Can Hackenberg really be this bad? UGH..

[Jet Nut]

43 minutes ago, dbatesman said:

I was being sarcastic (that wasn't what I was saying at all), but I actually do agree with this. Either you get the guy at the top of the draft or you grab some bum on day 3 and hope you can fix whatever's wrong with him. The history on QBs in the 2nd round is abysmal, and to the best of my recollection, none of them needed a f*cking redshirt year.

Favre.

Brees

Done

[Sperm Edwards]

1 minute ago, Jet Nut said:

Because there was no guarantee that they could draft who they wanted?  They just cant snap their fingers and get a specific player.  But they sure were the only ones who would get Osweiler?  Or they're feeling heat to win in Texas, have a pretty good team and needed a QB who could play today, not 2 seasons down the road?

Our 2 teams were in similar situations as the season officially began in March. Built to win now, except at QB. Their HC knew this QB like no other, and was the only one to coach him to any degree of success in the past.

[Jet Nut]

2 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Our 2 teams were in similar situations as the season officially began in March. Built to win now, except at QB. Their HC knew this QB like no other.

Except our GM and HC just finished year 1 together and at least in theory we have a bridge QB in place to allow Hack the time needed to learn. 

No matter what he thinks of Hack you never know how he'll do in the NFL, there are no givens.  You know what you're getting, pretty much, with Osweiller

[Sperm Edwards]

7 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

Except our GM and HC just finished year 1 together and at least in theory we have a bridge QB in place to allow Hack the time needed to learn. 

No matter what he thinks of Hack you never know how he'll do in the NFL, there are no givens.  You know what you're getting, pretty much, with Osweiller

That is not a reason why it's smart for us but dumb for them, or vice versa. In Houston, they know Fitzpatrick just as well as the Jets know Fitzpatrick. Plus they know Hackenberg far better.

[dbatesman]

13 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

Favre.

Brees

Done

whoa

[Jet Nut]

Just now, Sperm Edwards said:

That is not a reason why it's smart for us but dumb for them, or vice versa. In Houston, they know Fitzpatrick just as well as the Jets know Fitzpatrick. Plus they know Hackenberg far better.

And again, there is no guarantee that you get Hack even if you wanted him.  Osweiller was picked before that draft and is ready to go.  They had to make up their minds and went with the given

[Jet Nut]

Just now, dbatesman said:

whoa

Cute, you asked, those were too easy

[Sperm Edwards]

2 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

And again, there is no guarantee that you get Hack even if you wanted him.  Osweiller was picked before that draft and is ready to go.  They had to make up their minds and went with the given

Why was grabbing Osweiller smart for Houston but not smart for the Jets? We even picked in nearly identical spots in the draft.

They could have also re-signed Fitzpatrick, then drafted Hackenberg, just like we did. If we didn't grab Hackenberg, it sure didn't look like anyone else was going to. No, we'll never know for sure, but for all we know he would have slipped at least another 2 rounds if we didn't jump at him. Even that kid the Giants drafted in round was projected to go as high as #8 overall, which is 20 slots higher than the most optimistic draft slot for Hackenberg this year.  But if someone took him in round 2, people would then claim he'd never have lasted 2 more rounds.

[HessStation]

38 minutes ago, RutgersJetFan said:

Yeah, that's right. A Multiplicity reference. Anyone else on their C-game today?

 

[Jet Nut]

6 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Why was grabbing Osweiller smart for Houston but not smart for the Jets? We even picked in nearly identical spots in the draft.

They could have also re-signed Fitzpatrick, then drafted Hackenberg, just like we did. If we didn't grab Hackenberg, it sure didn't look like anyone else was going to. No, we'll never know for sure, but for all we know he would have slipped at least another 2 rounds if we didn't jump at him. Even that kid the Giants drafted in round was projected to go as high as #8 overall, which is 20 slots higher than the most optimistic draft slot for Hackenberg this year.  But if someone took him in round 2, people would then claim he'd never have lasted 2 more rounds.

