bitonti Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 how about Jason Campbell. Another 1.5M guy. Im not saying these guys are awesome but better than David Garrard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 Is he better than Mark Sanchez or David Garrard? Probably not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 how about Jason Campbell. Another 1.5M guy. Im not saying these guys are awesome but better than David Garrard. Sanchez > Campbell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustInFudge Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 I really hate that the Jets haven't just named Sanchez the starter right now. Geno isn't ready, and delaying the inevitable seems minor league. Your boy Idzik's a dick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bitonti Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 Probably not. everyone is better than David Garrard. He retired. Literally you can't sign a more worthless player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustInFudge Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 how about Jason Campbell. Another 1.5M guy. Im not saying these guys are awesome but better than David Garrard. FWIW - none of these options do anything to progress this franchise in the slightest. Who cares if he signed one of these dead beats? The Jets still suck and need QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 FWIW - none of these options do anything to progress this franchise in the slightest. Who cares if he signed one of these dead beats? The Jets still suck and need QB. Yes, this exactly. I'd rather stomach another year of Mark than turn on my tv every week to see Jason Campbell handing off and throwing 5 yard outs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZachEY Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 That can be true and Garrard can still be a dumb signing. I understand why he did it, with all the other local guys they signed (Goodson, Colon, Garay etc). But there were many other better options. Dumb is on a continuum that includes price. Garrard was not a dumb signing because he cost almost nothing, there is another one year rental on the team in Sanchez, and he drafted a QB. Further, the only reason to bring in Garrard was to create a $8.5M back up and appease the fans in a rebuilding year. It certainly did not work out, but that doesn't make it dumb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZachEY Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 FWIW - none of these options do anything to progress this franchise in the slightest. Who cares if he signed one of these dead beats? The Jets still suck and need QB. Exactly the point I'm trying to make. With Garrard, we still were not looking forward to a great season. We just got to not watch Sanchez. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 how about Jason Campbell. Another 1.5M guy. Im not saying these guys are awesome but better than David Garrard. What are you trying to do, lose by an average of 9 points, as opposed to an average score of 10 points? None of those options were going to make this year's Jets correspondingly better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustInFudge Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 Exactly the point I'm trying to make. With Garrard, we still were not looking forward to a great season. We just got to not watch Sanchez. Is the lesser of two evils. Just one prevented us from having to watch that head band fu manchu wearing mofo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bitonti Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 Dumb is on a continuum that includes price. Garrard was not a dumb signing because he cost almost nothing, there is another one year rental on the team in Sanchez, and he drafted a QB. Further, the only reason to bring in Garrard was to create a $8.5M back up and appease the fans in a rebuilding year. It certainly did not work out, but that doesn't make it dumb. 1 mil to a retired guy is not as good as 1.5 mil to a guy who is playing. You guys sound like me defending Herm. There is no defense for it. If the Garrard signing had worked out they could have theoretically traded Mark and eaten his salary. Everytime a Jets fan complains about Mark Sanchez, remind him of the David Garrard signing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bitonti Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 What are you trying to do, lose by an average of 9 points, as opposed to an average score of 10 points? None of those options were going to make this year's Jets correspondingly better. I didn't say David Garrard = super bowl. But people who say it was a good signing and smart and they couldn't sign anyone else is wearing blinders. If they had a vet who wasn't Sanchez, it would be better. Period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbatesman Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 1 mil to a retired guy is not as good as 1.5 mil to a guy who is playing. You know we only paid Garrard $100k, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZachEY Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 1 mil to a retired guy is not as good as 1.5 mil to a guy who is playing. You guys sound like me defending Herm. There is no defense for it. If the Garrard signing had worked out they could have theoretically traded Mark and eaten his salary. Everytime a Jets fan complains about Mark Sanchez, remind him of the David Garrard signing. Garrard's cap charge is 100,000 this year, not 1M. "Cutting or trading Mark Sanchez does not make the Jets better." Jokes aside, we wouldn't get better than a 6th for him and the dead money was astronomical. Garrard was a one year fix at best. Which is literally only about appeasing the fans. It wasn't a move that