Tanking for a QB?

[pajet]

I said I would but only under specific circumstances.  First, the QB you are targeting is a stone cold lock such as Luck or Manning.   Secondly depends on the team.  If you have a playoff capable team I wouldn't do it.  Once you get in anything can happen.   If you know you are not competitive anyway (i.e. a 6/7 win team) then sure go for it.   I would not tank this year for anybody.   I don't know enough about the QB's coming out TBH and I do think the Jets have a shot at the playoffs, despite the schedule.

If it doesn't look like we are getting the QB we WANT this year in round 1, I would consider trading Mo for a 2017 first rounder.  That way you have more ammo to move up next year if you chose to do so.

[pajet]

1 hour ago, gEYno said:

I think it's far more nuanced.  While I certainly don't endorse going into a season with a plan to lose, I believe you need to have an honest assessment of the team, and not tie up future resources for no good reason.  If your team isn't championship caliber, I don't see a good reason to add expensive pieces that may make you a little better, but not get you over the hump, and I don't see a great reason to not play a younger roster who you hope will develop.  So, these decisions happen both in the offseason and in the season as it develops.  I wouldn't actively try to lose a game outside of maybe week 17 though.

Ironically, we are great at winning meaningless week 17 games to screw our draft position.

[RutgersJetFan]

9 minutes ago, bitonti said:

yeah that Jameis Winston championship should happen any day now

 

8 minutes ago, bitonti said:

Matt Ryan would have been chased out of town years ago. He can't win in the playoffs. 

[Lupz27]

1 hour ago, jett said:

I love love love Winston. He's that type of qb who can win regardless of whose on his team. He wills his team to victories. 

Yes Rex Ryans last second game winning FG VS TB that season week 15 was so worth not getting Winston.

And I don't blame Rex, it's Woody J fault for letting the coaching staff stay in place to win those games, Ryan should have been fired so the Jets did tank, and a puppet with strict instructions to play to lose the game.

[Jet Nut]

15 minutes ago, majf said:

Don't like "athleticism," huh?

Has nothing to do with it.  Not a knock on Cam

IMO Luck is a better QB, passer and leader.

[Jet Nut]

39 minutes ago, RutgersJetFan said:

Also worth noting that this is the same exact argument you made right before the Chiefs game that landed us Vernon Gholston instead of Matt Ryan. Might wanna rethink your position on this one.

And there were doubts inside the Jets and elsewhere about Ryan being effective in the outdoors, northeast weather.  Arm strength was the issue

[King P]

17 minutes ago, bitonti said:

yeah that Jameis Winston championship should happen any day now

I guarantee Winston will lead the Bucs to a Super Bowl in the near future. He's that good

[Irish Jet]

Whether you want it or not we're definitely not setting up to tank this season. The Clady and Forte moves were made to help us win right now, the only viable alternative would be to help a young QB if we were to draft one this year. 

I hate the concept. I appreciate that it's necessary but I don't think teams should ever be encouraged to do anything but win. It creates a strange sort of dynamic for the end of the season too. Most coaches and players have too much at stake to intentionally tank but owners and management can definitely influence things. Right now the indication is that we want to compete, which I'm delighted with. No way our fans have the patience to allow any regime to tank by the way. By week 8 they'll want everyone fired.

Ultimately our schedule will give us a pretty good indicator early on about where we're at. If we're even 3-4 after those 7 games then we'll be in good shape to compete. If the season's over then I could see some personnel changes and some more experimenting with next season in mind. At that point I'd be okay with it. 

[Irish Jet]

44 minutes ago, RutgersJetFan said:

Also worth noting that this is the same exact argument you made right before the Chiefs game that landed us Vernon Gholston instead of Matt Ryan. Might wanna rethink your position on this one.

I'm pretty sure that even if we had Matt Ryan the majority of our fanbase would hate him.

[RutgersJetFan]

1 minute ago, Lupz27 said:

Yes Rex Ryans last second game winning FG VS TB that season week 15 was so worth not getting Winston.

And I don't blame Rex, it's Woody J fault for letting the coaching staff stay in place to win those games, Ryan should have been fired so the Jets did tank, and a puppet with strict instructions to play to lose the game.

