Jump to content

Hackenburg has 9 years to get us to the Superbowl


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, peebag said:

What exactly have you seen?

Nothing...... there is no hope or anything that would encourage anyone that we have something in Hackenberg and the last people I will believe is Todd Bowles and Mike Maccagnan.They purposely didnt play him in 2016 for fear of both losing their jobs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 173
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

So that gives Tajh Boyd another five years and we'll be loaded at the position 

I have seen nothing that leads me to believe he will be ready in 9 years or 90 years. 

As rookies Hackenberg was 4th string -- behind 3 bad QBs (one of whom not even fit to be a backup QB himself last year). Ryan was already an asset to his team as an NFL starter. It

1 hour ago, gEYno said:

When they called it a "redshirt year" the expectation was the Ryan Fitzpatrick was going to start 16 games, he'd put forth a similar performance, and we'd be in wildcard contention.  Things detoured from that plan, and Hackenberg still wasn't even considered.  How people can think anything but that being a very bad sign is hard to figure.

Of course. Just because a team would elect Option A (never let him dress) due to Reason B (developmental principle to never let him see the field as a rookie), doesn't therefore eliminate Reason C (he was too awful to use), since that reason would also lead the team to elect Option A.

It is particularly damning since the team violated Reason B themselves by giving Hackenberg another tryout/opportunity to dress in the first half of the season. It's a critical hole in this excuse.

Further, one cannot simply make Bowles the scapegoat here since Maccagnan had the opportunity to sign or trade for another QB (instead of Bowles resorting to the Petty/Hack competition any HC would have done in that situation). That occurred at the end of October, and the trade deadline wasn't until November 1st. So that's yet another hole in this made-up story.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/4/2017 at 9:59 PM, Larz said:

that run him out of town thing is getting old.  I know it was a different franchise, but in his first 4 seasons matt ryan;

missed 2 starts total

on average completed 60% of his passes with a rating of 87.9 (including his first NFL starts as a rookie)

averaged 24 TD passes and 12 int's   (including his first NFL starts as a rookie)

that production gets you a huge extension no matter who you play for.  He has never had a butt fumble or really done anything embarrassing.  every QB throws pick 6's. 

his "contract year" he threw 29 TD's vs 12 int's and had a rating of 92 and won 10 games and went to the playoffs

oh yeah, he has lead his team to the post season 3 times in 4 years including his rookie year and won 13 games his 3rd year in the league

I would give several vestigial body parts for a QB like that after what we have had to endure

 

 

Spot on.  We had a whole this.  I have no idea where this myth came about that the Jets would have run-off Ryan because of lack of success.  The FO gets rid of players because their always hurt, suck or both.  There is not a single good player, let along good QB, who gut "run off" by the team.

Ryan would have been a god here.  It would never be about his playoff losses because fans would have made every excuse in the book for the playoff losses and insist that he is better than Tom Brady.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i still applaud the hack pick.  the jets are never going to be serious contenders unless/until they hit on a real qb with a big time arm who can beat teams by throwing for multiple tds.  i don't want guys like jarred goff who don't have the skills.  i'd rather take some shots on qbs with big ben/rivers measurables who have had success in a pro offense.  he may suck, he may not, but at least the guy ran a pro offense and actually preferred it to the pop gun crap he had to endure for 2 years.  guys like clemens/sanchez/geno don't have the physical skills to be good in the pros, they're career backups.  at least with hack, if they can develop him correctly, we will have a legit qb.  there is no point in taking qbs in the first 2 rounds who simply don't have the upside that hack does.  you look at the teams in the playoffs and most of them have good or great qbs who are 6'3" or taller.  

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/4/2017 at 2:38 PM, joewilly12 said:

The fact that we were decimated at the QB position and we drafted a QB with a 2nd round pick and he wasn't good enough to see the field speaks volumes for the decision. 

No it says he was being red shirted and wasn't being prepared to be put in games.  

No matter how many times fans like you say he should have just been thrown out to fail.  As if that would have proved anything to anyone and accomplished something 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, thadude said:

So who will have more rings when it's all over? Brady or Hack?

How about Brady vs. any QB before him?  Or after?  

Your point is?  If your not as good as maybe the GOAT you suck?  

