Our current situation started on Nov 8 2015

[Jetsplayer21]

17 hours ago, johnnysd said:

When Bowles went back to Fitz.

I said it then. Fitz was never the long term answer, and the Jets needed clarity at the QB position.

By starting Fitz we still have no answer at QB. Had we started Geno as we should have, and kept Fitz in the backup role he is marginally accetance at we would have had sone clarity on the QB position at this point.

The reality is that it does not matter if Geno has sucked. Fitz was never the answer, so it was critical to know if Geno was. Let's say he was terrible and never won a game. Well maybe we have Carson Wentz right now. Maybe the light goes on for Geno and we are sitting at 4 and 2 today

It was an insanely bad move. All it did was confirm Fitz is a complete fraud which was obvious back the too, and we have a shambles of a team and no idea what our QB situation is going forward.

Putting Fitz back in set us back 2 years. Re-signing him has destroyed the team and set us back 3.

 

 

 

 

 

lol I don't know about all that. But I do think we should give Mac some credit, despite the media saying " jets MUST re-sign fitz " every day. He didn't budge and was prepared to go with geno if fitz didn't cave to jets demands. Not because he thought geno was better, but he knew fitz was junk too.. ofcourse the fitz lovers never buy into this truth.. Mac thought of fitz only being slightly better than geno at best.. hence the thinking was Why pay over 15 million for a 3.5 engine when you can get a 3.3 for 1.7? Ok, fitz and geno are not 6 cylinders, but shhhityy 4's- 2.7 and 2.4.. 

[Stark]

17 hours ago, johnnysd said:

When Bowles went back to Fitz.

I said it then. Fitz was never the long term answer, and the Jets needed clarity at the QB position.

By starting Fitz we still have no answer at QB. Had we started Geno as we should have, and kept Fitz in the backup role he is marginally accetance at we would have had sone clarity on the QB position at this point.

The reality is that it does not matter if Geno has sucked. Fitz was never the answer, so it was critical to know if Geno was. Let's say he was terrible and never won a game. Well maybe we have Carson Wentz right now. Maybe the light goes on for Geno and we are sitting at 4 and 2 today

It was an insanely bad move. All it did was confirm Fitz is a complete fraud which was obvious back the too, and we have a shambles of a team and no idea what our QB situation is going forward.

Putting Fitz back in set us back 2 years. Re-signing him has destroyed the team and set us back 3.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[southparkcpa]

3 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

 

Alex Smith will never take a franchise to the next level because of his aversion to taking risks.  I get that he's the posterboy for QB's left for dead who eventually made a nice career out of it, but that does NOT mean he's ever been the "right" QB for a franchise.  He can't win put a team on his back in the playoffs.  He just can't.  Even Harbaugh recognized this when he made the switch from Smith to Kaepernick.

For every Alex Smith there are 100 Joey Harrington's who just can't cut it as an NFL QB. 

But none of them have ever been JETS because we wont take the time to develop a QB but your point is sadly accurate. Id throw Dalton and MANY others in that category.

[August]

The decision to ride with Fitzpatrick for me was disappointing for 1, I'm a Geno supporter so I wanted to see my guy get his shot, however I understood why Bowles stuck with Fitzpatrick. He played relatively well that season and he wanted to give him his chance to turn things around, combined with how Fitzpatrick galvanized the locker room and the organization as a whole and that meant something to Bowles. So the decision was easy for Bowles, Fitzpatrick went on to have his best 5 game stretch of his career. The Buffalo game was back to the norm. 

The first mistake was Bowles naming Fitzpatrick the starter while he wasn't under contract. The next mistake was constantly talking about him as if he was still on the team. The next mistake was not telling the players to not speak on Fitzpatrick. The organization as a whole was liable for how they handled the situation in the offseason. They caved to fan and media pressure. But to be honest bringing him back was the right decision it's the way they've handled it now is what's the problem. 

