Do you agree with this article?

[Tinstar]

34 minutes ago, 56mehl56 said:

Like spay or neuter 

He already did that .

[Ohio State NY Jets fan]

I am rooting for the Hack since he is a Jet but I absolutely agree with the article based on the PSU games I watched, 3 losses to the Buckeyes, Hack looked horrible, missing wide open receivers, deer in the headlights, and his few successful plays (he did have 1 good quarter) reminded me of Sanchez at USC, lucky breaks, throw it up and the receiver made a play...  all fun and games until the Jets drafted him

I applaud Mac for making the attempt and hope he keeps drafting QB's (and signing FA QB's) until the Jets have a franchise player behind center, Jet fans deserve better 

[drsamuel84]

12 hours ago, Larz said:

taking a developmental QB in the 2nd round is not a bad pick

taking him they year after taking another developmental QB when your starter is on a 1 year deal and apparently everybody in the building would rather spend a long weekend with belicheat going over his scrapbook than play Geno IS

the jets will only have petty and hack on the roster next year, and then they will probably choke and sign matt flynn, lol

I agree with the strategy as well.  It was the same thought when they took Geno, they didn't invest all that much or trade away the farm to get him it was a 2nd rd. draft pick which still matters but worth the risk.  At the same time, seeing guys like Prescott and even Cody Kessler take the field and play pretty well doesn't make the pick look good, it's way early to make judgement on Hack or the rookies but when our "Journeyman" QB is out there throwing 9 picks and neither of our two young qb's are "ready" to take the field it's concerning.  Ultimately, whether it Hack, Petty or another draft pick this year we just need to find the guy and all will be forgiven if we do.

[FTL Jet Fan]

I didn't like the pick at all and was pissed we past on Lynch or would have rather traded for Glennon. I am just hoping a year on the bench will help this kid because to me he looks completely shell shocked from getting sacked so often. He had one great year but after that he was getting clobbered constantly. He was the one QB I didn't want us to take, now that he is a Jet I hope he is our franchise QB. I think he is more of a 2 year project than a one year, I hope I am wrong. 

[Xtina]

14 hours ago, Pcola said:

I seriously doubt Patullo is doing anything with Hack.  It's the middle of the season and Patullo has work to do with Fitz.

And obviously doing a bang up job. Concern 

[Ex-Rex]

19 hours ago, southparkcpa said:

Bad decision after bad decision...... that pretty much sums it up.  Agreed. 

You can't tell if a draft - or any player from that draft - is good for at least two or three years. I am not ready to blow off Hackenberg or Bryce Petty. I think Petty showed a lot in preseason. Rex Ryan and John Idzik left a nearly bare cupboard as far as drafted players go and it will take several drafts to right the ship. Be patient or go be a Buffalo Bills fan.

All that is left of drafted players since Rex came aboard in 2009 are Mo and Sheldon Richardson. Now THAT is poor drafting.

[UnitedWhofans]

"From all accounts, Jets general manager Mike Maccagnan fell in love with Hackenberg during the draft process. Some believe the infatuation began when Maccagnan still was working for the Texans and former Penn State coach Bill O’Brien told him about Hackenberg. "

Called this the moment the pick came.

[Warfish]

1. We have to trust that our GM knows what he is doing.  So we have to support his selection of a QB till it's proven to be a good/bad choice.

2. With that said, I saw nothing in Hack's resume, and nothing from Hack this Preseason, to indicate he is anything other than a High-School-Has-Been talent, an expensive "we know better than everyone else" reach pick, unready for the NFL, a developmental pick at best and (worst of all) a completely non-productive roster spot for the next two to three years. 

3. IMO we could have acquired an equal QB talent/potential later in the draft, and for a "win now" team, should have addressed other weaknesses with a 2nd Round Pick (where day 1 starters should still be found).  In hindsight, perhaps CB/DB would have been nice?  But it seems Macc did a poor job evaluating the crappy DB's we already had on the roster.