That was against Tennessee and it cost us Mariota, not Winston. The Jets never had a shot at Winston after the Pittsburgh game. It was crystal clear that the Jets were going nowhere in 2014 and were on a fast track to having a top pick in a draft where the top 2 picks were going to be quarterbacks. Instead we didn't fire Rex at the bye when the writing was on the wall and then won 2 out of our last 3. It was and still is completely unforgivable. If Mariota goes on to have a successful career, not firing Rex at the bye will go down as the worst decision this organization has made since it passed on Marino.

[Lupz27]

3 minutes ago, RutgersJetFan said:

That was against Tennessee and it cost us Mariota, not Winston. The Jets never had a shot at Winston after the Pittsburgh game. It was crystal clear that the Jets were going nowhere in 2014 and were on a fast track to having a top pick in a draft where the top 2 picks were going to be quarterbacks. Instead we didn't fire Rex at the bye when the writing was on the wall and then won 2 out of our last 3. It was and still is completely unforgivable. If Mariota goes on to have a successful career, not firing Rex at the bye will go down as the worst decision this organization has made since it passed on Marino.

That's right the Titans played the Bucs head to head I think the following week or something like that. 

[RutgersJetFan]

6 minutes ago, Irish Jet said:

I'm pretty sure that even if we had Matt Ryan the majority of our fanbase would hate him.

Bullsh*t. This fanbase loved Mark Sanchez and Chad Pennington. For ****'s sake, you still have schleps who love Geno. Because Jets.

[RutgersJetFan]

14 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

And there were doubts inside the Jets and elsewhere about Ryan being effective in the outdoors, northeast weather.  Arm strength was the issue

Matt Ryan leads the Jets to the same exact record that Sanchez does in '09 and '10. He wins in Indy in '09 and probably in Pittsburgh in '10 too. Jets demolish Saints in rematch played in Miami. Science.

[Jet Nut]

1 minute ago, RutgersJetFan said:

Matt Ryan leads the Jets to the same exact record that Sanchez does in '09 and '10. He wins in Indy in '09 and probably in Pittsburgh in '10 too. Jets demolish Saints in rematch played in Miami. Science.

Not saying this isnt true.  Just that the Jets were said to be concerned with his arm strength 

[chirorob]

1 hour ago, bitonti said:

tanking a season is bulls--t and the reason that it's not assured that a QB will be waiting at the end of that tank. 

Some years don't have a good QB. Some years you can win 4 games and be picking 5th.

this isn't the NBA. there's no Lebron James that's going to save the franchise. Andrew Luck was a once in a generation type of prospect, like Elway or Peyton. It happens about once every 10-15 years. 

and let's say you get that player, congrats you've just introduced him to a talent less, broken franchise, with a culture of purposeful losing. GL with that. 

Totally agree.

Now, if your team is 5-10, with one last game, if they lose that one playing a bunch of kids, so be it. 

You pay your players to win, what are you going to do, sit the good ones for guys who stink?  What does that say about you as a coach?

[Irish Jet]

20 minutes ago, RutgersJetFan said:

Bullsh*t. This fanbase loved Mark Sanchez and Chad Pennington. For ****'s sake, you still have schleps who love Geno. Because Jets.

He's not better than JJ Watt though.

[JetPotato]

Start Geno. Draft high. The formula for success next year and beyond.

[majf]

36 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

Has nothing to do with it.  Not a knock on Cam

IMO Luck is a better QB, passer and leader.

Can't speak to what kind of leader he is, as who really knows what goes on in a locker room other than players and coaches. What I'm saying is that his performance hasn't measured up to his hype, and that he has had sufficient time in the league for us to know what he is. Quibble if you will about the value of the passer rating stat, but it's based on actual performance and, among active QBs, Luck is 16th, between Tannehill and Flacco, which seems about right, and makes him the epitome of an average starting QB. For what it's worth, Fitz is 22nd, which is not bad, and Cam is 11th. I would say that Luck is even more overrated than Cutler (13th, if anyone is counting). How long can Luck get the benefit of the doubt, people counting on his potential, rather than his performance?

