Trade #6 pick to San Diego for Phillip Rivers?

[JoJoTownsell1]

27 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

let's look at top 10 QBs from 1990-2014(give the recent guys a chance before we label them):

1990 #1 overall Jeff george

1990 #7 Andrew Ware

1992 #6 David Klingler

1993 #1 Drew Bledsoe

1993 #2 Rick Mirer

1994 #3 Heath Shuler

1994 #6 Trent Dilfer

1995 #3 Steve McNair

1995 #5 Kerry Collins

1998 #1 Peyton Manning

1998 #2 Ryan Leaf

1999 #1 Tim Couch

1999 #2 Donovan McNabb

1999 #3 Akili Smith

2001 #1 Michael Vick

2002 #1 David Carr

2002 #3 Joey Harrington

2003 #1 Carson palmer

2003 #7 Byron Leftwich

2004 #1 Eli Manning

2004 #4 Philip Rivers

2005 #1 Alex Smith

2006 #3 Vince Young

2006 #10 Matt Leinart

2007 #1 Jamarcus Russell

2008 #3 Matt Ryan

2009 #1 Matt Stafford

2009 #5 Mark Sanchez

2010 #1 Sam Bradford

2011 #1 Cam Newton

2011 #8 Jake Locker

2011 #10 Blaine Gabbert

2012 #1 Andrew Luck

2012 #2 RG III

2012 #8 Ryan Tannehill

2014 #3 Blake Bortles

 

36 top 10 guys in that time period.  1 lock HOFer, 2 potential HOFers in Luck and Newton, 15 that would classify as at least solid starters, at least 15 total busts.

 

it's a crapshoot.

 

You don't get it. There is a difference between a QB taken in the top 10 because a team is desperate for a QB (sanchez/tannehill/Bortles etc..) and a guy that is considered by all the experts as the next Elway/Peyton. This year there are three Qbs that may get taken in the 1st round. None of them are graded as top 10 picks, none of them were worth tanking for but they all may get taken in the top 10 because they are QBs. Teams often reach for QBs that have a shot at being a franchise QB even if they can just as easily be busts. 

Last year guys like Goff and Wentz were taken high. But no one was talking about tanking for Goff before the season started. He just evolved into the top pick. 

Darnold is that once in a generation guy. He is the Lebron of next years draft class. You can say "well Anthony Bennett was taken with the first overall pick in the NBA  so Lebron could have sucked too." Think about how foolish a GM would have been to suggest that Lebron may not be great because some other #1 picks were busts. Lebron wasn't just another #1 pick and Darnold is the Lebron of next years draft. He isn't the Anthony Bennett or Bargnani or even Kyrie Irving, he is the next Lebron. 

I live for college football. What Darnold was able to do from the day he took over at USC is simply incredible. He is a once in a lifetime QB. 

I just don't think  you understand the difference between a random QB taken in the top 10, or even at 1 and a QB that is a consensus future HOF type QB prospect. I can't help you much more with that. 

[ScarletKnight89]

Phillip Rivers would not enjoy New York. It's not his type of place and while he could easily settle down in places of New Jersey where he could enjoy the outdoor types of activities he loves, it's just not a good fit. I doubt he'd be interested in coming here.

And from the Jets perspective it's not worth it. We need to hit with that 6th pick. Not trade it away for a 35 year old QB whose best days are behind him.

I love Rivers. But it's not a good match and his play is starting to regress.

[ScarletKnight89]

1 hour ago, JoJoTownsell1 said:

LOL, just because you can hit the lottery once in a while doesn't mean that you can just as easily find a franchise QB at the end of the first round than you can with the first pick in the draft especially when the first pick in the draft is the consensus pick to become a franchise QB. We aren't talking about a Goff type prospect we are talking about an Elway/Peyton/Luck type prospect. 

My comparison to Rodgers was simply to show how important it is to find a QB of his caliber and sometimes that guy is known to the experts in advance. It happened with Luck and it's happening with Darnold. The only question with that kid is whether he comes out or not. 

I haven't gone back and read the whole conversation. Are you advocating tanking for Darnold? I'm just asking.

I'm not a believer in tanking but regardless, the problem with doing that is that it's no lock that he'd come out anyway. Everyone thought Peyton would come out, and he didn't. The player can always decide to stay for any number of reasons. That's the danger.

[nyjunc]

22 minutes ago, JoJoTownsell1 said:

You don't get it. There is a difference between a QB taken in the top 10 because a team is desperate for a QB (sanchez/tannehill/Bortles etc..) and a guy that is considered by all the experts as the next Elway/Peyton. This year there are three Qbs that may get taken in the 1st round. None of them are graded as top 10 picks, none of them were worth tanking for but they all may get taken in the top 10 because they are QBs. Teams often reach for QBs that have a shot at being a franchise QB even if they can just as easily be busts. 

