Rocket Scientists

[CrazyCarl40]

28 minutes ago, Mike135 said:

So do I.

Would you have taken Sanchez over Geno too? For 2016 I mean. 

[BowlesMovement]

24 minutes ago, Mike135 said:

 

 

I don't get it

[Mike135]

1 minute ago, CrazyCarl40 said:

Would you have taken Sanchez over Geno too? For 2016 I mean. 

It would have been close I think.  Geno would have had a year in the system, though he still has never played what I'd consider a legit NFL down yet.  Meaning with a solid team around him.  

Mark on the other hand, definitely has played on good teams.  And while sure he's had some decent success at times, he's also been his own worst enemy at times.

I'd have to see both play to tell ya that one.  Slight edge to Geno w/o having benefit of seeing both in practice.  I would have been happy with a depth chart of Geno/Mark/Hack with Petty on practice squad.  

Both however have more current and future potential than Fitz.

[Mike135]

1 minute ago, BowlesMovement said:

I don't get it

Your previous post made it sound like you were making an excuse by saying it's not easy hanging with us.  Kinda feeling sorry for yourself because you lack football knowledge.  Made me think of that clip.

Video clip is basically saying "man up and stop feeling sorry for yourself".

 

[Rangers9]

Just one more thing. About the original premise of this thread. These starting Qbs are under contract. With a lot of guaranteed money on the line. So how are there openings if there are no openings. And how does it prove that no team is interested in him. Unless you expect them to cut these players to sign Fitz. 

[BowlesMovement]

4 minutes ago, Mike135 said:

Your previous post made it sound like you were making an excuse by saying it's not easy hanging with us.  Kinda feeling sorry for yourself because you lack football knowledge.  Made me think of that clip.

Video clip is basically saying "man up and stop feeling sorry for yourself".

 

I don't get it

[Mike135]

Just now, BowlesMovement said:

I don't get it

"Your" a rocket scientist.

[BowlesMovement]

6 minutes ago, Mike135 said:

"Your" a rocket scientist.

You are

[PatsFanTX]

Low blow.  I am admittedly extremely disappointed in our own version of Dumb n Dumber (Macc n Bowles), but that's still better than cheaters.

So, you'd rather have Dumb n Dumber than 4 Super Bowl championships?

[nycdan]

1 hour ago, j4jets said:

So you're saying that there are 30 other teams that had a QB situation better than Fitz or he wasn't a feasible options. Sounds awfully similar to "passed on Fitz". You don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure that out. If Fitz was half decent, atleast half the NFL would pick him up. But he's a bottom of the barrel QB. Besides Jet n Broncos, no one wanted him n even the Broncos think Sanchez was a better option than Mr. Journeyman. 

Don't agree.  Fitz is not a 'bottom of the barrel QB'.  he's an average QB.  And had he not thrown those picks in BUF in week 17 and the Jets won that game, he'd be an 'above average' QB (in perception, not necessarily reality) and would have had a much better offer from one or more teams.  Sometimes it's all about perception and that week 17 loss dropped him from 'viable mid-range starter' to 'stop-gap starter / veteran backup' which is a big drop in money

He doesn't have to like it, or agree with it, but unless one of exactly and only 32 NFL GMs feels differently, that's HIS reality right now.  Blow a playoff-level game in your walk year and yeah, you don't get paid. 

 

[Mike135]

9 minutes ago, PatsFanTX said:

So, you'd rather have Dumb n Dumber than 4 Super Bowl championships?

Heck no.  I'd rather the 4 SBs.  But if the 4 SBs in question are due to cheating, like this recent Pat "dynasty", I'll take Dumb n Dumber.

[Mike135]

5 minutes ago, nycdan said:

Fitz is not a 'bottom of the barrel QB'.  he's an average QB. 

Wait.  When you say he's average, how exactly do you mean that?

Like he's an average starting QB?  As in he's ranked somewhere between the 11th and 22nd best QB in the league?

Or he's average in terms of all NFL QBs?  Figure there are 3 QBs per team.  So 96 QBs.  And Fitz would rank somewhere around 40th to 60th?

If the latter, good call.  

If the former, you're nuts.

[Larz]

so are we winning the superbowl ?

[The Crusher]

13 minutes ago, Larz said:

so are we winning the superbowl ?

