joewilly12 Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 Just now, NoBowles said: The odds are certainly stacked against Hack for many reasons. I still don't get the complete and utter temper tantrum being thrown though about the Jets taking a chance on him. After all, we wasted higher picks on Kellen Clemens and Geno Smith at the QB position. If you want a QB, you have to draft them, then develop them. If both Lynch and Hack fail, which is the highest probability, it will have been better to have taken Hack then Lynch. Can we just see how he plays out over the next year for crying out loud? If we sit back and don't address the starting QB position all off season and then Hackenberg fails us miserably in pre season and then we scramble to sign someone namely an old retread I will be pissed. The big question mark with Hackenberg could have been addressed the last few games of this season but for some unknown reason our coaching staff decided to keep him under wraps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoBowles Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 Just now, joewilly12 said: If we sit back and don't address the starting QB position all off season and then Hackenberg fails us miserably in pre season and then we scramble to sign someone namely an old retread I will be pissed. The big question mark with Hackenberg could have been addressed the last few games of this season but for some unknown reason our coaching staff decided to keep him under wraps. I see no chance we don't address the starting QB position while waiting for Hack, zero chance. Its really not an unknown reason at all, the reason has been clearly stated from day 1, you may not like the reason, and disagree with it, but its not unknown at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-met57 Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 Just now, T0mShane said: True story: when they drafted Hack I was so distraught that my iPad slipped out of my hands onto the concrete floor. There's a crack bisecting the screen. So, my disappointment is consistent and real. i feel about hack like i feel about trump...once the deed is done all you can hope is that he turns out to be great...god knows ive been on these boards long enough...and i remember you being on the other board when i first started posting a loooong time ago...so for sanity sake...we need a QB and soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeptable Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 Just now, T0mShane said: Are you liking your own posts? Deflection from the actual point that you are wrong about their being redemption stories... Whether Hack can be or not is not part of my argument with you. Its simply you stating there is none in the NFL at QB... of which you are completely wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joewilly12 Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 Just now, NoBowles said: I see no chance we don't address the starting QB position while waiting for Hack, zero chance. Its really not an unknown reason at all, the reason has been clearly stated from day 1, you may not like the reason, and disagree with it, but its not unknown at all. We shall see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 4 minutes ago, NoBowles said: The odds are certainly stacked against Hack for many reasons. I still don't get the complete and utter temper tantrum being thrown though about the Jets taking a chance on him. After all, we wasted higher picks on Kellen Clemens and Geno Smith at the QB position. If you want a QB, you have to draft them, then develop them. If both Lynch and Hack fail, which is the highest probability, it will have been better to have taken Hack then Lynch. Can we just see how he plays out over the next year for crying out loud? Because Maccagnan is new on the job, we need to assess clues for how it'll translate moving forward. That he has--to date--sh*t all over himself with the QB position, particularly in ways that were avoidable, is a bad sign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 Just now, Skeptable said: Deflection from the actual point that you are wrong about their being redemption stories... Whether Hack can be or not is not part of my argument with you. Its simply you stating there is none in the NFL at QB... of which you are completely wrong You liked all of your posts. All of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeptable Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 Just now, T0mShane said: You liked all of your posts. All of them. Exactly... no response... Point proven Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 Just now, Skeptable said: Exactly... no response... Point proven ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoBowles Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 Just now, T0mShane said: Because Maccagnan is new on the job, we need to assess clues for how it'll translate moving forward. That he has--to date--sh*t all over himself with the QB position, particularly in ways that were avoidable, is a bad sign. He is the first GM that we have ever had who has not sat back with the QB's we have and actually tries to get one. He was handed Geno Smith for crying out loud, and in two years he acquired Fitzpatrick, Petty and Hackenberg. He tried to trade up for either Goff or Wentz, and passed on Lynch. Dak is 100% hindsight, and there is zero chance in hell that Dak did anything close to what he did with the Jets. Its easy to say find a good QB, but there are about 10-15 of them on the planet at any point in time. If it were easy, everyone would have one. You can'g get one if you don't try. What should Mac have done in his < 2 years here that would have appeased you at the QB position that would have us in a better spot than we are now? I seem to recall you going gaga for Lynch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freemanm Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 That's great, I'm glad we used a second round pick on him instead of someone who can... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 2 minutes ago, NoBowles said: He is the first GM that we have ever had who has not sat back with the QB's we have and actually tries to get one. He was handed Geno Smith for crying out loud, and in two years he acquired Fitzpatrick, Petty and Hackenberg. He tried to trade up for either Goff or Wentz, and passed on Lynch. Dak is 100% hindsight, and there is zero chance in hell that Dak did anything close to what he did with the Jets. Its easy to say find a good QB, but there are about 10-15 of them on the planet at any point in time. If it were easy, everyone would have one. You can'g get one if you don't try. What should Mac have done in his < 2 years here that would have appeased you at the QB position that would have us in a better spot than we are now? I seem to recall you going gaga for Lynch. The whole world knew what Fitzpatrick was and Macc signed him--twice. Similarly, the whole world knew who Hackenberg was and Macc spent a two on him. This isn't throwing spaghetti at the wall. It's throwing spaghetti at the wall while bashing your face into that same wall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoBowles Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 2 minutes ago, T0mShane said: The whole world knew what Fitzpatrick was and Macc signed him--twice. Similarly, the whole world knew who Hackenberg was and Macc spent a two on him. This isn't throwing spaghetti at the wall. It's throwing spaghetti at the wall while bashing your face into that same wall. OK, so give us what he should have done at the QB position than that would have given you so much more confidence in him as a GM who is going to get the QB we need. Its easy to bash, its hard to give a valid solution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-met57 Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 4 minutes ago, T0mShane said: The whole world knew what Fitzpatrick was and Macc signed him--twice. Similarly, the whole world knew who Hackenberg was and Macc spent a two on him. This isn't throwing spaghetti at the wall. It's throwing spaghetti at the wall while bashing your face into that same wall. the options were Fitz, or throw money at the kid from Houston, or Brian Hoyer, or what? just dont give me Dak, he didnt go in the fourth because teams thought he could start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 1 minute ago, NoBowles said: OK, so give us what he should have done at the QB position than that would have given you so much more confidence in him as a GM who is going to get the QB we need. Its easy to bash, its hard to give a valid solution. Ah. What I would have done this year is give Geno the first six games, then I'd have given Petty six games. If neither of them showed anything, I'd have given Hackenberg the last four. Worst case scenario, you go into 2017 with a young QB or knowing you have no QB. Instead, you just wasted a year and tore the locker room to shreds, and now you're going to beg Tony Romo and his neurologist to take $20 mil from you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 1 minute ago, k-met57 said: the options were Fitz, or throw money at the kid from Houston, or Brian Hoyer, or what? just dont give me Dak, he didnt go in the fourth because teams thought he could start. I wouldn't mention Dak anyway. He's only relevant because he's a rookie who played and didn't die. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joewilly12 Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 Just now, T0mShane said: Ah. What I would have done this year is give Geno the first six games, then I'd have given Petty six games. If neither of them showed anything, I'd have given Hackenberg the last four. Worst case scenario, you go into 2017 with a young QB or knowing you have no QB. Instead, you just wasted a year and tore the locker room to shreds, and now you're going to beg Tony Romo and his neurologist to take $20 mil from you. Agree starting the QB they did most of the season did nothing for this organization in any way shape or form. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 1 minute ago, joewilly12 said: Agree starting the QB they did most of the season did nothing for this organization in any way shape or form. January decisions are so easy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-met57 Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 Just now, T0mShane said: I wouldn't mention Dak anyway. He's only relevant because he's a rookie who played and didn't die. If my options were Fitz, Petty or Geno...coming off a 10-6 season where we would have made the playoffs had billal been healthy...and considering the chemistry Fitz had with decker and marshall...i think it was a no brainer. obviously everything blew up in our face...but hindsight is 20/20. btw i cant stand Geno, him and Jimmy Claussen should start a club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SickJetFan Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 21 minutes ago, T0mShane said: I don't want to rain on the pro-Hack parade, but literally every hope you have for him is based on pure and simple faith and there isn't much you can point to otherwise. I don't believe you fix accuracy issues, and he seems to be an emo mush besides. I don't believe environment is the issue with Hack as much as it is his head. Not sure there is a pro-Hack parade but I do think you onto something about parades Parade 1 ....those who have not seen him play after being coached by nfl coaches in an nfl game and therefore have reserved opinion as to whether he is good or not. Parade 2....sheep....get on the bandwagon types that rely on others to form their opinions. Parade 3....life losers...those who are so use to losing they always on the side/probility of failure. Hack being only 21 years old has an opportunity to become next Brady or next Geno Smith....the odds and preliminary indications favor Geno Smith type carreer...so join a parade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-met57 Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 1 minute ago, SickJetFan said: Not sure there is a pro-Hack parade but I do think you onto something about parades Parade 1 ....those who have not seen him play after being coached by nfl coaches in an nfl game and therefore have reserved opinion as to whether he is good or not. Parade 2....sheep....get on the bandwagon types that rely on others to form their opinions. Parade 3....life losers...those who are so use to losing they always on the side/probility of failure. Hack being only 21 years old has an opportunity to become next Brady or next Geno Smith....the odds and preliminary indications favor Geno Smith type carreer...so join a parade. i believe there is a term for parade 3...its called SOJF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoBowles Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 9 minutes ago, T0mShane said: Ah. What I would have done this year is give Geno the first six games, then I'd have given Petty six games. If neither of them showed anything, I'd have given Hackenberg the last four. Worst case scenario, you go into 2017 with a young QB or knowing you have no QB. Instead, you just wasted a year and tore the locker room to shreds, and now you're going to beg Tony Romo and his neurologist to take $20 mil from you. Unless you think Geno was going to magically stop being the worst QB of all time, everything you said could have been done with Fitzpatrick being here, and this probably more on Bowles than it is Mac. If they sign Romo or Cutler, I am all aboard the Mac sucks train. For now, it seems more just bitching that we don't have the guy, and blaming him for the coach sucking than anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-met57 Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 Just now, NoBowles said: Unless you think Geno was going to magically stop being the worst QB of all time, everything you said could have been done with Fitzpatrick being here, and this probably more on Bowles than it is Mac. If they sign Romo or Cutler, I am all aboard the Mac sucks train. For now, it seems more just bitching that we don't have the guy, and blaming him for the coach sucking than anything. id be ok with Romo coming in, and Hack sitting as long as Romo is healthy...but Romo is never ever coming here...why would he? bank on him going to like denver or arizona. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoBowles Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 Just now, k-met57 said: id be ok with Romo coming in, and Hack sitting as long as Romo is healthy...but Romo is never ever coming here...why would he? bank on him going to like denver or arizona. IMO if you bring in Romo, you are putting all your eggs in the Hack basket, which you just cannot do. Now, if they draft a relatively high draft pick, and say we will have, cough, Romo, Hack and the high draft pick, I don't hate it nearly as much. But if you have Petty, Hack and Romo, we are totally screwed unless Hack becomes the guy, which is unlikely, and I have no problem at all with the Hack pick, 2nd round picks at QB just don't have a high probability of success. Romo will also almost surely be hurt by week 3, and even if he isn't, the team around him is not good enough to do anything with him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 4 minutes ago, NoBowles said: Unless you think Geno was going to magically stop being the worst QB of all time, everything you said could have been done with Fitzpatrick being here, and this probably more on Bowles than it is Mac. If they sign Romo or Cutler, I am all aboard the Mac sucks train. For now, it seems more just bitching that we don't have the guy, and blaming him for the coach sucking than anything. No, no. I never bitch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbatesman Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 36 minutes ago, T0mShane said: Are you liking your own posts? One of the most savage owns in JN history Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoBowles Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 5 minutes ago, T0mShane said: No, no. I never bitch. The real crime here is that we don't have one of Bridgewater, Garropolo or Carr. We passed on all 3 of those guys for Geno ******* Smith!!!! We can sit back and whine and complain about Fitzpatrick or Hackenberg all day long, but if we had taken any of the 3 that were right there for the taking, Fitzpatrick and Hackenberg never happen. But instead we have the Louisville slugger.......... Except he doesn't really slug. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 Like it or not, the Hack experiment can't consist of having him sit another year. What you would essentially be doing then is developing him (or not developing him) for someone else. You can buy one year of insurance with a 2nd round qb pick, you can't buy 2. Not possible. It is Hack or bust on that pick next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrazyCarl40 Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 22 minutes ago, T0mShane said: Ah. What I would have done this year is give Geno the first six games, then I'd have given Petty six games. If neither of them showed anything, I'd have given Hackenberg the last four. Worst case scenario, you go into 2017 with a young QB or knowing you have no QB. Instead, you just wasted a year and tore the locker room to shreds, and now you're going to beg Tony Romo and his neurologist to take $20 mil from you. Giving Geno six games would have been foolish. Especially if he failed epically like he always has, then the Jets would be over the fire about how they should have brought Fitz back. They couldn't put themselves in that situation from a PR standpoint as it would have been unmanageable. Petty got in six games of the ones he started he finished one. Hack was never playing this season. They have a pretty good idea of what they have with both and neither guy will prevent them from getting a different QB if they so choose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
section314 Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 1 minute ago, Scott Dierking said: Like it or not, the Hack experiment can't consist of having him sit another year. What you would essentially be doing then is developing him (or not developing him) for someone else. You can buy one year of insurance with a 2nd round qb pick, you can't buy 2. Not possible. It is Hack or bust on that pick next year. Whether it's opening day, or week 6-7, Hackenberg will be the starting QB for the Jets next year. And if they are right about him, and I think they will be, it will be for 10 -12 years after that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SickJetFan Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 27 minutes ago, k-met57 said: i believe there is a term for parade 3...its called SOJF True dat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
munchmemory Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 If Hack is really this bad? The team needs to cut the kid this afternoon. (Yes, I know it'll never happen as it would doom Mcc for his increasingly idiotic decision to draft a "project" in the second round.) Again, if true, Hack will never start so let him go find backup work (even this is most likely a dream for the kid) with some other team with a sap for a GM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-met57 Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 7 minutes ago, munchmemory said: If Hack is really this bad? The team needs to cut the kid this afternoon. (Yes, I know it'll never happen as it would doom Mcc for his increasingly idiotic decision to draft a "project" in the second round.) Again, if true, Hack will never start so let him go find backup work (even this is most likely a dream for the kid) with some other team with a sap for a GM. why is it "idiotic to draft a project in the second round" considering if he wasn't a project he would go first overall? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 I'd rather see him play in a few meaningful games before writing him off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
munchmemory Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 2 minutes ago, k-met57 said: why is it "idiotic to draft a project in the second round" considering if he wasn't a project he would go first overall? I hope you're joking. With all our team needs, Mcc drafts a kid who by nearly unanimous appraisals was a disaster? A guy who would most likely have been there in the fourth or fifth rounds? Believe what you want. But I think reaching for Hack in the second round was beyond dumb and unnecessary. His decision--when Hack eventually washes out--is something which will eventually cost Mcc his job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.