It's a passing league! Part Deux

[HessStation]

Did you even read the article?

Several NFL execs, when assessing that situation, believe it could lead to Bradford’s departure, while team sources have indicated the organization remains very comfortable with Bradford and while “all options would be on the table” if St. Louis has the top pick, the likelihood of drafting a quarterback is more remote than most other scenarios. The dream scenario for the Rams would be other teams coveting that pick -- as the Skins did with St. Louis’ second-overall selection in 2012 -- and then offering a bounty to trade down and pick up a bunch of selections, able to fill multiple holes.

They're not going to cut him. Almost a 0 % chance of it.

Its a lot of speculation but I've heard his name come up more than once. If one of the big 3 are picked they could be looking to trade him. Better than Vick or Cousins.

[Jetsfan80]

Its a lot of speculation but I've heard his name come up more than once. If one of the big 3 are available they could be looking to trade him. Better than Vick or Cousins.

 

Teams just don't trade their franchise QB like that.  He is still their franchise QB, regardless of injuries, regardless of circumstances.  They're living or dying with him.  QB is not a position they're looking to change coming off a season where their defense and running game looked really good.  They want to see how the team does for a full season with that strong overall roster and a veteran QB running things.

 

My guess is they use a mid-rounder on a QB just in case.  They probably don't want to hand the reigns to Kellen Clemens if Bradford gets hurt again.  They'll want a guy with potential, because if Bradford DOES get hurt again, THEN he is probably done in St. Louis.

[HessStation]

Another interesting speculative article on Bradford.

http://ramblinfan.com/2014/02/06/mystery-sam-bradford-trade-value/

[HessStation]

Teams just don't trade their franchise QB like that. He is still their franchise QB, regardless of injuries, regardless of circumstances. They're living or dying with him. QB is not a position they're looking to change coming off a season where their defense and running game looked really good. They want to see how the team does for a full season with that strong overall roster and a veteran QB running things.

My guess is they use a mid-rounder on a QB just in case. They probably don't want to hand the reigns to Kellen Clemens if Bradford gets hurt again. They'll want a guy with potential, because if Bradford DOES get hurt again, THEN he is probably done in St. Louis.

Youre speculating but there are some cracks in the foundation. Read Clayton's tweet in the article. They have the second overall pick. Might be time for a change. no more outrageous than getting Vick or Cousins.

Somewhat similar to what happened in SD w Rivers and Brees.

http://ramblinfan.com/2014/02/06/mystery-sam-bradford-trade-value/

[Sperm Edwards]

I agree with this completely.

 

Lets upgrade the offensive talent, run Marty's system again, and see what happens.

 

Now, we all know that poor QB play can torpedo any system, so we have to hope that GENO or whoever the QB is will have to improve on the 65 QBR's we have been getting. If our QB play can get to say the mid to high 70's QBR, and cut the TO's, with this defense, should be a playoff team.

 

The one year Sanchez had a positive TD:INT ratio AND under 15 picks, we had a near top-10 offense both in terms of points scored (#13) and yards (#11).  And mind you, he still wasn't really any good, benefitting immensely from over a dozen easy interceptions that were flat-out dropped by the opposition that year (I forget exactly but I think the final # was 15 or 16.  I forget where the link is).  People have some memory of that season as though we had a bottom-ranked offense that year and speak of it in such terms.

 

So he still wasn't really what anyone would call good, and were barely outside having a top-10 offense.  What would our offense have been if he was actually above-average (even if only mildly so)?

 

Well if you ask some around here, it would have been no better or even worse because something-something-Wrecks-something-something is stuck in the stone age of offenses and therefore can't win a SB.

 

Yeah, meanwhile the 2010 Jets - with an infinitely worse QB - attempted a motherload more passes than the SB champs who somehow "get" today's style offense.  What a load of crap.  Our defense was good enough, our OL was good enough, our ST unit was good enough, our RBs were good and productive enough, and while our receiving corps wasn't incredible you could do plenty worse than 2009-2010 versions of Edwards, Keller, Cotchery, Holmes (2010 only for Holmes).  Our QB sucked and this required 100% mistake-free play from everyone else.  We didn't get it so we didn't get to the SB.  

