Carlton and Boomer: " Fitz/Jets have an agreement in place

[Villain The Foe]

10 hours ago, Warfish said:

I didn't call you a simpleton.  Quite the contrary, I said "we both know you're not a simpleton" which, I would say, should be clear cut evidence I don;t think you're a simpleton.

As, right now, is Glennon.

Which makes it odd that you're avoiding addressing direct points about Glennon, Eli Manning and other Jets players role in our Bills loss.

Ryan overall career was not in question in the post you're taking great pains not to address.

You certainly can.  As I say, what we choose to answer, or not, speaks loudly for the quality of our opinions my friend.

Then I apologize that I misread that statement about simpletons. 

 

With that said, I will walk away from this because its ring around the rosy. I've provided numerous quotes along with a 30 min on Fitzpatrick. When I hear responses like "as of right now, so is Glennon" or "Im avoiding addressing direct points" yet my direct points are met with comparisons of QB's that I like when there is clear cut differences between the two (age, arm strength, potential. Fitz actually having a playoff-caliber team around him yet having the EXACT SAME RESULT. etc.), thats when I know that this is just a dog chasing its tale type of debate. 

 

I'd rather just leave it as agreeing to disagree. 

[Warfish]

9 hours ago, Jet Nut said:

Never said both aren't or can't be true.

What I said is the game was on the line....

The game is "one the line" every play of a game.  Every time Revis got burned, the game was also on the line.  Every time our RB could only manage 1 yard, the game was on the line.  Every dropped pass or broken route incompletion.  Every poor tackle.  And yes, every bad throw, be it bad because the QB failed, bad because the WR gave up or bad because the O-line failed to protect and let Fitz get crushed.  All of which happened vs. the Bills.

Lets be clear here, we were, bad as we played as a team, one dropped easy catch away from a win that day.  A 3 TD pass win, had the WR actually made said easy catch.  

9 hours ago, Jet Nut said:

, it's outcome on Fitzs hand and he shlt the bed.

The outcome of a play is in 11 men's hands.  The QB is just one.  Unless you blame a QB when a O-lineman whifs, or a WR gives up halfway through a route, or a WR alligator arms a catch, etc, etc, etc.

And yes, Fitz absolutely takes his fair share of responsibility for his overall poor play that day.  It's be nice if his detractors were as critical of all the other factors that equally or more so led to that loss.  of course, that doesn't serve the agenda of acquire X QB, so honesty and accurate analysis goes right out the window.

9 hours ago, Jet Nut said:

Again, they all played poorly but a QB has to take the lead there.  It's not like they gave up 40 points.

It is interesting that one player can't cost a game but you name Revis, his stats against him and his salary, as if that makes a difference.  

Revis mattered because Revis failed to defend anyone that day and was burned regularly, and allowed so many yards and extended possessions that it was a major factor (not the ONLY factor of course) as to how the Bills scored and hence defeated us.

9 hours ago, Jet Nut said:

Again, let's agree to disagree.  

I don't agree with your agenda because it's not factual or accurate.  You're attempt to assign all blame to Fitz for what was clearly a TEAM effort to lose that day, from the Coaches on down, is not something I will simply agree to disagree with, it's something I will actively disagree with every time it's trotted out in ignorance yet again to support this agenda or that.

Same way, my friend, you defend any and all threads that involved Glennon.  I don;t see you simply "agreeing to disagree" with all the posters who think trading a high pick for a failed backup QB who will be a free agent next year is a bad idea.  

[Warfish]

2 hours ago, 32EBoozer said:

Great post, and I hope you're right about the last point. That would help keep any anger towards the Jets to a minimum.

"Look Fitzy, we're willing to offer you a 2 yr. $14m contract if you don't find anything better out there.

We'd love to hav you back but that's all we're willing to invest in the position at this time.

If you get a better offer, please allow us the opportunity to match before signing. Good Luck out there"

Change to "3 year, 24 mil, with the this year a team-option year and only 16 guaranteed" and I'd agree.

[Jet Nut]

18 minutes ago, Warfish said:

The game is "one the line" every play of a game.  Every time Revis got burned, the game was also on the line.  Every time our RB could only manage 1 yard, the game was on the line.  Every dropped pass or broken route incompletion.  Every poor tackle.  And yes, every bad throw, be it bad because the QB failed, bad because the WR gave up or bad because the O-line failed to protect and let Fitz get crushed.  All of which happened vs. the Bills.

Lets be clear here, we were, bad as we played as a team, one dropped easy catch away from a win that day.  A 3 TD pass win, had the WR actually made said easy catch.  

The outcome of a play is in 11 men's hands.  The QB is just one.  Unless you blame a QB when a O-lineman whifs, or a WR gives up halfway through a route, or a WR alligator arms a catch, etc, etc, etc.

And yes, Fitz absolutely takes his fair share of responsibility for his overall poor play that day.  It's be nice if his detractors were as critical of all the other factors that equally or more so led to that loss.  of course, that doesn't serve the agenda of acquire X QB, so honesty and accurate analysis goes right out the window.

Revis mattered because Revis failed to defend anyone that day and was burned regularly, and allowed so many yards and extended possessions that it was a major factor (not the ONLY factor of course) as to how the Bills scored and hence defeated us.