4. If QB was a priority, Macc perhaps should have been more willing to pay the piper to get one, either via trade up, or via trade.  Not that the options looked THAT enticing, tbqh.

5. My problem with Macc is I don't see what his direction is now....are we building something, or win now.  Because when you try this way to do both, you often end up doing neither.  The Jets Franchises pants-pissing FEAR of playing young QB's also does not serve them well.  Why draft a Petty if you never plan to play him, even when the players ahead (Fitz, Geno) are proven losers?  I get Fitz, 2015 and all, but not making a move soon will just be wasting the year when we could get something out of it (a yes/no on Petty and better knowledge on our QB need going forward).

Overall, Macc appears to line up with other previous Jets GM's.....he's not a great QB talent evaluator.  And QB remains our biggest, most glaring, and most damaging, weakness.

And Hack does not look in any way like he'll fix that, not in 2016, surely not in 2017, and who knows?  2018 maybe?

[Big Blocker]

46 minutes ago, Warfish said:

My problem with Macc is I don't see what his direction is now....are we building something, or win now.  Because when you try this way to do both, you often end up doing neither.  The Jets Franchises pants-pissing FEAR of playing young QB's also does not serve them well.  Why draft a Petty if you never plan to play him, even when the players ahead (Fitz, Geno) are proven losers?  I get Fitz, 2015 and all, but not making a move soon will just be wasting the year when we could get something out of it (a yes/no on Petty and better knowledge on our QB need going forward).

Overall, Macc appears to line up with other previous Jets GM's.....he's not a great QB talent evaluator.  And QB remains our biggest, most glaring, and most damaging, weakness.

And Hack does not look in any way like he'll fix that, not in 2016, surely not in 2017, and who knows?  2018 maybe?

For me I don't quite share the concern about the supposed existence of the need to make an either/or choice between contending and building.  Some teams seem to be able to do both.  Yes there is a question whether the Jets right now are one of those teams, but for me the real issue of direction concerns the specific problem of who the Qb will be in the medium, and perhaps long, term.

I suppose one can say the Jets in fact have a plan, of sorts, anyway.  It is rather simple.  One of Petty or Hack will be the starter next year, and if by next off season neither looks like a good prospect to be that, then they can again look at other options.  In fairness that is a rather straightforward concept.  But... I think there are a lot of problems with it.

First is, how much more knowledge will the FO really have on this question in January than it did this past off season?  This past off season the Jets I think did not pursue some other options that it might have pursued because it, supposedly, had a plan that would be the best plan available to them.  And that was to hold onto Petty from the previous year, draft Hackenberg and re-sign Fitz.  Smith was also in the mix on the off chance, however unlikely, that he might come into camp and light it up.  Well, despite encouraging signs from Petty, that plan has not, so far, worked out very well.

What will be different next off season? Unless between now and then Petty gets into the action, and gives them data to assess him going forward, I think the answer is not much.  I suppose they will also have more info on whether to retain Fitzpatrick for one more year in some kind of hold the fort/mentoring mix of a role.  If they choose not to so retain him, presumably they might, and might well, pursue some other Qb in a trade or in FA.  But of course they could have done that last off season.  We can debate how hard they did, how serious they were, in terms of that.  I don't think they were all that serious or tried that hard, but whether I am right or not, the fact is they ended up with Fitzpatrick.

Second is, how realistic and acceptable is it to rely on a mix of Petty Hack and some JAG vet Qb for 2017?  That's pretty much the big question, isn't it?  Unless of course the Jets decide to really go for a quality vet Qb, or somehow can navigate the draft to get a quality prospect at Qb.  But it says here the latter is not realistic.  How realistic is it to suppose the Jets will have enough confidence to go into camp next summer having to find a starter from among Petty Hack and a rookie?  That again will depend in part on how much they can learn from starting Petty this season. 

(I very much doubt the Jets will have learned much more than they know about Hackenberg today by the time the draft rolls around.  How would they come up with such information?  They've already said he will not see the field this season.  But at the same time they will have Hack on the roster when camp opens.  They're not going to cut him without even going to camp for his second off season.  This is the net result of the "logic" of their approach.)

