Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
drdetroit

Thank You Rex

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

winning is always better than losing.  

This is demonstratively false.  Losing is rewarded in the NFL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, gEYno said:

This is demonstratively false.  Losing is rewarded in the NFL.

TB picked top 5 for 20 years and always sucked, NE picks bottom 5 every year and are always great.  Good organizations will bring in good players no matter where they pick.  bad ones will make bad picks no matter where they draft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

TB picked top 5 for 20 years and always sucked, NE picks bottom 5 every year and are always great.  Good organizations will bring in good players no matter where they pick.  bad ones will make bad picks no matter where they draft.

You cherry picking your narratives doesn't change the fact that losing is rewarded in the NFL.  Having a higher draft pick gives you more options when you select and gives you more value should you decide to trade.  As such, losing more games and receiving that higher draft pick is rewarded.  This is an exceptionally simple fact.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, gEYno said:

You cherry picking your narratives doesn't change the fact that losing is rewarded in the NFL.  Having a higher draft pick gives you more options when you select and gives you more value should you decide to trade.  As such, losing more games and receiving that higher draft pick is rewarded.  This is an exceptionally simple fact.

No way. Teams get compensated for trading up because the lower you draft the worse talent you have to choose from. Teams are simply better off with lower draft picks. Because Tom Brady.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, gEYno said:

You cherry picking your narratives doesn't change the fact that losing is rewarded in the NFL.  Having a higher draft pick gives you more options when you select and gives you more value should you decide to trade.  As such, losing more games and receiving that higher draft pick is rewarded.  This is an exceptionally simple fact.

gives you more options to screw up too, you don't like my NE example b/c of Brady?  ok, what about Pitt? they are always drafting bottom 10 and never have years like the 2016 Jets.

good teams will draft well no matter where they pick, bad teams will screw it up no matter where they pick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

No way. Teams get rewarded for trading up because the lower you draft the worse talent you have to choose from. Teams are simply better off with lower draft picks. Because Tom Brady.

there are other examples besides NE.  Obviously Brady is why NE is great but what about Pitt? they have a rare down year once in a while but no matter who has been QB they usually draft bottom 10 and they are nearly always competitive. draft position guarantees nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, drdetroit said:

For winning a couple meaningless games at the end of the 2014 season and costing us a shot at Jameis Winston.

Never had a shot at Winston.  It was Mariota they missed on. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, drdetroit said:

For winning a couple meaningless games at the end of the 2014 season and costing us a shot at Jameis Winston.

Crab Legs would be absolutely terrible here. He actually has a good team behind him. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

there are other examples besides NE.  Obviously Brady is why NE is great but what about Pitt? they have a rare down year once in a while but no matter who has been QB they usually draft bottom 10 and they are nearly always competitive. draft position guarantees nothing.

That is a straw man argument; no one is stipulating that draft position guarantees greatness or correct draft selections. It is factually inarguable, though, that there are some good/great players available earlier that are unavailable later.

If they had the opportunity, every year New England, Pittsburgh, etc. would trade their lower picks for higher ones if no return compensation was required. 

Picking later has gotten in the way of drafting some players. That one can also point to other (good) players we had the opportunity to draft, and passed on, does not mean that draft position is therefore meaningless (and in turn, that there is no benefit to having a higher draft slot). 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

That is a straw man argument; no one is stipulating that draft position guarantees greatness or correct draft selections. It is factually inarguable, though, that there are some good/great players available earlier that are unavailable later.

If they had the opportunity, every year New England, Pittsburgh, etc. would trade their lower picks for higher ones if no return compensation was required. 

Picking later has gotten in the way of drafting some players. That one can also point to other (good) players we had the opportunity to draft, and passed on, does not mean that draft position is therefore meaningless (and in turn, that there is no benefit to having a higher draft slot). 

I guess that is why NE has traded back so often?

every team misses on players they want.

