Tanking for a QB?

[Sperm Edwards]

8 hours ago, Villain The Foe said:

It doesnt work. The fact that a team thinks that tanking is a good decision just shows how poorly that operation is run. Check out the colts for example. The "sucked for Luck", was actually successful at not winning games. Got themselves a franchise QB yet arent good enough as an organization to even provide him an offensive line. Their so terrible that when he's injured they're the same organization that went 1-16 when Manning was injured. 

Develop your team, thats how you win. A complete team with a competent QB will always be better than an Andrew Luck let terrible Colts team. 

Makes you wonder about all the might-have-been's were we to have had a QB like a healthy Andrew Luck (or better).

[Sperm Edwards]

8 hours ago, Gastineau Lives said:

Any idea how that conversation went down? Something like:

Irsay: Come on into my office, Bill, I mean Chris...I want to lose games. Big time. Got it?

Polian: Sure, how do you want to do it?

Irsay: You figure it out. Just make sure you win two of the last three for appearances.

Polian: I'll get on it. We are going to get this Luck kid, I'm so excited. Gonna be a bright future for us!

Irsay: Yes, um, sure, yes it will. For us. That's right for....us. I love you Bill, I mean Chris.

Polian: You're going to fire me, aren't you?

Irsay: Yes, absolutely. Send Jim in, will you?

You left out a bit of the conversation:

Polian: OK, it's settled then.

Irsay: Great. Hey Bill, so...wanna do some blow?

Polian: Look, Jim. What you do in your personal life is none of my--

Irsay: Then afterwards, my Rolls is right outside. I had them take the back seat out and a put a split cooler/kegerator in there. It's badass. Also the leather armrest was replaced with a mirror top. The seat belts are made of guitar strings. I'm telling you Bill, it's f**king badass, dude. I'm a rock & rolling motherf**ker. Woooooooooo!

Polian: Uh, you go ahead. I'm probably a little old for that and I --

Irsay: You're only as old as you feel, my man. Get the f**king stick outta your ass. If we get into an accident, I've got money and aspirin. Either one fixes everything. 

[PatsFanTX]

lol i mean reverting to ground and pound. Belichick's best quality is being ahead of curve. it makes a lot of sense. most other teams are followers. when some other teams find success with a different approach - wildcat, dual TEs, the 3-4 defense revolution of late 90s - they copy cat. that then drives up the relative values of players that fit that scheme. belichick recognizes this and then "buys low" on players that fit forgotten trends (such as pats going back to 4-3) before anyone else because you can get stud players for forgotten schemes later in draft/cheaper than studs for en vogue schemes. not exactly rocket science but it works. when Brady retires i think you're going to see NE become a more old school offensive team for awhile, at least.

Excellent post, you hit the nail on the head.

[Jolot]

With Jim Caldwell as your HC and Curtis Painter as your QB I'm not sure what could possibly go wrong , I'm still shocked it didn't work out better

[greenwichjetfan]

11 hours ago, gEYno said:

Irrelevant because however he's rated, he'd still be by far the best QB the Jets had since he's been in the league.  Even if he wasn't 'as good,' it's very doubtful he'd fall to statistically (advanced and standard) one of the leagues worst QBs, which is exactly what we've dealt with since Ryan entered the league.

The argument was never whether he'd be better than Sanchey/Geno. That's obvious. 

The argument was that we should be tanking for a top QB so that we can win a super bowl, or have sustained long term success, and people are attempting to use our failure to tank for Matt Ryan as one of their supporting arguments. That's where my very relevant posts about his being overrated come in. Matty Ice, with better resources, hasn't even matched what the Jets have done in the post season thus far, let alone gone on to win a Super Bowl. Further, he's shown that just like Sanchez and Geno, when the talent level around him diminishes, he's not the tide that raises all boats...he's a composite 12 games under .500 in the last three years. So that sustained long term success thing...not so much either. 

So great, he'd be a middling QB like Chad was for us; better than sanchey and geno, can beat the bad defenses, but sucks against the good ones in the playoffs. I'd argue that we're better off without him. At this point, we know our QBs suck, and we're not hog-tied to a clearly ceiling-capped Matt Ryan for another 5-8 years. We can go out and get a higher ceiling guy. 