Geno has struggled on and off the field but I think the right decision is to start Geno and see what he is once and for all. It's up to him to keep Petty glued to the bench, if not then we may see Petty by week 14. Hopefully someone got to Bowles and told him to bench Fitzpatrick there is zero reasons to trot Fitzpatrick out there at this point. He had his chance he failed, now let's see what we have in the young guys so we have some idea of how we address the QB position next offseason. 

 

 

 

[Cap'nObvious]

Wow, simply wow! The logic in the OP is so incredibly flawed, and there are oodles of posters agreeing. Literally the only premise to this argument is if Geno Smith is a franchise QB, that is it. The Jets have done nothing at all to show they believe in Fitzpatrick for the long haul, zero. They tried to get him for backup money, and when that failed, they signed him to a one year deal. They drafted a QB in the 2nd round, and were trying to trade up to 1st and 2nd pick to draft a QB, and they tried to get Glennon, AND Bradford. Can someone with any logic ability at all explain how Fitzpatrick sets them back? Literaly the only argument you can make is if you honestly believe Geno to be a true franchise QB, that is it. And if you believe that, even more wow. The upside of Geno Smith is a poor mans Jay Cutler, he literally does one thing well, and nothing else. He throws a nice ball, and that is it. He is terribly inaccurate. Holds the ball way too long, makes dumb decision after dumb decision, and he has zero leadership ability, and is generally disliked by his teammates. This is the guy who was going to propel the franchise into the future? I mean for real? Fitzpatrick is a journeyman JAG, nothing more. They paid him too much money for one year, he is nothing more than a bridge to a real QB not named Geno Smith. This fan base never stops amazing me.

[JiFtheOracle]

15 hours ago, Warfish said:

In what way?

What is your "if we hadn't signed Fitz, we'd have....." belief that we did not achieve?

Where do you see this franchise today had we never signed Fitz?

In many ways.  When you operate as if your set at the QB position and go into win now mode, it impacts literally every single aspect of the team.  From how you target FA's, how you negotiate with those FA's, how you negotiate with your own, who you target in the draft and when, who gets reps and who doesnt, who you hold accountable and who you dont, how you game plan, how you construct your roster, who you keep and who you dont and how you assess the future of the team.

You cant make a single conclusion on the offense because the QB play is so bad its literally impossible to succeed or find out what you really have.  It also impacts the D, as bad as they've been, when you're on the field for 35 minutes for a 48 minute game, you're going to get tired, especially when your coach refuses to rotate fresh players.  So as bad as the corners look, are they really that bad?  It's the same group minus Cro.  What's the difference?  The difference is they're on the field for the entire game and get zero help from the offense.  In fact, the offense makes their life 100x more difficult when it this inept.  So sure, you can make some educated guesses but those guesses are jaded.

If we had not signed Fitz, we'd know for certain what Geno Smith is.  That information (despite stupid fans who refuse to accept he can improve), is 100000x times more valuable than hoping Fitz can duplicate something everyone in the world knew he couldnt.  We'd also have got to see more of Bryce Petty.  He would have received probably 500x more reps.  Same with Hack.  We possibly could have a real veteran QB worth a sh*t or maybe we kick the tires on another teams youngster that we didnt have room for. Maybe we dont reach for an ILB and draft the QB.  Maybe we have an extra corner on the team or a real OLB.  Who knows?  

If Fitz was never named the starter, I see this as a building team who's probably more focused on the development of their young players than trying to get the last drip out of the bottle from a bunch of over priced old veterans who provide nothing to this team.  I see us getting better QB play because I dont think it's possible to be worse than Fitz right now.  He's that bad.  You would then possibly be seeing the emergence of a Robbie Anderson or Charone Peake.  Now?  You dont get to see that and you dont really know what you have there.  We're probably not trotting out Matt Forte and breaking in a new RB.

It literally impacts everything you do. 

 

 

 

 

[Cap'nObvious]

Just now, JiF said:

In many ways.  When you operate as if your set at the QB position and go into win now mode, it impacts literally every single aspect of the team.  From how you target FA's, how you negotiate with those FA's, how you negotiate with your own, who you target in the draft and when, who gets reps and who doesnt, who you hold accountable and who you dont, how you game plan, how you construct your roster, who you keep and who you dont and how you assess the future of the team.

