Freemanm Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 Is Geno the QB of the future? Always easy to say yes after he had a good game. He has thrown a lot of ugly pics this year, but if the Jets FO surround him with good receivers, is he the guy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SayNoToDMC Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 Yes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aec4 Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 No f way Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BroadwayJoe12 Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 I don't know, but I do feel that he has shown enough where he deserves the opportunity to compete for the starting job next year against actual NFL quarterback talent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbatesman Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 Not enough info. Sign a vet, draft a rook, let 'em duke it out in August. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bergen Jet Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 I don't know, but I do feel that he has shown enough where he deserves the opportunity to compete for the starting job next year against actual NFL quarterback talent. This. Costs nothing to let him compete for the job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jetsfan80 Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 Not enough info. Sign a vet, draft a rook, let 'em duke it out in August. Which veteran do you want? The names out there aren't great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbatesman Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 Which veteran do you want? The names out there aren't great. It doesn't really matter. They all suck. But Geno+Simms+Garrard is not tenable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyLV Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 Smith could have a big jump next season with a a lot of work on foootwork, throwing motion and film study Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Mostro Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 Which veteran do you want? The names out there aren't great. Anyone with a QB rating in the 80's who knows how to take care of the ball will do as a bridge move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lupz27 Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 It doesn't really matter. They all suck. But Geno+Simms+Garrard is not tenable. But fire the HC who got 7 wins at least with them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbatesman Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 But fire the HC who got 7 wins at least with them? FO's median projection for the 2013 Jets was 7.5. Keep f*cking that chicken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stoicsentry Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 FO's median projection for the 2013 Jets was 7.5. Keep f*cking that chicken. Well, we beat the Vegas over/under. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lupz27 Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 FO's median projection for the 2013 Jets was 7.5. Keep f*cking that chicken. What was their median on the Falcons? Panthers? Texans? Chiefs? Giants? Cardinals? You keep ******* that rotten chicken! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bassmaster2 Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 Look at Luck and RG3 it take time for a young QB , both guys had poor seasons this year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbatesman Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 Well, we beat the Vegas over/under. EXTENSIONS FOR EVERYONE What was their median on the Falcons? Panthers? Texans? Chiefs? Giants? Cardinals? You keep ******* that rotten chicken! Let's try this: you guys dig up a reputable source that says we were going to win 3 games this year, and we'll go from there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lizard King Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 FO's median projection for the 2013 Jets was 7.5. Keep f*cking that chicken. What was their mean projection Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbatesman Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 What was their mean projection Sorry, that was the mean. Typo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stoicsentry Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 He has the physical ability to be the guy. Just needs to study and get used to the game more. Look off his receivers more. Put some more talent around him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lizard King Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 Sorry, that was the mean. Typo. Thats pretty impressive then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slats Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 I don't know, but I do feel that he has shown enough where he deserves the opportunity to compete for the starting job next year against actual NFL quarterback talent. Not enough info. Sign a vet, draft a rook, let 'em duke it out in August. These. Jets need to bring in a QB or two who can legitimately compete with Geno for the starting job. Competition, except when it comes to my draft picks, that sort of thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stoicsentry Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 Thats pretty impressive then It is, but it's also weird. Everyone was picking the Jets to be