Jump to content

Can Hackenberg really be this bad? UGH..


#90

Recommended Posts

Goff looks equally as bad. Haven't seen Wentz. Lynch looked okay yesterday, but generally bad too.

QBs aren't easy finds.

Goff looks bad. EQUALLY as bad is quite the overstatement. The only QB I've ever seen achieve the level of suck that Hackenberg did last night is Josh Freeman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 194
  • Created
  • Last Reply

this is another classic example of the fans knowing better-he sucked in college with accuracy and holding the ball-the pros are bigger , faster and stronger.

 

Clearly this is just one a game a preseason game so the believers will have 2-3 years to make excuses for him until he reaches his browning nagle destiny

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RoadFan said:

This is his 3rd year in a row of lousy football.  How anyone could have expected his game to magically go from cartilage scraps to filet is beyond me.

Hack is almost certainly hopeless.  This "he has all the tools" cliche is crap.  So does Cardale Jones.  There are QBs with those same tools every draft that fail miserably.

I don't  buy it anyway.  One of the necessary  tools is, in fact, accuracy.  Clearly Hack ain't got that.

Hopeless.

Do you also see dead people? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, The Troll said:

Goff looks bad. EQUALLY as bad is quite the overstatement. The only QB I've ever seen achieve the level of suck that Hackenberg did last night is Josh Freeman.

Splitting hairs. Either way, Goff sucking wasn't intended as an excuse for Hack.

Its concerning, make no mistake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only thing we can take away from yesterday's game is that Hackenberg needs a lot of work before he'll be ready to be a starting QB in the NFL.  Based on his college experience, this was expected.  Why are folks all of a sudden surprised at this?  It would have been nice if he came in and played like Joe Montana, but as we all know, stuff like that NEVER happens to the Jets.  Instead, he will have to be developed.  As I've said before, the modern day NFL QB either comes into the league ready to start or not, and the majority of current NFL QB's came into the league ready to start, so this is going to be an uphill battle for Hackenberg. Fingers crossed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, JiF said:

Factors to consider before Jets fans start to overreact to more preseason garbage:

- Everyone around him sucked last night.  

- It's preseason, no better time to suck

 

He was never supposed to see extended action either. Last night was supposed to have more Petty than we got.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd be willing to bet a small amount of money that Hack saw more snaps in his 2 preseason games than he did in all of TC. We knew coming in that he was going to be a minimum 1-2 year project, and that's exactly what he looks like.

Anyone who thinks that because Hack wasn't great in college means he can't be good in the NFL should look at Brett Favre and Warren Moons college stats. Moon was particularly atrocious. Conversely, a great college career doesn't guarantee success in the NFL. Just ask Vince Young, Manziel or Tebow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jack48 said:

he was bad. early on I thought a lot of it was the awful protection and the penalties.  but when you cannot protect- you hold.  later I could see that it had gotten to him. footwork was dicey.  thus accuracy suffered.

That was his issue coming out of PSU , his mechanics got all screwed up . It will be worked on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Smashmouth said:

Please stop with these threads. Hack barely got any reps at all in training camp and he has played well in that respect. In pre season game 3 he led a very nice drive and showcased his talent that should be all you need to know at this stage.

If Hack came in here and was handed the starting job as a rookie he would have gotten all the snaps and all the work and in that case maybe he would not look clueless but for the little work he did get I would have expected a lot worse at this stage and he seems to be just fine.

Please stop with the negatives and please stop trying to evaluate something that really can't be evaluated at this point in time.

We've barely seen these type of threads. For onceonce it's about another qb. I consider this progress. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, highvoltage said:

A lot can be fixed over time

2 years holding a clipboard could do wonders.

 

 

The only problem with a sit-for-2-years approach is that non-first rounders only get 4-year deals.  Meaning we'd only have a small window to assess whether he's "the guy", similar to what the Redskins dealt with with Kirk Cousins, finally deciding to franchise tag him at the end of his rookie deal.  For them its a good problem to have, but it might not be for us if Hack has mixed results. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Crusher said:

It can be plug n' play sometimes.  Russell Wilson was plug n' play.  I want one like that.  Don't you?

Of course, unfortunately those a few and far between.  One thing to remember Hackenberg is only 21, also not every QB develops at the same rate.  Drew Brees and Eli Manning to name a couple struggled early.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, CrazyCarl40 said:

Yes. He can be. I have more faith in Bryce Petty turning the corner and becoming a solid pro than Hack even finding the corner and if he did, he'd probably miss it completely. He was a bad college player and he's a terrible pro. If all things were equal, he'd be on the roster bubble. It's hard to honestly evaluate him as a 2nd round pick because he shouldn't have been touched until the 4th at the earliest. This has the potential to be a major miss for this regime. They created a QB controversy when there didn't need to be one. 

