Cimini expects Jets to target Glennon

[ZachEY]

1 hour ago, JiF said:

My biggest fear with Mike Glennon, is no QB as ugly as him has ever succeeded in the NFL.  You have to be handsome man to play QB.  And Glennon is an ugly dude.

 

The Colts have disagreed for an exceptionally long time.

[jetsfansince7]

Why is this typical NY Jets? Typical NY Jets is bringing in Romo or Breeze with a team that can't win. Tell me a better option than Glennon. Glennon has a situation similar to Geno, not a great team around him, pressure to win now, never got a full change with Freeman hanging around. 

 

[Beerfish]

I still swear that Glennon is Idziks son.

[detectivekimble]

On January 14, 2017 at 7:49 PM, Bugg said:

Glennon might be good enough to carry the offense to 5-7 wins, keep the disaster that is Bowles employed and cost the Jets any shot at a franchise QB in 2018 draft. That is, if they can find anyone dumb enough to sign up for Bowles' short term horror show. But this would be entirely typical water-treading stupidity.  

Aren't winning a damn thing in 2017. Burn it down. Blow it up. Clean house. Throw out the trash. 

Not happening.

[southtown24th]

Another retread.

[MaxAF]

Glennon would be a good grab IMO. He's still young, could bridge the gap on our current stable and just might turn out to be a QB that can win. 

[CrazyCarl40]

53 minutes ago, MaxAF said:

Glennon would be a good grab IMO. He's still young, could bridge the gap on our current stable and just might turn out to be a QB that can win. 

Bridge what gap? You bring in someone like Glennon or Taylor you aren't paying them to bridge any gap, you're giving them the keys to the car for at least 2-3 years and never giving yourself an honest look at the young players. Do you think the Texans signed Osweiler to 18 million a year to bridge the gap? Neither Taylor or Glennon are even in the same galaxy as the QBs that will be playing this weekend. Just a couple of meh guys who may get the team to the playoffs if you have a great running game and a top five defense but can't get you there on their own or win if they ever did. 

[Ben Had]

18 hours ago, JiF said:

It's really simple?  Who's better looking and start that dude:

 

Look at the neck on that guy...5'6" and a 12" neck. Gots lil tiny legs an lil tiny feet...

[MaxAF]

1 hour ago, CrazyCarl40 said:

Bridge what gap? You bring in someone like Glennon or Taylor you aren't paying them to bridge any gap, you're giving them the keys to the car for at least 2-3 years and never giving yourself an honest look at the young players. Do you think the Texans signed Osweiler to 18 million a year to bridge the gap? Neither Taylor or Glennon are even in the same galaxy as the QBs that will be playing this weekend. Just a couple of meh guys who may get the team to the playoffs if you have a great running game and a top five defense but can't get you there on their own or win if they ever did. 

So is your assessment that we have our QB on the team now? Or draft another QB and go with 3 unknowns? Or a vet like Romo or Cutler? And if the youngbloods don't pan out we are 2 or 3 or 4 more years without a decent QB then what? I personally think Hack or Petty may pan out but we may need someone that can play now and be competitive. We'll see if the Jets go after Glennon. I think they will.

[CrazyCarl40]

Just now, MaxAF said:

So is your assessment that we have our QB on the team now? Or draft another QB and go with 3 unknowns? Or a vet like Romo or Cutler? And if the youngbloods don't pan out we are 2 or 3 or 4 more years without a decent QB then what? I personally think Hack or Petty may pan out but we may need someone that can play now and be competitive. We'll see if the Jets go after Glennon. I think they will.

Why do the Jets need to bring in someone and be "competitive now"? Why can't they just suck and figure out which young players are worth keeping? I don't think the QB of the future is on this roster, but we won't know that for certain if you bring a Glennon in to start for multiple years. You play the young guys in 2017 and if they're awful, you look at the loaded 2018 QB draft class and go all in on one of them. That would be my plan especially since brining in a QB like Taylor or Glennon or whomever isn't going to matter when you're looking at cutting a ton of veterans this offseason, a whole new offensive system, and an overhaul of the secondary means this team isn't going to compete for a year or two at minimum anyway. 

