Ryan Fitzpatrick: MERGED

[Rangers9]

15 minutes ago, slats said:

Did he sign a contract to be the starter? If so, the Jets should pay him what Houston paid him. 

He won the job in training camp. He was stuck on a backup deal. A good reason not to do that again. 

[Big Blocker]

20 minutes ago, Jetsplayer21 said:

Lol.. Is it that time of the month little blocker? It's useless arguing with a fitz lover.. It's amazing how stupid The fitz lovers are.. Can't see why fitz did decent last yr.. Or cant comprehend most qbs don't come out of college and light it up in yr one and two.. Especially those not picked top of the draft, that had half the Weapons fitz had.. Marty moron instead of chan gailey.. And try to argue fitz didn't lay a huge egg playing absolutely horrible in the biggest game jets had in a few yrs.. But still, I'm for bringing him back because petty isn't ready for #2.. But jets would be stupid to overpay for a guy nobody else wants.. That is the point.. 

You sure do like to whine, and not add anything to the conversation.

[Rangers9]

According to some of you brain surgeons anyone could have won 10 games with last year's team because we had favorable weather and a JV schedule. So we might as well sign Dolly then. It would be a heck of a lot more fun than with Geno or Fitz. 

[slats]

6 minutes ago, Rangers9 said:

He won the job in training camp. He was stuck on a backup deal. A good reason not to do that again. 

Oh, because you felt the need to correct me when I said he'd only been offered a contract to start one other time in his entire career. That sorta threw me off. So I guess I was right, then? 

[slats]

37 minutes ago, Rangers9 said:

 105 starts. But maybe all in great weather. So they don't count. I guess we can say then that Marino was lucky because he played in Miami. Nobody is saying the guy is great. The guy is experienced and good which is good enough for the 2016 Jets to make a run at the playoffs. He is the best available Qb and rated the no. 1 available free agent still on the market.  Of course some of our wonderful fans say we're going to lose anyways.

Lol, wow. The #1 NFL free agent still available on the first day of summer? Holy mackerel! He should totally frame that certificate and put it on the shelf next to his participation trophies. 

[Rangers9]

Just now, slats said:

Oh, because you felt the need to correct me when I said he'd only been offered a contract to start one other time in his entire career. That sorta threw me off. So I guess I was right, then? 

I mixed up years, my mistake. He signed the 2 year backup deal in 2014 and then won the job in training camp. So why is that a negative on Fitz. He outplayed his contract both years. He doesn't want to sign a multiyear deal again that ties him up as a backup. 

[sourceworx]

13 hours ago, PatsFanTX said:

I lived upstate NY for 3 years, absolutely loved it.

Met some of the dumbest people in my lifetime up there.

Some of them lived upstate.  The rest live in the state you're in now.

[ylekram]

3 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Auto correct. I know what a straw man argument is.

I didn't say or suggest they didn't know how to manage it. Nor did I say half the things you're ascribing to me.

You like putting words into peoples' mouths and then arguing against them. I suppose it makes it easier to frame an argument, since you do it constantly. For something more compelling, try sticking with my own words instead of repeatedly changing them with inaccurate paraphrases designed to exaggerate and distort. 

The last paragraph is otherwise hilarious. You blankety assigned Fitzpatrick 10 wins just before, but the last loss, in contrast, is a team loss. Thank you for proving my point. 

 

2 hours ago, Warfish said:

I'll take your word on that.

It never ceases to be a source of mirth to me how often people say over-the-top things, then when called on it attempt to claim "I didn't say that, hurfabluf!"  

I have no need to create anything for me to expose the laughable nature of your braggadocio over your claimed cap and contract management skills. 

Once again, a lack of understanding as to what words mean.  There is no hypocricy here.  The proper word for what you mean would be "contradictory", but that's not the case either:

Ryan Fitzpatrick won 10 games, as in he started and played as the QB in ten games and stats sites credit him as being 10-5 last year.  Only the QB is given a "record" like a pitcher by statistics sites.  This statement does not, however, imply anything but the fact that he was the credited starting QB for 10 wins in 2015.  Any implication that it limits overall credit (or blame) to ONLY Fitzpatrick exclusively is purely in your mind, an agenda-driven creation intended to attempt to paint Fitz as being somehow given more credit than warranted (as you see it).  if one wished to give Fitz all the credit, they would write "Fitz alone won 10 games", which clearly would delineate that Fitrz was being the credit to the exclusion of other contributors.