 

Could our offense have been even better with that same talent?  Well duh, of course.  But no one was turning that offense into world-beaters without an above-average QB, and our GM not only bet on a bad one, he then doubled-down on that bet and in doing so eradicated any hope of landing one of the available options in the upcoming 2012 draft.  There was no markedly fixing Sanchez, there was no bringing anyone else in during that span, and we got further than we should have.  It is not a minor handicap.  

 

This past offseason a lot changed in the offensive/QB coaching.  Mornhinweg and David Lee are brought in and there's competition and what do we see in pre-season from the guy who stupid Wrecks couldn't develop? Pick 6, fumble, and on-field mindlessness that we expected to see from Geno who was truly learning a pro style offense.  

[Jetsfan80]

Youre speculating but there are some cracks in the foundation. Read Clayton's tweet in the article. They have the second overall pick. Might be time for a change. no more outrageous than getting Vick or Cousins.

Somewhat similar to what happened in SD w Rivers and Brees.

http://ramblinfan.com/2014/02/06/mystery-sam-bradford-trade-value/

 

They're far more likely to trade down like they did with the RG3 deal.  They've stockpiled talent nicely.  Off the RG3 deal they were able to get guys like Robert Quinn, Brockers and Janoris Jenkins on the D, and Zac Stacy and Tavon Austin on offense.  Not bad.

[Jetsfan80]

Other thing to consider:  The Rams owner recently bought 60 acres of land in LA and told the NFL about it.  Either they're moving or they're trying to gain leverage towards a new stadium deal (their current stadium is probably the worst in the NFL).  The last thing they want to do right now is shake things up at the QB position, at least not until they're in a fancy new staidum.

[HessStation]

They're far more likely to trade down like they did with the RG3 deal. They've stockpiled talent nicely. Off the RG3 deal they were able to get guys like Robert Quinn, Brockers and Janoris Jenkins on the D, and Zac Stacy and Tavon Austin on offense. Not bad.

They've done well drafting lately agreed, but doesn't mean they keep Brafford especially w the #2. That said either way I doubt they trade out having 2 and 13 already. Go read their message boards a lot of fans have given up on Bradford.

Might get interesting. They do have a solid roster outside of OL.

[Jetsfan80]

They've done well drafting lately agreed, but doesn't mean they keep Brafford especially w the #2. That said either way I doubt they trade out having 2 and 13 already. Go read their message boards a lot of fans have given up on Bradford.

Might get interesting. They do have a solid roster outside of OL.

 

The fans may have given up, but that doesn't meant the organization has.  Nor can they really afford to give up on him at the moment.  You don't pair a solid roster with a rookie QB when you already have a capable veteran.  The Seahawks did so, but that's because their alternative was Matt Flynn.  Bradford is not Matt Flynn.  We did it with Sanchez, but that's because we're an organization with dumb brains.

[HessStation]

Other thing to consider: The Rams owner recently bought 60 acres of land in LA and told the NFL about it. Either they're moving or they're trying to gain leverage towards a new stadium deal (their current stadium is probably the worst in the NFL). The last thing they want to do right now is shake things up at the QB position, at least not until they're in a fancy new staidum.

That could be a pro or con pending how y want to look at it.

[HessStation]

The fans may have given up, but that doesn't meant the organization has. Nor can they really afford to give up on him at the moment. You don't pair a solid roster with a rookie QB when you already have a capable veteran. The Seahawks did so, but that's because their alternative was Matt Flynn. Bradford is not Matt Flynn. We did it with Sanchez, but that's because we're an organization with dumb brains.

I believe he has a huge conteact but none of it is guaranteed. He's often injured coming off a knee injury. Easily cutable or traded to a desperate team in need of a QB w out a top 5 pick...

Obviously the FO isn't gonna show their hand one way or another. It only drops his value if they say right now, yeah he sux we want to trade him.

I think the speculative talks will only grow stronger as we get close to the draft.

[Jetsfan80]

I believe he has a huge conteact but none of it is guaranteed. He's often injured coming off a knee injury. Easily cutable or traded to a desperate team in need of a QB w out a top 5 pick...

Obviously the FO isn't gonna show their hand one way or another. It only drops his value if they say right now, yeah he sux we want to trade him.

I think the speculative talks will only grow stronger as we get close to the draft.

 

They'd be smart to keep things close to the vest, agreed.  If they can't find a trade-down partner for the # 2 pick, they could draft a QB there if they choose and trade Bradford for 2015 picks.