[Warfish]

Not a huge fan of any of our options tbqh.

Glennon?  Failed backup, in Tampa no less.  

Tyrod?  Failed starter, in Baffalol.

Hack?  So bad he couldn't play garbage time in the last game.

Petty?  Nice kid, but didn't overly impress when he got his opportunity.

Draft Picks?  None seem overly sure thing.

Here's the thing, I can understand Macc and Co. going with ANY of the options above honestly, they all have some merit, and they all have big risks of failure.

So here is what I don't want to see:  XXX signed for 4 years, 95 million dollars.  So if we sign a Glennon or Tyrod, it damn sure better not be for Osweiller type money.  They have NOT Earned that, and if they get it, let some other team take the Scott Mitchell risk on it.

If we're going with a crapshoot at QB, I'd rather go with Petty (free, already have him), Hack (free, already have him) and a Draft Pick (cheap).  I defer to others if that draft pick should be a #1 pick (for the trio currently considered first round worthy) or a Mid-rounder to be the #3.

But if Glennon, or Tyrod, could be signed for low cost, I would support that as a flier.  Let them come in and compete with the two kids, and the best player playing the best plays (as I always hope).

Price is my fear here.  Big contract and fail....and we're in trouble.

[Bruce Harper]

On 1/14/2017 at 2:45 PM, joewilly12 said:

Another teams backup bench warmer QB let me refrain myself. 

He has a two to one TD to INT ratio and a career 60% completion rate.  Sad as it may be, he is probably better than anyone we have on the roster.

[ChuckkieB]

Glennon is better than any QB on our roster, but that isn't saying much.  I would honestly rather see Petty start the whole year and hope by some miracle that we catch lightning in a bottle and he develops into a legit starter.  If not, we draft in the top 5 in 2018 and pick our next "franchise QB." The money saved from not signing Glennon would be better served to fill the many other holes the team has. 

[Bruce Harper]

On 1/14/2017 at 5:49 PM, Jet Life said:

A big contract for a QB who was benched for Mccown. No thanks. 1 year deal though , sure why not

That was an indisputably horrible coaching move made because McCown had just had a career year for Lovie in Chicago.

[MaxAF]

35 minutes ago, CrazyCarl40 said:

Why do the Jets need to bring in someone and be "competitive now"? Why can't they just suck and figure out which young players are worth keeping? I don't think the QB of the future is on this roster, but we won't know that for certain if you bring a Glennon in to start for multiple years. You play the young guys in 2017 and if they're awful, you look at the loaded 2018 QB draft class and go all in on one of them. That would be my plan especially since brining in a QB like Taylor or Glennon or whomever isn't going to matter when you're looking at cutting a ton of veterans this offseason, a whole new offensive system, and an overhaul of the secondary means this team isn't going to compete for a year or two at minimum anyway. 

I'm not so sure the Jets will definitely suck the next couple years. They still have a good team. Tweak the O line and secondary, draft another Fournette if he's still there at the 6 spot and they're competitive. Glennon could compete with Petty and Hack for the starting position. I'm not real high on the QB draft this year. 

[Villain The Foe]

On 1/14/2017 at 11:13 PM, Saul Goodman said:

I mostly haven't liked Glennon because of Villain's unrelenting, countless posts declaring him to be this unknown, untapped talent. 

Other than that, he really is someone the Jets should (have to) make an offer to.  

Superbowl 

[flgreen]

29 minutes ago, MaxAF said:

I'm not so sure the Jets will definitely suck the next couple years. They still have a good team. Tweak the O line and secondary, draft another Fournette if he's still there at the 6 spot and they're competitive. Glennon could compete with Petty and Hack for the starting position. I'm not real high on the QB draft this year. 

Unfortunately your probably right.  The Jets will clear a lot of cap space, hire another group of over the hill, over paid vets.  Sign Glennon for 18 M, go 7-9 next year, save Bowles job, miss out on any good QB's in the 18 draft and be 5-11 again in 20.