To me the best approach next off season is to make the decision about Fitz, and if he's not the answer for a hold the fort/mentoring role next year, which for me would require a real turnaround from him the rest of the year, that they make a huge effort to get a real upgrade in a vet Qb.  but of course in leaving open the option of Fitz having that same turnaround, where and when are they going to get more data on Petty?

It's not a pretty picture.  So yeah, there are a lot of problems with the way the Jets are handling this and with what seems to be their strategy.

[PepPep]

45 minutes ago, Warfish said:

1. We have to trust that our GM knows what he is doing.  So we have to support his selection of a QB till it's proven to be a good/bad choice.

2. With that said, I saw nothing in Hack's resume, and nothing from Hack this Preseason, to indicate he is anything other than a High-School-Has-Been talent, an expensive "we know better than everyone else" reach pick, unready for the NFL, a developmental pick at best and (worst of all) a completely non-productive roster spot for the next two to three years. 

3. IMO we could have acquired an equal QB talent/potential later in the draft, and for a "win now" team, should have addressed other weaknesses with a 2nd Round Pick (where day 1 starters should still be found).  In hindsight, perhaps CB/DB would have been nice?  But it seems Macc did a poor job evaluating the crappy DB's we already had on the roster.

4. If QB was a priority, Macc perhaps should have been more willing to pay the piper to get one, either via trade up, or via trade.  Not that the options looked THAT enticing, tbqh.

5. My problem with Macc is I don't see what his direction is now....are we building something, or win now.  Because when you try this way to do both, you often end up doing neither.  The Jets Franchises pants-pissing FEAR of playing young QB's also does not serve them well.  Why draft a Petty if you never plan to play him, even when the players ahead (Fitz, Geno) are proven losers?  I get Fitz, 2015 and all, but not making a move soon will just be wasting the year when we could get something out of it (a yes/no on Petty and better knowledge on our QB need going forward).

Overall, Macc appears to line up with other previous Jets GM's.....he's not a great QB talent evaluator.  And QB remains our biggest, most glaring, and most damaging, weakness.

And Hack does not look in any way like he'll fix that, not in 2016, surely not in 2017, and who knows?  2018 maybe?

2. I get that there is a lot of bad tape on Hack. But it's a bit unfair to call him a "High-School-Has-Been talent" considering he has yet to take an NFL snap (other than pre-season). He didn't exactly light it up in pre-season but we saw that (albeit at times inaccurate and inconsistent) he has the arm and touch to make all the throws. We saw that he can stand in the pocket, look down the field and deliver the football. We saw that he can come to line, read the D and audible if nec. We saw that he actually goes through his progressions, which Geo and even Fitz still have issues with. I just don;t understand why people are so critical of Hack as a prospect are ready to call him a bum or bust before he's gotten a chance to prove himself.  

3. In hindsight CB/DB would have been nice, but how can you even say that when it looks like Macc found a Gem in the 4th round with Burris??? Its like, damn, give the guys SOME credit.

5. Next year Fitz will surely be gone and so will Geno. The Jets will have Petty in his third year and Hack in his second. Two young QBs that should be ready to show what they can do in the NFL. Petty and Hack will get plenty of opportunities then and will be more prepared and set up for success then. If you have Fitz and Geno, why play Hack or Petty if they are obviously not ready? Makes no sense. You could argue the Jets should have cut Geno or not re-signed Fitz to keep only 3 QBs on the roster. But that is hindsight. If Fitz was playing anything close to the way he played last year, nobody would be talking about this.  