You cant make a single conclusion on the offense because the QB play is so bad its literally impossible to succeed or find out what you really have.  It also impacts the D, as bad as they've been, when you're on the field for 35 minutes for a 48 minute game, you're going to get tired, especially when your coach refuses to rotate fresh players.  So as bad as the corners look, are they really that bad?  It's the same group minus Cro.  What's the difference?  The difference is they're on the field for the entire game and get zero help from the offense.  In fact, the offense makes their life 100x more difficult when it this inept.  So sure, you can make some educated guesses but those guesses are jaded.

If we had not signed Fitz, we'd know for certain what Geno Smith is.  That information (despite stupid fans who refuse to accept he can improve), is 100000x times more valuable than hoping Fitz can duplicate something everyone in the world knew he couldnt.  We'd also have got to see more of Bryce Petty.  He would have received probably 500x more reps.  Same with Hack.  We possibly could have a real veteran QB worth a sh*t or maybe we kick the tires on another teams youngster that we didnt have room for. Maybe we dont reach for an ILB and draft the QB.  Maybe we have an extra corner on the team or a real OLB.  Who knows?  

If Fitz was never named the starter, I see this as a building team who's probably more focused on the development of their young players than trying to get the last drip out of the bottle from a bunch of over priced old veterans who provide nothing to this team.  I see us getting better QB play because I dont think it's possible to be worse than Fitz right now.  He's that bad.  You would then possibly be seeing the emergence of a Robbie Anderson or Charone Peake.  Now?  You dont get to see that and you dont really know what you have there.  We're probably not trotting out Matt Forte and breaking in a new RB.

It literally impacts everything you do. 

 

 

 

 

Holy Hell! This is so gold!

[Warfish]

That's an awful lot of baseless speculation.  

It implies that sans Fitz, Macc would have gone full-ok-to-suck-Rebuild mode.  There is no evidence that's the case, quite the contrary.

Had we not signed Fitz, we almost assuredly would have signed some OTHER journeyman Free Agent QB.  

If the argument by yourself at the time and others are true, that various of the other free agent QB's were "better", we'd be exactly where we are today.

The concept you seem to think we'd have followed, the "Pure" rebuild....it does not really exist in the NFL generally speaking.  No GM is ever given enough time to pull it off.

No, it's a nice thought, but we're not held back by Fitz.  If anything, we're held back by the modern NFL GM and patience-limited ownership, leading to the conflict of "rebuild, sure, but win while you do it or else!".

And that leads to where we are now.  

I hope you're not expecting this to change next year, I fear you may be deeply disappointed.  I fully expect some other veteran QB here failing and "holding us back" as you see it.  

[NorthCoastJetsFan]

Fitz and/or Geno are not the root causes that are holding the team back.

The root cause of all of this the series of horrible drafts dating back to the Tannenbaum era. NO team in the NFL could survive competitively getting 2 decent starters out of those 5 or 6 drafts.

Both of these 2 QBs are stopgaps. Whether our future QB is on the roster yet is unknown, but I wouldn't feel good about them. There is no evidence at this point that they will ever be competent starters in the NFL.

[JiFtheOracle]

2 minutes ago, Warfish said:

That's an awful lot of baseless speculation.  

It implies that sans Fitz, Macc would have gone full-ok-to-suck-Rebuild mode.  There is no evidence that's the case, quite the contrary.

Had we not signed Fitz, we almost assuredly would have signed some OTHER journeyman Free Agent QB.  

If the argument by yourself at the time and others are true, that various of the other free agent QB's were "better", we'd be exactly where we are today.

The concept you seem to think we'd have followed, the "Pure" rebuild....it does not really exist in the NFL generally speaking.  No GM is ever given enough time to pull it off.

No, it's a nice thought, but we're not held back by Fitz.  If anything, we're held back by the modern NFL GM and patience-limited ownership, leading to the conflict of "rebuild, sure, but win while you do it or else!".

And that leads to where we are now.  

I hope you're not expecting this to change next year, I fear you may be deeply disappointed.  I fully expect some other veteran QB here failing and "holding us back" as you see it.  