I am not going to root for my team to lose in order to get better draft position, if they lose they lose but I won't root for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, nyjunc said:

I guess that is why NE has traded back so often?

every team misses on players they want.

I am not going to root for my team to lose in order to get better draft position, if they lose they lose but I won't root for it.

NE trades back because they're already starting so low. Among other times they've traded back was to get a player a round higher the following year. Why bother doing that if the pool of players are just as good later in the draft? 

So, don't root for them to lose; fine, no one is coming to your house forcing you to do otherwise. Besides, whether you root for the to win or lose from your living room has zero impact on what will happen anyway.

The fact is that higher draft picks have higher value than lower draft picks, and a team is rewarded with a higher pick if they lose additional games, and lower picks if they win more. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

NE trades back because they're already starting so low. Among other times they've traded back was to get a player a round higher the following year. Why bother doing that if the pool of players are just as good later in the draft? 

So, don't root for them to lose; fine, no one is coming to your house forcing you to do otherwise. Besides, whether you root for the to win or lose from your living room has zero impact on what will happen anyway.

The fact is that higher draft picks have higher value than lower draft picks, and a team is rewarded with a higher pick if they lose additional games, and lower picks if they win more. 

exactly so why waste our time rooting for our team to lose?

 

the facts are good players can be found anywhere in the draft.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

exactly so why waste our time rooting for our team to lose?

 

the facts are good players can be found anywhere in the draft.  

Why even score players? Why put grades on them? Why rank them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, NoBowles said:

Why even score players? Why put grades on them? Why rank them?

it's an inexact science, those grades and ranks are part of the process.  the greatest QB of all time was passed over by every team at least 4 or 5 times while guys like jamarcus Russell went #1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, nyjunc said:

gives you more options to screw up too, you don't like my NE example b/c of Brady?  ok, what about Pitt? they are always drafting bottom 10 and never have years like the 2016 Jets.

good teams will draft well no matter where they pick, bad teams will screw it up no matter where they pick.

I have no opinion on your examples, because they're not relevant.

If you give an investor $100 and an addict $1000, in all likelihood, the investor's $100 will be put to better use.  But, $1000 is still more money than $100.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, nyjunc said:

it's an inexact science, those grades and ranks are part of the process.  the greatest QB of all time was passed over by every team at least 4 or 5 times while guys like jamarcus Russell went #1.

There have been many analysis' that have shown that more times than not, the higher the draft pick the higher chance of being successful. There are always outliers and mistakes made, doesn't mean the process is wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, NoBowles said:

There have been many analysis' that have shown that more times than not, the higher the draft pick the higher chance of being successful. There are always outliers and mistakes made, doesn't mean the process is wrong.

the game is about winning not tanking.  i's not like basketball where one player can change a franchise almost instantly. Good organizations find good players no matter where they draft.  that's the bottom line.  if the jets lose in a season like this then they lose but I will never root for it to happen and I would be pissed if we found out they were tanking games.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, nyjunc said:

the game is about winning not tanking.  i's not like basketball where one player can change a franchise almost instantly. Good organizations find good players no matter where they draft.  that's the bottom line.  if the jets lose in a season like this then they lose but I will never root for it to happen and I would be pissed if we found out they were tanking games.

I generally don't want to see teams tank either, but that year it was clearly the right thing to do, the coach was gone, the GM was gone and we had a shot at two highly rated QB prospects. Even if we did not grab one, we could have gotten a boat load back in trades. Sometimes you have to do it. Even if you don't tank, you can play all your young guys and give them a shot to win. Woody is a moron, and his complete lack of a clue cost us dearly. It cost us dearly in retaining Rex and getting Idzik, it cost us dearly in not tanking in that spot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, NoBowles said:

I generally don't want to see teams tank either, but that year it was clearly the right thing to do, the coach was gone, the GM was gone and we had a shot at two highly rated QB prospects. Even if we did not grab one, we could have gotten a boat load back in trades. Sometimes you have to do it. Even if you don't tank, you can play all your young guys and give them a shot to win. Woody is a moron, and his complete lack of a clue cost us dearly. It cost us dearly in retaining Rex and getting Idzik, it cost us dearly in not tanking in that spot.