I don't agree with your agenda because it's not factual or accurate.  You're attempt to assign all blame to Fitz for what was clearly a TEAM effort to lose that day, from the Coaches on down, is not something I will simply agree to disagree with, it's something I will actively disagree with every time it's trotted out in ignorance yet again to support this agenda or that.

Same way, my friend, you defend any and all threads that involved Glennon.  I don;t see you simply "agreeing to disagree" with all the posters who think trading a high pick for a failed backup QB who will be a free agent next year is a bad idea.  

You read an agenda in my response? 

You haven't seen the posts where I've called Glennon a cheap alternative?  An unknown?  Sorry, with Fitz not signed that I might be interested in someone else not knowing when or if he signs with the Jets. 

But I have an agenda? 

You want to a guy that 22 or 33 players failed, fine.  But you keep coming back trying to deflect too much off Fitz and putting it on others.  You are the one defending a single player, one that you coincidentally proclaimed had the greatest year since Namath or something along those lines.

Seems like if I don't agree with you I'm either argumentative or now it's that I have an agenda.  That's not fair.

[Warfish]

On 4/6/2016 at 6:24 AM, Kleckineau said:

If they do indeed have an agreement in place, this Macc / Bowles regime is no better than Idzik / Tannenbaum / Ryan.

Standing pat at the QB position with essentially a back up QB is not the way a winning organization operates.

I hope they prove me wrong and make a trade for Glennon or Kaep or make a bold move on or before draft day but I doubt it.

I'd like to point out that resigning Fitz (a Veteran QB) for veteran back-up QB Money (5-9 mil or thereabouts) does not necessarily mean or imply that the team is "standing pat" at the QB position.

Also, there is no evidence beyond optimistic speculation that a Glennon (for example) would be an upgrade.  But they could still make a deal if they wanted him (I don't think they do).

Where the team may still make a move is in the 2016 Draft.  If they select a QB in round #1, that's hardly standing pat, right?

The problem we have in not "standing pat" is threefold, we have no one ready in our own depth chart yet (Petty is a minimum of one year away), the Free Agent market is exceptionally weak at QB this year, and we lack the picks to be strong movers in the 2016 Draft to guy a top1-2 prospect at QB.

That leaves us vastly overpaying for either a failed backup (Glennon, to-date) or a failed former hyped running QB (Kaep, whose been sh*t for multiple years now and is coming off injury).  

Being patient is hard, but that doesn't make patience the wrong choice here.  Fitz is NOT a long term answer, he's a short term producer who keeps the team competative while we look for/train/acquire the "future" at QB.

[Warfish]

19 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

But you keep coming back trying to deflect too much off Fitz and putting it on others.  

Because the loss to the Bills was as much a "team effort" loss as I've ever seen.

Had any QB lost both their starting RB's, had WR's drop passes (including one sure-thing TD pass), had their big-money CB burned all day long by everyone he tried to cover, an O-line that at times was not what they'd been all year long, and a Defense that overall was less than normal, that QB would have had problems.  Fitz played poorly, not sure how many times I can say that, but any effort to lay the entire loss on him is agenda-based bullsh*t, frankly.  That game was death by a thousand cuts, and a whole host of responsible players and coaches, of whom Fitz was only one.

Quote

You are the one defending a single player, one that you coincidentally proclaimed had the greatest year since Namath or something along those lines.

Statistically, he is, yes.  That's not debatable, it's numbers that anyone can look up.  Which is what I said at the time, that he was (at that moment) potentially on pace for the best year of production (yards/TD's) since Namath, who had out best year in franchise history.  Fitz is now our all-time #2/#3, depending on which single-year stat we look at.

[Jet Nut]

Is it me or where is the agenda bullshlt I supposedly am putting out

[Jet Nut]

Agenda?

Ok, the defense gave up 22. Not great but not a number that should scare away any QB. Revis was toasted for Revis.  True.  We know why today.  They gave up less than 200 yards total in the air though. Total. That's not a number a good QB is afraid of,  can't overcome.  Can't think of a QB anywhere who's defense for a loss would be the 180 yards passing their D gave up. That's not agenda based bullshlt.  You're doing everything to turn a simple disagreement, a different interpretation of a game into something it's not. Youre the one looking to defend a player, not me.

Sorry it is debatable that Fitz had the second greatest season by any Jets QB. Putting up TD numbers while doing little to effect games, to win games, isn't that impressive to me. You might be happy with his output but I expect a QB to win games not blame others for failing in the red zone, for throwing 2 picks on the Eagles side of the field down 4 or 5, pissing away the opportunities in both Bills games, his history against winning teams and when seasons are on the line hasn't changed. He's a solid backup, hired to be a backup who lucked out and got a job then played just well enough. 11 years no playoffs. 11 years one winning season. Who's to blame for the other 10 seasons? Who's agenda got him fired 6 times?

Sometimes it's the player, some players are losers. You love Fitz, that's fine. i don't love him, have no love of his game. I don't even have a replacement for you.  Doesn't change what Fitz is either way.  If that's an agenda, so be it.  We all have our agendas then

time to move on.  Hard to discuss sports when the response is "you have an agenda"