I don't know, why do we feel the need to justify what we do or don't do off what the Texans do?  They chose Malette over Fitz, hardly a selling point to their ability to rate QBs. 

I don't know if Macc thought Hack would be picked, if he had any info saying just that.  And even if he did, would never know if he was right or wrong.  At this point its done and just have to hope he was right on Hack being worth the pick.

[Big Blocker]

2 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I think it puts the team in a bad position to draft total project QBs in back to back years (with non-throwaway level picks in both cases). It then forces a reinvestment in a blah QB like Fitz (and further, the retention of sub-blah QB like Geno) because starting the moment they were drafted it was wishful thinking for either of these guys to start by their respective 3rd seasons. And so here we are with 4 QBs, and not 1 of them on any other team's wish list.

Or maybe the FO is happy with Fitzpatrick and intended all along to bring him back as the starter, trying to get a multi-year deal from him as well.  With Fitz there and Petty in year two, they can afford to bring Petty along, and then added Hackenberg as someone who might challenge Petty later.  With Fitz there they can afford to have project Qb's.

I don't know how hard they tried, but they did make some noise about perhaps trading up in the draft to get Goff or Wentz, as there was some last year regarding Winston and Mariota.  None of those panned out, so it's not like Petty and Hack was Plan A all along.

[JetBlue]

On 9/2/2016 at 7:43 AM, PCP63 said:

What he did in college is now irrelevant. After a good showing last week, a rookie comes in and has a really bad game. Just one. Stop overreacting, guys. He'll be fine. Cutting a second rounder after one bad game would be utterly ridiculous.

The guy had the fewest snaps of any qb in camp and now he is supposed to do what exactly?  It has been common knowledge to just about everyone that this is a red-shirt year for Hack.  Why are people trying to "evaluate him" now?    

[JetBlue]

On 9/2/2016 at 9:31 AM, CrazyCarl40 said:

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.

The only controversy is in your mind and perhaps some media types like Cimini or Mehta.   It was almost a foregone conclusion that they were going to carry 4 qbs after drafting Hack in the 2nd.  

[Beerfish]

25 minutes ago, JetBlue said:

The guy had the fewest snaps of any qb in camp and now he is supposed to do what exactly?  It has been common knowledge to just about everyone that this is a red-shirt year for Hack.  Why are people trying to "evaluate him" now?    

Because he is a 2nd round pick that looks far worse than any new Qb we have had around here for ages and a 2nd round olineman, Te or CB would look nice on this roster right now.

The issue is the pick value of this player, a 2nd rounder, and some of the things it is requiring us to do roster wise.  The team had to evaluate him when they picked him so there is nothing wrong with making a judgement on him now, right or wrong.

[Larz]

Read up in hacks scouting reports leading up to the draft

He is what he is

 

[cant wait]

1 hour ago, Big Blocker said:

Or maybe the FO is happy with Fitzpatrick and intended all along to bring him back as the starter, trying to get a multi-year deal from him as well.  With Fitz there and Petty in year two, they can afford to bring Petty along, and then added Hackenberg as someone who might challenge Petty later.  With Fitz there they can afford to have project Qb's.

I don't know how hard they tried, but they did make some noise about perhaps trading up in the draft to get Goff or Wentz, as there was some last year regarding Winston and Mariota.  None of those panned out, so it's not like Petty and Hack was Plan A all along.

Fwiw Mac was trying to package #20 & 51 to trade up for tunsil on draft day

[thebuzzardman]

You can tell Geno is almost out the door as posters align themselves on either side of the Hackenberg sucks/is great debate. 

Will the next Jet QB whipping boy come on down! Next contestant on "Discuss backup Jet QB to death!"

[Pcola]

Not nitpicking but Jarvis Harrison was cut so not all 13 picks are still here. 

Macc has done a fantastic job but last year's draft, he was relying on a lot of the prior regime's scouts.  So the 2016 draft was all his.  While he hasn't been perfect as a few of his picks look like garbage (Shell) he and his scouts have a knack for finding incredible talent late (Jenkins, Burris, the 3 WRs).