[Jet Nut]

1 minute ago, majf said:

Can't speak to what kind of leader he is, as who really knows what goes on in a locker room other than players and coaches. What I'm saying is that his performance hasn't measured up to his hype, and that he has had sufficient time in the league for us to know what he is. Quibble if you will about the value of the passer rating stat, but it's based on actual performance and, among active QBs, Luck is 16th, between Tannehill and Flacco, which seems about right, and makes him the epitome of an average starting QB. For what it's worth, Fitz is 22nd, which is not bad, and Cam is 11th. I would say that Luck is even more overrated than Cutler (13th, if anyone is counting). How long can Luck get the benefit of the doubt, people counting on his potential, rather than his performance?

You might want to look up what hes accomplished and see how many in the entire history of the NFL have reached the same level of accomplishment.  

If you think that Luck is somewhere between Tannihill and Flacco this is pointless.

[win4ever]

It's too hard to tank a season, because I just can't root against the team for 16 games.

However, the idea does have merit.  Similar to how players crouch a little before jumping, you do go further if you go backwards a bit and build up momentum.   Looking at the team, if there is no real chance of competing, I'd rather finish 2-14 than 6-10.

Watson is a QB I definitely tank for, I think he's somewhere between Luck/Winston and a franchise QB.  There were already reports that he was the best QB in college last yes and there aren't physical limitations with him as we saw someone like Barkley fall because he has a very weak arm.

There should be 5 teams in play for a QB next year.  49ers, Bills, Saints, Eagles, Bears.  I'm assuming both Rams/Browns take QBs, one of the other 5 takes Lynch and one takes Cook.  That would lead 4 teams.  It might actually come down to Bills/Jets if we are tanking.

Also, it's not just the first pick you are tanking for, it's the second round and third round picks as well.  If your team isn't going to win, it makes sense to tank.  Have their been failures at the No. 1 draft slot?  Sure, but there is likely to be a greater amount of failures in history at pick 5,6,7 or 12,13,14 as well.  Similar to gambling, you are just trying to get odds in your favor.

I would trade Mo for a first next year, so if we don't tank, at least we have ammunition to move up if a non qb needy team ends up at first.  

[afosomf]

9 minutes ago, win4ever said:

It's too hard to tank a season, because I just can't root against the team for 16 games.

However, the idea does have merit.  Similar to how players crouch a little before jumping, you do go further if you go backwards a bit and build up momentum.   Looking at the team, if there is no real chance of competing, I'd rather finish 2-14 than 6-10.

Watson is a QB I definitely tank for, I think he's somewhere between Luck/Winston and a franchise QB.  There were already reports that he was the best QB in college last yes and there aren't physical limitations with him as we saw someone like Barkley fall because he has a very weak arm.

There should be 5 teams in play for a QB next year.  49ers, Bills, Saints, Eagles, Bears.  I'm assuming both Rams/Browns take QBs, one of the other 5 takes Lynch and one takes Cook.  That would lead 4 teams.  It might actually come down to Bills/Jets if we are tanking.

Also, it's not just the first pick you are tanking for, it's the second round and third round picks as well.  If your team isn't going to win, it makes sense to tank.  Have their been failures at the No. 1 draft slot?  Sure, but there is likely to be a greater amount of failures in history at pick 5,6,7 or 12,13,14 as well.  Similar to gambling, you are just trying to get odds in your favor.

I would trade Mo for a first next year, so if we don't tank, at least we have ammunition to move up if a non qb needy team ends up at first.  

Browns are tanking, they will be frontrunner

[Patriot Killa]

1 hour ago, King P said:

I really hate when people say sh*t like this

I'm sorry? Is that what you want?

[Sperm Edwards]

1 hour ago, RutgersJetFan said:

Also worth noting that this is the same exact argument you made right before the Chiefs game that landed us Vernon Gholston instead of Matt Ryan. Might wanna rethink your position on this one.

Agree. It's one thing to argue against "tank the whole season" ideas, which is unrealistic for those actually employed by the team, as a preseason plan. 

It's another thing entirely when we have 3 wins entering the last game of the season and we win. Thus dropping our QB-needy team out of the top 5 draft picks when there are serious QB prospects at the top of the upcoming draft. 

[RutgersJetFan]

Just now, Sperm Edwards said:

Agree. It's one thing to argue against "tank the whole season" ideas, which is unrealistic for those actually employed by the team, as a preseason plan. 