My own statements on Fitz have been very, very clear: he is (and was) a generally average, journeyman, functional QB last year, who had a very good year statistically (especially in turnovers), and materially contributed to our 10 wins (and to our 6 loses as well).  His limitations are obvious to any objective observer.  Given our poor starting point at QB prior (the worst QB play in the NFL two years running in 2013 and 2014), average-level play looked like a hell of an upgrade.

As to the last game, I continue to stand by what I've said since the moment the game ended, it remains one of the best examples of a "total team loss" as I've ever witnessed.  As Fitz was part of the aforementioned "team" portion, and a key part at that, he takes his due amount of criticism and blame for the loss.  At no point would or have I ever attempted to say he (Fitz) bore no responsibility of blame fo rthe loss.  I've simply said the truth, the loss is not "all on Fitz" as the narrative here amongst a certain subset seems to be.

one of you posters are losing this argument, badly.one is dominating and the other needs to re-group

[nyjunc]

2 hours ago, Warfish said:

I'll take your word on that.

It never ceases to be a source of mirth to me how often people say over-the-top things, then when called on it attempt to claim "I didn't say that, hurfabluf!"  

I have no need to create anything for me to expose the laughable nature of your braggadocio over your claimed cap and contract management skills. 

Once again, a lack of understanding as to what words mean.  There is no hypocricy here.  The proper word for what you mean would be "contradictory", but that's not the case either:

Ryan Fitzpatrick won 10 games, as in he started and played as the QB in ten games and stats sites credit him as being 10-5 last year.  Only the QB is given a "record" like a pitcher by statistics sites.  This statement does not, however, imply anything but the fact that he was the credited starting QB for 10 wins in 2015.  Any implication that it limits overall credit (or blame) to ONLY Fitzpatrick exclusively is purely in your mind, an agenda-driven creation intended to attempt to paint Fitz as being somehow given more credit than warranted (as you see it).  if one wished to give Fitz all the credit, they would write "Fitz alone won 10 games", which clearly would delineate that Fitrz was being the credit to the exclusion of other contributors.

My own statements on Fitz have been very, very clear: he is (and was) a generally average, journeyman, functional QB last year, who had a very good year statistically (especially in turnovers), and materially contributed to our 10 wins (and to our 6 loses as well).  His limitations are obvious to any objective observer.  Given our poor starting point at QB prior (the worst QB play in the NFL two years running in 2013 and 2014), average-level play looked like a hell of an upgrade.

As to the last game, I continue to stand by what I've said since the moment the game ended, it remains one of the best examples of a "total team loss" as I've ever witnessed.  As Fitz was part of the aforementioned "team" portion, and a key part at that, he takes his due amount of criticism and blame for the loss.  At no point would or have I ever attempted to say he (Fitz) bore no responsibility of blame fo rthe loss.  I've simply said the truth, the loss is not "all on Fitz" as the narrative here amongst a certain subset seems to be.

he started 16 games so how could his record be 10-5?

[Matt39]

3 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

he started 16 games so how could his record be 10-5?

Raider game he got hurt on the first possession.

[cant wait]

2 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

he started 16 games so how could his record be 10-5?

Because Fitz running scared, sliding headfirst and knocking himself out of the game is geno smith's fault 

[Rangers9]

7 minutes ago, cant wait said:

Because Fitz running scared, sliding headfirst and knocking himself out of the game is geno smith's fault 

I know it's like talking to a wall but even if you don't like Fitz as a player why "running scared." I know you're data mining for negatives only. And probably you're referring to that video of Fitz looking like a mad man running from defenders who were basically trying to destroy him. I thought it was cool. Why so much hatred for a player. 

[cant wait]

2 minutes ago, Rangers9 said:

I know it's like talking to a wall but even if you don't like Fitz as a player why "running scared." I know you're data mining for negatives only. And probably you're referring to that video of Fitz looking like a mad man running from defenders who were basically trying to destroy him. I thought it was cool. Why so much hatred for a player. 