At first I questioned passing on Lynch because as predicted, he will probably be starting a playoff game this year.  But I have a slight suspicion that Woody plays a bigger role than anyone lets on.  

Since the Sanchez draft, we have drafted defense in the first round every year, offense in the second round every year we had a pick, and defense in the third round every year but one (Winters).  3 different GMs, same trend.  Could be coincidence because of the small sample size, but we are talking about 7 drafts.  Thinking back, I recall that Woody seemed enamored with Plaxico personally, so much that the Jets signed him not knowing what he was going to bring to the table and required letting Braylon Edwards go.

Personally, I think that Woody fell in love with Hackenberg's story, read all the stories about his potential, and dictated the pick.

Could be wrong, but this pick was so "un-Macc-like.

[Miss Lonelyhearts]

Mechanics my god. When are people going to realize this is something they talk about to avoid talking about things that are actually things. It's like an 80s- style movie montage or some sh*t.

Scene: Hackenberg, wearing a hard hat sideways and eye black on his forehead, holding a hammer by the head and swinging the handle at an oversized comic prop nail, missing badly.

Cut to: Gailey jumping up and down And gesturing wildly in front of a blackboard with a sketch of a hammer and a nail and a great big arrow pointing from the head of the hammer to the head of the nail. Pan to Hackenberg furiously scribbling notes.

Cut back to Hackenberg still holding the hammer wrong, handle comes flying off on the backswing, goes hurtling end over end, and plunks Gailey in the head.

Cut to Hackenberg in the library, a tower of books on either side, thoughtfully scratching the three hairs on his chin while poring over technical manuals, Neolithic cave paintings of prehistoric Ryan brothers using crude stone tools, and Thor comics.

And back to Hackenberg with the hammer, still missing the nail.

This is significantly less ludicrous than the sh*t some of you actually believe.

[JetBlue]

8 hours ago, Beerfish said:

Because he is a 2nd round pick that looks far worse than any new Qb we have had around here for ages and a 2nd round olineman, Te or CB would look nice on this roster right now.

The issue is the pick value of this player, a 2nd rounder, and some of the things it is requiring us to do roster wise.  The team had to evaluate him when they picked him so there is nothing wrong with making a judgement on him now, right or wrong.

Actually there is something wrong with that but am not going waste bandwidth debating it with you.  I will revisit this conversation in training camp 2017.

[jgb]

 

[Harlemnite1]

On September 2, 2016 at 8:24 AM, highvoltage said:

A lot can be fixed over time

2 years holding a clipboard could do wonders.

Plus side he has a NFL arm and size to play the position, and he's very young

A true project, let's hope the Paxton Lynch comparisons don't derail his progress, because he looks legit albeit preseason

 

Hasn't done a thing for Geno. He is still throwing into triple coverage. 

[maury77]

FWIW from Rich Gannon: http://www.nj.com/jets/index.ssf/2016/09/rich_gannon_not_worried_about_christian_hackenberg.html

 

 

[Sperm Edwards]

17 hours ago, Big Blocker said:

Or maybe the FO is happy with Fitzpatrick and intended all along to bring him back as the starter, trying to get a multi-year deal from him as well.  With Fitz there and Petty in year two, they can afford to bring Petty along, and then added Hackenberg as someone who might challenge Petty later.  With Fitz there they can afford to have project Qb's.

I don't know how hard they tried, but they did make some noise about perhaps trading up in the draft to get Goff or Wentz, as there was some last year regarding Winston and Mariota.  None of those panned out, so it's not like Petty and Hack was Plan A all along.

They didn't try to get Goff or Wentz. They tried to get Goff and Wentz. 

[Sperm Edwards]

17 hours ago, Jet Nut said:

And again, there is no guarantee that you get Hack even if you wanted him.  Osweiller was picked before that draft and is ready to go.  They had to make up their minds and went with the given

Sure there is. As it turns out we likely flinched to get a QB that, despite the few outliers, most had projected to go 2 rounds later out of fear of missing him in rounds 3-4. Few fans wanted him, due to his back to back horrible seasons where he could barely throw on target to his checkdown back like Knoblauch throwing to 1st base, so it was going to be a risky pick for any GM even if he kind of liked him more than most.

