Why we haven't seen Hack IMO

[kdels62]

Just now, gEYno said:

Just so I'm clear on what the idiotic mentality is... Thinking a guy who was okay at best his first year, and awful the following two years in college, and then has been by all accounts awful in his first training camp, and who can't earn practice or preseason reps, is not going to magically merit a second round pick and be a legitimate quality starter at some point is idiotic.  As opposed to the contrary, thinking a guy who couldn't complete passes in college and can't complete passes in shorts, is going to continue to be unable to complete passes, which is the smart way of thinking.

The idiotic part is the constant joy at hackenberg' failures. Discussing his faults while hoping for improvement is not idiotic but similar to the constant Geno bashing throughout the summer, taking joy in a player that might be a franchise QB seems dumb.

[Big Blocker]

13 hours ago, detectivekimble said:

Well, let's see, Geno is only in his fourth year and the current regime has only seen him in live action once.  Young QBs do tend to improve from years two to three and three to four.

Gee I thought most people who post here realize that coaches study game film.  Of which there is plenty of Smith.  Too much to watch, probably, without feeling ill, but there you have it.

[ZachEY]

5 minutes ago, kdels62 said:

The idiotic part is the constant joy at hackenberg' failures. Discussing his faults while hoping for improvement is not idiotic but similar to the constant Geno bashing throughout the summer, taking joy in a player that might be a franchise QB seems dumb.

I'd love to see a post where someone is actually happy about this?  Venting frustration, not deluding oneself, and believing we (and more importantly, the front office) should have seen this coming is not the equivalence of "joy".

Personally, I'm really upset.  I like Bowles and Macc, and overall, I appreciate what they've accomplished thus far despite some things I don't agree with (Revis - more of a woody johnson call, I'd guess; Harris - not worth the money; Hack - obviously).  And while Hack wasn't a first round pick, I'm worried that he's their guy now, and it sinks the ship.  So, my feelings are, that I hope Hack doesn't prove to much of an anchor, which I see as more likely than you know, him actually becoming a good player.

[Big Blocker]

13 hours ago, jgb said:

This team is going to win the Superbowl if this many fans got time to worry about why a rookie, 4th string, shell shocked, reclamation project QB in his 6th week of pro camp isn't getting to throw passes in the 4th quarter of pre-season games.

Jets fans would worry when curfew was in Heaven.

I understand the point, but the concern about Hackenburg is part of the ongoing assessment of just how good a job Macc and his people are doing. 

Putting aside the Favre interlude, this team has not had a really solid prospect at Qb since Chad, and he quickly became damaged goods and was figured out by opponents.  It's been a long dry spell at Qb, and eventually a Jet FO has to solve this.  Is it going to be this one?  So far it has not.

[Adoni Beast]

If the Jets only had 3 qb's, Hackenberg would have gotten more reps and playing time. But as a rookie with limited reps (some days I read he only had 2 reps) there isn't much room to show anything. By accounts this is how Petty looked at this time last year and he had more reps, and look at this year.

The Jets knew when they drafted Hackenbeg that he needed a year to learn the playbook, re-develop his mechanics, and learn nfl defenses. For all his freshman year bill o'brien pro system accolades, he still was playing against college defenses. So he has a long way to go and the Jets are doing the right thing and slowly bringing him along.

 

[whodeawhodat]

2 minutes ago, gEYno said:

I'd love to see a post where someone is actually happy about this?  Venting frustration, not deluding oneself, and believing we (and more importantly, the front office) should have seen this coming is not the equivalence of "joy".

Personally, I'm really upset.  I like Bowles and Macc, and overall, I appreciate what they've accomplished thus far despite some things I don't agree with (Revis - more of a woody johnson call, I'd guess; Harris - not worth the money; Hack - obviously).  And while Hack wasn't a first round pick, I'm worried that he's their guy now, and it sinks the ship.  So, my feelings are, that I hope Hack doesn't prove to much of an anchor, which I see as more likely than you know, him actually becoming a good player.

it is a bit early for this imo. deep breaths

[kmnj]

he is browning nagle reincarnated

played for a "pro style offense" had a big arm..... but struggles throwing the ball with accuracy and holds the ball too l ong

we should just trade away our 2nd round pick every year for proven guys as we certainly cant draft them

our gm knows pro talent when proven-bmarsh and forte and our new tackle were GREAT moves

 

as for our drafts color me unimpressed

 

 

[Big Blocker]

6 minutes ago, Adoni Beast said:

If the Jets only had 3 qb's, Hackenberg would have gotten more reps and playing time. But as a rookie with limited reps (some days I read he only had 2 reps) there isn't much room to show anything. By accounts this is how Petty looked at this time last year and he had more reps, and look at this year.