Last year guys like Goff and Wentz were taken high. But no one was talking about tanking for Goff before the season started. He just evolved into the top pick. 

Darnold is that once in a generation guy. He is the Lebron of next years draft class. You can say "well Anthony Bennett was taken with the first overall pick in the NBA  so Lebron could have sucked too." Think about how foolish a GM would have been to suggest that Lebron may not be great because some other #1 picks were busts. Lebron wasn't just another #1 pick and Darnold is the Lebron of next years draft. He isn't the Anthony Bennett or Bargnani or even Kyrie Irving, he is the next Lebron. 

I live for college football. What Darnold was able to do from the day he took over at USC is simply incredible. He is a once in a lifetime QB. 

I just don't think  you understand the difference between a random QB taken in the top 10, or even at 1 and a QB that is a consensus future HOF type QB prospect. I can't help you much more with that. 

how often are guys considered the next elway, manning, etc... those guys come along once, maybe twice in a generation.  to tank is silly.  the two best QBs of this generation were taken at the bottom of rd 1 and in rd 6.  

 

Darnold was impressive in the Rose Bowl, I'd like to see him more to declare he will be a great pro.  

[ScarletKnight89]

3 hours ago, nyjunc said:

it should be, he's been one of the most overrated players of his generation.  is he better than what we have? of course but considering picks and $ it would cost to get him it makes no sense just to make our losing more entertaining.

both were very good QBs for us and rookie Mark outplayed vet Rivers w/ half the talent around him that Rivers had on the road in the div rd of the playoffs.

That's one single game. You can't draw a conclusion based off of one game.

Mark Sanchez came into the league in 2009 and is on his way out and it's only 2017. Rivers has been the starting QB for the Chargers since 2006 and has remained the clear cut starter during that whole time, before Mark, during Mark, and after Mark.. He's definitely been a choker, but Mark is nowhere near the player Rivers is.

But trading for Rivers makes no sense for the Jets. He probably doesn't want to come here and the Jets need to use that pick to add a top notch young player.

[JoJoTownsell1]

12 minutes ago, ScarletKnight89 said:

I haven't gone back and read the whole conversation. Are you advocating tanking for Darnold? I'm just asking.

I'm not a believer in tanking but regardless, the problem with doing that is that it's no lock that he'd come out anyway. Everyone thought Peyton would come out, and he didn't. The player can always decide to stay for any number of reasons. That's the danger.

We've gone generations without a franchise QB. We have one in our sights and need to have just 1 really bad year to have a chance to get him. I think it's worth the risk. We've had bad years in the past and this team is not close to a super bowl. I don't see the downside, but I also understand macc/bowles may not have the luxury to think that way. The browns pretty much tanked this year and there was no clear cut franchise QB coming out this year. 

[Jet_Engine1]

38 minutes ago, JoJoTownsell1 said:

You don't get it. There is a difference between a QB taken in the top 10 because a team is desperate for a QB (sanchez/tannehill/Bortles etc..) and a guy that is considered by all the experts as the next Elway/Peyton. This year there are three Qbs that may get taken in the 1st round. None of them are graded as top 10 picks, none of them were worth tanking for but they all may get taken in the top 10 because they are QBs. Teams often reach for QBs that have a shot at being a franchise QB even if they can just as easily be busts. 

Last year guys like Goff and Wentz were taken high. But no one was talking about tanking for Goff before the season started. He just evolved into the top pick. 

Darnold is that once in a generation guy. He is the Lebron of next years draft class. You can say "well Anthony Bennett was taken with the first overall pick in the NBA  so Lebron could have sucked too." Think about how foolish a GM would have been to suggest that Lebron may not be great because some other #1 picks were busts. Lebron wasn't just another #1 pick and Darnold is the Lebron of next years draft. He isn't the Anthony Bennett or Bargnani or even Kyrie Irving, he is the next Lebron. 

I live for college football. What Darnold was able to do from the day he took over at USC is simply incredible. He is a once in a lifetime QB. 

I just don't think  you understand the difference between a random QB taken in the top 10, or even at 1 and a QB that is a consensus future HOF type QB prospect. I can't help you much more with that. 

These are good words. The best words. Luxurious words.

[ScarletKnight89]

Just now, JoJoTownsell1 said:

We've gone generations without a franchise QB. We have one in our sights and need to have just 1 really bad year to have a chance to get him. I think it's worth the risk. We've had bad years in the past and this team is not close to a super bowl. I don't see the downside, but I also understand macc/bowles may not have the luxury to think that way. The browns pretty much tanked this year and there was no clear cut franchise QB coming out this year. 