Pointless statement that proves nothing.  Marino has not one ring. I'd kill for A Marino.  An Elway, Kelly, Montana, etc, all with fewer rings. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at this thread again, if Jets fans have to wait 9 years for Hackenberg to take the team to the SB (meaning it would be 57 years from SBIII) and Hackenberg blew a 25 point lead in the SB, Jet fans would riot

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jet Nut said:

How about Brady vs. any QB before him?  Or after?  

Your point is?  If your not as good as maybe the GOAT you suck?  

Pointless statement that proves nothing.  Marino has not one ring. I'd kill for A Marino.  An Elway, Kelly, Montana, etc, all with fewer rings. 

No, but if you're not as good as Bryce Petty you do suck.

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

Hate.

Lol, he is already got a head start on that.  I just don't understand why so many refuse to give the guy a chance.   I think the best thing that could have happened to him was to just sit and watch.  We have already destroyed two other quarterbacks in Sanchez and Geno Smith by rushing them before they are ready.  It is good to see the staff take a different approach and not panic or give in to public pressure to "play the Kid".  That one decision may turn out to be the best of this entire season. 

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

Lol, he is already got a head start on that.  I just don't understand why so many refuse to give the guy a chance.   I think the best thing that could have happened to him was to just sit and watch.  We have already destroyed two other quarterbacks in Sanchez and Geno Smith by rushing them before they are ready.  It is good to see the staff take a different approach and not panic or give in to public pressure to "play the Kid".  That one decision may turn out to be the best of this entire season. 

They didn't get "ruined" -- please. All that happens is their introduction was rockier than others. If Sanchez was going to be good, he'd be good (not to mention he had it about as easy as any QB could hope for here. If Geno was going to be good, he will still become so. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, JetBlue said:

Lol, he is already got a head start on that.  I just don't understand why so many refuse to give the guy a chance.   I think the best thing that could have happened to him was to just sit and watch.  We have already destroyed two other quarterbacks in Sanchez and Geno Smith by rushing them before they are ready.  It is good to see the staff take a different approach and not panic or give in to public pressure to "play the Kid".  That one decision may turn out to be the best of this entire season. 

What does this even mean?  Honestly?  Fans don't need to "give Hackenberg a chance," the Jets will do that for us, or not if he continues on this trajectory.  Are we supposed to just pretend that all the evidence that exists points to Hackenberg not being a good QB?  Is that what is meant by giving him a chance?  Are we supposed to pretend he wasn't awful in college?  Are we supposed to accept the narrative that it was all the coach (who just after Hack left, was a hair outside the Nat. Championship)?  Are we supposed to pretend that he wasn't awful from all reports in training camp?  That he didn't get preseason reps until he did, and was terrible?  Are we supposed to pretend that despite this season circling the drain in October, that he didn't even dress, and that's okay?  Are we supposed to ignore the multiple anonymous quotes from team sources saying exactly what we all saw, that he's terrible?  Hackenberg may turn into the greatest QB of all time.  That is a possibility.  But, the objective evidence suggests otherwise.  In fact, it suggests he doesn't belong in the NFL at all.  So, to the original question, what exactly does it mean for fans to "give Hackenberg a chance?"

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, gEYno said:

What does this even mean?  Honestly?  Fans don't need to "give Hackenberg a chance," the Jets will do that for us, or not if he continues on this trajectory.  Are we supposed to just pretend that all the evidence that exists points to Hackenberg not being a good QB?  Is that what is meant by giving him a chance?  Are we supposed to pretend he wasn't awful in college?  Are we supposed to pretend that he wasn't awful from all reports in preseason?  Are we supposed to pretend that despite this season circling the drain in October, that he didn't even dress, and that's okay?  Hackenberg may turn into the greatest QB of all time.  That is a possibility.  But, the objective evidence suggests otherwise.  In fact, it suggests he doesn't belong in the NFL at all.  So, to the original question, what exactly does it mean for fans to "give Hackenberg a chance?"

Forget it.  These are the same folks who wanted us to stand behind the "Trust in Rex", "Trust in Tanny", "Trust in Idzik" idiocy.  

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

He was not as good last year. That is why he stayed benched while Petty was bumped up. 

Which could have nothing to do with being better, just not as prepared.  Or better at the moment.