I'm not sure why I expected you to get it...but I didnt want to be rude and avoid your question.

What are you learning about this team right now? 

[Warfish]

19 minutes ago, JiF said:

I'm not sure why I expected you to get it.

I could say the same, but it's a quaint fantasy you laid out.  Just not close to a real world scenario.  

Have no doubt, no-Fitz likely meant a Hoyer-alike would be here in place of Fitz, and we'd be in the exact same place we are now.

19 minutes ago, JiF said:

What are you learning about this team right now? 

We're a poorly coached team with a massive weakness at QB, D-Back, RB, O-Line and WR's not named Marshall/Enunwa.

We're a typical low-tier NFL team trying to balance being competitive with rebuilding portions of the roster.

And we're not doing a great job thus far at it.

Why, what have you learned?

[JiFtheOracle]

8 minutes ago, Warfish said:

I could say the same, but it's a quaint fantasy you laid out.  Just not close to a real world scenario.  

Have no doubt, no-Fitz likely meant a Hoyer-alike would be here in place of Fitz, and we'd be in the exact same place we are now.

We're a poorly coached team with a massive weakness at QB, D-Back, RB, O-Line and WR's not named Marshall/Enunwa.

We're a typical low-tier NFL team trying to balance being competitive with rebuilding portions of the roster.

And we're not doing a great job thus far at it.

Why, what have you learned?

If you cant see how those are all downstream impacts, this is pointless.  Like usual. 

You dont know if you have a weakness at QB, RB, OL or WR because of Fitz.  And some of those problems exist because of Fitz.  That's the issue.

Those DB's were the same that lead a top 10 D last year.  What's the difference?

I've learned the Jets wasted 2 seasons thinking they could get something they couldnt and in the meantime finding out nothing about a team that was in rebuild mode because we went all in to win now.  Instead of rebuilding, they tried to win and guess what's next now that has failed?  A rebuild. 

It's amazing how easy of a concept this is to grasp and you cant. 

[slats]

2 hours ago, Warfish said:

Had we not signed Fitz, we almost assuredly would have signed some OTHER journeyman Free Agent QB.  

The move I advocated at the time was to sign Brian Hoyer, let him battle it out with Geno for the starting job, and cut the loser. Hoyer signed for $2M, and has completed 68% of his passes this year with 6 TDs and just 1 int. Imagine saving $10M only to get dramatically better play from the position! 

Keeping four QBs is what's "setting the team back years" more than specifically signing Fitzpatrick. Right now you have Fitz getting the starter reps, Geno getting the backup reps, and Petty and Hack splitting the scout team reps. It's dumb. Petty should be getting all the backup reps, and Hackenberg should be getting all the scout team reps. Those are the QBs who are gonna be on this team next year. Their development should be the team's first thought, not the afterthought. 

[Miss Lonelyhearts]

1 hour ago, JiF said:

In many ways.

You're kidding yourself. All this stuff about individual transactions is just pointless details. 

[JiFtheOracle]

20 minutes ago, Miss Lonelyhearts said:

You're kidding yourself. All this stuff about individual transactions is just pointless details. 

I dont kid and that's just a component of it but it absolutely impacts it.

[JiFtheOracle]

1 hour ago, slats said:

The move I advocated at the time was to sign Brian Hoyer, let him battle it out with Geno for the starting job, and cut the loser. Hoyer signed for $2M, and has completed 68% of his passes this year with 6 TDs and just 1 int. Imagine saving $10M only to get dramatically better play from the position! 

Keeping four QBs is what's "setting the team back years" more than specifically signing Fitzpatrick. Right now you have Fitz getting the starter reps, Geno getting the backup reps, and Petty and Hack splitting the scout team reps. It's dumb. Petty should be getting all the backup reps, and Hackenberg should be getting all the scout team reps. Those are the QBs who are gonna be on this team next year. Their development should be the team's first thought, not the afterthought. 

I did as well. And these are exactly the parts of the downstream impacts I was referring too.  You're not moving forward, you're a stick in the mud.