Literally everything you write is an excuse for ryan fitzpatrick. why he can't win a big game, why he can't get a league average NFL contract, now it's "he looks cool" when he takes off running prematurely, slides headfirst and breaks his thumb. you seem like a nice guy but your love for fitz keeps you from seeing things objectively 

[Warfish]

28 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

he started 16 games so how could his record be 10-5?

Quite right, actually.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/F/FitzRy00.htm

My preferred source does indeed list Fitz as 10-6, and he does get the w/l based on his having started under the QBrec stat.

[nyjunc]

1 hour ago, Matt39 said:

Raider game he got hurt on the first possession.

but he started it so he gets credit for it, that is the way the official W-L records are counted.

[Matt39]

16 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

but he started it so he gets credit for it, that is the way the official W-L records are counted.

right, but there's no reason when discussing his performance last year to count the Raider game as a loss.

[nyjunc]

1 minute ago, Matt39 said:

right, but there's no reason when discussing his performance last year to count the Raider game as a loss.

if he's going to post official #s you have to post the correct #s.  he could at least mention it.  In my Mark sanchez discussions Mark came into a 7-7 tie and led Philly to a win 2 years ago yet no one on here wants to give him credit for the win.  can't have it both ways.

[Sperm Edwards]

4 hours ago, Warfish said:

I'll take your word on that.

Take my word or just click the simple link. Either way.

Quote

It never ceases to be a source of mirth to me how often people say over-the-top things, then when called on it attempt to claim "I didn't say that, hurfabluf!"  

Well, I didn’t say the things you are ascribing to me.  It would be about the same as calling you a Fitz-lover at every opportunity. When you restate what other people say, with the intention of changing the meaning, you get it wrong.

Quote

I have no need to create anything for me to expose the laughable nature of your braggadocio over your claimed cap and contract management skills. 

You like to cherry-pick and decide for other people what they really mean. I never claimed to be any such thing. The cap’s basic nuances are not difficult to comprehend, no matter how many times you may claim such amounts to braggadocio. There are a number of people here who can look at a signing bonus and see that it spreads over the life of a deal, who can refer to the hours of work others have done to aggregate them in one place, and see what happens when salaries are added and subtracted, when bonuses are spread, and over how many years they get spread. Repeatedly insinuating concepts are harder than they are doesn’t make them so. 

Quote

Once again, a lack of understanding as to what words mean.  There is no hypocricy here.  The proper word for what you mean would be "contradictory", but that's not the case either:

Wrong again. The appropriate word is hypocrisy. You like to credit him for wins, but when they’re losses you like to spread the blame to others. Correcting people who blame him for a loss while correcting no one who credits him for a win: that is hypocrisy.

An example of contradictory would be claiming that a QB is worth a certain amount of team resources to start for them, because one feels he gives us the best chance to win, while also inadvertently acknowledging it will ultimately be a waste of resources, since paying him to be the starting QB won't cause us to get to or win a superbowl.

Quote

Ryan Fitzpatrick won 10 games, as in he started and played as the QB in ten games and stats sites credit him as being 10-5 last year.  Only the QB is given a "record" like a pitcher by statistics sites.  This statement does not, however, imply anything but the fact that he was the credited starting QB for 10 wins in 2015.  Any implication that it limits overall credit (or blame) to ONLY Fitzpatrick exclusively is purely in your mind, an agenda-driven creation intended to attempt to paint Fitz as being somehow given more credit than warranted (as you see it).  if one wished to give Fitz all the credit, they would write "Fitz alone won 10 games", which clearly would delineate that Fitrz was being the credit to the exclusion of other contributors.

My own statements on Fitz have been very, very clear: he is (and was) a generally average, journeyman, functional QB last year, who had a very good year statistically (especially in turnovers), and materially contributed to our 10 wins (and to our 6 loses as well).  His limitations are obvious to any objective observer.  Given our poor starting point at QB prior (the worst QB play in the NFL two years running in 2013 and 2014), average-level play looked like a hell of an upgrade.