The question is how do you tank? You tell players after weeks of trying, not to try?

  • Thumb Down 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, NoBowles said:

I generally don't want to see teams tank either, but that year it was clearly the right thing to do, the coach was gone, the GM was gone and we had a shot at two highly rated QB prospects. Even if we did not grab one, we could have gotten a boat load back in trades. Sometimes you have to do it. Even if you don't tank, you can play all your young guys and give them a shot to win. Woody is a moron, and his complete lack of a clue cost us dearly. It cost us dearly in retaining Rex and getting Idzik, it cost us dearly in not tanking in that spot.

if the coach knows he's gone he has even more incentive to win.  The bottom line is the Idzik fiasco sett us back many years

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, UnitedWhofans said:

The question is how do you tank? You tell players after weeks of trying, not to try?

No, you just play all your youngest players and you lose

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

if the coach knows he's gone he has even more incentive to win.  The bottom line is the Idzik fiasco sett us back many years

Exactly, which is why Woody should have fired Rex before he had a chance to ruin our draft pick with his win one for the leaving hero schtick the he does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, nyjunc said:

it's an inexact science, those grades and ranks are part of the process.  the greatest QB of all time was passed over by every team at least 4 or 5 times while guys like jamarcus Russell went #1.

I agree with you.  Most fans act as if it is better to lose to draft 6th instead of 8th.  Ridiculous logic.  The draft is an inexact science.  If the Jets were to somehow upset the Pats* and Petty threw 3 TD passes, it would be worth losing a couple of spots in the draft, and do a world of good for Petty.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, NoBowles said:

Exactly, which is why Woody should have fired Rex before he had a chance to ruin our draft pick with his win one for the leaving hero schtick the he does.

woody's big mistake was firing Tannenbaum.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, nyjunc said:

woody's big mistake was firing Tannenbaum.  

Woody's big mistake was firing Tannebaum and insisting Rex stay. Even if he wanted to fire Tanny, and let his new GM pick the HC and decide Rex's fate, he would have ended up with a far better GM than the crap he got with Idzik. If the new GM wanted Rex, so be it, but the fact that he crammed Rex down the new GM's throat was a colossal mistake we are still paying for.

It was pretty damn clear that Rex and Tannebarum were an awful fit. Tanny was very good with Mangini, but he was absolutely awful with Rex. Tanny was never meant to be a personnel type GM, he was meant to be a Paoli type GM where the HC picks the groceries, and he does contracts and facilitates deals and makes things happen. Mangini was better at picking groceries than he was a HC, so it worked with Tanny, but Rex was absolutely awful at picking groceries, and as it turns out, a bad coach too.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, drdetroit said:

For winning a couple meaningless games at the end of the 2014 season and costing us a shot at Jameis Winston.

What the hell does this have anything to do with anything?  Petty could very well be a starting-caliber QB for this team.

The problem isn't Petty; its the years of sh*te drafting that has left an OLINE in shambles, and a defense that has holes everywhere.

Bitch about that, because that has more to do with our problems than not drafting Jameis Winston.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, drdetroit said:

For winning a couple meaningless games at the end of the 2014 season and costing us a shot at Jameis Winston.

I am not gonna beat you up.  Your boy Jameis can play. Yes, I think i was wrong.

But he didn't exactly set the world on fire last night.  An unsportsmanlike conduct penalty, a fumble, and two picks.  And his long TD pass was an underthrown fortunate deflection. And he missed Mike Evans for a long gain on the final drive attempt.

I left off his third INT at the end because of the situation.