[SenorGato]

How many other superbowl-level QBs are there really (that came into the league since Rex was hired)?

 

We whiffed on Sanchez in '09 and the earliest the team would have even thought about drafting another is '11 (and that's still a stretch after on-paper improvement plus coming so close to a SB several weeks earlier).  I was for it, but I never liked him as a QB, plus I was in the minority and no one with the team is asking individual fans if they think the QB should stay or go.  

 

Say they didn't like him after his rookie season.  Who were they going to draft? 

 

2010 draft we had access to Tim Tebow, Jimmy Clausen, Colt McCoy, Mike Kafka, John Skelton, and a half dozen other guys I never heard of.

 

What we'd have had to use to get other QBs here in 2011 and beyond:

 

2011 round 1: Kaepernick

2011 round 1: Dalton

 

(keep in mind, it would have been unlikely for anyone to use our round 1 pick on a QB after #5 pick Sanchez's 2nd season)

 

2012 round 2: Brock Osweiler (assuming he's actually any good)

2012 round 2 or round 3 if we traded up a handful of slots: Russell Wilson

2012 round 3: Nick Foles

2012 round 3: Kirk Cousins (Tannenbaum traded our 4th rounder away for Tebow)

Who else am I missing? Trading a couple of first round picks and more to move up high enough to draft Tannehill from #3 to #7 in 2012?

 

(Again, keep in mind how unlikely drafting of any of the first 4 were after Tannenbaum's Sanchez extension, when Tannenbaum was the one in charge of the draft.)

 

2013 round 2 plus 2014 round 2 plus more (to outbid KC): Alex Smith

2013 ? For all we know Geno's going to end up being the best QB in the class, though Glennon clearly had the best start.

 

Mixed in there you have to weed through and not sign all the others who vary from meh to garbage:

 

Henne, Campbell, Fitzpatrick, Manuel, Glennon, Palmer, Weeden, Flynn, Freeman, Orton, Hasselbeck, Wallace, McCoy, Clemens, Moore... 

 

 

We didn't have access to most of the good (or great) QBs, and those we did have a shot at were punted away when Tannenbaum extended Sanchez, in large part to clear his precious 2012 cap room.  Hey, we cleared up enough room to pick up Landry for 1 season, and hey he went to the pro bowl! So what if it meant we passed up on as many as 4 potential future QBs? No one signs a healthy, young QB to a mega-deal extension and then burns a 2nd-3rd round pick on a QB.  No one.  What needed to happen was not extending him in the first place.

 

But it's easier and lazier and more convenient to say Wrecks doesn't care about offense.

 

Not that it matters for many reasons but Ryan Mallett would have worked for me in 2011. 

[SenorGato]

Speaking of the Rams - I like FA OG Roger Saffold. 

[Sperm Edwards]

Not that it matters for many reasons but Ryan Mallett would have worked for me in 2011. 

 

How would that have happened?

 

Mallett was drafted #74.  We had picks at #30 (Wilkerson) and #94 (Ellis).  Too high for our 3rd round pick and we didn't have a 2nd round pick (#61 went to SD for Cromartie).

 

On paper we couldn't have traded up enough unless we dipped into the following season's picks.  Trading our 3rd plus all the rest of our picks from that draft wouldn't have been enough to trade up enough to draft Mallett. 

 

Coming off an AFCCG loss (a close one), and an on-paper improvement from Sanchez's year 1 to year 2? What do you think were the odds of a GM, who just traded up to #5 to draft him the prior year, putting together a package like that? I say zero.

 

But these are "semantics" I suppose.

[SenorGato]

How would that have happened?

 

 

 

Well APPARENTLY it couldn't happen.

 

Still annoyed the Patriots got him even if he hasn't done anything yet.

 

We're on the same page...I was making the "where the **** is this QB you guys keep imagining is/was available to supplant Sanchez" posts in 2011 and 2012. There was Peyton Manning and that ends it...He hedged and picked the thin air to not overexpose that Pennington-esque arm of his. 

[Sperm Edwards]

 

 

Well APPARENTLY it couldn't happen.

 

Still annoyed the Patriots got him even if he hasn't done anything yet.

