2 QBs-Does That Make Sense?

[varjet]

The Jets are struggling now with whether it is sensical to carry 4 QBs.  It has been noted that MOST teams last year only carried 2 QBs.  I presume that they had one or more on the PS.

Do you think it makes sense to only carry 2 QBs given their injuries?  Cowboys?

And if most teams are willing to carry their 3rd QBs on the PS, why does everyone think that someone will sign Petty to their 53?

If many other teams think Petty could be a 2nd QB on the 53, could we?

I note that the Jets' 53 rosters have always contained players who were being warehoused for the future.  Its not like they have been optimized for maximum production.

[joewilly12]

Macc and Bowles have a BIG decision to make to get down to the final cut downs. 

Lets hope that regardless of who he keeps and he cuts that its the right decision. 

We have suffered way too long. 

[Larz]

the jets may not have a veteran QB on the roster in 6 months.  keep 4

with all the injuries, petty could get snapped up at any point during the season, way too risky to PS him or hack

[Joe Jets fan]

I am on the side of only three going to stay.  

Next couple preseason games going to be very interesting.  

[jetsjets]

4QBs way too many roster spots. Make a decision!

[Shadetree]

Gotta keep all 4. If one must go, I vote Geno off the island.

[varjet]

Thanks for the replies.

My point was more focused on whether the teams keeping 2 were also foolish.

So by implication, to keep 4 is just one extra, not 2.  And as we have seen, we have extra OL and CB the last few years, and that was not the reason we did not make the playoffs.

[Better2bgreenthanblue]

19 minutes ago, varjet said:

Thanks for the replies.

My point was more focused on whether the teams keeping 2 were also foolish.

So by implication, to keep 4 is just one extra, not 2.  And as we have seen, we have extra OL and CB the last few years, and that was not the reason we did not make the playoffs.

I wonder what the stats are for season starting QB's missing more than 2 games a season over last 10 years. My gut thinks it's about 50%.

[GREENBEAN]

54 minutes ago, Larz said:

the jets may not have a veteran QB on the roster in 6 months.  keep 4

with all the injuries, petty could get snapped up at any point during the season, way too risky to PS him or hack

This.  It's about more than this season. The ability to think long term is a foreign concept to many Jets fans,  myself included, so throwing any of these young guys away at this time would be at least a very difficult decision. I would keep all 4 and let Petty and Hack groom under Fitz while Geno can be the 2nd with some real starter experience. He hasn't done well coming in for spot duty, but he is still most likely the best option to keep the momentum going with a solid team if Fitz goes down for a couple of weeks.

[Rangers9]

Well the only way they could carry only 2 is if Hack is the backup. There's other combinations like Petty on the PS. If Geno is the backup then Hack is on the 53 but probably not activated for most or all games. 

[Warfish]

Fitz, Petty, Hack is fine by me.

Fitz, Geno, Hack is what it will be, with Petty either cut or on P.S.

No one is signing Petty off the P.S., risk of that is pure (homer) fantasy.  Most teams have their own P.S. or #3 guy they like.

[varjet]

Four it is.  Considering that in prior years the Jets carried multiple OL who never played, this is the year that the PS gets stocked with more OL.  

How many other teams would Wes Johnson make?

[varjet]

2 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Fitz, Petty, Hack is fine by me.

Fitz, Geno, Hack is what it will be, with Petty either cut or on P.S.

No one is signing Petty off the P.S., risk of that is pure (homer) fantasy.  Most teams have their own P.S. or #3 guy they like.

I think teams are seeing the value of the QB.  Look at the Broncos.  They carried 3.  One retired, one left, one is playing decently, they drafted one and they signed one.   The position is looking stable.  2 is too few.   

Petty is a conundrum.  if he stinks the next few weeks, he does get cut and put on the PS for further development.  Maybe no one takes him.  If he plays well, he would definitely get picked up as a 3 on someone's 53.

But we need to look at the bright side-next year the Jets should only have 3.  Anyone they do draft or sign to eventually replace Fitz goes on the PS.

I think Fitz may be on the team for so long as Marshall and Decker can play.

[Shadetree]

1 hour ago, GREENBEAN said:

This.  It's about more than this season. The ability to think long term is a foreign concept to many Jets fans,  myself included, so throwing any of these young guys away at this time would be at least a very difficult decision. I would keep all 4 and let Petty and Hack groom under Fitz while Geno can be the 2nd with some real starter experience. He hasn't done well coming in for spot duty, but he is still most likely the best option to keep the momentum going with a solid team if Fitz goes down for a couple of weeks.

I agree w this but, in 3 weeks, I might believe Petty is that guy to go to in relief.