The Jets knew when they drafted Hackenbeg that he needed a year to learn the playbook, re-develop his mechanics, and learn nfl defenses. For all his freshman year bill o'brien pro system accolades, he still was playing against college defenses. So he has a long way to go and the Jets are doing the right thing and slowly bringing him along.

 

Last year was very different.  Fitzpatrick was as now the clear starter, but there was no real competition for the backup since Petty was considered far from ready, being a project 4th rounder.  But he still got in pre-season games.  So might Hack in the next two.  unless the Jets waste still more time giving Smith more playing time.

[ZachEY]

11 minutes ago, whodeawhodat said:

it is a bit early for this imo. deep breaths

Busting on a QB is the #1 reason coaches/GMs get fired.  It's not at all unreasonable to think that's what Macc/Bowles just signed on for.

[whodeawhodat]

Just now, gEYno said:

Busting on a QB is the #1 reason coaches/GMs get fired.  It's not at all unreasonable to think that's what Macc/Bowles just signed on for.

busting on a QB is trading up to one of the top spots in RD 1 of the draft and misssing imo.  2nd and 4th rd QBs are development projects(1 or more years).  My $0.02

[Rangers9]

Mac seems to be into that philosophy of drafting a Qb every year until you finally get your starter. And taking a chance on a prospect. First there have only been two exhibition games so we have two more to go before we see what their true game plan is with Hack. But it looks obvious that he was never in the mix to be Fitz's backup. Why, I don't know if he's considered the team's best Qb prospect. And why are they protecting him so much. The best way for him to get experience is to play in games. Even if that means game 4 and with just running the plays he knows. Btw Mac isn't just taking a chance on Hack (by drafting him) he's taking it on other players esp Clady. They could lose 3 mil if the guy physically can't play. I think a smart move because the guy is a former Pro Bowler but moves like that can backfire on you. In 2014 almost every move that Idzik made backfired on him even though some of them were not bad. I mean Percy Harvin had been an impact player and Seattle never really wanted to trade him until there were locker room issues. He played good in a few games but not good enough to get a contract with us. But it was worth taking a chance imo when he became available. Other players like Mike Vick and even Patterson were good signings but ones that didn't work out. Drafting Milliner in 2013 made sense even though he had an injury history, He was the best corner in that draft and a lot of players if not most have injury histories. But the guy has been injured most of the time he's been here. He drafted Pryor after Landry signed with the Colts as a hard hitting replacement but the guy was played out of position and had a poor rookie season. Now after his second season with a new coaching staff the guy looks like a potential Pro Bowler in the future So you have to take chances esp with injuries. And you have to be not only good but lucky. 

[jgb]

I understand the point, but the concern about Hackenburg is part of the ongoing assessment of just how good a job Macc and his people are doing. 

Putting aside the Favre interlude, this team has not had a really solid prospect at Qb since Chad, and he quickly became damaged goods and was figured out by opponents.  It's been a long dry spell at Qb, and eventually a Jet FO has to solve this.  Is it going to be this one?  So far it has not.

They got a guy who threw for 4000 yards for a song. They are among best jets FO ever at figuring out QB position

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Snell41]

The people who hate Hack now hated him before the draft, they're not changing their opinion. Arguing with them is like arguing with far right Repubs or far left Dems. Opinions will never change, so why bother.

Hack is going nowhere. He's not relevant at the moment because the coaches have no intention of putting him in a relevant position. That was clearly their plan all along, all the way back to when they drafted him. Save your breath.