 

We're on the same page...I was making the "where the **** is this QB you guys keep imagining is/was available to supplant Sanchez" posts in 2011 and 2012. There was Peyton Manning and that ends it...He hedged and picked the thin air to not overexpose that Pennington-esque arm of his. 

 

There could have been in 2012 if Tannenbaum wasn't so preoccupied with Sanchez's ego plus creating enough room to fit LaRon Landry on a 1-year deal.

[LionelRichie]

 

Mixed in there you have to weed through and not sign all the others who vary from meh to garbage:

 

Henne, Campbell, Fitzpatrick, Manuel, Glennon, Palmer, Weeden, Flynn, Freeman, Orton, Hasselbeck, Wallace, McCoy, Clemens, Moore... 

 

 

We didn't have access to most of the good (or great) QBs, and those we did have a shot at were punted away when Tannenbaum extended Sanchez, in large part to clear his precious 2012 cap room.

 

But it's easier and lazier and more convenient to say Wrecks doesn't care about offense.

 

Good post.  

 

My issue with Rex and the QB position has always been not having viable competition for Sanchez year in and year out.    Brunnell was a total joke and more of a baby-sitter than threat to actually start.   

 

Tannenbaum actually signed the right guy in 2012 - Drew Stanton.    He is arguably as good or better than anyone on your list and probably would have taken over for Sanchez in 2012.   

 

I think there is no way that Idzik makes the same mistake as Tanny/Rex wrt QB.    I guarantee there will be competition at QB this season.   JoeWillie's aside, there is no way the Jets get Bridgewater or Manziel so realistically they are left with the same sh*t ridden list you posted, Cousins, Simms, possibly Gabbert or a mid-rd draft pick - Garrappolo, Smith,  murray?   

 

Who do you think Idzik brings in to compete with Geno?   

[Sperm Edwards]

Good post.  

 

My issue with Rex and the QB position has always been not having viable competition for Sanchez year in and year out.    Brunnell was a total joke and more of a baby-sitter than threat to actually start.   

 

Tannenbaum actually signed the right guy in 2012 - Drew Stanton.    He is arguably as good or better than anyone on your list and probably would have taken over for Sanchez in 2012.   

 

I think there is no way that Idzik makes the same mistake as Tanny/Rex wrt QB.    I guarantee there will be competition at QB this season.   JoeWillie's aside, there is no way the Jets get Bridgewater or Manziel so realistically they are left with the same sh*t ridden list you posted, Cousins, Simms, possibly Gabbert or a mid-rd draft pick - Garrappolo, Smith,  murray?   

 

Who do you think Idzik brings in to compete with Geno?   

 

Hard to say because Idzik does seem to take note of compensatory picks.  It shouldn't be the end-all motivator behind who one signs and who one doesn't, but as I mentioned a minute ago in another thread, you don't want to find out afterwards that you'd have ended up with a high compensatory pick if you didn't sign some 1-year stop-gap camp fodder guy.  So with that said, and ignoring true UFAs vs UFAs who got cut:

 

 

 

Matt Cassel

 

Ugh.  He looked so awful in KC in 2012.  Meanwhile he had a productive year in NE (back in 2008) and his 2nd year in KC he played well enough to make the pro bowl (no, not first string but his #s were very good).  Since then I don't know what happened to him but there wasn't a lot going right for KC from 2011-2012 except for Jamal Charles individually in 2012.  Not the most accurate QB, to say the least.  He was easily Minnesota's best QB last year but that isn't saying much.  Still, he technically could start the whole season, and that's what you're after if you don't want your competition to be a complete farce. 

 

Josh McCown

 

Has hinted he might not want to play in 2013, suggesting he might pull a Garrard if he doesn't get the starting job.  Looked really good last year, but he had some serious help from his receivers making acrobatic catches.  I still don't think the receivers make the QB, but only a fool would think they didn't make his job easier.  On the Jets, he's not going to have a stud youngster opposite a future HOFer still very much in his prime.  Even Bennett is probably a better receiver than any TE we have.  But he did look good and having success in Chicago, clearly the cold weather isn't going to be his Achilles.