As to the last game, I continue to stand by what I've said since the moment the game ended, it remains one of the best examples of a "total team loss" as I've ever witnessed.  As Fitz was part of the aforementioned "team" portion, and a key part at that, he takes his due amount of criticism and blame for the loss.  At no point would or have I ever attempted to say he (Fitz) bore no responsibility of blame fo rthe loss.  I've simply said the truth, the loss is not "all on Fitz" as the narrative here amongst a certain subset seems to be.

The difference, of course, is that you routinely make no such painstaking rationalizations to spread credit for wins. Just like Geno Smith didn’t “win” 8 games as a rookie, even if the team won 8 games with him as its QB. 

If someone says he lost the Buffalo game (or any other), neither does that literally mean he - and he alone - lost the game, just like with wins. But inferred credit or blame for games' outcomes only elicits a reaction from some when it comes in one direction. 

[Jetsfan80]

5 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

The difference, of course, is that you routinely make no such painstaking rationalizations to spread credit for wins. Just like Geno Smith didn’t “win” 8 games as a rookie, even if the team won 8 games with him as its QB. 

 

Probably because it's been proven time and again that the 2013 Jets were one of the worst 8-8 teams in NFL history.  Both standard and advanced metrics show that to be true. 

Even if you want to penalize the 2015 Jets for a weak schedule, we'd probably have been about 8-8 at worst with a tougher schedule.  The 2013 Jets, against any schedule, should have been about a 5-win team.  And Geno wasn't even a top reason for any success we had that season.  The Atlanta game and his meaningless Week 17 performance were the only 2 times he was a top reason we won that year. 

The 2015 Jets, meanwhile, were carried by the passing game. 

[Rangers9]

18 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Probably because it's been proven time and again that the 2013 Jets were one of the worst 8-8 teams in NFL history.  Both standard and advanced metrics show that to be true. 

Even if you want to penalize the 2015 Jets for a weak schedule, we'd probably have been about 8-8 at worst with a tougher schedule.  The 2013 Jets, against any schedule, should have been about a 5-win team.  And Geno wasn't even a top reason for any success we had that season.  The Atlanta game and his meaningless Week 17 performance were the only 2 times he was a top reason we won that year. 

The 2015 Jets, meanwhile, were carried by the passing game. 

I think we were an 8-8 in 2013, a 4-12 in 2014 and a 10-6 in 2015. Some seasons teams win close games and are good but get the breaks. Like a ball bounces off of someone's head right into the arms of the receiver for the winning score. And that is one of the reasons football is such a fun sport. Way too much over analysis. Like Parcells said "you are what your record says you are." I'm not a fan of the No Fun League. 

[Warfish]

7 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Take my word or just click the simple link. Either way.

That a strong statement, man.

7 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

When you restate what other people say, with the intention of changing the meaning, you get it wrong.

I interpret what people say using the words they use.  It most certainly isn't my fault they sometimes don't understand or like what their words actually mean.

7 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Repeatedly insinuating concepts are harder than they are doesn’t make them so. 

As opposed to repeatedly claiming you understand the cap and how it is managed as well or better than professional General managers.  

Because all it is is "addition and subtraction".

7 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Wrong again. The appropriate word is hypocrisy.

No, it's it.  Which you'd know if you understood what the word means, Alanis.  Doncha think?

7 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

You like to credit him for wins

Let me remind you, since you're now ignoring the very posts you quote:

"Any implication that it limits overall credit (or blame) to ONLY Fitzpatrick exclusively is purely in your mind".

If you don't like it that QB's are given a record like MLB pitchers, take it up with the Stats folks.  I've said repeatedly that wins/losses are a team statistic.  

7 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

but when they’re losses you like to spread the blame to others.

I blame whomever warrants being blamed.  In the case of the final game (the only game where I have given specific credit/blame for in 2015), the blame lies with the entire team.  You, on the other hand, feel it lies only and specifically with Fitz.  

7 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Correcting people who blame him for a loss while correcting no one who credits him for a win: that is hypocrisy.

You really don't understand what hypocrisy means, do you.  