Round and round.  Team needs to be torn down , rebuilt thru the draft, and add some expensive FA's when the time comes to make the next step

[Villain The Foe]

On 1/14/2017 at 10:46 PM, AFJF said:

No sweat, I know most people haven't seen much of Glennon and they only know what they read or what other's say, which doesn't always tell the whole story.

1) He has a losing record....yes he does, but wins and losses are a team thing, not one guy.  Didn't Aikman go 1-15 once?  Can't write off a young QB on a bad team for poor record IMO.

2) He lost his job to Josh McCown...pretty much a load of crap.  After playing well as a rookie, Schiano said Glennon was TB's QB of the future, then he got fired and Lovie Smith came in.  Before even holding a single practice, he named McCown the starter.  There was no job or competition to lose, the job was just handed to McCown by a head coach who thought so little of Glennon that he didn't tell him about the decision.  Not to mention, when McCown went down with an injury, Glennon was more productive, but Lovie sent him back to the bench when McCown returned.

3) But the Bucs drafted Jameis, so he must suck...more garbage.  As I've said in the forums before, did Drew Brees suck because the Chargers drafted Rivers while he was still on the team?  Winston was viewed as the no. 1 QB in the draft and Glennon had been good when he played but was far from entrenched...because a team finds one player who is better than the one they already have, it does not mean the one they have isn't any good.  

4) If he was so good, somebody would have wanted him bad enough to trade for him.  More false than true if we believe many published reports.  Several outlets said teams called the Bucs to make a deal for Glennon, including the Jets.  However, Tampa Bay's asking price was a first round pick.  Even as a huge Glennon fan, a 1st is a bit much to ask for him.  Tampa Bay being greedy does not mean nobody wanted him.  If he was so bad, wouldn't the Bucs have been thrilled to get a 2nd or 3rd for him and run away laughing?  Why place such a high price tag on "the next Matt Flynn" and get nothing more than a late-round comp pick next season?

This entire piece of yours is great. At the end of the day, any team without a QB (such as the jets) will be better with Mike Glennon as their QB. Last I checked (as well as you) that was the point. 

 

No one is saying that he's a top 5 franchise QB. Those guys NEVER see free agency. However, there are young guys who do see free agency and become respectable starters having played on a prior team that either didnt fit them, or they were simply dismissed...which was exactly what happened to Glennon which is what you explained above. People continue to make these incorrect statements about Glennon never doing anything in the league and how he "lost his job"....no. Glennon outplayed Josh Freeman and Freeman never got his job back when Glennon was a rookie. As you stated, Schiano named Glennon the starter but was fired and when Lovie came in the guy named Josh McCown the starter before ever even trying out Glennon in his system. Glennon was replaced because of a coaching decision based on the fact that he brought his QB from Chicago with him, not because Glennon performed poorly on the field. Jets fans typically dont mention this. When McCown got hurt Glennon was playing well enough to even bring up the conversation in the public eye of him possibly keeping the position. Remember, Mike Evans was a rookie and with McCown as QB Evans averaged less than 50 yards per game and didnt record a TD. Glennon replaced McCown and Evans averaged 100 yards per game as well as a TD per game. 

Lovie tried to save his job by tanking week 17 to secure the top pick so he replaced all his starters on the field except Josh McCown. Now why the hell would you not put in your back up QB in a situation where you're obviously tanking to secure the top spot? It's because Lovie knew that Glennon would have tried to win that damn game. 

Mike Glennon imo is a starter in this league. Its a damn shame that he's had to deal with the bullsh*t down in Florida while guys like Ryan Fitzpatrick gets to hold a freaking team hostage. 

 

Mike Glennon is a good quarterback and could possibly be VERY GOOD with a nice team surrounding him. Glennon would most certainly compliment guys like Robby Anderson and Devin Smith as well given that he throws a pretty deep ball as well, similar to a guy like Tyrod Taylor. 

 

Great post. 

[CrazyCarl40]

1 hour ago, MaxAF said:

I'm not so sure the Jets will definitely suck the next couple years. They still have a good team. Tweak the O line and secondary, draft another Fournette if he's still there at the 6 spot and they're competitive. Glennon could compete with Petty and Hack for the starting position. I'm not real high on the QB draft this year. 