Yes. We currently undefeated.  

[joewilly12]

8 hours ago, BowlesMovement said:

I have seen many of the boards Rocket Scientists making claims about how all 31 teams have said no to Fitzpatrick, except the Jets. 

 

 

 

 

 

I say this all the time and guess what its the truth.

[PatsFanTX]

I say this all the time and guess what its the truth.

Don't you have to put some salt n your pool?

[slats]

4 minutes ago, PatsFanTX said:

Don't you have to put some salt n your pool?

Lol, you're now just the low hanging fruit guy. 

[joewilly12]

1 hour ago, PatsFanTX said:

Don't you have to put some salt n your pool?

Nah id rather put it in your wounds.

[j4jets]

6 hours ago, nycdan said:

Don't agree.  Fitz is not a 'bottom of the barrel QB'.  he's an average QB.  And had he not thrown those picks in BUF in week 17 and the Jets won that game, he'd be an 'above average' QB (in perception, not necessarily reality) and would have had a much better offer from one or more teams.  Sometimes it's all about perception and that week 17 loss dropped him from 'viable mid-range starter' to 'stop-gap starter / veteran backup' which is a big drop in money

He doesn't have to like it, or agree with it, but unless one of exactly and only 32 NFL GMs feels differently, that's HIS reality right now.  Blow a playoff-level game in your walk year and yeah, you don't get paid. 

 

It's not just one wk. Beating a dead horse here, we had the leagues easiest schedule as a D and the easiest passing D schedule a QB has played in years and yet his stats were poor save for average yards n TDs. 

[Smashmouth]

14 hours ago, BowlesMovement said:

I have seen many of the boards Rocket Scientists making claims about how all 31 teams have said no to Fitzpatrick, except the Jets. 

So, while they are busy helping build tools to get our great species to Mars and beyond, I figured I would dig a bit deeper into this, so they can continue their far more important work.

Lets look at all 31 teams, and their QB situation:

AFC East

Patriots - Brady

Jets

Bills - Taylor, young QB who showed a lot of promise, no way you can think about replacing him unless a bonafide top tier QB becomes available

Dolphins - Tannehill, I don't think he is very good, but they are tied to him based on the contract they gave him, and they need to see if he can become anything. Only way they replace him is with a bonafide top tier QB

AFC West

Broncos - Sanchez and an unproven, definitely a possibility

Chiefs - Alex Smith, no reason to go after Fitzpatrick, if a stud QB became available, would make sense, but Smith is in the same class of QB as Fitzpatrick, but probably better.

Chargers - Rivers, despite me thinking he is overrated, he is still better than Fitzpatrick, and still a middle of the pack starter in this league, no reason to go after a QB short of a true star

Raiders - Solid young up and coming QB in Carr, can't even thin about it

AFC North

Bengals - Dalton, basically a slightly better Fitzpatrick, same class of QB as Fitzpatrick, younger and a bit better

Steelers - Rapist

Ravens - Flacco

Browns - Nothing really, could have been a possibility, but Fitzpatrick makes no sense for them at all. They have nothing around him, and are in a rebuild mode with a new HC, he would be pointless for them.

AFC South

Texans - Signed Osweiller to a big deal, I think it was a mistake, but time will tell

Colts - Mr. Overrated, Andrew Luck

Jaguars - Bortles, not sure how good he is, but young and promising

Titans - Just drafted Mariota

NFC East

Redskins - got a good season out of Cousins and tagged him

Giants - Eli Manning

Cowboys - Romo, Fitzpatrick would be a great backup option for them, but not a starter option for them

Eagles - similar to Browns, and they tagged Bradford, who is worse than Fitzpatrick

NFC West

Cardinals - Palmer

Seahawks - Wilson

49ers - Similar to Browns, and still have Kap with a big $$ contract

Rams - Could have been a fit, but were committed to going out and getting Goff, hard to fault any team for making a big push for a potential franchise QB

NFC North

Packers - The guy Geno would have been had he sat behind Favre for a few years

Bears - Cutler, I think he sucks, and Fitzpatrick is a better overall starting QB, but with the contract he has, Fitzpatrick is not that good to consider the move

Lions - Stafford, I don't think he is very good, but Fitzpatrick makes no sense over him

Vikings - Young up and coming QB in Bridgewater

NFC South

Panthers - Dabber

Falcons - Another hugely overrated QB, but still probaly better than Fitzpatrick in Matty "melted ice"

Saints - Brees

Bucs - Winston just drafted

 

So, while I am not a rocket scientist, the realistic options for a starting QB of the caliber of Fitzpatrick was basically the Jets, and the Broncos. Ironically, the two teams who showed interest in him, but also the two teams who can do the same non rocket science type analysis I just did above, and see that there is no reason to pay him what he is looking for.