Darnold is the guy to do it for if you're going to go that route. I totally agree. But the problem is you don't know what he'll do. He could stay in school.

And like you said, Maac/Bowles don't have that luxury. If that's the route they wanted to go Woody should ensure Maac/Bowles are safe and let them go into next season with Hack and Petty battling it out and just see what happens.

[JoJoTownsell1]

15 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

how often are guys considered the next elway, manning, etc... those guys come along once, maybe twice in a generation.  to tank is silly.  the two best QBs of this generation were taken at the bottom of rd 1 and in rd 6.  

 

Darnold was impressive in the Rose Bowl, I'd like to see him more to declare he will be a great pro.  

67pct comp pct as a freshman. 161 Qb rating. Dominated the pac 10. Dominated a very good PSU defense. I've seen enough and most scouts have seen enough. Don't get me wrong, if we tank and Darnold implodes this year our strategy may change, but I just don't see Darnold falling off the pedestal. Even if he does, or he gets hurt or stays in school we would be in line to get a guy like Josh Rosen who on  most other years would be the consensus #1 QB. Rosen falls into the Bradford/Goff/Newton/Bortles/Stafford/Ryan/Leinart type prospect. He isn't worth tanking for but could easily be our franchise QB. Not a terrible consolation prize. 

[nyjunc]

35 minutes ago, ScarletKnight89 said:

That's one single game. You can't draw a conclusion based off of one game.

Mark Sanchez came into the league in 2009 and is on his way out and it's only 2017. Rivers has been the starting QB for the Chargers since 2006 and has remained the clear cut starter during that whole time, before Mark, during Mark, and after Mark.. He's definitely been a choker, but Mark is nowhere near the player Rivers is.

But trading for Rivers makes no sense for the Jets. He probably doesn't want to come here and the Jets need to use that pick to add a top notch young player.

of course not, Rivers is better obviously but I'd trust Mark in a big game over him.

17 minutes ago, JoJoTownsell1 said:

67pct comp pct as a freshman. 161 Qb rating. Dominated the pac 10. Dominated a very good PSU defense. I've seen enough and most scouts have seen enough. Don't get me wrong, if we tank and Darnold implodes this year our strategy may change, but I just don't see Darnold falling off the pedestal. Even if he does, or he gets hurt or stays in school we would be in line to get a guy like Josh Rosen who on  most other years would be the consensus #1 QB. Rosen falls into the Bradford/Goff/Newton/Bortles/Stafford/Ryan/Leinart type prospect. He isn't worth tanking for but could easily be our franchise QB. Not a terrible consolation prize. 

stats mean nothing to me.  I watched a little of that game and I was very impressed but I haven't watched close enough to make a determination.  I will trust your word for you.  if he is a freshman then he can't come out until 2019 so that's 2 more Jet seasons.  I doubt we'd be near #1 2 years from now b/c if we struggle this year Bowles will be gone then we'll get the year 1 new coach bump in 2018.

[phill1c]

1 hour ago, JoJoTownsell1 said:

67pct comp pct as a freshman. 161 Qb rating. Dominated the pac 10. Dominated a very good PSU defense. I've seen enough and most scouts have seen enough. Don't get me wrong, if we tank and Darnold implodes this year our strategy may change, but I just don't see Darnold falling off the pedestal. Even if he does, or he gets hurt or stays in school we would be in line to get a guy like Josh Rosen who on  most other years would be the consensus #1 QB. Rosen falls into the Bradford/Goff/Newton/Bortles/Stafford/Ryan/Leinart type prospect. He isn't worth tanking for but could easily be our franchise QB. Not a terrible consolation prize. 

And then he gets hurt because you didn't shore up the OL before taking him.

The Jets don't need a "once in a lifetime" QB, just one that can play. And you really don't need to take one in Round One to get him. Tom Brady, drafted in Round Six, has more SB wins than ALL of the Round One QBs taken in his lifetime. Manning had two and was responsible directly for only one of them. Russell Wilson, Dak Prescott, et al. are just guys with the tools you need and can be had without tanking a season or spending No. 1 pick draft capital on.

[JoJoTownsell1]

22 minutes ago, phill1c said:

And then he gets hurt because you didn't shore up the OL before taking him.

The Jets don't need a "once in a lifetime" QB, just one that can play. And you really don't need to take one in Round One to get him. Tom Brady, drafted in Round Six, has more SB wins than ALL of the Round One QBs taken in his lifetime. Manning had two and was responsible directly for only one of them. Russell Wilson, Dak Prescott, et al. are just guys with the tools you need and can be had without tanking a season or spending No. 1 pick draft capital on.