 

[j4jets]

3 hours ago, varjet said:

The Jets are struggling now with whether it is sensical to carry 4 QBs.  It has been noted that MOST teams last year only carried 2 QBs.  I presume that they had one or more on the PS.

Do you think it makes sense to only carry 2 QBs given their injuries?  Cowboys?

And if most teams are willing to carry their 3rd QBs on the PS, why does everyone think that someone will sign Petty to their 53?

If many other teams think Petty could be a 2nd QB on the 53, could we?

I note that the Jets' 53 rosters have always contained players who were being warehoused for the future.  Its not like they have been optimized for maximum production.

The way Fitz plays, I'll be surprised if plays 15 games again this year. He's only played all 16 games twice in his career I believe. So yeah, we need a decent backup and Macc isn't hanging his hat on Petty trying to win a couple of NFL games. But if push comes to shove, Petty can be your #3. Hack is a foregone conclusion this year (redshirt). 

 

Khiry starts on PUP, and allows us to use 4QBs for a few wks. When he comes back, you reevaluate the situation. By that time, the Jets may be 1-5 n pretty much out of playoff race, or are at 4-2, ahead of the Pats and have a shot at winning the division. Anything in between is where you have the most trouble imo evaluating the season imo. 

[Hitman Harris]

After seeing Chad, then Kellen or was it Brooksie go down back to back I'm good with 3. 

[Maxman]

I don't see any way that a defensive minded coach like Bowles doesn't lose his mind if Mac sticks with with 4 QBs on the active roster. But they have to decide who needs to go. It will be Geno or Petty. I am okay with either, if Petty sticks and can do the job, that is obviously much better for the Jets:

• Cap wise
• Drafting wise
• Long term depth wise

Geno seems like a safer bet because he has much more experience. But let the games begin. Well they already begun, so let them continue.

[jamesr]

6 hours ago, Hitman Harris said:

After seeing Chad, then Kellen or was it Brooksie go down back to back I'm good with 3. 

I think it was Penny & Fiedler on back to back plays.

[CrazyCarl40]

6 hours ago, Maxman said:

I don't see any way that a defensive minded coach like Bowles doesn't lose his mind if Mac sticks with with 4 QBs on the active roster. But they have to decide who needs to go. It will be Geno or Petty. I am okay with either, if Petty sticks and can do the job, that is obviously much better for the Jets:

• Cap wise
• Drafting wise
• Long term depth wise

Geno seems like a safer bet because he has much more experience. But let the games begin. Well they already begun, so let them continue.

If they cut Petty then in 2017 Hack is the only QB under contract. That doesn't seem palatable or productive, especially with bigger cap decisions to make and the fact that Hack likely won't be ready to take over in 2017 means you're again searching for a starting QB. Likely someone like Fitz.

[NYs Stepchild]

Obviously the QB position isn't very important, difficult to evaluate, nor does it take time to develop. 

Let's stick with the way we've always done things, because that has worked out so well. 

Let's keep Housewares, Jarvis Harrison, and McDougle and cut a possible franchise QB. Teams have been known to keep 2 kickers, but not 4 QBs.

Our last 4 roster spots almost never dress for one game. They are developmental spots, and reserved for TEs, guards, safeties, and FBs. QB is just not important enough to waste a developmental spot on. 

[drdetroit]

No thanks 

1. We are going to have a bottom 5 pass protecting OL

2. Geno and Petty are both cheap so no real cap savings

3. Having an extra running back on the roster changes nothing

[slats]

I think Belichick was one of the first big two QB guys. And it makes sense if your QB is your whole team. If your team has a young, franchise QB -where you don't really need to have developmental guys behind him- two QBs make sense. You have your backup for a game or two, and an emergency guy, a WR or TE who played QB in high school or college. 

Obviously, this is not the Jets situation. 

Also, I don't think a lot of QBs make their way onto practice squads. I know the league had that in mind when they created practice squads, but I don't think it's happening in practice. 

[jetfan61]

44 minutes ago, NYs Stepchild said:

Obviously the QB position isn't very important, difficult to evaluate, nor does it take time to develop. 

Let's stick with the way we've always done things, because that has worked out so well. 

Let's keep Housewares, Jarvis Harrison, and McDougle and cut a possible franchise QB. Teams have been known to keep 2 kickers, but not 4 QBs.

Our last 4 roster spots almost never dress for one game. They are developmental spots, and reserved for TEs, guards, safeties, and FBs. QB is just not important enough to waste a developmental spot on. 

This is a good point,  its easier to stash these players on tne practice squad and sign them back if needed. 

[drdetroit]

7 hours ago, Hitman Harris said:

After seeing Chad, then Kellen or was it Brooksie go down back to back I'm good with 3. 