Here's the facts: we have 4 QB's on the roster. We are very unlikely to carry all 4 into the season. Fitz is going nowhere. Hack is going nowhere. Geno and Bryce have taken the lions share of the reps thus far. Geno has gone from being the clear #2 to potentially falling behind Petty. Coach has gone from stating Geno is #2 to now back walking comments and being vague about who's playing when this upcoming game. How much more obvious does it need to be to you guys that the coaches and FO feel the immediate pressing need right now is to determine whether Geno or Bryce is making the team. Hack will get his work in throughout the season and next year, that's clearly the intent. Barring 2 QB's getting hurt in the same game this year they have zero intent putting him out there, and there's NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[section314]

3 minutes ago, Snell41 said:

 

The people who hate Hack now hated him before the draft, they're not changing their opinion. Arguing with them is like arguing with far right Repubs or far left Dems. Opinions will never change, so why bother.

 

Hack is going nowhere. He's not relevant at the moment because the coaches have no intention of putting him in a relevant position. That was clearly their plan all along, all the way back to when they drafted him. Save your breath.

 

Here's the facts: we have 4 QB's on the roster. We are very unlikely to carry all 4 into the season. Fitz is going nowhere. Hack is going nowhere. Geno and Bryce have taken the lions share of the reps thus far. Geno has gone from being the clear #2 to potentially falling behind Petty. Coach has gone from stating Geno is #2 to now back walking comments and being vague about who's playing when this upcoming game. How much more obvious does it need to be to you guys that the coaches and FO feel the immediate pressing need right now is to determine whether Geno or Bryce is making the team. Hack will get his work in throughout the season and next year, that's clearly the intent. Barring 2 QB's getting hurt in the same game this year they have zero intent putting him out there, and there's NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT!

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Finally, some sanity! Great post.

[ZachEY]

57 minutes ago, Snell41 said:

The people who hate Hack now hated him before the draft, they're not changing their opinion. Arguing with them is like arguing with far right Repubs or far left Dems. Opinions will never change, so why bother.

I just like that not being happy that we used a 2nd rounder on a guy who by all objective measures, sucked in college, is likened to extremism.

[Augustiniak]

so rex, tanny and idzik are geniuses for throwing sanchez and geno in there right away when they clearly weren't ready, but mccags and bowles are idiots for not throwing hack in there right away?

[Snell41]

I just like that not being happy that we used a 2nd rounder on a guy who by all objective measures, sucked in college, is likened to extremism.

He's here now, you're not going to see very much of him for the next year. You're obviously not changing your opinion on him during that time. I'm not changing my opinion that at the moment I have faith in the FO that they made the decision with a plan in mind and by all accounts are following that plan. He may turn out to suck, we'll see. But not anytime soon. Do we continue to beat this dead horse knowing that nothing is coming to light for at least a year? I think it's fair to say your argument is extreme when there is no argument. Most are saying we'll just have to wait and see. You want to keep hammering your opinion that he sucks, there's zero chance, cut his ass right now. Ok man, your opinion is logged for us to look back upon and will be right here ready for your "I told you so's" if you're right. Good luck to you. But he's not getting cut this year, and he's not playing. Them's the facts. Go ahead and pick up that bat and keep beating though.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[peekskill68]

If we tune out all the noise this preseason has turned into a very simple analysis.  Has Petty progressed enough to be a viable backup for Fitz this season?  That's really the only thing that's being evaluated.  Fitz is a known. Geno is a known and Hack is a red shirt.  It's all about Petty. If he's still a work in progress we keep 4 QB's.  If his current skill level is close enough to Geno's we cut ties with Geno and use that roster spot to keep an additional young position player with an expected higher ceiling.

[Snell41]

If we tune out all the noise this preseason has turned into a very simple analysis.  Has Petty progressed enough to be a viable backup for Fitz this season?  That's really the only thing that's being evaluated.  Fitz is a known. Geno is a known and Hack is a red shirt.  It's all about Petty. If he's still a work in progress we keep 4 QB's.  If his current skill level is close enough to Geno's we cut ties with Geno and use that roster spot to keep an additional young position player with an expected higher ceiling.

And there you have it, not sure why this turns into multiple pages of Hack analysis. There's nothing to analyze, and the real story is happening right under our noses. Bryce is going to have the opportunity to deliver the figurative knockout blow to Geno. It's a pretty darn big moment, and people are still going on about a guy they're not even gonna see.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RoadFan]

Time for a rehash of a Roadfan opinion that will eventually prove to be fact.

The Jets *fudged* up royally by not trading up to get Marcus Mariota.  The cost was irrelevant.