We need a once in a lifetime QB. We've gone with the Sanchez/Pennington/Obrien/Geno's of the world and it's gotten us what? You may be cool with 15 more entertaining years of football that all end in either missing the playoffs or getting knocked out by the likes of Brady/Ben/Peyton. Personally, I want to be the one with Ben/Peyton/Brady. We have a chance to get him, and all it will take is one "sucky" year. We are Jets fans so we are used to crappy years. This time it will just be intentional and with a greater purpose.

[CanadaSteve]

5 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I don't know what they teach up in Canadia, but we do have Catholics here in NY (and there's got to be at least a dozen in NJ).

It was a joke....like, if he was a satanist and he was thinking of playing in Utah, they might not accept him.  But he IS from the south, and while American history was a LONG time ago for me, I do recall the south and the north not getting along very well....

 

[CanadaSteve]

44 minutes ago, phill1c said:

The Jets don't need a "once in a lifetime" QB, just one that can play.

The last 20 years in the NFL say otherwise.  There have only been 7 teams represent the AFC in the Super Bowl for the past 20 years.

[phill1c]

6 hours ago, CanadaSteve said:

The last 20 years in the NFL say otherwise.  There have only been 7 teams represent the AFC in the Super Bowl for the past 20 years.

And most of them are Tom Brady teams. So, yeah, if you're dependent on a "once in a lifetime" QB then you really just should give up. And, of course, they actually have NFC teams as well. What about them??? Kinda left them out of your equation...

Anyway, it's my opinion that you could have a "once in a lifetime" QB and still never reach the Super Bowl if you don't have the complementary pieces surrounding him.

[Lot K Tailgaters]

This team needs a REAL rebuild.  Not what we do where every other year we sign a bunch of high priced guys go 8-8 and then the next season go 4-12.  Signing Rivers just does the same thing again.

[Jetsplayer21]

there is absolutely no way that trade happens. Mac isn't stupid.. Maybe rivers goes to a team that could actually contend next yr

[CanadaSteve]

1 hour ago, phill1c said:

And most of them are Tom Brady teams. So, yeah, if you're dependent on a "once in a lifetime" QB then you really just should give up. And, of course, they actually have NFC teams as well. What about them??? Kinda left them out of your equation...

Anyway, it's my opinion that you could have a "once in a lifetime" QB and still never reach the Super Bowl if you don't have the complementary pieces surrounding him.

Its not about opinions, its about what the reality of the situation is.  We can all say until we are blue in the face we don't need a 'once in a lifetime' QB, but the fact is, in the AFC, there have only been 7 teams represent the AFC in 20 years.  The numbers are higher in the NFC, no doubt.  12 teams.  Hell, if you look at the last 10 years, 8 different teams have made it to the Super Bowl.

But we don't play in the NFC...right now, if you want to beat the teams in the AFC, you need a top 5 QB.  That  could change in 5 years.  Manning has already retired, Big Ben, Flacco, Brady....when they are gone, you could see a complete trend change in where the QB isn't the sole provider of success.  The reality right now though in the AFC is the elite QB's are winning, and without one, you don't have a hope in hell of getting to the SB.

[CanadaSteve]

1 hour ago, Lot K Tailgaters said:

This team needs a REAL rebuild.  Not what we do where every other year we sign a bunch of high priced guys go 8-8 and then the next season go 4-12.  Signing Rivers just does the same thing again.

Worked in the hockey world for the Toronto Maple Leafs.  As a Leaf fan, it was PAINFUL watching the product the past few years.  But boy, is it paying off now.

[jeremy2020]

24 minutes ago, CanadaSteve said:

Worked in the hockey world for the Toronto Maple Leafs.  As a Leaf fan, it was PAINFUL watching the product the past few years.  But boy, is it paying off now.

Man, you really pick terrible teams. Jets will win the Superbowl before the leafs do anything.

[isired]

Rivers no want East Coast.  Forget it.

This. He's supposedly not crazy about moving his family to LA, and may not do that, and would then spend a lot less time with the team. No way he would agree to come to NY.

[King P]

On 1/17/2017 at 9:14 PM, SAR I said:

No thank you.  I want a black quarterback.

SAR I

Lol, if certain people said this then they'd be told to stop race baiting and the mods would put them in check. But your obvious sarcastic post goes unchecked.

It's pretty obvious what side they're on though.

[DetroitRed]

This. He's supposedly not crazy about moving his family to LA, and may not do that, and would then spend a lot less time with the team. No way he would agree to come to NY.

Who really wants him anyway? Is he really worth giving up premium draft picks? He has never been the answer, never won anything, and is now aging. I don't get it


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

[SenorGato]

Forget it lost my point