It's another thing entirely when we have 3 wins entering the last game of the season and we win. Thus dropping our QB-needy team out of the top 5 draft picks when there are serious QB prospects at the top of the upcoming draft. 

Not to mention that we had one of the worst head coaches in the history of the NFL waiting in the wings to take over as interim. The table couldn't have been more perfectly set if we had deliberately tried to.

[jamesr]

And the last team to win the Superbowl with the QB they deliberately tanked for is ...?

[greenwichjetfan]

1 hour ago, bitonti said:

Matt Ryan would have been chased out of town years ago. He can't win in the playoffs. 

Matt Ryan is the most overrated QB in the league. Was glad we didn't have a chance to take him that year, and have been calling his bust potential ever since. 

[majf]

14 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

You might want to look up what hes accomplished and see how many in the entire history of the NFL have reached the same level of accomplishment.  

If you think that Luck is somewhere between Tannihill and Flacco this is pointless.

I'm open-minded. I did look it up, and, having done that, I have no idea what you meant. I already referenced a quantitative measure of performance (QB rating), which shows Luck to be average among active starting QBs. As for post-season success, which many point to as a measure of QB worth, I only need look to Flacco, who is 6-3 in the postseason (vs. Luck's 3-3), not to mention his SB win. I'm not going to look up what other QBs in the "entire history of the NFL" have accomplished, but if Flacco has accomplished more than Luck, then I would think that are dozens, if not scores, of QBs in the history of the NFL who have accomplished more. The perception of Luck as something special seems to have hardened based on his college performance and hype leading up to the draft. What he has accomplished on the field since then has not measured up.

[PatsFanTX]

Matt Ryan would have been chased out of town years ago. He can't win in the playoffs. 

So that constitutes a successful QB?

Win a couple WC and Division playoff games?

[section314]

14 minutes ago, greenwichjetfan said:

Matt Ryan is the most overrated QB in the league. Was glad we didn't have a chance to take him that year, and have been calling his bust potential ever since. 

Andy Dalton would give him a pretty good run for his money.

[PatsFanTX]

Andy Dalton would give him a pretty good run for his money.

Dalton and Ryan would have been the best Jets QB since Namath.

Hell, 90% of the board are still pulling their puds over what they think Fitz accomplished last year.

Forgetting the fact that he was in the bottom 25% of all QB metrics last year.

[ZachEY]

1 hour ago, pajet said:

Ironically, we are great at winning meaningless week 17 games to screw our draft position.

Kind of our specialty.

[majf]

7 minutes ago, PatsFanTX said:

Dalton and Ryan would have been the best Jets QB since Namath.

Hell, 90% of the board are still pulling their puds over what they think Fitz accomplished last year.

Forgetting the fact that he was in the bottom 25% of all QB metrics last year.

Not true. He was in the top 50% in total yards, TDs, and completions.

[Long Island Leprechaun]

2 hours ago, Beerfish said:

No, don't tank, it doesn't work.  It fosters a losing attitude and young QB's and how they are viewed moves around wildly from year to year.  Guys like Barkley and Cook were viewed as high 1st rounders in the year before their draft year and both fell off.  Others, guys like Cam Newton were not looked at as franchise guys until their draft year.

 

I say this from experience being an Edmonton Oiler fan, though the oilers have not out right tanked in most years they have been dreadful enough to keep getting high to 1st overall picks and they continue to stink.  Teams like Cleve and Oakland were perpetual high drafters.

 

Try and win every year and make good management decisions that can set you for a possible trade up if you have to.  Draft QB prospects almost every year.  Tanking is simply not the way to go unless of course you are a 2 win team with 2 weeks left to go perhaps, then it may make sense but do not plan for failure.

Well said. Planning to suck is harder than it looks and doesn't even work.

[jack48]

I don;t think it is conditional. I think you either have the "tank" gene or you don't.

[ZachEY]

47 minutes ago, greenwichjetfan said:

Matt Ryan is the most overrated QB in the league. Was glad we didn't have a chance to take him that year, and have been calling his bust potential ever since. 

FWIW, if this is true, then the most overrated QB in the league is still better than anyone we've had at the position while he's been in the league, and far better than Vernon Gholston.