The jury is still out on Macc as a QB talent evaluator. He drafted a QB in the 4th and b/c he is not ready to start in his second year (even though he has made major strides and looked good in preseason) that makes Macc a bad QB talent evaluator??? He drafted a QB prospect in the 2nd round who is not ready to start his rookie year and THAT makes him a bad QB talent evaluator??? That's ridiculous. Hack is not as far away as you think he is. He will get an opportunity to start next year- not 2018. He could very well beat out any competition and be leading the Jets in battle on Sundays. I've seen enough of his upside and work ethic to not doubt that possibility. It's you opinion and thats fine, but I disagree. Hack has the goods and is a smart QB, I would not be at all surprised if he puts it all together next year and wins out the starting gig.     

[PepPep]

30 minutes ago, Big Blocker said:

For me I don't quite share the concern about the supposed existence of the need to make an either/or choice between contending and building.  Some teams seem to be able to do both.  Yes there is a question whether the Jets right now are one of those teams, but for me the real issue of direction concerns the specific problem of who the Qb will be in the medium, and perhaps long, term.

I suppose one can say the Jets in fact have a plan, of sorts, anyway.  It is rather simple.  One of Petty or Hack will be the starter next year, and if by next off season neither looks like a good prospect to be that, then they can again look at other options.  In fairness that is a rather straightforward concept.  But... I think there are a lot of problems with it.

First is, how much more knowledge will the FO really have on this question in January than it did this past off season?  This past off season the Jets I think did not pursue some other options that it might have pursued because it, supposedly, had a plan that would be the best plan available to them.  And that was to hold onto Petty from the previous year, draft Hackenberg and re-sign Fitz.  Smith was also in the mix on the off chance, however unlikely, that he might come into camp and light it up.  Well, despite encouraging signs from Petty, that plan has not, so far, worked out very well.

What will be different next off season? Unless between now and then Petty gets into the action, and gives them data to assess him going forward, I think the answer is not much.  I suppose they will also have more info on whether to retain Fitzpatrick for one more year in some kind of hold the fort/mentoring mix of a role.  If they choose not to so retain him, presumably they might, and might well, pursue some other Qb in a trade or in FA.  But of course they could have done that last off season.  We can debate how hard they did, how serious they were, in terms of that.  I don't think they were all that serious or tried that hard, but whether I am right or not, the fact is they ended up with Fitzpatrick.

Second is, how realistic and acceptable is it to rely on a mix of Petty Hack and some JAG vet Qb for 2017?  That's pretty much the big question, isn't it?  Unless of course the Jets decide to really go for a quality vet Qb, or somehow can navigate the draft to get a quality prospect at Qb.  But it says here the latter is not realistic.  How realistic is it to suppose the Jets will have enough confidence to go into camp next summer having to find a starter from among Petty Hack and a rookie?  That again will depend in part on how much they can learn from starting Petty this season. 

(I very much doubt the Jets will have learned much more than they know about Hackenberg today by the time the draft rolls around.  How would they come up with such information?  They've already said he will not see the field this season.  But at the same time they will have Hack on the roster when camp opens.  They're not going to cut him without even going to camp for his second off season.  This is the net result of the "logic" of their approach.)

To me the best approach next off season is to make the decision about Fitz, and if he's not the answer for a hold the fort/mentoring role next year, which for me would require a real turnaround from him the rest of the year, that they make a huge effort to get a real upgrade in a vet Qb.  but of course in leaving open the option of Fitz having that same turnaround, where and when are they going to get more data on Petty?

It's not a pretty picture.  So yeah, there are a lot of problems with the way the Jets are handling this and with what seems to be their strategy.

I will say that the one thing Macc did is give himself options. I think the plan was draft Hack- shelf him. Evaluate Petty and see how he is in year two. Petty looked good but not good enough to start. Shelf Petty- he did look good in pre-season after all. Now the question is- do we start Geno or re-sign Fitz and who will be the backup? I think the hope was that Geno would light it up and get a stranglehold on the starting gig. Geno being Geno looked very good at times and very bad at times. He didn't quite light it up. Luckily Geno is on a 1yr cheap contract, and if the Jets re-sign Fitz, he can serve as a viable backup. Done. That was the solution the Jets came up with and it actually is not that bad in principle.