Meanwhile, my man Marcus didn't set the world ablaze either yesterday.  But he did enough for the Titans win a huge game on the road at Arrowhead.

And you can ditch the "running QB" crap.  He had one rush for  -2 yards.  Mariota is a passer who can also run.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, NoBowles said:

Woody's big mistake was firing Tannebaum and insisting Rex stay. Even if he wanted to fire Tanny, and let his new GM pick the HC and decide Rex's fate, he would have ended up with a far better GM than the crap he got with Idzik. If the new GM wanted Rex, so be it, but the fact that he crammed Rex down the new GM's throat was a colossal mistake we are still paying for.

It was pretty damn clear that Rex and Tannebarum were an awful fit. Tanny was very good with Mangini, but he was absolutely awful with Rex. Tanny was never meant to be a personnel type GM, he was meant to be a Paoli type GM where the HC picks the groceries, and he does contracts and facilitates deals and makes things happen. Mangini was better at picking groceries than he was a HC, so it worked with Tanny, but Rex was absolutely awful at picking groceries, and as it turns out, a bad coach too.

Rex didn't deserve to be fired after 2012 but they either had to keep him and Mike together or fire them both so I agree with you there.

Tannenbaum has done an excellent job resurrecting a dead Miami franchise.  he went for from 2008-2011, we got close but had to retool.  he wasn't allowed that opportunity.  we'd be in a much better situation now if he was never fired.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, nyjunc said:

Rex didn't deserve to be fired after 2012 but they either had to keep him and Mike together or fire them both so I agree with you there.

Tannehill has done an excellent job resurrecting a dead Miami franchise.  he went for from 2008-2011, we got close but had to retool.  he wasn't allowed that opportunity.  we'd be in a much better situation now if he was never fired.

I always believed with the right HC and the right people around him, Tannenbaum was a good FO guy. He and Rex were just an absolute debacle together, but the early success they had based on the team Mangini and Tannenbaum put together, gave them both a huge ego

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, drdetroit said:

For winning a couple meaningless games at the end of the 2014 season and costing us a shot at Jameis Winston.

Marietta is better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jets had the great Geno Smith on the roster. Why would they draft Winston or Mariota who are both clearly inferior QBs who have never taken a punch to the face that broke their jaw and still managed to make a career comeback?

 

Also, they have Petty and Hack...it's cute that people think they'll draft a QB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, UnitedWhofans said:

The question is how do you tank? You tell players after weeks of trying, not to try?

You do a "competitive tank." Like the Browns.  They got rid of most of their vets. Filled the roster with youth and rookies. Leaving the team void of talent, but full of hungry kids that want to stick in the league.  The team sucks, but nobody can say they aren't trying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, nyjunc said:

exactly so why waste our time rooting for our team to lose?

 

the facts are good players can be found anywhere in the draft.  

What you consider a waste of time others do not. I can watch & root for Jets players - ones that hopefully have a good future here - to do well, without rooting for the final result to be a win that helps nothing and wins nothing. I can enjoy that, knowing the future may be brighter and here are some players that will be part of it. 

You can't credibly point to success in the absence of a higher pick as an advocation for rooting for a lower pick and ignore such relatively glaring examples like Vernon Gholston over Matt Ryan because we won another meaningless December game long after being eliminated. I'll bet you rooted & cheered for that as well, and truly enjoyed that OT win over the 3-12 Chiefs that won us nothing. 

That win then led to not only picking Gholston instead of Ryan, but it also led to trading a 1st & a 2nd (and more) for Sanchez a year later, which then led to an extension for Sanchez (which led to Stephen Hill over Russell Wilson), which led to drafting Geno (which led to Calvin Pryor over Carr/Bridgewater), which led to signing (then re-signing) Fitzpatrick, which led to drafting Hackenberg, which will then lead to burning another high pick this year and/or picking up another placeholder like Romo.