I don't think Osweiller is a sure thing. I find it interesting that 2 teams that were ready-now minus the QB both went in the directions they did. Neither had experience with Osweiller, both had experience with Fitz, and only 1 had experience with Hackenberg. That O'Brien was more familiar with the 2 QBs we chose than the 1 unknown (to him) he instead chose. It's interesting.

[Pcola]

Not giving up the next two drafts for the rights to draft Goff or Wentz was the right move.  Taking Lee over Paxton Lynch and therefore settling for Hackenberg could potentially be a career limiting move.  

I don't know how heat Lee needs to be to justify taking over Lynch if Lynch ends up winning playoff games for Denver.

Maybe Macc and staff are ok with Fitz as their long term starter.  Would anyone be shocked if Fitz comes close to duplicating last year and the Jets sign him long term?

[Sperm Edwards]

2 minutes ago, Pcola said:

Not giving up the next two drafts for the rights to draft Goff or Wentz was the right move.  Taking Lee over Paxton Lynch and therefore settling for Hackenberg could potentially be a career limiting move.  

I don't know how heat Lee needs to be to justify taking over Lynch if Lynch ends up winning playoff games for Denver.

Maybe Macc and staff are ok with Fitz as their long term starter.  Would anyone be shocked if Fitz comes close to duplicating last year and the Jets sign him long term?

If coach and GM are to be taken at their word, they passed on Lynch because they felt he wouldn't see the field this year, as opposed to Lee who should definitely see the field a lot.

[Big Blocker]

12 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Sure there is. As it turns out we likely flinched to get a QB that, despite the few outliers, most had projected to go 2 rounds later out of fear of missing him in rounds 3-4. Few fans wanted him, due to his back to back horrible seasons where he could barely throw on target to his checkdown back like Knoblauch throwing to 1st base, so it was going to be a risky pick for any GM even if he kind of liked him more than most.

I don't think Osweiller is a sure thing. I find it interesting that 2 teams that were ready-now minus the QB both went in the directions they did. Neither had experience with Osweiller, both had experience with Fitz, and only 1 had experience with Hackenberg. That O'Brien was more familiar with the 2 QBs we chose than the 1 unknown (to him) he instead chose. It's interesting.

I don't know enough about the Texans' organization to say as you imply that O'Brien had total control on the decision.  In the case of the off season preceding 15, when they let go of Fitzpatrick, he did seem to want to go in the direction of Mallett who he coached in NE.  Looked to me like the Texans made the wrong decision there, and the right one was made by the Jets.  And in a contest between arguably the best run organization in the NFL, that being Denver, and Houston, Houston took Osweiler, and Denver let him go.  Who was Mr. Smarty Pants there?  I guess we'll find out.

But the sequence of events had Osweiler in Texas long before Hackenberg hit the draft.  And having signed Osweiler, I don't know it would have made much sense to pick Hackenberg, certainly not before he "fell" to the Jets.  So I don't think you can make much of anything about how that sequence played out in what it showed, and didn't show, regarding how O'Brien thinks about Hackenberg.

And with that, isn't the off season over, and we won't see much of Hackenberg until the next off season?  Imo, time to focus on the regular season.

[Sperm Edwards]

8 minutes ago, Big Blocker said:

I don't know enough about the Texans' organization to say as you imply that O'Brien had total control on the decision.  In the case of the off season preceding 15, when they let go of Fitzpatrick, he did seem to want to go in the direction of Mallett who he coached in NE.  Looked to me like the Texans made the wrong decision there, and the right one was made by the Jets.  And in a contest between arguably the best run organization in the NFL, that being Denver, and Houston, Houston took Osweiler, and Denver let him go.  Who was Mr. Smarty Pants there?  I guess we'll find out.

But the sequence of events had Osweiler in Texas long before Hackenberg hit the draft.  And having signed Osweiler, I don't know it would have made much sense to pick Hackenberg, certainly not before he "fell" to the Jets.  So I don't think you can make much of anything about how that sequence played out in what it showed, and didn't show, regarding how O'Brien thinks about Hackenberg.