It's not just a "tweak" of the offensive line. It's finding a left tackle in a year bad for left tackles in free agency and the draft. And it's not just fixing the secondary, it's completely revamping it. Again. For the second time in Macc's short tenure. I'm going to get into how bad it is to draft a running back in the first round. Or how naive it is to sign Glennon for 15-18 million a year at the thought he would compete with Petty and Hack. That's not how any of this works. 

[Sperm Edwards]

4 minutes ago, CrazyCarl40 said:

It's not just a "tweak" of the offensive line. It's finding a left tackle in a year bad for left tackles in free agency and the draft. And it's not just fixing the secondary, it's completely revamping it. Again. For the second time in Macc's short tenure. I'm going to get into how bad it is to draft a running back in the first round. Or how naive it is to sign Glennon for 15-18 million a year at the thought he would compete with Petty and Hack. That's not how any of this works. 

I'll tell you what, if he does sign Glennon to that amount and it pans out, I'll give him full props for it without reservation since it's no slam-dunk successful move at all.

Also I just have a feeling Glennon is going to be closer to the $18m side of that than the $15m side, even with the Osweiller flop. Because if that move does pan out, the team that made the move may have saved not only the upcoming (non-contending) season or two, but potentially a 1st round draft pick and more that would have been spent for the privilege of slowly developing a prospect with a 50/50 shot of failure.

When one considers the asset value comparisons between cap dollars and 1st round picks (especially high ones), is it really that much more of a crap shoot to go after a Glennon or Taylor instead of the leftover QB prospect, of a weak class, that fell to you? Once in a while there's an instant-starter mid round rookie like Russell Wilson or a Dak Prescott, but we all know how rare that is, and how hard it is to predict who & when it'll be.

The goal is to get a good-enough QB, particularly for the long term. No one should honestly care how it happens. If it means having to badly whiff on a top 50 pick in Hackenberg, and then waste another season on Fitzpatrick for $12m, to make the team do a 180 and pick up Glennon (should he prove to be good)? So be it. Means to an end.

[LionelRichie]

8 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I'll tell you what, if he does sign Glennon to that amount and it pans out, I'll give him full props for it without reservation since it's no slam-dunk successful move at all.

Also I just have a feeling Glennon is going to be closer to the $18m side of that than the $15m side, even with the Osweiller flop. Because if that move does pan out, the team that made the move may have saved not only the upcoming (non-contending) season or two, but potentially a 1st round draft pick and more that would have been spent for the privilege of slowly developing a prospect with a 50/50 shot of failure.

When one considers the asset value comparisons between cap dollars and 1st round picks (especially high ones), is it really that much more of a crap shoot to go after a Glennon or Taylor instead of the leftover QB prospect, of a weak class, that fell to you? Once in a while there's an instant-starter mid round rookie like Russell Wilson or a Dak Prescott, but we all know how rare that is, and how hard it is to predict who & when it'll be.

The goal is to get a good-enough QB, particularly for the long term. No one should honestly care how it happens. If it means having to badly whiff on a top 50 pick in Hackenberg, and then waste another season on Fitzpatrick for $12m, to make the team do a 180 and pick up Glennon (should he prove to be good)? So be it. Means to an end.

Assuming Glennon is looking at $16-18M, the Jets should just take a run at Cousins in the $20-22M range.   I would be fine with the Jets overpaying for cousins on a deal they can end at 3 years if it doesn't work out.   The Redskins shot themselves in the foot with the franchise tag and should now let Cousins hit free agency.  

 

  

[Beerfish]

There is no way in this world or any other world that I pay Glennon 15 million.  Pure lunacy.    He might very well be an upgraded over Petty and Hack but that would be just as stupid as paying Oswieler what he got paid.

[Sperm Edwards]

1 hour ago, Warfish said:

Not a huge fan of any of our options tbqh.

Glennon?  Failed backup, in Tampa no less.  

Tyrod?  Failed starter, in Baffalol.

Hack?  So bad he couldn't play garbage time in the last game.

Petty?  Nice kid, but didn't overly impress when he got his opportunity.