As hard as that seems to be to understand.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

Which could have nothing to do with being better, just not as prepared.  Or better at the moment.

As hard as that seems to be to understand.

Therefore he was not as good as Bryce Petty. I fail to understand your reluctance to admit this obvious assessment by the team. Might that change? Yes. Might that not change? Yes. But the default, until further news, is that Petty - who has been nothing special himself - is a better QB. 

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

Therefore he was not as good as Bryce Petty. I fail to understand your reluctance to admit this obvious assessment by the team. Might that change? Yes. Might that not change? Yes. But the default, until further news, is that Petty - who has been nothing special himself - is a better QB. 

And why should he not be after having spent the year before learning the offense that Hackenberg didn't know exist . Here's the thing, if Hackenberg even had a chance to unseat Petty , Petty is not worth keeping around .

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Tinstar said:

And why should he not be after having spent the year before learning the offense that Hackenberg didn't know exist . Here's the thing, if Hackenberg even had a chance to unseat Petty , Petty is not worth keeping around .

But he could pick up Bill O'Brien's offense at age 18 straight out of high school. Didn't you see any images of him tapping his helmet? I never watched a PSU game that year and even I saw a helmet tap.

Petty also had taken fewer practice reps than Hackenberg for the immediately prior 6 weeks or so. So there's that.

I think you're making mountains out of playbooks. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/4/2017 at 7:13 AM, Jetster said:

Christian turns 22 in a couple of weeks. Matt Ryan is 31 going on 32.

Do Jet fans have the patience of Falcon fans? Lol. The way I look at it by time everything is in place & Christian has the players around him, (an Oline like the Cowboys), a fantastic RB, dynamic WRs, and a strong defense we should be on our way right?

These things take time, sometimes years as in Matty Ice case. Wasn't long ago you started hearing the whispers, "is Matt Ryan good enough to take his team to the next level?". QBs take years to mature in this league, we're Jet fans, we have all the time in the world to do this thing right. What's another 9/10 years when it's been over 47?

The NFL sucks now anyway, so let's all just take a few years away while Hack develops & when we return, he might be ready to rock & we'll all love the NFL again like Brady, Manning & Big Ben fans who have watched these 3 dominate the AFC for 16 freaking years.

I can't stand the NFL right now. Brady & BB dominating every year. Instead of taking Bradys head off when given the chance our defenders let him lead a play as a blocker and it looked like Moses parting the Red Sea. Dear Mr. Goodell...I want MY NFL back! The NFL I fell in love with watching Joe Kapp throwing wobblers in the snow vs the Bears. The Rams fearsome foursome, Kenny "the snake" Stabler, Barry Sanders just flipping the ball to the ref, not doing a stupid feed me act. If I have to watch that classy Edelman shaking his head vigorously at DBs after another successful Patriots pick play I'll lose my mind.

Or the Patriots offensive line go through the entire playoffs & Super Bowl with nary a holding call while Brady does one one thousand, two onethousand, three onethousand, four onethousand, five onethousand, six onethousand, seven onethousand.

If there is a god up there, the Falcons have to win this Sunday...right? Right?

Well, he does have 2 years to become a Pro Bowler, and ZERO years to be the Offensive Rookie of the Year, so there's that. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Therefore he was not as good as Bryce Petty. I fail to understand your reluctance to admit this obvious assessment by the team. Might that change? Yes. Might that not change? Yes. But the default, until further news, is that Petty - who has been nothing special himself - is a better QB. 

Reluctance?  Why would he be as good?  He's a 2nd round pick who didn't practice.  For season one he shouldn't have been as good.  Doesn't mean he's less talented and won't be better moving forward or better yet that It proves Hack sucks.  

Been saying this all along

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/4/2017 at 9:16 AM, joewilly12 said:

I have seen nothing that leads me to believe he will be ready in 9 years or 90 years. 

He hasn't played yet...so how could you? There are people on this board that loved O'Brien, he didnt take one snap in his rookie year either.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, JetsFanatic said:

He hasn't played yet...so how could you? There are people on this board that loved O'Brien, he didnt take one snap in his rookie year either.

The FACT that he couldn't get on the field with a  roster of the worst QB's in the NFL speaks volumes. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...