We don't have a good OL and Fitz could regress this year.  This is not time to go 2 qb on the depth chart

[rex-n-effect]

If Petty performs well through the preseason and goes to the PS it is improbable that he survives the season as a Jet. Some team with a QB problem at the end of the season will go fishing for help on next year's roster. Young QBs who did well in the preseason will definitely be in their sights.

[Warfish]

2 hours ago, CrazyCarl40 said:

If they cut Petty then in 2017 Hack is the only QB under contract.

I don't understand this fear at all.

1. If we want Fitz back, we can have Fitz back.

2. There is never a shortage of "Fitz-quality" Journeyman Free Agent QB's to sign.

3. There is never a shortage of "Petty-quality" Young Free Agent QB's available to sign.

4. We can always draft another QB in the mid-late rounds to be the #3.

The only risk is cutting/P.S. Petty is he is stolen, and turns out to be Joe Montana.  That is a minimal risk.

Folks need to temper their panic.  If we cut Geno and stick with Petty/Hack, we'll be fine.  If we P.S. or cut Petty, we'll be fine.  There is no emergency of fatal problem in either decision.

 

[BUM-KNEE]

4 would be great if the situation doesnt cost us a good player in another area. (unlikely)

2 is an insane notion, and seems highly unlikely to me.

Having Hack or Petty on the IR with a bruised cuticle seems like the ideal scenerio that plays out.

[hawk]

The team only dresses 48 players,iirc, so if you keep 4, you have 3 other positions scratched versus 4.  I don't believe they cut any.

 

However, if Petty is even or passes, Geno, which I believe he will, issue works itself out.

 

JMO

[drdetroit]

Cut Hackenburg

 

problem solved 

[Doggin94it]

3 hours ago, slats said:

I think Belichick was one of the first big two QB guys. And it makes sense if your QB is your whole team. If your team has a young, franchise QB -where you don't really need to have developmental guys behind him- two QBs make sense. You have your backup for a game or two, and an emergency guy, a WR or TE who played QB in high school or college. 

Obviously, this is not the Jets situation. 

Also, I don't think a lot of QBs make their way onto practice squads. I know the league had that in mind when they created practice squads, but I don't think it's happening in practice. 

Right.  And if you build your team around your QB, and both he and your backup go down, you're screwed anyway - so why bother carrying a third? 

[Doggin94it]

1 hour ago, BUM-KNEE said:

4 would be great if the situation doesnt cost us a good player in another area. (unlikely)

2 is an insane notion, and seems highly unlikely to me.

Having Hack or Petty on the IR with a bruised cuticle seems like the ideal scenerio that plays out.

That's exactly what will happen. Hack will be IRd after the fourth preseason game

[NYs Stepchild]

2 hours ago, Warfish said:

I don't understand this fear at all.

1. If we want Fitz back, we can have Fitz back.

2. There is never a shortage of "Fitz-quality" Journeyman Free Agent QB's to sign.

3. There is never a shortage of "Petty-quality" Young Free Agent QB's available to sign.

4. We can always draft another QB in the mid-late rounds to be the #3.

The only risk is cutting/P.S. Petty is he is stolen, and turns out to be Joe Montana.  That is a minimal risk.

Folks need to temper their panic.  If we cut Geno and stick with Petty/Hack, we'll be fine.  If we P.S. or cut Petty, we'll be fine.  There is no emergency of fatal problem in either decision.

 

Same argument Bellicheck used with Brady.

You can always draft another 6th round QB. No need to waste a spot on him. Instead we'll keep a 10th olineman that we'll cut next year. 

You have no idea how good Petty is or isn't going to be besides the fact that you will need to spend another 2 years training a new QB...then cut him and draft a new one. 

[NYs Stepchild]

27 minutes ago, Doggin94it said:

Right.  And if you build your team around your QB, and both he and your backup go down, you're screwed anyway - so why bother carrying a third? 

The third QB should always be developmental. Finding a franchise QB is the most important thing in football. 

If you happen to have 2 QBs that are still developing then you have to keep them.

If any one stops showing progress you cut them immediately but not before.

 

[Doggin94it]

The third QB should always be developmental. Finding a franchise QB is the most important thing in football. 

If you happen to have 2 QBs that are still developing then you have to keep them.

If any one stops showing progress you cut them immediately but not before.

 

My point is that teams like indy or Seattle - teams that already have young long term franchise QBs- are less likely to keep 3 QBs, since they don't need that "developmental" guy

Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk

[NYs Stepchild]

8 minutes ago, Doggin94it said:

My point is that teams like indy or Seattle - teams that already have young long term franchise QBs- are less likely to keep 3 QBs, since they don't need that "developmental" guy

Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk

I agree. They would be more likely to risk those guys clearing waivers.

Once you have one develop past the average backup your developmental QB and your backup can be one in the same. 

If Petty surpasses Geno we won't have this problem anymore.