[dbatesman]

2 hours ago, gEYno said:

And while Hack wasn't a first round pick, I'm worried that he's their guy now, and it sinks the ship. 

This is the big concern. If we end up passing on a solid QB prospect next year just because we haven't seen Hackenberg publicly sh*t his pants yet, you can officially start the doomsday clock on this group.

[Charlie Brown]

17 minutes ago, Augustiniak said:

so rex, tanny and idzik are geniuses for throwing sanchez and geno in there right away when they clearly weren't ready, but mccags and bowles are idiots for not throwing hack in there right away?

Someone had to say it.......

Thank you!

[Adoni Beast]

It takes time for quarterbacks to peak and see the whole game. Marinos and Peytons are rare.

It took Aaron Rodgers 4 years before he was ready, Romo 4 years, Favre 4 years before actually having good stats, Eli 4 years, etc etc.

If in year 3 of training camp Hack is playing like this then it'll be time to panic. I wanted to draft Hack, but I don't want him seeing the field this year, besides maybe the final preseason game. 

[ZachEY]

52 minutes ago, Snell41 said:

He's here now, you're not going to see very much of him for the next year. You're obviously not changing your opinion on him during that time. I'm not changing my opinion that at the moment I have faith in the FO that they made the decision with a plan in mind and by all accounts are following that plan. He may turn out to suck, we'll see. But not anytime soon. Do we continue to beat this dead horse knowing that nothing is coming to light for at least a year? I think it's fair to say your argument is extreme when there is no argument. Most are saying we'll just have to wait and see. You want to keep hammering your opinion that he sucks, there's zero chance, cut his ass right now. Ok man, your opinion is logged for us to look back upon and will be right here ready for your "I told you so's" if you're right. Good luck to you. But he's not getting cut this year, and he's not playing. Them's the facts. Go ahead and pick up that bat and keep beating though.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's funny, because I never said, "there's zero chance" or to "cut his ass right now."

Him sucking is not an extreme, it's a simple continuation of his college career.

[Big Blocker]

2 hours ago, jgb said:

They got a guy who threw for 4000 yards for a song. They are among best jets FO ever at figuring out QB position

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, I should have made clear I was talking about a longer term solution and so in that sense the reference to Favre was unhelpful.  I do count myself as one who gives credit for the Fitzpatrick deal.  But the need for Qb help medium to long term very much remains.

[jgb]

2 minutes ago, Big Blocker said:

Yes, I should have made clear I was talking about a longer term solution and so in that sense the reference to Favre was unhelpful.  I do count myself as one who gives credit for the Fitzpatrick deal.  But the need for Qb help medium to long term very much remains.

I don't disagree but I'm focused on enjoying this rapidly closing window of older, great players while we have them. When/if we find the "QB of the future," by the time he is ready to play well, revis, mangold, harris, forte and marshall will be a memory.

[Big Blocker]

1 hour ago, Augustiniak said:

so rex, tanny and idzik are geniuses for throwing sanchez and geno in there right away when they clearly weren't ready, but mccags and bowles are idiots for not throwing hack in there right away?

The situations are not equivalent.  Sanchez and Smith became starters in their rookie seasons for the regular season.  The question here is why Hackenburg has not played in a pre-season game just like every other bench Qb in the league.

[Big Blocker]

6 minutes ago, jgb said:

I don't disagree but I'm focused on enjoying this rapidly closing window of older, great players while we have them. When/if we find the "QB of the future," by the time he is ready to play well, revis, mangold, harris, forte and marshall will be a memory.

I actually expect all those named will be back in 17, and some to most will be in 18.  By which time Fitzpatrick will be gone, if not in 17.  Who will replace Fitzpatrick is not an unreasonable question to ask about this FO.  After all, they just signed a one year deal, setting up the question.

[ZachEY]

1 hour ago, Augustiniak said:

so rex, tanny and idzik are geniuses for throwing sanchez and geno in there right away when they clearly weren't ready, but mccags and bowles are idiots for not throwing hack in there right away?

Question:  Is there a gray area between starting day one and getting almost no reps in practice?  Or, do you have to pick one of the two?