You have two young QBs waiting in the wings. A vet starter on a 1 year deal who played great for you last year (regardless of schedule). And a cheap backup on a 1yr deal who has talent but has yet to prove he can be an NFL QB in Geno. After this season, you can part ways with both Geno and Fitz, hold on to your young QBs and re-evaluate. It's really not a bad plan. The only kink is that you have to carry 4 QBs rather than 3. Ok. So a scrub at the bottom of the depth chart at another position will have to get cut. But the QB is the most important position, right? 

I love how people are like- but Fitz never made the playoffs, he never won, he chokes, etc. Well, please show me a FA QB available for a non-commit 12mil that consistently makes the playoffs and fans would have been confident leading the Jets to the playoffs/SB. A guy who could come in and know and be comfortable in the system, have chemistry with the receivers and the O-coordinator, etc. Those guys do not grow on trees and they certainly are not cheap (12mil is cheap for a starting QB).  

Fans are reactionary. Hindsight is 20/20. If Fitz was not playing so awful or the Jets just happened to win vs. the Bengals and Hawks, the sky would no longer be falling b/c they would be 3-1. I mean, seriously, it's SO early and as poorly as te Jets have played, they have been in most (if not all) of these games- the toughest stretch on their schedule.   

[Big Blocker]

1 hour ago, PepPep said:

You have two young QBs waiting in the wings. A vet starter on a 1 year deal who played great for you last year (regardless of schedule). And a cheap backup on a 1yr deal who has talent but has yet to prove he can be an NFL QB in Geno. After this season, you can part ways with both Geno and Fitz, hold on to your young QBs and re-evaluate. It's really not a bad plan. The only kink is that you have to carry 4 QBs rather than 3. Ok. So a scrub at the bottom of the depth chart at another position will have to get cut. But the QB is the most important position, right? 

 

Putting aside for the moment that the Jets could retain Fitz depending in some role next year, the strategy of having Petty and Hackenberg and evaluating them IS clear enough.  But again there are some real problems with this.  Quite simply the Jets will enter camp with Hackenberg, but not knowing much more about him than they do now.  This in turn means they have to plan their roster moves before camp without the expectation that he could be even their #2 let alone the starter.

Which means Petty is their only real hope for being a starter next season of the ones who are on the roster and under contract for 17.  While reasonable hopes for him are higher than for Hack, the question is will the Jets FO enter next off season thinking Petty will be a likely candidate to start next year, or not?

The problem with the strategy is they will likely have insufficient information on which to base a solid answer to that question.  And not having that, the way forward in the next off season is far from clear.

[southparkcpa]

5 hours ago, Ex-Rex said:

You can't tell if a draft - or any player from that draft - is good for at least two or three years. I am not ready to blow off Hackenberg or Bryce Petty. I think Petty showed a lot in preseason. Rex Ryan and John Idzik left a nearly bare cupboard as far as drafted players go and it will take several drafts to right the ship. Be patient or go be a Buffalo Bills fan.

All that is left of drafted players since Rex came aboard in 2009 are Mo and Sheldon Richardson. Now THAT is poor drafting.

Agreed.

[Integrity28]

5 hours ago, UnitedWhofans said:

"From all accounts, Jets general manager Mike Maccagnan fell in love with Hackenberg during the draft process. Some believe the infatuation began when Maccagnan still was working for the Texans and former Penn State coach Bill O’Brien told him about Hackenberg. "

Called this the moment the pick came.

Wait, you called that Mac liked Hack the minute he drafted him?

Nostradamus as a mother****er. 

[Integrity28]

5 hours ago, Warfish said:

are we building something, or win now.

These aren't mutually exclusive, and Mac has made it clear. His goal is to field a competitive team while also bolstering depth and development within the organization and throughout the roster. He accomplished it last year with a nice blend of trades, FA acquisitions and draft picks. Though this year, the FA acquisitions and overall blend of players isn't executing as well as last year. This doesn't expose a flaw in his philosophy, it ... simply put ... is the way of football, if your players don't execute, then you lose, and everything gets over-examined.