made the team significantly better. Nor would the options available. And I'm not defending Idzik, I'm simply not killing him for a completely consequence-less issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bitonti Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 You know we only paid Garrard $100k, right? if Garrard had been healthy it would have been more, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bitonti Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 And I'm not defending Idzik, I'm simply not killing him for a completely consequence-less issue. You (and others) are giving him a pass on Garrard because you hope he's better at his job than Tanny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kleckineau Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 Ryan Fitzpatrick is slated to make 1.5M in 2013 and could easily start in Tennessee over Locker. btw if I were Idzik i'd be on the phone right now trying to pry Nick Foles out of Philadelphia. It might seem like a trader mike type of move but he can start in this league and already knows Marty's offense. If I were Idzik I'd be on the phone right now trying to pry Kirk Cousins out of Washington. Next training camp there could be a genuine QB competition between him, Geno and Simms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbatesman Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 if Garrard had been healthy it would have been more, right? If he'd been healthy, he wouldn't have retired, we could have theoretically traded Mark and eaten his salary, and presumably no one would be bitching about our starting QB making $1.1 million. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lizard King Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 If he'd been healthy, he wouldn't have retired, we could have theoretically traded Mark and eaten his salary, and presumably no one would be bitching about our starting QB making $1.1 million. Ah yes, nothing to see here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bitonti Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 If he'd been healthy, he wouldn't have retired, we could have theoretically traded Mark and eaten his salary, and presumably no one would be bitching about our starting QB making $1.1 million. right and my point is that investing 1.5M into a healthier option would have been better. the 400k diff between Garrard and Campbell/Hasselbeck/Fitzpatrick wouldn't have broken the Jets salary cap. They did have the room for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbatesman Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 right and my point is that investing 1.5M into a healthier option would have been better. the 400k diff between Garrard and Campbell/Hasselbeck/Fitzpatrick wouldn't have broken the Jets salary cap. They did have the room for that. I don't think anyone's debating that. Idzik blew the Garrard signing. The point is that acquiring Campbell/Hasselbeck/Fitzpatrick--even if it allowed us to dump Sanchez (dubious at best)--would not, dare I say, make the Jets better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeKlecko Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 Honest to God, I just wish Geno would step up and take the job this week - so we can all stop hashing over and over the steps of rebuilding and start talking about winning again. If that happened, would we still be rooting for the Jets? I mean, we've had the opportunity to do that so seldom in Jets history, I'm not sure I'd know how to do that! lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeKlecko Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 This season probably comes down to for us Jets fans sadly- does Geno Smith show when he does get into games the potential to be a solid NFL QB I think that what happens with Geno, Richardson, Milliner, Davis and Coples (hopefully, solid development and play), is about all that we can realistically hope for at this point. Anything else is gravy. If Geno shows that he can be a quality starter and the four young defenders develop into quality starters, I think I'll be ecstatic regardless of what the team's record is or who the HC will be next season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeKlecko Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 Geno is starting Saturday!!! I'm not surprised by that. It will be very interesting to see what happens if he plays well vs the Giants. Would that tilt the scales towards Geno (or would Idzik order Rex to start Geno)? Would it be too little, too late? Would it make things closer, but would they still give the edge to Sanchez to give Geno a little more time to develop, especially with the 2 games within 4-5 days early in the season? A couple of things are almost for certain. One, if Geno lights it up against the Giants, Jets fans will go nuts if the Jets announce Sanchez as the starter for the regular season. Would Idzik dare do that even if Rex and Mornhinweg say they think Sanchez should start? That would take some guts or not worrying about the fans. (Hopefully he doesn't make his decisions based on what fans think/say). Two, if he falls flat on his face vs the Giants, then a lot of Jets fans will crawl out on ledges and be ready to jump. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZachEY Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 You (and others) are giving him a pass on Garrard because you hope he's better at his job than Tanny. I am giving him a pass on Garrard, because Garrard was consequence-less, not because I hope he's better at his job than Tanny. But as long as we're ascribing motives, why not just admit this has nothing to do with Garrard, Geno, or Brandon Moore and is truly and solely about not paying an injured corner 16 million a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeKlecko Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 Ryan Fitzpatrick is slated to make 1.5M in 2013 and could easily start in Tennessee over Locker. btw if I were Idzik i'd be on the phone right now trying to pry Nick Foles out of Philadelphia. It might seem like a trader mike type of move but he can start in this league and already knows Marty's offense. Then I'm glad you're not Idzik. The very LAST thing he should do is panicking and trading away future draft picks. The team will have something like 10-11 draft picks next year and a ton of cap space. THAT is when they will fix most of the rest of the team's problems issues, not now. Fitzpatrick sucks and is only marginally better than Sanchez. You lose a lot of credibility on that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeKlecko Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 That would mean you're already giving up on Geno as a prospect. Not as a Day 1 starter. Foles is not a one year fix. No GM was coming into this situation and making us a contender, regardless of platitudes about "retooling not rebuilding". Exactly. To think otherwise is just nuts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NCJETSFAN Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 I will say one thing I don't care who starts but if geno is named week 1 starter they need to cut Sanchez and move on it will be better for the whole team Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeKlecko Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 how about Jason Campbell. Another 1.5M guy. Im not saying these guys are awesome but better than David Garrard. Now you're making more sense. I like Campbell and wanted the Jets to sign him. As a player, I think he is/was a better choice than Garrard, but as a mentor, I think I'd have to give the nod to Garrard. I think that Idzik really thought/hoped that Geno would either start game 1 or by the mid-point of the season, so he thought he needed more of a mentor rather than player. That could be totally offbase, but even if it isn't, I'm not sure that was a smart decision because injuries happen all the time, and every team needs a capable backup. Even if Geno did start the season or was ready and starting by game 3, if he got injured and Garrard was also injured, then what good would he have been? I'm not gonna kill Idzik for that move, but do agree that Campbell would have been a better move, but of course that's in hindsight (even though he's the QB I wanted the Jets to sign as soon as last season ended). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeKlecko Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 Sanchez > Campbell. No way, Jose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZachEY Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 right and my point is that investing 1.5M into a healthier option would have been better. the 400k diff between Garrard and Campbell/Hasselbeck/Fitzpatrick wouldn't have broken the Jets salary cap. They did have the room for that. Campbell was the ONLY one to sign a 1.5M deal. Hasselback has a $3.5M cap number this year and signed a multi-year deal including future deal money if cut next year. Fitzpatrick has a $2.4M cap number this year and signed a multi-year deal including future dead money if cut next year. So essentially, your argument is the Jets should have invested more than a year and at least $2.5M in a placeholder when they've already got an $8M placeholder on the roster. Or, you're a big believer in Jason Campbell as a viable option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeKlecko Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 FWIW - none of these options do anything to progress this franchise in the slightest. Who cares if he signed one of these dead beats? The Jets still suck and need QB. I disagree. Campbell is a decent QB. He isn't the turnover machine that Sanchez is, is much more poised, and a better all around player than Sanchez, yet he's not so great that Geno couldn't have eventually beaten him out. In addition, Campbell would be a solid choice as a veteran backup QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeKlecko Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 What are you trying to do, lose by an average of 9 points, as opposed to an average score of 10 points? None of those options were going to make this year's Jets correspondingly better. I agree that Campbell was going to make the team that much better, but wouldn't it have been much better just watching the team knowing that we weren't going to see Sanchez freeze like a deer in the headlights, throw pick sixes to DL and buttfumble games away? I think most Jets fans would have been much happier and willing to accept the growing pains this year knowing that they wouldn't have to see Sanchez. Look at all the discussion that's gone on on this board alone. Campbell is much better than Sanchez, but not so great that Geno couldn't have replaced him, and he would have made a solid backup going forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bitonti Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 But as long as we're ascribing motives, why not just admit this has nothing to do with Garrard, Geno, or Brandon Moore and is truly and solely about not paying an injured corner 16 million a year. you can choose to believe this or not but once it became clear that Revis really was signing for 16 mil a year, every year, i did not support resigning him. the contract he signed with Tampa Bay is ludicrous. I thought they could work out a reasonable deal but in fact there was no reasonable deal. I hold no grudge for the Jets losing Revis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.05f3dc52804d5fd84cf09ccfcd7bd10b.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.