 

Michael Vick

 

You asked for my opinion as to who is likely not who I like.  And he's going to be right up there.  A possibility for the 2 reasons.  1. Started for Mornhinweg for years.  2. There's already a rumor the Jets (and Bucs) will show interest.  Also he's the type that you could give the starting job to week 1 and then ease Geno in after Vick gets injured (which WILL happen).  I still hate this idea because I hate Vick and will root for him to get injured on every play.  I don't mean a little twisted ankle or cracked rib. I'm talking about the kind of gross compound leg fracture injury that Leon had.  Leon I liked (who didn't?) and was sick about it when that happened to him.  Vick I would replay it in slow motion whenever I'm feeling sad and it would cheer me up.  Filthy scumbag.  But it's possible we bring him in.

 

Shaun Hill

 

Tall passer, experienced, cheap, looked damn good against us in pre-season.  Yes, it was pre-season, but I'm sure (or I like to think) they took notice of how every pass seemed to hit his man in the numbers and/or in stride.  It was ridiculous.  I was like, where did this come from (and it had little to do with a poor pass defense; dead-on accuracy is dead-on accuracy)? Yeah, he still probably sucks, but I'd bring him in just because I was impressed with the performance.  Just turned 34 so he's not old but he's young enough to start for a few years if the light suddenly goes on a la Rich Gannon (even if that light was turned on using a dimmer switch).

 

 

Others I think are possible but unlikely (now watch us sign 2 of them, lol):

 

Mark Sanchez - lip service aside, I think they realize the distraction and controversy that would be created if it's neck & neck and they give the job to Geno again.  Even more so if Geno struggles out of the gate. 

 

Tarvaris Jackson - was with Seattle in 2011 and wasn't the worst thing of all time.  Possible, but I see him as a guy a team signs specifically to be a backup not someone to seriously compete for the starting job.

 

David Garrard - think it's a long shot for Idzik to bet on him again, but he was with the team for half the season.  But would the team really consider giving Garrard a shot at the starting job? I think it's unlikely.  But if they do bring him back it's because they really liked what they saw of him in practices.

 

Chad Henne - I don't think it's realistic. He just sucks. Might as well re-sign Sanchez for the same money. Competition should be with someone who the Jets really might hand the job to for the season and I don't see how Henne qualifies.  Nor do I think he fits anyway.  Oh yeah, and he's a mental pussy like Sanchez.

[Larz]

 

 

Shaun Hill

 

Tall passer, experienced, cheap, looked damn good against us in pre-season.  Yes, it was pre-season, but I'm sure (or I like to think) they took notice of how every pass seemed to hit his man in the numbers and/or in stride.  It was ridiculous.  I was like, where did this come from (and it had little to do with a poor pass defense; dead-on accuracy is dead-on accuracy)? Yeah, he still probably sucks, but I'd bring him in just because I was impressed with the performance.  Just turned 34 so he's not old but he's young enough to start for a few years if the light suddenly goes on a la Rich Gannon (even if that light was turned on using a dimmer switch).

 

 

 

me likey hill

[Bleedin Green]

Chad Henne - I don't think it's realistic. He just sucks. Might as well re-sign Sanchez for the same money. Competition should be with someone who the Jets really might hand the job to for the season and I don't see how Henne qualifies.  Nor do I think he fits anyway.  Oh yeah, and he's a mental pussy like Sanchez.

you're after if you don't want your competition to be a complete farce. 

 

The funny thing is the same reasons you feel that Henne is unrealistic are the ones why I feel like he's a real possibility for them to sign.  He's essential just a copy of Sanchez, but the difference is he doesn't come along with all of that bullsh*t melodrama that would come with having Sanchez on the roster.  Sad to say, the Jets may very well consider that to be good enough as an option.

[LionelRichie]

Shaun Hill

 

Tall passer, experienced, cheap, looked damn good against us in pre-season.  Yes, it was pre-season, but I'm sure (or I like to think) they took notice of how every pass seemed to hit his man in the numbers and/or in stride.  It was ridiculous.  I was like, where did this come from (and it had little to do with a poor pass defense; dead-on accuracy is dead-on accuracy)? Yeah, he still probably sucks, but I'd bring him in just because I was impressed with the performance.  Just turned 34 so he's not old but he's young enough to start for a few years if the light suddenly goes on a la Rich Gannon (even if that light was turned on using a dimmer switch).

 

 

Hill is probably the best of the bunch but I think the Idzik / Ryan / MM are committed to a more mobile QB.  