[greenwichjetfan]

Also @gEYno, I very much agree with your first post in the thread, along with all of the others. Anyone with any functional understanding of risk/reward analysis would have to agree. You don't go into a season to lose, but if you find yourself at 1-7 with a lame duck coach and a potential superstar waiting in the draft at #1 in Winston, you obviously should be playing your younger guys to see what you've got in them, and start to make honest assessments about the future of the team. Added to that, we were coming up on a bye week and a perfect time to can the coach, and we didn't take it. 

So yea, I agree with the rationale. I'm just stating that Matt Ryan is not the optimal example to use as a reason to tank. 

[Paradis]

21 hours ago, flgreen said:

your that sure that Lynch is that special guy?  I'm sure not

Apparenlty I'm that sure... i had another dream we drafted him last night. This one we traded up to #7...

It's getting bad. 

[flgreen]

42 minutes ago, Paradis said:

Apparenlty I'm that sure... i had another dream we drafted him last night. This one we traded up to #7...

It's getting bad. 

The way things are going with Fitz I just keep on having a recurring nightmare

 

 

 

 

[ZachEY]

1 hour ago, greenwichjetfan said:

The argument was never whether he'd be better than Sanchey/Geno. That's obvious. 

The argument was that we should be tanking for a top QB so that we can win a super bowl, or have sustained long term success, and people are attempting to use our failure to tank for Matt Ryan as one of their supporting arguments. That's where my very relevant posts about his being overrated come in. Matty Ice, with better resources, hasn't even matched what the Jets have done in the post season thus far, let alone gone on to win a Super Bowl. Further, he's shown that just like Sanchez and Geno, when the talent level around him diminishes, he's not the tide that raises all boats...he's a composite 12 games under .500 in the last three years. So that sustained long term success thing...not so much either. 

So great, he'd be a middling QB like Chad was for us; better than sanchey and geno, can beat the bad defenses, but sucks against the good ones in the playoffs. I'd argue that we're better off without him. At this point, we know our QBs suck, and we're not hog-tied to a clearly ceiling-capped Matt Ryan for another 5-8 years. We can go out and get a higher ceiling guy. 

I'd think that Matt Ryan at his worst would be better than Pennington, and good enough, with the defense we had, to have made a difference in 09/10.  Anything short of worst QB play in the league would likely have made a meaningful difference.

[Beerfish]

QBs are not good enough until suddenly they are.  It took Elway a LOT of years to win.

A really good Qb doesn't win you a superbowl what he does is get you to the playoffs in years where the rest of the team is not super bowl dominant.  Make the playoffs, get hot, you win is the usual way things happen, even the elite teams seen as dynasties like Dallas won 2 or 3.

[ZachEY]

1 hour ago, greenwichjetfan said:

So yea, I agree with the rationale. I'm just stating that Matt Ryan is not the optimal example to use as a reason to tank. 

See, I kind of think it is, because one meaningless win is the difference in the franchise between a very competent, even if overrated, starter at QB, and Vernon Gholston.

[greenwichjetfan]

24 minutes ago, gEYno said:

I'd think that Matt Ryan at his worst would be better than Pennington, and good enough, with the defense we had, to have made a difference in 09/10.  Anything short of worst QB play in the league would likely have made a meaningful difference.

While I agree that Sanchey stunk, there's no denying that he wasn't the reason we didn't advance. If Shonn had stayed healthy in Indy, and our defense didn't make Mendenhall look like Barry Sanders in the first half, we might be talking about something entirely different. 

15 minutes ago, gEYno said:

See, I kind of think it is, because one meaningless win is the difference in the franchise between a very competent, even if overrated, starter at QB, and Vernon Gholston.

Lol, I agree that the meaningless win was stupid, and I agree that Ryan is better than Vernon.

I don't agree with your assertion that the win is the reason we don't have a capable QB; (1) because I don't find Ryan to be a top tier QB who would have succeeded in the sh*t storm that was the depleting of our talent in '11/'12/'13, and (2) who's to say that if Matty were there, we'd have taken him?

The Dolphins and Rams needed a QB too with Ryan sitting there, and they took the Long bros. 

If we were to talk about tanking in 2011 for Luck or 2014 when tanking at 1-7 would have landed us Jameis Winston, then yea, I'm good with that.

Ultimately, we agree on tanking, we disagree on Matt Ryan being the qualifier. I'm good with that. 

[T0mShane]

On 4/18/2016 at 6:56 PM, T0mShane said:

Also, I think Matt Ryan and Mariota are mushes. 

I would like to state for the record that history is validating my analysis once again.