And with that, isn't the off season over, and we won't see much of Hackenberg until the next off season?  Imo, time to focus on the regular season.

If you don't like the topic you don't have to respond. No need to be the topic police. 

I said I think it's interesting. The season is about to start so we'll see how it plays out. I don't know anyone who thinks of Osweiller as a sure thing, and few (outside of Jetsland) think of Fitz that way either. Again, it's just interesting. 

The idea of picking up Osweiller then drafting Hackenberg wasn't part of the equation so I don't know why you're arguing against it. Like arguing against the idea that grass doesn't naturally grow in orange and pink plaid. Well, who said it was? 

O'Brien: knew Fitz and knew Hackenberg. Both were as available to them as they were to us. And O'Brien didn't just "know" them like Bowles "knows" Fitzpatrick; he was active and instrumental in coaching their game and plays and mechanics/footwork and more. Given that, the Texans went with Osweiller instead. Osweiller, who just got benched for a broken down Peyton Manning who threw twice as many picks as TDs.

Season's about to start so we'll see how that ends up. 

[Big Blocker]

9 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

If you don't like the topic you don't have to respond. No need to be the topic police. 

I said I think it's interesting. The season is about to start so we'll see how it plays out. I don't know anyone who thinks of Osweiller as a sure thing, and few (outside of Jetsland) think of Fitz that way either. Again, it's just interesting. 

The idea of picking up Osweiller then drafting Hackenberg wasn't part of the equation so I don't know why you're arguing against it. Like arguing against the idea that grass doesn't naturally grow in orange and pink plaid. Well, who said it was? 

O'Brien: knew Fitz and knew Hackenberg. Both were as available to them as they were to us. And O'Brien didn't just "know" them like Bowles "knows" Fitzpatrick; he was active and instrumental in coaching their game and plays and mechanics/footwork and more. Given that, the Texans went with Osweiller instead. Osweiller, who just got benched for a broken down Peyton Manning who threw twice as many picks as TDs.

Season's about to start so we'll see how that ends up. 

I do think there's not much to say worth saying about Hackenberg, at least compared to the fact that the regular season is upon us.  But yeah how well Osweiler does in Houston is a pretty big NFL story seeing as how Denver let him go and Houston paid him big money.  Who was right?  It will be interesting.

 

But the point about O'Brien, Fitz and Osweiler - I don't follow how you said they went with Osweiler instead.  No doubt Texas wanted to go with a young guy who might be their future, and paid him a lot more than the Jets signed Fitz for.  Were they right to do so?  We'll find out.  That strategy hardly means that O'Brien thinks Fitzpatrick sucks.  The point is given their respective ages and resumes, Fitz and Osweiler is comparing apples to oranges.

And the year before, when Houston let Fitz go, he was coming off a broken leg, and O'Brien seemed invested in banking on Mallett.  Well the next off season Mallett couldn't beat out Hoyer for the starting job entering the season, but did get to play when Hoyer played badly.  Still, Mallett ended up a mid-season cut.

I don't see how you can conclude from that that O'Brien made the right move comparing Fitzpatrick to Mallett and Hoyer.  So what he "knows" may not have been very helpful.  I don't think it was. 

[Sperm Edwards]

2 minutes ago, Big Blocker said:

I do think there's not much to say worth saying about Hackenberg, at least compared to the fact that the regular season is upon us.  But yeah how well Osweiler does in Houston is a pretty big NFL story seeing as how Denver let him go and Houston paid him big money.  Who was right?  It will be interesting.

 

But the point about O'Brien, Fitz and Osweiler - I don't follow how you said they went with Osweiler instead.  No doubt Texas wanted to go with a young guy who might be their future, and paid him a lot more than the Jets signed Fitz for.  Were they right to do so?  We'll find out.  That strategy hardly means that O'Brien thinks Fitzpatrick sucks.  The point is given their respective ages and resumes, Fitz and Osweiler is comparing apples to oranges.