Not at all sure how there is a QB controversy...we have our starter...our did I miss something

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Fed Hill Jet said:

Not at all sure how there is a QB controversy...we have our starter...our did I miss something

Controversy over the #2, controversy over keeping 4 QBs this season, controversy of the position heading into 2017. This board has been littered with it all summer long. I think you did miss something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hack was put in a tough situation last night behind a swiss cheese O-line, but even when he had time and open receivers, he was woefully inaccurate.  I watched a lot of the kid at PSU and you always saw the potential -- he would drop a dime on the sideline 30 yards downfield, but then follow that up with a couple of inexplicable bad plays either overthrowing an open receiver by 10 yards, or stepping up into the teeth of a rush and taking a needless sack.  All we saw last night was the bad Hack, without the good plays sprinkled in.  At least we saw a bit of what he is capable of on a couple of throws on his first drive last week against the Giants.

Not going to panic though, I did not expect him to contribute this season.  Time to forget about last night and hope he shows substantial improvement next August.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, sirlancemehlot said:

Thing is, people defending the kid point to the fact that "it was just one game".  People knocking him look at the last several years of his play and find it to be terribly flawed. Taking into consideration the level of competition he faced last night, you'd hope to see at least spot success. 

But it wasn't just one game in college where he played well. Not only that, but this was a game that doesn't count, and where he's had very limited reps.

Not making excuses right now. I'm a HUGE fan of his, but he played like crap yesterday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 56mehl56 said:

That was his issue coming out of PSU , his mechanics got all screwed up . It will be worked on.

Another thing he has to work on is setting up and throwing in rhythm when he takes the snap over center.  He has a cannon. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, #90 said:

Decision making, Accuracy, just awful.

Thoughts?....

Evaluate again in preseason 2018.

Because that's the timeline.

I wouldn't have picked him (I wanted Lynch, sorta, or the guy who ended up on the Raiders, Cook).

But he's here now, and his timeline (at the earliest) is likely 2018-2019.

And he id definitely Macc's guy.

So we wait.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, CaliforniaJet said:

Hated it when we drafted him

Last week I loved him

This week I hate him again

I don't know what to do. 

The #4 QB really shouldn't cause much stress. Worry about it when he's supposed to be 1A or 1B, and if he looks like crap then... freak out accordingly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I posted this in the other Hackenberg thread and figured it's more appropriate here:

 

In fairness to Hack, he was playing with a second string offensive line, and only had one maybe-NFL-caliber WR in Robby Anderson to throw to. I'm not excusing his play; he looked terrible and no one should be happy, but even starting NFL QBs wouldn't have performed very well with that supporting cast. Let's pump the breaks before calling him an epic bust. If he looks this bad next year then I'll be alarmed. 

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Petty impressed with limited, action, perfect td pass got crushed, geno doesn't make that pass! Hack was horrible! I couldn't believe how bad he was! Petty is the future! Arm, smarts, courage, leader! Enough sad

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll reiterate my beefs with the Hackenburg pick.

 

- Poor resume leading up to the draft.

- 2nd round pick used on a major project

- Has looked worse to start out than any QB I can remember coming intot the league for the jets.

 

The biggest one is:  If he was looked at as a major long term project, why did you spend a 2nd rounder on him, a pick value that usually goes towards getting players that start sooner than later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll reiterate my beefs with the Hackenburg pick.

 

- Poor resume leading up to the draft.

- 2nd round pick used on a major project

- Has looked worse to start out than any QB I can remember coming intot the league for the jets.

 

The biggest one is:  If he was looked at as a major long term project, why did you spend a 2nd rounder on him, a pick value that usually goes towards getting players that start sooner than later.

His picked slot is what this is all about. I have no idea why they picked him in the second Rd.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll reiterate my beefs with the Hackenburg pick.

 

- Poor resume leading up to the draft.

- 2nd round pick used on a major project

- Has looked worse to start out than any QB I can remember coming intot the league for the jets.

 

The biggest one is:  If he was looked at as a major long term project, why did you spend a 2nd rounder on him, a pick value that usually goes towards getting players that start sooner than later.

His picked slot is what this is all about. I have no idea why they picked him in the second Rd.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...