one of the 5 worst teams in football this year. That doesn't seem like a team that should be projected for 7.5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lizard King Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 It is, but it's also weird. Everyone was picking the Jets to be one of the 5 worst teams in football this year. That doesn't seem like a team that should be projected for 7.5. I know nothing about them, their methods, accuracy rating, but I am interested. What I do want to know is, did the model have Sanchez playing QB? Besides a "yes" can anyone actually quote the study showing it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bugg Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 No f way THIS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lupz27 Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 EXTENSIONS FOR EVERYONE Let's try this: you guys dig up a reputable source that says we were going to win 3 games this year, and we'll go from there. No such thing exists if you say it doesn't, so why have this argument, I could say so, and so is reputable, but if it doesn't meet your agenda you will say so, and so isn't reputable, and around, and around we go! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slats Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 It is, but it's also weird. Everyone was picking the Jets to be one of the 5 worst teams in football this year. That doesn't seem like a team that should be projected for 7.5. But FO... ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 FO's median projection for the 2013 Jets was 7.5. Keep f*cking that chicken. False. Sometimes pure stats over-analyze & over-think. At some point they need to look at the results of their statistical analysis and ask themselves if any season ended the way they're predicting it's going to. 7.3 was the mean wins for the Jets using DVOA on September 4th. But using DVOA also caused them to predict that no team in the NFL would finish with worse than a 6-10 record or better than an 11-5 record in 2013. Lowest prediction was Minnesota at 5.7 wins (6-10 record) and Denver with 10.7 wins (11-5). Literally, the stat model predicted that every team in the NFL would finish between 6-10 and 11-5. That the team with the best regular-season record would finish with only 5 more wins than the team with the worst record. That was their DVOA prediction, and even the writers on their own website know that was never going to happen. By the way, Scott Kacsmar from FootballOutsiders predicted the Jets would be 3-13. http://www.footballoutsiders.com/extra-points/2013/kacsmar-and-smiths-predict-2013-nfl-season. He links to his predictions at the top of paragraph 2. Then here they reference the DVOA-prediction article and the 11 writers predicted who would finish below their 2013 DVOA predictions and why. Of the 11 writers, 3 of them specifically predicted the Jets' DVOA numbers were the most likely to be overrated. As in they said their own website's DVOA prediction was faulty. Ben Muth from FootballOutsiders: "I just can't see the Gang Green winning more than six games; the only thing worse than the Jets wideouts is the Jets quarterback situation. If I was Rex Ryan I'd rather watch Clemson play too." Mike Ridley from FootballOutsiders (on why he felt the Jets were the most likely team to fall short of the website's DVOA win prediction): "Mark Sanchez, Geno Smith, Brady Quinn..." Another (Rob Weintraub) from FO also predicted the Jets were the most likely team to fall short of the computer model's DVOA win prediction. The last line in the article, he predicted the Jets to have the #1 pick in the 2014 draft (but only to be different because everyone else said Oakland would have the #1 pick and they'd take Clowney; still, it would seem that he felt the Jets would have the #2 overall pick at best). So these are FooballOutsiders.com's OWN AUTHORS acknowledging that not only are those numbers not what they thought each team's win total would actually be, but with 32 teams to single out and choose from, 3 out of 11 pinpointed the Jets as the most likely to fall short of the 7.3 wins their model predicted (and listed players as the reason). It means the authors thought that prediction was ridiculous based on the roster they headed into the season with. Then these same authors took a stab at which teams they felt the computer model underestimated win totals. Zero of them picked the Jets. You would have to search high & low & cherry-pick the outliers to find people who firmly predicted the Jets would win 7 games this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacked4JetsFB Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 False. Sometimes pure stats over-analyze & over-think. At some point they need to look at the results of their statistical analysis and ask themselves if any season ended the way they're predicting it's going to. 7.3 was the mean wins for the Jets using DVOA on September 4th. But using DVOA also caused them to predict that no team in the NFL would finish with worse than a 6-10 record or better than an 11-5 record in 2013. Lowest prediction was Minnesota at 5.7 wins (6-10 record) and Denver with 10.7 wins (11-5). Literally, the stat model predicted that every team in the NFL would finish between 6-10 and 11-5. That the team with the best regular-season record would finish with only 5 more wins than the team with the worst record. That was their DVOA prediction, and even the writers on their own