And the year before, when Houston let Fitz go, he was coming off a broken leg, and O'Brien seemed invested in banking on Mallett.  Well the next off season Mallett couldn't beat out Hoyer for the starting job entering the season, but did get to play when Hoyer played badly.  Still, Mallett ended up a mid-season cut.

I don't see how you can conclude from that that O'Brien made the right move comparing Fitzpatrick to Mallett and Hoyer.  So what he "knows" may not have been very helpful.  I don't think it was. 

How do you not follow?

Texans new Fitz and Hackenberg. Jets knew Fitz but not Hackenberg. Neither knew Osweiller. 

With the Fitz/Hackenberg option as open to Houston as it was to the Jets, the Texans went with Osweiller instead. 

Mallett got cut for being a bigger douche than Geno.

[Jetmech]

If you don't like the topic you don't have to respond. No need to be the topic police. 

I said I think it's interesting. The season is about to start so we'll see how it plays out. I don't know anyone who thinks of Osweiller as a sure thing, and few (outside of Jetsland) think of Fitz that way either. Again, it's just interesting. 

The idea of picking up Osweiller then drafting Hackenberg wasn't part of the equation so I don't know why you're arguing against it. Like arguing against the idea that grass doesn't naturally grow in orange and pink plaid. Well, who said it was? 

O'Brien: knew Fitz and knew Hackenberg. Both were as available to them as they were to us. And O'Brien didn't just "know" them like Bowles "knows" Fitzpatrick; he was active and instrumental in coaching their game and plays and mechanics/footwork and more. Given that, the Texans went with Osweiller instead. Osweiller, who just got benched for a broken down Peyton Manning who threw twice as many picks as TDs.

Season's about to start so we'll see how that ends up. 

Is it possible they picked hack early because the Texans would take him in the 3rd round ahead of them? Only suggesting this due to their HC's connection..

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

[Beerfish]

8 hours ago, JetBlue said:

Actually there is something wrong with that but am not going waste bandwidth debating it with you.  I will revisit this conversation in training camp 2017.

Sure, and know what will happen next year?  The theme will be, 'oh he's a rookie as he never played at all last year, how can you except him to be good when this is his 1st year essentially!'

[Sperm Edwards]

25 minutes ago, Jetmech said:

Is it possible they picked hack early because the Texans would take him in the 3rd round ahead of them? Only suggesting this due to their HC's connection..

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

From all the rumors going back to before the draft, he was afraid of anyone drafting Hackenberg. Except the Texans. The Texans just took Osweiller and had just leapfrogged the Jets to take someone other than Hackenberg. I got the sense no one else wanted to touch him prior to round 4, but MM was obsessed with his theoretical potential of round 1 skills he could get in the bottom half of round 2; that only by the grace of PSU sanctions was this elite specimen available to him so late. 

[Jet Nut]

1 hour ago, Sperm Edwards said:

If you don't like the topic you don't have to respond. No need to be the topic police. 

I said I think it's interesting. The season is about to start so we'll see how it plays out. I don't know anyone who thinks of Osweiller as a sure thing, and few (outside of Jetsland) think of Fitz that way either. Again, it's just interesting. 

The idea of picking up Osweiller then drafting Hackenberg wasn't part of the equation so I don't know why you're arguing against it. Like arguing against the idea that grass doesn't naturally grow in orange and pink plaid. Well, who said it was? 

O'Brien: knew Fitz and knew Hackenberg. Both were as available to them as they were to us. And O'Brien didn't just "know" them like Bowles "knows" Fitzpatrick; he was active and instrumental in coaching their game and plays and mechanics/footwork and more. Given that, the Texans went with Osweiller instead. Osweiller, who just got benched for a broken down Peyton Manning who threw twice as many picks as TDs.

Season's about to start so we'll see how that ends up. 

Didn't we pick ahead of Houston? Then they had no chance of picking up Hackenberg, we took him first.  He wasn't even an option.  If they wanted him and let Osweilller go they wouldn't have either QB.

If Denver starts Osweiller in the SB, they still win the SB IMO.