If Revis wasn't fat and slow. If Pryor and Gilchrist weren't freelancing and doing their jobs. If Skrine was playing the slot, and a real corner was on the outside. If Forte was being used as a receiver, and another RB was being used between the tackles. If Brandon Marshall and Jalin Marshall didn't drop so many passes. If Fitz wasn't throwing the ball with rampant inaccuracy. Then we wouldn't be talking about Mac and Bowles competency. 

I have legit concerns about both guys, because they are 1st timers, but at the end of the day.... these losses are about player execution, more so than anything else.

 

[Warfish]

29 minutes ago, Integrity28 said:

These aren't mutually exclusive, and Mac has made it clear. His goal is to field a competitive team while also bolstering depth and development within the organization and throughout the roster.

I think they're more mutually exclusive than folks give credit.

If you make ANY move designed for the future over the now, you're hurting the chances of winning now.

And vice versa.

We are a great example, we're always mid-rebuild, sorta-competing.  Occasionally we're full-rebuild.  We never get to the just competing part.

/shrug.

[PepPep]

4 hours ago, Big Blocker said:

Putting aside for the moment that the Jets could retain Fitz depending in some role next year, the strategy of having Petty and Hackenberg and evaluating them IS clear enough.  But again there are some real problems with this.  Quite simply the Jets will enter camp with Hackenberg, but not knowing much more about him than they do now.  This in turn means they have to plan their roster moves before camp without the expectation that he could be even their #2 let alone the starter.

Which means Petty is their only real hope for being a starter next season of the ones who are on the roster and under contract for 17.  While reasonable hopes for him are higher than for Hack, the question is will the Jets FO enter next off season thinking Petty will be a likely candidate to start next year, or not?

The problem with the strategy is they will likely have insufficient information on which to base a solid answer to that question.  And not having that, the way forward in the next off season is far from clear.

Yeah, but I don;t think you need to nec. have a young QB be the starter at any point in the season to be able to tell if he is making progress or not. 

The Jets could very well go into the offseason with the assumption that they will let Geno and Fitz walk and have an open competition between Petty, Hack and a vet. FA. They would have to be confident enough in Petty and Hack that one of them is ready enough to possibly win out and be the starter. If you see that both guys have progressed since last year, let the competition begin. I mean, look at the rookies that are starting in the NFL this year. They are as green as it gets and somehow, without seeing them play actual NFL games, the coaches made the decision that they were ready to start. So the Jets may not know much about Hack than they know now, but they could very well know enough to give him a legit opportunity to win the starting job. Not all teams have the luxury of going into the next season with a definitive starter at QB. In fact, its typically only teams with 'Franchise QBs' that can do that. Otherwise, there always gonna be a QB competition- IMO.    

[Beerfish]

1 hour ago, Integrity28 said:

These aren't mutually exclusive, and Mac has made it clear. His goal is to field a competitive team while also bolstering depth and development within the organization and throughout the roster. He accomplished it last year with a nice blend of trades, FA acquisitions and draft picks. Though this year, the FA acquisitions and overall blend of players isn't executing as well as last year. This doesn't expose a flaw in his philosophy, it ... simply put ... is the way of football, if your players don't execute, then you lose, and everything gets over-examined.

If Revis wasn't fat and slow. If Pryor and Gilchrist weren't freelancing and doing their jobs. If Skrine was playing the slot, and a real corner was on the outside. If Forte was being used as a receiver, and another RB was being used between the tackles. If Brandon Marshall and Jalin Marshall didn't drop so many passes. If Fitz wasn't throwing the ball with rampant inaccuracy. Then we wouldn't be talking about Mac and Bowles competency. 

I have legit concerns about both guys, because they are 1st timers, but at the end of the day.... these losses are about player execution, more so than anything else.

 

The biggest problem with  that goal is that to be competitive you need a decent QB at least and thus are always going to be looking for the vet to help you win games and thus never really find out about guys like Petty before it is time to move on.