Let me help you:  From Miriam-Webster:  

1. a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelingshypocrite

 adjective

In no way am I 'acting in contradiction to my stated beliefs or feelings'.  I am completely and utterly consistent on this topic.  Wins/Losses are a stat for QB's (as per the cited reference).  That's a fact.  Credit for wins/loses in opinion-based written posting is purely at the discretion of the writer, but in my view, the final game of the season was the best example of a "total team loss" as I have seen in years.  In casual conversation, stating "Joe won ten games last year" does not mean he ALONE won ten games.  That's a laughable conclusion to draw from common parlance.  

Exactly the kind of poor analysis I'd expect when someone doesn't understand what hypocrite means.

7 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

An example of contradictory would be claiming that a QB is worth a certain amount of team resources to start for them, because one feels he gives us the best chance to win, while also inadvertently acknowledging it will ultimately be a waste of resources, since paying him to be the starting QB won't cause us to get to or win a superbowl.

Such an opinion is only inconsistent if the only goal or positive that can be gained from a season of NFL football is a Title.

Once again, that's rather poor analysis.  Incremental gains can and are available, and there are benefits that could be gained that would not pay their full dividends till future seasons (like properly trained and mentored young QB's, or the benefits of winning 10 games for a second season and the effect that could have on potential free agents, etc).

So no, that's not a contradiction.

7 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Just like Geno Smith didn’t “win” 8 games as a rookie, even if the team won 8 games with him as its QB.

Of course he won 8 games.  It's right there in the record books.  He won 4 the following year.  

How much individual credit he deserves for those wins is certainly up for debate.

7 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

If someone says he lost the Buffalo game (or any other), neither does that literally mean he - and he alone - lost the game, just like with wins.

Except for the many many times they have said exactly that, of course, right?  If you haven't noticed a number of our posters writing "it was all Fitz", I suggest you pay more attention.

7 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

But inferred credit or blame for games' outcomes only elicits a reaction from some when it comes in one direction. 

If that were true, you wouldn't be here "reacting" to what you see as it going in only one direction, now would it?

I might suggest you slow down and attempt to understand a bit better the things you're "reacting" to.  The phantom "hypocrisy" you appear to be so intellectually molested by is not here.

 

[Sperm Edwards]

1 minute ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Probably because it's been proven time and again that the 2013 Jets were one of the worst 8-8 teams in NFL history.  Both standard and advanced metrics show that to be true. 

Even if you want to penalize the 2015 Jets for a weak schedule, we'd probably have been about 8-8 at worst with a tougher schedule.  The 2013 Jets, against any schedule, should have been about a 5-win team. 

Maybe. Maybe we would have won 9 games. Maybe we would have only won 6. The problem is our record against tough opponents on the schedule was no better with Fitz than it was with freaking Geno, bad as he was, and decidedly worse than it was with Sanchez. Fitz played well in 1 of the losses, badly in 4, and got himself knocked out of another that we'd likely have still lost with that defensive performance.

I don't think it automatically translates to only 2 fewer wins "at worst" if we had 5-7 tough games on the schedule instead of only 1-2 (where we were winless anyway). All we have is someone who has faced an impossibly lucky percentage of easy/easier opponents over the past few years, along with his teams posting an almost impossibly futile record against opponents that score an nfl average number of points in a game, despite often playing with talented receivers. 

[Jetsfan80]

29 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Maybe. Maybe we would have won 9 games. Maybe we would have only won 6. The problem is our record against tough opponents on the schedule was no better with Fitz than it was with freaking Geno, bad as he was, and decidedly worse than it was with Sanchez. Fitz played well in 1 of the losses, badly in 4, and got himself knocked out of another that we'd likely have still lost with that defensive performance.

I don't think it automatically translates to only 2 fewer wins "at worst" if we had 5-7 tough games on the schedule instead of only 1-2 (where we were winless anyway). All we have is someone who has faced an impossibly lucky percentage of easy/easier opponents over the past few years, along with his teams posting an almost impossibly futile record against opponents that score an nfl average number of points in a game, despite often playing with talented receivers. 

I just think the schedule argument is overstated.  All games in the NFL tend to be hard to win.  Teams win games they shouldn't all the time, and let games they should win slip away.  The 2015 Jets were + 73 in the scoring margin.  That's the mark of a good team with at least a decent QB.  The 2013 Jets were outscored by 97 points.  That's the sign of a bad team with a bad QB.  The '13 Jets were just not even in the same category as the '15 Jets.  There's no comparison whatsoever to be made between those 2 teams. 

