck, then I would think that are dozens, if not scores, of QBs in the history of the NFL who have accomplished more. The perception of Luck as something special seems to have hardened based on his college performance and hype leading up to the draft. What he has accomplished on the field since then has not measured up.

  9. 36 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

    Has nothing to do with it.  Not a knock on Cam

    IMO Luck is a better QB, passer and leader.

    Can't speak to what kind of leader he is, as who really knows what goes on in a locker room other than players and coaches. What I'm saying is that his performance hasn't measured up to his hype, and that he has had sufficient time in the league for us to know what he is. Quibble if you will about the value of the passer rating stat, but it's based on actual performance and, among active QBs, Luck is 16th, between Tannehill and Flacco, which seems about right, and makes him the epitome of an average starting QB. For what it's worth, Fitz is 22nd, which is not bad, and Cam is 11th. I would say that Luck is even more overrated than Cutler (13th, if anyone is counting). How long can Luck get the benefit of the doubt, people counting on his potential, rather than his performance?

  10. Two things:

    1. Tanking is for cowards

    2. If I were to tank, I wouldn't tank for a Luck-type prospect. Luck right now is no better than a slightly above average QB. He doesn't look like a FQB on the field. Too many INTs. Fitz has a higher career completion % than Luck and had a much better year last year, which is not to say I would rather have Fitz, just that you never know with these QBs drafted high. In fact, since the 2010 draft, Fitz had a better year last year (based on passer rating) than all the QBs picked high other than Cam and Bortles (and he essentially tied Bortles). That means he had a better year than Bradford, Winston, and Luck. All I'm saying is that unless you have a once (or twice) in a generation talent like Cam, it's not worth tanking (if I were to tank, which I wouldn't, because I'm no coward). And even then, you don't know if that once in a generation talent will turn out to be Cam, or, instead, RGIII.

    • Thumb Down 1
  11. Even if true, of what advantage is it to let this be known? Maintaining interest in Kaepernick contributes to whatever leverage the Jets have vs. Fitz. I can't see an up side to letting your lack of interest in Kaepernick be known. And given how few leaks have come out of the current regime, I can only assume the story is false or there's a reason it got out that will become clearer down the road. Would welcome enlightenment on this question.

    • Upvote 1
  12. It'll be a great day when the Jets can consistently draft and develop their own passionate leaders, instead of having to borrow them from other teams.

    The Jets have shown themselves entirely capable of drafting and developing passionate leaders. Take the recent examples of Chad and Vilma. The problem is that neither management nor fans fully appreciate the value of leadership, particularly when the player's performance slips from career highs.

  13. Say NO and NYJ were interested in trading with one another, but somewhat far apart in terms of the compensation. If NO wanted Brick, it would make sense for NYJ to have taken him and both teams agreeing to wait to see if whomever would be available at 29 would be someone that NO had their eyes on (say, D. Williams). A trade at that point could be consumated (Bush for Brick, #29 and something lower than NYJ 3rd rounder), with NO getting more certainty as to the value of the 29 pick and NYJ not having to give up the farm. Maybe both teams are playing high stakes chicken at this point.

  • Create New...