Draft Picks?  None seem overly sure thing.

Here's the thing, I can understand Macc and Co. going with ANY of the options above honestly, they all have some merit, and they all have big risks of failure.

So here is what I don't want to see:  XXX signed for 4 years, 95 million dollars.  So if we sign a Glennon or Tyrod, it damn sure better not be for Osweiller type money.  They have NOT Earned that, and if they get it, let some other team take the Scott Mitchell risk on it.

If we're going with a crapshoot at QB, I'd rather go with Petty (free, already have him), Hack (free, already have him) and a Draft Pick (cheap).  I defer to others if that draft pick should be a #1 pick (for the trio currently considered first round worthy) or a Mid-rounder to be the #3.

But if Glennon, or Tyrod, could be signed for low cost, I would support that as a flier.  Let them come in and compete with the two kids, and the best player playing the best plays (as I always hope).

Price is my fear here.  Big contract and fail....and we're in trouble.

I hear you, but not all crapshoots are equal. Petty is a decidedly longer-odds crapshoot than Glennon or Taylor. First off, even if he got it together, the kid isn't half as durable as Chad Pennington.

There are some bad examples of teams crossing their fingers on overpaying a veteran who failed elsewhere, but it was such limited action the hope of upside still exists for some. Osweiller is just the latest among them. It's nothing new: Matt Flynn, Kevin Kolb, Rob Johnson, Scott Mitchell (as you mentioned), Cassel.

It does work out once in a while. The best ones I can think of - where the new team made an investment in a prior unknown/failure to get another team's garbage or spare part - off the top of my head are Alex Smith, Matt Hasselbeck, Kerry Collins, Schaub, Grbac, Trent Green. Oh yeah, and that Brett Favre guy.

One could argue it's "just money" which eventually resets kind of, and the team would suffer for the same period of time - maybe less - than drafting a bust early on in the draft. Still gets GMs fired though lol.

[Sperm Edwards]

15 minutes ago, LionelRichie said:

Assuming Glennon is looking at $16-18M, the Jets should just take a run at Cousins in the $20-22M range.   I would be fine with the Jets overpaying for cousins on a deal they can end at 3 years if it doesn't work out.   The Redskins shot themselves in the foot with the franchise tag and should now let Cousins hit free agency.    

It's a good argument. If Brian Winters is $8m, and a stopgop nobody like Fitzpatrick is $12m, how is Cousins not worth Winters+Fitzpatrick?

We'll see if he actually hits free agency. I can't imagine nobody on the Redskins has made that same calculation.

It's a 3-year investment. Either works out or it doesn't. But what it does, also, is frees up another high pick or two (or more) to take a shot on the next college QB hopeful. We aren't doing dick anyway in the meantime lol.

[Warfish]

44 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I hear you, but not all crapshoots are equal. Petty is a decidedly longer-odds crapshoot than Glennon or Taylor.

Based on evidence to-date, agreed.

44 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

First off, even if he got it together, the kid isn't half as durable as Chad Pennington.

He certainly appears fragile, but the sieve-like nature of last year's O-line was a factor.  

44 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Osweiller is just the latest among them. It's nothing new: Matt Flynn, Kevin Kolb, Rob Johnson, Scott Mitchell (as you mentioned), Cassel.

Reasons for doubt and fear.

44 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

It does work out once in a while. The best ones I can think of - where the new team made an investment in a prior unknown/failure to get another team's garbage or spare part - off the top of my head are Alex Smith, Matt Hasselbeck, Kerry Collins, Schaub, Grbac, Trent Green. Oh yeah, and that Brett Favre guy.

How many of them won Super Bowls?  Honest question.

44 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

One could argue it's "just money" which eventually resets kind of, and the team would suffer for the same period of time - maybe less - than drafting a bust early on in the draft. Still gets GMs fired though lol.

In taking risk, I prefer home-grown risk to once-failed-other-team-castoff-risk.  Generally speaking.

I would be happier (emotionally) if we draft a QB in the first than if we sign a Glennon or a Tyrod.  

But I freely admit, both Glennon and Tyrod have some record of production success and production metrics that bear a thorough examination by Macc and Co.