Yes the Jets added a lot of talent before that '15 season.  But you're lying to yourself if you think Fitz himself wasn't a big positive in that talent haul from the prior offseason.

You have to do a lot of mental gymnastics to complicate things much further than that.

[cant wait]

1 hour ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Probably because it's been proven time and again that the 2013 Jets were one of the worst 8-8 teams in NFL history.  Both standard and advanced metrics show that to be true. 

Even if you want to penalize the 2015 Jets for a weak schedule, we'd probably have been about 8-8 at worst with a tougher schedule.  The 2013 Jets, against any schedule, should have been about a 5-win team.  And Geno wasn't even a top reason for any success we had that season.  The Atlanta game and his meaningless Week 17 performance were the only 2 times he was a top reason we won that year. 

The 2015 Jets, meanwhile, were carried by the passing game. 

Disagree with your last point here, the 2015 jets were carried by the defense first and foremost (30 takeaways +6 differential) and a top 10 running game. teams like pitt and NE are the ones who are carried by the passing game, the jets ran a conservative offense that didn't ask the QB to put the team on his back. the fact that the jets won only one game all season that they were trailing in at any time tells you what they were asking of their offense. a ball control, conservative gameplan (4th in 3 & out percentage) and win the turnover battle

[nyjunc]

23 minutes ago, cant wait said:

Disagree with your last point here, the 2015 jets were carried by the defense first and foremost (30 takeaways +6 differential) and a top 10 running game. teams like pitt and NE are the ones who are carried by the passing game, the jets ran a conservative offense that didn't ask the QB to put the team on his back. the fact that the jets won only one game all season that they were trailing in at any time tells you what they were asking of their offense. a ball control, conservative gameplan (4th in 3 & out percentage) and win the turnover battle

I agree with yoiu most of the time, I can't agree here.  Our pass game led the way in 2015- mostly b/c of Marshall and decker but it led the way.  the D was very inconsistent all year.

[Sperm Edwards]

1 minute ago, Warfish said:

I interpret what people say using the words they use.  It most certainly isn't my fault they sometimes don't understand or like what their words actually mean.

Clearly you don't, since you like to reword what people say before arguing with them.

Quote

As opposed to repeatedly claiming you understand the cap and how it is managed as well or better than professional General managers.  

Case in point. I have never said that. That is you making things up.

Quote

Because all it is is "addition and subtraction".

I didn't say this either. Addition and subtraction is merely part of it. 

Quote

 

No, it's it.  Which you'd know if you understood what the word means, Alanis.  Doncha think?

Let me remind you, since you're now ignoring the very posts you quote:

"Any implication that it limits overall credit (or blame) to ONLY Fitzpatrick exclusively is purely in your mind".

If you don't like it that QB's are given a record like MLB pitchers, take it up with the Stats folks.  I've said repeatedly that wins/losses are a team statistic. 

 

No, it's the idea that you're fine with crediting him with wins and take issue when he's credited with losses. It's as simple as that.

Quote

 

I blame whomever warrants being blamed.  In the case of the final game (the only game where I have given specific credit/blame for in 2015), the blame lies with the entire team.  You, on the other hand, feel it lies only and specifically with Fitz.  

You really don't understand what hypocrisy means, do you.  

Let me help you:  From Miriam-Webster:  

a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelingshypocrite

 adjective

In no way am I 'acting in contradiction to my stated beliefs or feelings'.  I am completely and utterly consistent on this topic.  Wins/Losses are a stat for QB's (as per the cited reference).  That's a fact.  Credit for wins/loses in opinion-based written posting is purely at the discretion of the writer, but in my view, the final game of the season was the best example of a "total team loss" as I have seen in years.  In casual conversation, stating "Joe won ten games last year" does not mean he ALONE won ten games.  That's a laughable conclusion to draw from common parlance.  

Exactly the kind of poor analysis I'd expect when someone doesn't understand what hypocrite means.

 

This has long since gotten boring but that is only a partial definition, as you know since you purposely omitted the #1 part of the definition: "a feigning to be what one is not or to believe what one does not; especially :  the false assumption of an appearance of virtue or religion."