It happens to be a very rare time in the NFL where the majority of teams are committed to a QB for better or for worse. 

So, when you have a spare second trying to find an alternate planet for our species, because plastic is destroying the Earth, please keep this in mind when you throw around "All 31 teams passed on Fitz".

Kind thanks in advance

 

 

 

 

 

 

Finally some common sense ...I've been saying this for a while but I certainly did not take it to this level . I think the only team other than the Jets that makes sense is the Broncos.

[j4jets]

2 hours ago, Smashmouth said:

Finally some common sense ...I've been saying this for a while but I certainly did not take it to this level . I think the only team other than the Jets that makes sense is the Broncos.

Agreed. Reason being, Fitz wasn't a good enough option for the 31 other teams, including the Broncos, which qualifies as "passed on" Fitz. 

[BowlesMovement]

15 hours ago, joewilly12 said:

I say this all the time and guess what its the truth.

The next time you say something that is the truth, it will be the first. You exposed yourself yesterday by posting Pats highlights. I am actually relieved to know that you and Mike000 are Pats fans, trolling us, and that there aren't really people this dumb on our planet.

[BowlesMovement]

17 hours ago, j4jets said:

So you're saying that there are 30 other teams that had a QB situation better than Fitz or he wasn't a feasible options. Sounds awfully similar to "passed on Fitz". You don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure that out. If Fitz was half decent, atleast half the NFL would pick him up. But he's a bottom of the barrel QB. Besides Jet n Broncos, no one wanted him n even the Broncos think Sanchez was a better option than Mr. Journeyman. 

Context is a mother fker, and way above your comprehension level, so we can just leave it at that. I'd rather you focus your horse power on something more your speed.

[Warfish]

23 hours ago, T0mShane said:

As a person who possesses many advanced degrees in rocket engineering, allow me to present the actual formula thusly:

 

32 NFL teams, each team with ~3 roster slots devoted to the QB position, equalling 96 available roster slots for the available population of quarterbacks.

 

if you work out the math using my highly sophistucated training, one could conclude that, in the opinion of those 32 NFL teams, Ryan Fitzpatrick is not one of the 96 most desirable candidates to fill those available slots. 

Perfect example of poor analysis.  Must be those "advanced stats" again....

Ryan Fitzpatrick is a starting QB who completed a successful season in a poor way, and is asking for starting QB money for multiple years.

31 of 32 teams, as far as we know, said no to Fitzpatrick as a starting QB asking for starting QB money.

We have no idea how many teams would be happy to sign Fitz at backup QB money.  My guess would be a goodly number, given he's one of the best #2-level QB's in the NFL today.  

The issue is money and future.  Fitz wants starter money, over multiple years, and at his age and resume, thats a very tough sell.  If he was willing to accept backup money, I have no doubt he'd have been signed already in an assortment of possible locations.

But see, WE still seem to want him at sorta-starter money.  Hence why he is still available and hasn't reduced his price.  Because WE appear willing to give him 12/6/6, and why would he accept something like 2/2 to be a backup somewhere else when he could take 12/6/6/ and be handed the starters job here?

 

[Rangers9]

37 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Perfect example of poor analysis.  Must be those "advanced stats" again....

Ryan Fitzpatrick is a starting QB who completed a successful season in a poor way, and is asking for starting QB money for multiple years.

31 of 32 teams, as far as we know, said no to Fitzpatrick as a starting QB asking for starting QB money.

We have no idea how many teams would be happy to sign Fitz at backup QB money.  My guess would be a goodly number, given he's one of the best #2-level QB's in the NFL today.  

The issue is money and future.  Fitz wants starter money, over multiple years, and at his age and resume, thats a very tough sell.  If he was willing to accept backup money, I have no doubt he'd have been signed already in an assortment of possible locations.