As I say, if the price is reasonable for the risk (and make no mistake, these tow are nearly as risky as a draft pick despite their minor successes thus far) then I would not overly bemoan their signing.  Well....maybe Tyrod, as I simply don't see him as the type of pocket-passer QB I prefer.  

[Charlie Brown]

2 hours ago, Villain The Foe said:

Mike Glennon is a good quarterback and could possibly be VERY GOOD with a nice team surrounding him. Glennon would most certainly compliment guys like Robby Anderson and Devin Smith as well given that he throws a pretty deep ball as well, similar to a guy like Tyrod Taylor. 

This is all we need to know, Glennon would be a SIGNIFICANT upgrade to what we have experienced in general over the last 7 or 8 years.

Petty and Hack are to unproven to risk the season on and the Mcgowns of the world who are literally worse then Fitzpatrick shouldn't even be considered.... 

[ChuckkieB]

If the Jets are truly rebuilding, they will not sign Glennon or any other FA QB for that matter, and will bite the bullet and let Petty and Hackenberg duke it out in preseason.  If they want to continue this cycle of mediocrity, they will clear up  some cap space only to sign overpriced veterans or unproven players so they can win 7-8 games and pick in the middle of the draft year after year. 

[JoJoTownsell1]

1 minute ago, ChuckkieB said:

If the Jets are truly rebuilding, they will not sign Glennon or any other FA QB for that matter, and will bite the bullet and let Petty and Hackenberg duke it out in preseason.  If they want to continue this cycle of mediocrity, they will continue the cycle of clearing up  some cap space only to sign overpriced veterans or unproven players so they can win 7-8 games and pick in the middle of the draft year after year. 

Unless they think Glennon could be a franchise QB. I am not sold on Glennon but he is young and has shown flashes. The only thing holding him back was that the Bucs ended up with the first pick in the draft the year a consensus #1 QB was available to them so they went with Winston. The Chargers did the same with Rivers when they already have Brees. I am not suggesting Glennon=Rivers, but at least he is a young guy we could conceivably build around. 

If i was running things, I would definitely go with Hack/Petty/Rookie QB and hope one becomes a franchise QB, if not, hopefully get a top 2 pick next year and land a franchise QB. But I am not going to bash Glennon without first seeing him play in a Jets uniform. 

[thadude]

3 hours ago, Warfish said:

Not a huge fan of any of our options tbqh.

Glennon?  Failed backup, in Tampa no less.  

Tyrod?  Failed starter, in Baffalol.

Hack?  So bad he couldn't play garbage time in the last game.

Petty?  Nice kid, but didn't overly impress when he got his opportunity.

Draft Picks?  None seem overly sure thing.

Here's the thing, I can understand Macc and Co. going with ANY of the options above honestly, they all have some merit, and they all have big risks of failure.

So here is what I don't want to see:  XXX signed for 4 years, 95 million dollars.  So if we sign a Glennon or Tyrod, it damn sure better not be for Osweiller type money.  They have NOT Earned that, and if they get it, let some other team take the Scott Mitchell risk on it.

If we're going with a crapshoot at QB, I'd rather go with Petty (free, already have him), Hack (free, already have him) and a Draft Pick (cheap).  I defer to others if that draft pick should be a #1 pick (for the trio currently considered first round worthy) or a Mid-rounder to be the #3.

But if Glennon, or Tyrod, could be signed for low cost, I would support that as a flier.  Let them come in and compete with the two kids, and the best player playing the best plays (as I always hope).

Price is my fear here.  Big contract and fail....and we're in trouble.

Dude Petty sucks

 

Glennon had 30tds 16 ints in Tampa.  Hardly a failed backup

 

I get it you think Lovie Smith is a great evaluator of qb talent.  Stick to whining about Geno

 

[thadude]

21 hours ago, southtown24th said:

Another retread.