For example: remaining silent when he's credited with wins, but whining rationalizations occurs when he's credited with losses, all the while feigning to be consistent.

If you want to say he won games then don't get all upset when others say he lost games, where you need to provide some proper context only to losses but not to wins. It is hypocritical.

Quote

 

Such an opinion is only inconsistent if the only goal or positive that can be gained from a season of NFL football is a Title.

Once again, that's rather poor analysis.  Incremental gains can and are available, and there are benefits that could be gained that would not pay their full dividends till future seasons (like properly trained and mentored young QB's, or the benefits of winning 10 games for a second season and the effect that could have on potential free agents, etc).

So no, that's not a contradiction.

Of course he won 8 games.  It's right there in the record books.  He won 4 the following year.  

How much individual credit he deserves for those wins is certainly up for debate.

Except for the many many times they have said exactly that, of course, right?  If you haven't noticed a number of our posters writing "it was all Fitz", I suggest you pay more attention.

If that were true, you wouldn't be here "reacting" to what you see as it going in only one direction, now would it?

I might suggest you slow down and attempt to understand a bit better the things you're "reacting" to.  The phantom "hypocrisy" you appear to be so intellectually molested by is not here.

 

The goal is an NFL title. There is also downside in doing everything a team can in any given year to get as close as it can. If you can't comprehend this then you have no sense of planning. But suffice to say, there's a reason the Jets won't offer 4 first round picks for Drew Brees even though he's a better QB than Fitzpatrick and that would give us a better chance to win. It's an exaggeration of the same premise: everything has its costs. I think the cost for Fitzpatrick is more than he's worth. You clearly don't.

[Sperm Edwards]

1 hour ago, Jetsfan80 said:

I just think the schedule argument is overstated.  All games in the NFL tend to be hard to win.  Teams win games they shouldn't all the time, and let games they should win slip away.  The 2015 Jets were + 73 in the scoring margin.  That's the mark of a good team with at least a decent QB.  The 2013 Jets were outscored by 97 points.  That's the sign of a bad team with a bad QB.  The '13 Jets were just not even in the same category as the '15 Jets.  There's no comparison whatsoever to be made between those 2 teams. 

Yes the Jets added a lot of talent before that '15 season.  But you're lying to yourself if you think Fitz himself wasn't a big positive in that talent haul from the prior offseason.

You have to do a lot of mental gymnastics to complicate things much further than that.

I'd be more sympathetic to this idea if the record with him QB'ing wasn't so lopsided playing against good teams than bad ones. 

I didn't make any attempts to compare the 2013 team to the 2015 team, so I don't see why you keep harping on that. 

[Jetsfan80]

11 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I'd be more sympathetic to this idea if the record with him QB'ing wasn't so lopsided playing against good teams than bad ones. 

I didn't make any attempts to compare the 2013 team to the 2015 team, so I don't see why you keep harping on that. 

Because you brought up the Geno 8-8 season as if that means anything.  It doesn't.  It's not hypocritical to suggest Geno deserves little credit for those 8 wins while simultaneously praising Fitz for contributing to a 10-6 season. 

Fitz was a top reason why we went 10-6, with the weak schedule and Brandon Marshall absolutely claiming spots as well.  Meanwhile, not only was that 8-8 Jets team a farce, but even if we went 5-11 like the numbers suggest we SHOULD have gone, Geno would have only been able to claim that he played very well in 2 of those games, 3 at most.  Which is pretty pathetic.  The team sucked AND Geno sucked too, and there was very little to be happy about from that season.  Any other concept of that season is revisionist history.  All that season accomplished was keeping Rex here another unnecessary year. 

[Jetsplayer21]

6 hours ago, Rangers9 said:

I mixed up years, my mistake. He signed the 2 year backup deal in 2014 and then won the job in training camp. So why is that a negative on Fitz. He outplayed his contract both years. He doesn't want to sign a multiyear deal again that ties him up as a backup. 

I'm just curious ranger. When fitz caves and signs for whatever jets are offering... Something you feel is way under his value.. Are you going to be upset with the jets ? Or happy fitz is signed regardless of not getting a great deal.. 