website know that was never going to happen. By the way, Scott Kacsmar from FootballOutsiders predicted the Jets would be 3-13. http://www.footballoutsiders.com/extra-points/2013/kacsmar-and-smiths-predict-2013-nfl-season. He links to his predictions at the top of paragraph 2. Then here they reference the DVOA-prediction article and the 11 writers predicted who would finish below their 2013 DVOA predictions and why. Of the 11 writers, 3 of them specifically predicted the Jets' DVOA numbers were the most likely to be overrated. As in they said their own website's DVOA prediction was faulty. Ben Muth from FootballOutsiders: "I just can't see the Gang Green winning more than six games; the only thing worse than the Jets wideouts is the Jets quarterback situation. If I was Rex Ryan I'd rather watch Clemson play too." Mike Ridley from FootballOutsiders (on why he felt the Jets were the most likely team to fall short of the website's DVOA win prediction): "Mark Sanchez, Geno Smith, Brady Quinn..." Another (Rob Weintraub) from FO also predicted the Jets were the most likely team to fall short of the computer model's DVOA win prediction. The last line in the article, he predicted the Jets to have the #1 pick in the 2014 draft (but only to be different because everyone else said Oakland would have the #1 pick and they'd take Clowney; still, it would seem that he felt the Jets would have the #2 overall pick at best). So these are FooballOutsiders.com's OWN AUTHORS acknowledging that not only are those numbers not what they thought each team's win total would actually be, but with 32 teams to single out and choose from, 3 out of 11 pinpointed the Jets as the most likely to fall short of the 7.3 wins their model predicted (and listed players as the reason). It means the authors thought that prediction was ridiculous based on the roster they headed into the season with. Then these same authors took a stab at which teams they felt the computer model underestimated win totals. Zero of them picked the Jets. You would have to search high & low & cherry-pick the outliers to find people who firmly predicted the Jets would win 7 games this season. Did they account for two gift of god Type wins? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villain The Foe Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 Is Geno the QB of the future? Always easy to say yes after he had a good game. He has thrown a lot of ugly pics this year, but if the Jets FO surround him with good receivers, is he the guy? To broad a question. Is he the QB of the future? We dont know. Has he shown enough to stay in the conversation? Heck yes. In otherwords, we shouldnt be drafting a QB in the 1st 3 rounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slats Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 False. Sometimes pure stats over-analyze & over-think. At some point they need to look at the results of their statistical analysis and ask themselves if any season ended the way they're predicting it's going to. 7.3 was the mean wins for the Jets using DVOA on September 4th. But using DVOA also caused them to predict that no team in the NFL would finish with worse than a 6-10 record or better than an 11-5 record in 2013. Lowest prediction was Minnesota at 5.7 wins (6-10 record) and Denver with 10.7 wins (11-5). Literally, the stat model predicted that every team in the NFL would finish between 6-10 and 11-5. That the team with the best regular-season record would finish with only 5 more wins than the team with the worst record. That was their DVOA prediction, and even the writers on their own website know that was never going to happen. By the way, Scott Kacsmar from FootballOutsiders predicted the Jets would be 3-13. http://www.footballoutsiders.com/extra-points/2013/kacsmar-and-smiths-predict-2013-nfl-season. He links to his predictions at the top of paragraph 2. Then here they reference the DVOA-prediction article and the 11 writers predicted who would finish below their 2013 DVOA predictions and why. Of the 11 writers, 3 of them specifically predicted the Jets' DVOA numbers were the most likely to be overrated. As in they said their own website's DVOA prediction was faulty. Ben Muth from FootballOutsiders: "I just can't see the Gang Green winning more than six games; the only thing worse than the Jets wideouts is the Jets quarterback situation. If I was Rex Ryan I'd rather watch Clemson play too." Mike Ridley from FootballOutsiders (on why he felt the Jets were the most likely team to fall short of the website's DVOA win prediction): "Mark Sanchez, Geno Smith, Brady Quinn..." Another (Rob Weintraub) from FO also predicted the Jets were the most likely team to fall short of the computer model's DVOA win prediction. The last line in the article, he predicted the Jets to have the #1 pick in the 2014 draft (but only to be different because everyone else said Oakland would have the #1 pick and they'd take Clowney; still, it would seem that he felt the Jets would have the #2 overall pick at best). So these are FooballOutsiders.com's OWN AUTHORS acknowledging that not only are those numbers not what they thought each team's win total would actually be, but with 32 teams to single out and choose from, 3 out of 11 pinpointed the Jets as the most likely to fall short of the 7.3 wins their model predicted (and listed players as the reason). It means the authors thought that prediction was ridiculous based on the roster they headed into the season with. Then these same authors took a stab at which teams they felt the computer model underestimated win totals. Zero of them picked the Jets. You would have to search high & low & cherry-pick the outliers to find people who firmly predicted the Jets would win 7 games this season. How do you do this? I'm gonna have another beer, get some dinner, and root for the majority of JN to get coal in their stockings. Or Bevell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SenorGato Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 Not enough info. Sign a vet, draft a rook, let 'em duke it out in August. This, though I'm pretty damn optimistic about Geno. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deucebag Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 Well he's better than Browning Nagle. But seriously, cannot really judge him completely based on the lack of weapons and work with them. I would restructure Sanchez and go into next season with Sanchez and Simms to challenge the incumbent - Geno. Must add at least three weapons - ideally - Riley Cooper, Brandon Pettigrew and Sammy Watkins add them to Cumberland, Kerley, Hill and Nelson - could be fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 Did they account for two gift of god Type wins? Well we all know those were the two most improbable victories in NFL history. Totally never happens to any other team. And it only makes it worse because 2 plays are indicative of history that we all are accustomed to, which is that the Jets have routinely been the beneficiaries of the refs being in the tank for them game after game, season after season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BroadwayJoe12 Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 False. Sometimes pure stats over-analyze & over-think. At some point they need to look at the results of their statistical analysis and ask themselves if any season ended the way they're predicting it's going to. 7.3 was the mean wins for the Jets using DVOA on September 4th. But using DVOA also caused them to predict that no team in the NFL would finish with worse than a 6-10 record or better than an 11-5 record in 2013. Lowest prediction was Minnesota at 5.7 wins (6-10 record) and Denver with 10.7 wins (11-5). Literally, the stat model predicted that every team in the NFL would finish between 6-10 and 11-5. That the team with the best regular-season record would finish with only 5 more wins than the team with the worst record. That was their DVOA prediction, and even the writers on their own website know that was never going to happen. By the way, Scott Kacsmar from FootballOutsiders predicted the Jets would be 3-13. http://www.footballoutsiders.com/extra-points/2013/kacsmar-and-smiths-predict-2013-nfl-season. He links to his predictions at the top of paragraph 2. Then here they reference the DVOA-prediction article and the 11 writers predicted who would finish below their 2013 DVOA predictions and why. Of the 11 writers, 3 of them specifically predicted the Jets' DVOA numbers were the most likely to be overrated. As in they said their own website's DVOA prediction was faulty. Ben Muth from FootballOutsiders: "I just can't see the Gang Green winning more than six games; the only thing worse than the Jets wideouts is the Jets quarterback situation. If I was Rex Ryan I'd rather watch Clemson play too." Mike Ridley from FootballOutsiders (on why he felt the Jets were the most likely team to fall short of the website's DVOA win prediction): "Mark Sanchez, Geno Smith, Brady Quinn..." Another (Rob Weintraub) from FO also predicted the Jets were the most likely team to fall short of the computer model's DVOA win prediction. The last line in the article, he predicted the Jets to have the #1 pick in the 2014 draft (but only to be different because everyone else said Oakland would have the #1 pick and they'd take Clowney; still, it would seem that he felt the Jets would have the #2 overall pick at best). So these are FooballOutsiders.com's OWN AUTHORS acknowledging that not only are those numbers not what they thought each team's win total would actually be, but with 32 teams to single out and choose from, 3 out of 11 pinpointed the Jets as the most likely to fall short of the 7.3 wins their model predicted (and listed players as the reason). It means the authors thought that prediction was ridiculous based on the roster they headed into the season with. Then these same authors took a stab at which teams they felt the computer model underestimated win totals. Zero of them picked the Jets. You would have to search high & low & cherry-pick the outliers to find people who firmly predicted the Jets would win 7 games this season. You really do live for this stuff. I'm with Slats though, the furthest I'd ever get to compiling that, would be thinking about doing it, which is usually about where it ends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacked4JetsFB Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 Well we all know those were the two most improbable victories in NFL history. Totally never happens to any other team. And it only makes it worse because 2 plays are indicative of history that we all are accustomed to, which is that the Jets have routinely been the beneficiaries of the refs being in the tank for them game after game, season after season. Hey, I'm just impressed you can actually make a post that does not involve Sanchez. I did not think that possible. Congrats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.