[jgb]

I actually expect all those named will be back in 17, and some to most will be in 18.  By which time Fitzpatrick will be gone, if not in 17.  Who will replace Fitzpatrick is not an unreasonable question to ask about this FO.  After all, they just signed a one year deal, setting up the question.

Even if we get a stud in draft next year first year or several will be learning curve which is why I said "when he is ready to play WELL"

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Saul Goodman]

I'll just leave this here...

There’s no argument that Jared Goff wasn’t going to come into the NFL and blow away expectations, but the #1 overall pick isn’t even living up to expectations of a high-round draft pack.

According to Jason Cole of Bleacher Report, Goff isn’t just sitting at backup behind Case Keenum on the Rams depth chart, but rather he’s the third-string quarterback behind Sean Mannion as well. Yes, Sean Mannion.

Though coaches are still optimistic about Goff’s talent and the plan that he will eventually become the starter, Veteran Case Keenum is still running the Rams offense.

Live-game NFL action doesn’t mesh well with lack of NFL experience, what seems concerning though is the fact that Goff is being outperformed by just the second-year QB Sean Mannion in practice.

Goff has had rough outing in both two opening preseason gaames for LA, being picked off on only his second career NFL pass.

[RutgersJetFan]

4 hours ago, gEYno said:

Maybe.  But, if Hackenberg's practices didn't look like they do, at least according to the limited reports.  Do you really believe they'd be holding him out?  Honestly, my concern is less about preseason minutes than it is about the fact that he can barely earn practice reps.

Honestly I have no idea. I still don't know what to make of Bowles, but the one awesome thing he does seem to have is the no-bullsh*t approach to roster spots. I think either scenario is plausible considering the emergence of Petty of appearing to be at least on Geno's level. That absolutely should have taken priority over anything Hackenberg once that became apparent.

I'm cool either way. I know my cycloptic colleague would disagree, but IMO even if Hackenberg sucks it was worth the shot. Sanchez and Geno were worth their picks too. So long as this staff and front office isn't going to waste years on hoping and wishing that a sh*tty QB can finally pull it together like previous regimes, that's all that matters. Pick one or two every year and if they don't have it, roll the dice again next year. In other words, if Hackenberg can't earn reps and craps out, that's fine, it happens; what matters is that they cut bait and select again next year, and keep doing that until they find a guy.

[Augustiniak]

1 hour ago, Big Blocker said:

The situations are not equivalent.  Sanchez and Smith became starters in their rookie seasons for the regular season.  The question here is why Hackenburg has not played in a pre-season game just like every other bench Qb in the league.

b/c they have 3 qbs who need the reps more this season.  fitz missed all the OTAs and needs work with the starters.  the gm needs to decide who the backup qb is.  plus you have a gm who is committed to the long-term development of multiple qbs.  petty and hack are the first to get their shots.  last year was petty's redshirt year but since he was the #3 qb last year he got preseason reps.  

[dbatesman]

5 minutes ago, RutgersJetFan said:

Honestly I have no idea. I still don't know what to make of Bowles, but the one awesome thing he does seem to have is the no-bullsh*t approach to roster spots. I think either scenario is plausible considering the emergence of Petty of appearing to be at least on Geno's level. That absolutely should have taken priority over anything Hackenberg once that became apparent.

I'm cool either way. I know my cycloptic colleague would disagree, but IMO even if Hackenberg sucks it was worth the shot. Sanchez and Geno were worth their picks too. So long as this staff and front office isn't going to waste years on hoping and wishing that a sh*tty QB can finally pull it together like previous regimes, that's all that matters. Pick one or two every year and if they don't have it, roll the dice again next year. In other words, if Hackenberg can't earn reps and craps out, that's fine, it happens; what matters is that they cut bait and select again next year, and keep doing that until they find a guy.

I'm always going to be pissed about the pick because I think it was a waste, but I agree that it would take some of the sting out if it turns out they're just going to draft a guy every year until one hits. The absolute nightmare scenario is they pass over a solid prospect next year because they're committed to Hackenberg.

[Augustiniak]

Just now, dbatesman said:

I'm always going to be pissed about the pick because I think it was a waste, but I agree that it would take some of the sting out if it turns out they're just going to draft a guy every year until one hits. The absolute nightmare scenario is they pass over a solid prospect next year because they're committed to Hackenberg.

the russell wilson scenario.  i agree