But see, WE still seem to want him at sorta-starter money.  Hence why he is still available and hasn't reduced his price.  Because WE appear willing to give him 12/6/6, and why would he accept something like 2/2 to be a backup somewhere else when he could take 12/6/6/ and be handed the starters job here?

 

Fitz agreed to a one year contract but the Jets said no. IMO the only reason they want him for multiple years is to protect themselves if Hack can't start and lock him in at 6 mil per season (before incentives). We don't know what those incentives are. I think the 1-12 is fair and they can do it if they want to do it. Or maybe he'd be willing to take less money. To me this is the fair solution. He wants starter money but low starter money. And believes he's a starter and so do I. If Mac isn't willing to compromise and doesn't sign Fitz it's his and Woody's fault if things so south with Geno. As for no team being interested in him. Again and this is what this thread is all about. The OP went over every team and starting Qb,. There are no starting Qb jobs this off season. Those guys are on contracts mostly high paying long term deals with a lot of guaranteed money still left on them. 

[Integrity28]

I was like, "oh, this is a high effort, but mostly dumb opening post", and then I read the responses. 

God almighty.

[joewilly12]

2 hours ago, BowlesMovement said:

The next time you say something that is the truth, it will be the first. You exposed yourself yesterday by posting Pats highlights. I am actually relieved to know that you and Mike000 are Pats fans, trolling us, and that there aren't really people this dumb on our planet.

No Patriots fan here glad to see you stopped the personal attacks at least I post the TRUTH what I posted was actual TRUTH with a video you seem to have issues handling and facing the truth 

[Warfish]

18 hours ago, Mike135 said:

Wait.  When you say he's average, how exactly do you mean that?

Like he's an average starting QB?  As in he's ranked somewhere between the 11th and 22nd best QB in the league?

Or he's average in terms of all NFL QBs?  Figure there are 3 QBs per team.  So 96 QBs.  And Fitz would rank somewhere around 40th to 60th?

If the latter, good call.  

If the former, you're nuts.

We don't have access to 96 QB's.

We have access to exactly 4.  Fitz, Geno, Hack and Petty.

And Fitz is the best of that group without question, both for short term competitiveness, and long term mentorship of the future starter Hack.

The #60 QB in the NFL is still the best option, when your best alternative is #93.

[PatsFanTX]

The #60 QB in the NFL is still the best option, when your best alternative is #93.

I'm curious, who are the 3 QB's who are worse than Geno?

[BowlesMovement]

39 minutes ago, joewilly12 said:

No Patriots fan here glad to see you stopped the personal attacks at least I post the TRUTH what I posted was actual TRUTH with a video you seem to have issues handling and facing the truth 

Nice try, we all know the truth now, your a Patr troll, trolling the sh*t out of this board.

[Tinstar]

42 minutes ago, Warfish said:

We don't have access to 96 QB's.

We have access to exactly 4.  Fitz, Geno, Hack and Petty.

And Fitz is the best of that group without question, both for short term competitiveness, and long term mentorship of the future starter Hack.

The #60 QB in the NFL is still the best option, when your best alternative is #93.

when was Fitz signed  ?  To my knowledge Todd Bowles has no access to Ryan Fitzpatrick until he's signed .

[joewilly12]

2 minutes ago, Tinstar said:

when was Fitz signed  ?  To my knowledge Todd Bowles has no access to Ryan Fitzpatrick until he's signed .

Pathetic isn't it that fans actually continue to support Fitzpatrick like he's a member of this team and refuse to face the fact that he isn't. 

[BowlesMovement]

Just now, joewilly12 said:

Pathetic isn't it that fans actually continue to support Fitzpatrick like he's a member of this team and refuse to face the fact that he isn't. 

What's pathetic is Pats trolls wasting their life on a Jets message board trolling Jets fans, go be with your ilk.

[T0mShane]

On July 9, 2016 at 10:01 AM, jamesr said:

I'm quite sure many teams would love to have Fitz as their #2, but there's no way he's going to take backup QB money. 

I would love to have Halle Berry star in this amateur porn flick I'm making, but we can't seem to agree to terms.

[Mike135]

14 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

I would love to have Halle Berry star in this amateur porn flick I'm making, but we can't seem to agree to terms.

So you're saying you'd settle for Fitz starring in your porn flick?