[Rangers9]

8 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Because you brought up the Geno 8-8 season as if that means anything.  It doesn't.  It's not hypocritical to suggest Geno deserves little credit for those 8 wins while simultaneously praising Fitz for contributing to a 10-6 season. 

Fitz was a top reason why we went 10-6, with the weak schedule and Brandon Marshall absolutely claiming spots as well.  Meanwhile, not only was that 8-8 Jets team a farce, but even if we went 5-11 like the numbers suggest we SHOULD have gone, Geno would have only been able to claim that he played very well in 2 of those games, 3 at most.  Which is pretty pathetic.  The team sucked AND Geno sucked too, and there was very little to be happy about from that season.  Any other concept of that season is revisionist history.  All that season accomplished was keeping Rex here another unnecessary year. 

We earned that 8-8 that season and even beat Brady after losing to them by only 3. And give Geno some credit he was a rookie Qb. So let's not get into "almost losses" because I'll take them any day. Our W-L record is a part of our team's history and each W is golden. No excuses for any of them we'll take them all. 

[Rangers9]

1 minute ago, Jetsplayer21 said:

I'm just curious ranger. When fitz caves and signs for whatever jets are offering... Something you feel is way under his value.. Are you going to be upset with the jets ? Or happy fitz is signed regardless of not getting a great deal.. 

That's his business. I'd like to see both sides compromise. Nothing wrong with compromise. 

[Jetsplayer21]

13 minutes ago, Rangers9 said:

That's his business. I'd like to see both sides compromise. Nothing wrong with compromise. 

Did you mean to say " that's my business " ? My question is, if jets do not budge, and fitz signs the current deal on the table.. Will that bother you ?that the jets called fitz bluff, got him signed and for what they wanted to pay him. Especially with our cap problems.  

[56mehl56]

34 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Because you brought up the Geno 8-8 season as if that means anything.  It doesn't.  It's not hypocritical to suggest Geno deserves little credit for those 8 wins while simultaneously praising Fitz for contributing to a 10-6 season. 

Fitz was a top reason why we went 10-6, with the weak schedule and Brandon Marshall absolutely claiming spots as well.  Meanwhile, not only was that 8-8 Jets team a farce, but even if we went 5-11 like the numbers suggest we SHOULD have gone, Geno would have only been able to claim that he played very well in 2 of those games, 3 at most.  Which is pretty pathetic.  The team sucked AND Geno sucked too, and there was very little to be happy about from that season.  Any other concept of that season is revisionist history.  All that season accomplished was keeping Rex here another unnecessary year. 

How can you even compare the two offenses when we had a HC (Rex) who couldn't give two sh*ts about offense in 2013. He was more concerned in making sure he got the top flight defenders.

[Rangers9]

45 minutes ago, Jetsplayer21 said:

Did you mean to say " that's my business " ? My question is, if jets do not budge, and fitz signs the current deal on the table.. Will that bother you ?that the jets called fitz bluff, got him signed and for what they wanted to pay him. Especially with our cap problems.  

What's the diff what I think. Fitz has to manage his own money and life and 15 mil is a lot of money to turn down. I think the structuring of the deal is unfair and I'd like to see them offer him a one year contract. Between 8-12. There's plenty of ways to deal with cap problems and it's not just about what's best and most convenient for the Jets.  As far as I'm concerned Mac and Woody put them into this cap situation with the Revis contract. But I don't think this is about the cap. It's about keeping the player as an insurance policy to cover Mac and Woody's asses in case Hack isn't that good.  I hope we sign him but I'd like to see our FO compromise and not give him a take it or leave it. He deserves a little more respect than that. 

[Rangers9]

42 minutes ago, Jetsplayer21 said:

Did you mean to say " that's my business " ? My question is, if jets do not budge, and fitz signs the current deal on the table.. Will that bother you ?that the jets called fitz bluff, got him signed and for what they wanted to pay him. Especially with our cap problems.  

Treating a player fairly doesn't mean you have to give them the store like they did with Revis. I suspect Woody Johnson is behind this just like he's been with other incompetent moves in the past. If Fitz agrees to the 3 year deal ok with me. But I doubt it will happen.