 

I am sure it'll be an unpopular opinion but the guy I'd like to see is Blaine Gabbert - assuming he's cut in JAX and can be signed relatively cheap.    He's still only 24 years old and has all of the physical tools.   Gabbert also fits with the 'preseason' theory as he lit up the Jets and would really benefit from working with MM and Lee.  

[Sperm Edwards]

Hill is probably the best of the bunch but I think the Idzik / Ryan / MM are committed to a more mobile QB.  

 

I am sure it'll be an unpopular opinion but the guy I'd like to see is Blaine Gabbert - assuming he's cut in JAX and can be signed relatively cheap.    He's still only 24 years old and has all of the physical tools.   Gabbert also fits with the 'preseason' theory as he lit up the Jets and would really benefit from working with MM and Lee.  

 

I have an issue with a QB whose name is Blaine.  Maybe it's just me.

[joewillie78]

I have an issue with a QB whose name is Blaine.  Maybe it's just me.

Kevin Kolb?

[Bugg]

Would emphasize that the underlying point to this thread, the formerly 300 pound guy in a black vest in the room, is that the head coach of the Jets contracts out the offense other than asking they not commit turnovers. Granted no successful head coach is micromanaging everything.You have to delegate.  When everything is a priority nothing gets accomplished. But cannot think of any good or even decent head coach that so divorced himself from the offense. In fact  NFL history is filled with examples of HCs with defensive backgrounds who still gave their offense and the OC direction, from Landry to Parcells, Bellicheat and even Pete Carroll. Ryan's template is his dad, and that's ultimately failure.

[sourceworx]

I have an issue with a QB whose name is Blaine.  Maybe it's just me.

 

 

Bunch of slack-jawed faggots around here.....

 

 

[Sperm Edwards]

Kevin Kolb?

 

Iffy.

[HessStation]

I have an issue with a QB whose name is Blaine. Maybe it's just me.

same reasoning for my predictions of Blake Bortles future failures. If they only named him James.

[Sperm Edwards]

same reasoning for my predictions of Blake Bortles future failures. If they only named him James.

 

Bortles & James?

[HessStation]

Bortles & James?

Naming your kid Blake is cruel.

[Jetsfan80]

same reasoning for my predictions of Blake Bortles future failures. If they only named him James.

Naming your kid Blake is cruel.

 

 

 

 

Blake is on George's "list".  lulz.

[Matt39]

Poor Todd

[Jetsfan80]

Poor Todd

 

At least we've had a Vinny.  Hmm.  Let's look back at our QB's names and see if it correlates:

 

 

Joe:  Great name, HOF QB

 

Richard (Todd):  Debateable because "Todd" is his last name.  Richard can be "Dick" which is a strong name.  Todd, however, sucked.

 

Ken:  My name.  I'd say its a tweener.  And so was Ken.  Solid career but because we passed over a "Dan" for him, he gets overlooked.

 

Browning:  NOT A REAL NAME.  SUCKED.

 

Boomer:  Good name.  Good QB.

 

Vinny:  Great name.  Pretty solid career.

 

Chad:  Homo American Eagle male model name.  Homo QB.

 

Kellen:  Weak name.  Weak QB.

 

Brett:  Not bad.  Best QB play we've gotten since Namath.

 

Mark:  Clearly this name retroactively sucks.

 

Geno aka Eugene:  Kind of a weird name.  Jury's still out.

[BroadwayJoe12]

Bortles & James?

 

[Matt39]

At least we've had a Vinny.  Hmm.  Let's look back at our QB's names and see if it correlates:

 

 

Joe:  Great name, HOF QB

 

Richard (Todd):  Debateable because "Todd" is his last name.  Richard can be "Dick" which is a strong name.  Todd, however, sucked.

 

Ken:  My name.  I'd say its a tweener.  And so was Ken.  Solid career but because we passed over a "Dan" for him, he gets overlooked.

 

Browning:  NOT A REAL NAME.  SUCKED.

 

Boomer:  Good name.  Good QB.

 

Vinny:  Great name.  Pretty solid career.

 

Chad:  Homo American Eagle male model name.  Homo QB.

 

Kellen:  Weak name.  Weak QB.

 

Brett:  Not bad.  Best QB play we've gotten since Namath.

 

Mark:  Clearly this name retroactively sucks.

 

Geno aka Eugene:  Kind of a weird name.  Jury's still out.

 

Cant say I disagree with any of this.