That useless December win, enjoyable as you may have found it, was a very short-lived day of enjoyment. Given how close we came with freaking Sanchez & Gholston later, I can see a clear path to better short & long term results with Matt Ryan plus a 1st rounder plus a 2nd rounder. 

There are many such examples, but that one sticks out in my head.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sperm Edwards said:

What you consider a waste of time others do not. I can watch & root for Jets players - ones that hopefully have a good future here - to do well, without rooting for the final result to be a win that helps nothing and wins nothing. I can enjoy that, knowing the future may be brighter and here are some players that will be part of it. 

You can't credibly point to success in the absence of a higher pick as an advocation for rooting for a lower pick and ignore such relatively glaring examples like Vernon Gholston over Matt Ryan because we won another meaningless December game long after being eliminated. I'll bet you rooted & cheered for that as well, and truly enjoyed that OT win over the 3-12 Chiefs that won us nothing. 

That win then led to not only picking Gholston instead of Ryan, but it also led to trading a 1st & a 2nd (and more) for Sanchez a year later, which then led to an extension for Sanchez (which led to Stephen Hill over Russell Wilson), which led to drafting Geno (which led to Calvin Pryor over Carr/Bridgewater), which led to signing (then re-signing) Fitzpatrick, which led to drafting Hackenberg, which will then lead to burning another high pick this year and/or picking up another placeholder like Romo.

That useless December win, enjoyable as you may have found it, was a very short-lived day of enjoyment. Given how close we came with freaking Sanchez & Gholston later, I can see a clear path to better short & long term results with Matt Ryan plus a 1st rounder plus a 2nd rounder. 

There are many such examples, but that one sticks out in my head.

we could have moved up for Ryan if we wanted him that bad and imagine him here losing playoff games.  we'd run him out of town.

 

2009 and 2010 probably don't happen if we lose that Chiefs game and take Ryan.

Wilson w/ the talent we had in 2012-2014 wouldn't have been the Russell Wilson we see today.

 

I want a team and franchise that fights, one that hates to lose not one that will give up.  we can get players we want anywhere.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

What you consider a waste of time others do not. I can watch & root for Jets players - ones that hopefully have a good future here - to do well, without rooting for the final result to be a win that helps nothing and wins nothing. I can enjoy that, knowing the future may be brighter and here are some players that will be part of it. 

You can't credibly point to success in the absence of a higher pick as an advocation for rooting for a lower pick and ignore such relatively glaring examples like Vernon Gholston over Matt Ryan because we won another meaningless December game long after being eliminated. I'll bet you rooted & cheered for that as well, and truly enjoyed that OT win over the 3-12 Chiefs that won us nothing. 

That win then led to not only picking Gholston instead of Ryan, but it also led to trading a 1st & a 2nd (and more) for Sanchez a year later, which then led to an extension for Sanchez (which led to Stephen Hill over Russell Wilson), which led to drafting Geno (which led to Calvin Pryor over Carr/Bridgewater), which led to signing (then re-signing) Fitzpatrick, which led to drafting Hackenberg, which will then lead to burning another high pick this year and/or picking up another placeholder like Romo.

That useless December win, enjoyable as you may have found it, was a very short-lived day of enjoyment. Given how close we came with freaking Sanchez & Gholston later, I can see a clear path to better short & long term results with Matt Ryan plus a 1st rounder plus a 2nd rounder. 

There are many such examples, but that one sticks out in my head.

I could even get excited about these meaningless wins if they came with the team playing well.  Winning doesn't bring on more winning, good play brings on more winning.  The 49ers win did not help the Jets franchise.  If Petty comes out and plays well for the better portion of the games, and the Jets look strong and win, I don't think too many people would complain much.  What is terrible, and what we do consistently, is winning a sloppy game, 13-10ish against another bad team when the only measurable outcome is loss of draft position.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  



Content Partnership

Yes Network

Site Sponsor

MILE-Social - NJ Social Media & SEO company
×
×
  • Create New...