Retreads never win anything just ask Steve Young, Brett Favre, Kurt Warner, Rich Gannon, Brad Johnson, Trent Dilfer, Randall  Cunningham and our own Vinny Testaverde

 

Or we can stick with Bryce Putrid and Wackenberg

[thadude]

1 hour ago, LionelRichie said:

Assuming Glennon is looking at $16-18M, the Jets should just take a run at Cousins in the $20-22M range.   I would be fine with the Jets overpaying for cousins on a deal they can end at 3 years if it doesn't work out.   The Redskins shot themselves in the foot with the franchise tag and should now let Cousins hit free agency.  

 

  

1. Snyder is not letting Cousins go

 

2. Cousins is not that great

[Sperm Edwards]

6 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Based on evidence to-date, agreed.

He certainly appears fragile, but the sieve-like nature of last year's O-line was a factor.  

Reasons for doubt and fear.

How many of them won Super Bowls?  Honest question.

In taking risk, I prefer home-grown risk to once-failed-other-team-castoff-risk.  Generally speaking.

I would be happier (emotionally) if we draft a QB in the first than if we sign a Glennon or a Tyrod.  

But I freely admit, both Glennon and Tyrod have some record of production success and production metrics that bear a thorough examination by Macc and Co.

As I say, if the price is reasonable for the risk (and make no mistake, these tow are nearly as risky as a draft pick despite their minor successes thus far) then I would not overly bemoan their signing.  Well....maybe Tyrod, as I simply don't see him as the type of pocket-passer QB I prefer.  

As far as winning SBs? Well, there's Favre and...Favre. Though Hasselbeck and Collins did both make it there. But, like they say, Marino doesn't have any SB rings either. Others played well enough to get there at one time or another. I doubt anyone would hold Trent Green and KC's top-2 offense responsible for the defense's pathetic showings every year. Also I'm sure I'm forgetting someone else who panned out.

I wouldn't care where the QB came from, and doubt you would either.

[thadude]

1 minute ago, Sperm Edwards said:

As far as winning SBs? Well, there's Favre and...Favre. Though Hasselbeck and Collins did both make it there. But, like they say, Marino doesn't have any SB rings either. Others played well enough to get there at one time or another. I doubt anyone would hold Trent Green and KC's top-2 offense responsible for the defense's pathetic showings every year. Also I'm sure I'm forgetting someone else who panned out.

I wouldn't care where the QB came from, and doubt you would either.

Brad Johnson and Trent Dilfer both won Super Bowls as retreads. Warner would have won one if Santonio Holmes doesn't make a great catch for the steelers

 

Glennon and Taylor are so much better than the crap we have on our roster currently.  Frankly it's scary that posters would actually prefer Petty/Hack

[Sperm Edwards]

Just now, thadude said:

Brad Johnson and Trent Dilfer both won Super Bowls as retreads. Warner would have won one if Santonio Holmes doesn't make a great catch for the steelers

 

Glennon and Taylor are so much better than the crap we have on our roster currently.  Frankly it's scary that posters would actually prefer Petty/Hack

Yeah I thought of listing them, but they weren't relative unknowns. Ditto others who bounced around when they were older, like Gannon.

Warner did win one. He'd have also won another one, perhaps, if he didn't throw that 100-yard pick-6 with his team 1st & goal on Pittsburgh's 2 yard line. Perhaps.

[Warfish]

24 minutes ago, thadude said:

Dude Petty sucks

Certainly a possibility.  Maybe we just need to give him.....wait for it.....a fair chance.  With Weaponz.

Quote

Glennon had 30tds 16 ints in Tampa.  Hardly a failed backup

So he's a successful starter then?  Is that why Tampa dumped him, drafted a guy asap after seeing him play, and now will let him walk?

Till he proves otherwise (by, you know, starting, and succeeding/winning) a failure and a backup QB is exactly what he is.

If we do sign him, I'll most certainly be hoping he changes that.  Especially if we overpay (which I fear we'd have to do, given the market).

Quote

I get it you think Lovie Smith is a great evaluator of qb talent.  Stick to whining about Geno

I don't hold Lovie in any particular regard.  Sorry you feel I'm being unfair to a player you clearly have warm feelings for.  

As for Geno, no need to whine.  He, and Fitz, are history.  That's a battle of the past.  A battle both sides lost.  I'm far more interested in our future.