If you have a QB long term I think you can rebuild on the fly, if you don't have a QB it makes it tougher to know if one of your young guys can do it or not and you really never know about a guy until he is given a fair shot as a starter for a number of games.

[Beaver]

Hack is only 21 years old and would be a senior in college this year.   Most QBs come out after their senior years.   I think it's good Hack is shelved this year.   Make him work on his mechanics and see if his issues can be fixed.    The article is a little short sighted.  Good points but still doesn't take into account everything.    

 

Oh and am I the only one who just doesn't get the Kizer hype for next years draft?

[Integrity28]

1 hour ago, Beerfish said:

The biggest problem with  that goal is that to be competitive you need a decent QB at least and thus are always going to be looking for the vet to help you win games and thus never really find out about guys like Petty before it is time to move on.

If you have a QB long term I think you can rebuild on the fly, if you don't have a QB it makes it tougher to know if one of your young guys can do it or not and you really never know about a guy until he is given a fair shot as a starter for a number of games.

Not true at all. The entire premise of the approach is to home-grow a QB. We have 2 in progress. Stopgap is only needed to start down the path.

[RoadFan]

On 10/05/2016 at 2:10 PM, derp said:

If the premise here is that Hackenberg was a mistake because he was taken in the second round but apparently isn't ready to play - I disagree.

Not sure I like the Hackenberg pick, wasn't a fan at the time, but I have no issue with drafting a talented quarterback and sitting him. I think Hackenberg has other issues but appreciate the effort to try and develop him.

Honestly, the pick looks bad because of Prescott's success. Not sure whether that will continue.

The pick looks bad because he got worse for two consecutive years at PSU after a grossly overrated rookie season aided by an excellent Allen Robinson.  Hack's accuracy is far too inconsistent for the NFL, and his decision making was terrible even by college standards.  Hack missed routine throws at Penn State with even with a clean pocket.  The guy should not have been drafted until late on day 3.

I will be surprised if he is ever "ready" enough to actually deserve to start an NFL game.  Notice I said DESERVE to start, not just be handed the job by circumstance.

[BrickTamland]

Aaron Rodgers. 

[UnitedWhofans]

17 hours ago, Integrity28 said:

Wait, you called that Mac liked Hack the minute he drafted him?

Nostradamus as a mother****er. 

No I called that that was the reason he drafted him

[Integrity28]

Just now, UnitedWhofans said:

No I called that that was the reason he drafted him

So, he drafted Hack because he liked him. Hot take.

[UnitedWhofans]

2 minutes ago, Integrity28 said:

So, he drafted Hack because he liked him. Hot take.

No because he talked with Bill O'Brien about him

[Integrity28]

46 minutes ago, UnitedWhofans said:

No because he talked with Bill O'Brien about him

Insightful.

[UnitedWhofans]

I mean considering that we heard that Goff and Hackenberg were the top QBs on his draft board, it seems that Macc is more interested in grooming a QB this year than throwing one to the dogs.

Maybe, just maybe, he knew we would take a step back in 2016, and knew that a rookie QB starting would not be a good match with this team. Just a thought.

[derp]

15 hours ago, RoadFan said:

The pick looks bad because he got worse for two consecutive years at PSU after a grossly overrated rookie season aided by an excellent Allen Robinson.  Hack's accuracy is far too inconsistent for the NFL, and his decision making was terrible even by college standards.  Hack missed routine throws at Penn State with even with a clean pocket.  The guy should not have been drafted until late on day 3.

I will be surprised if he is ever "ready" enough to actually deserve to start an NFL game.  Notice I said DESERVE to start, not just be handed the job by circumstance.

Not for nothing, but you took the pick looking bad comment grossly out of context. I said I didn't like the pick at the time. I'm well aware of his college career.

What I meant was the pick looks bad now, based on what he's done in the NFL to date and not what he did in college, because of Prescott's success. There's nothing wrong with a second round quarterback not playing as a rookie. It looks especially bad at the moment because a quarterback drafted after him is having success, and the Jets could use some help at the position.