Villain The Foe Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 6 hours ago, TuscanyTile2 said: I hear ya. And tbh, the odds of us getting Darnold are probably low. Knowing the Jets, they'll win a meaningless game and blow their shot at him. And the likelihood that we can trade for Darnold if we're not already at #1 is probably not that high (how many teams are passing up a franchise QB). If we are not in position to draft him the Macc needs to depend on his scouts that earn a paycheck to find that diamond in the rough. Example, my favorite qb next year is easily Baker Mayfield from Oklahoma. In other words, you don't have to pass on an "Alex Smith" in free agency in order to find a qb in the draft. How many times have we seen the most coveted qb end up being either a bust or not being as good as some qb drafted in a later round? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetFaninMI Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 18 hours ago, Gas2No99 said: Bucs offered deal to make Mike Glennon highest-paid backup The Buccaneers offered Mike Glennon a contract that would make him the highest-paid backup quarterback in the NFL, a source confirms to ESPN's Adam Caplan. Glennon, 27, however, wants to be a starting QB and plans to test free agency, according to Caplan. Bleacher Report first reported the contract offer. The Bucs' offer to Glennon would eclipse the deal that the Eagles gave QB Chase Daniel ($7 million per season). Glennon has seen action in 21 career games with 18 starts for the Bucs, although he hasn't started a game in the past two seasons. Purely a drop-back passer, Glennon has a strong arm that will function in an offense designed to push the ball downfield, which worked perfectly for Greg Schiano's offense under Mike Sullivan but wasn't ideal when Jeff Tedford became offensive coordinator for the Bucs. West Coast systems relying on shorter, quick throws aren't his forte, and he does not offer much in the way of mobility. In 2013, his rookie season, Glennon started 13 games and threw for 19 touchdowns and nine interceptions. He threw for 2,608 yards that year while completing 59 percent of his passes. In 2014, he started five games for Josh McCown, completing 57.6 percent of his passes for 1,417 yards, 10 touchdowns and six interceptions. He has 30 career touchdown passes, 15 interceptions and a passer rating of 84.6. ESPN's Jenna Laine contributed to this report. Here's another opinion on "Magic Mike" According to Yahoo's Charles Robinson, "multiple NFL sources" anticipate free agent Mike Glennon landing a deal worth $14-15 million per year. It's only $3-4 million short of last year's Brock Osweiler benchmark. (Osweiler landed $18 million annually from the Texans.) Glennon showed plus decision-making skills as an 18-game starter his first two years in the league, but he is timid in the pocket and a poor downfield passer, offering what amounts to a game-manager skill set. He may end up as 2017's most overpaid free agent. Mar 5 - 10:22 PM Source: Charles Robinson on Twitt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 14 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said: For me? Fine to sign Glennon, so long as they don't use that as an excuse to stay away from a QB (Watson, or whomever) at #6. You say a lot of smart things on this site, and typically hold GM's accountable. To sign a qb in free agency at high dollars (assumedly to a long term contract) and then draft another qb the same year with a top 10 draft choice, to me, would be the epitome of stupidity. GM's are paid to have a conviction and evaluate talent. If you sign a qb in free agency to that kind of deal, he BETTER be your solution for the future. You can't hedge on that kind of decision. Rosters and salary caps do not allow "stacking" of positions. Especially when there are holes all over. If the Jets did this it would be roster suicide, and I believe that you would kill them for it. No GM in the NFL has that luxury. Make a decision and live with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 13 minutes ago, JetFaninMI said: Here's another opinion on "Magic Mike" According to Yahoo's Charles Robinson, "multiple NFL sources" anticipate free agent Mike Glennon landing a deal worth $14-15 million per year. It's only $3-4 million short of last year's Brock Osweiler benchmark. (Osweiler landed $18 million annually from the Texans.) Glennon showed plus decision-making skills as an 18-game starter his first two years in the league, but he is timid in the pocket and a poor downfield passer, offering what amounts to a game-manager skill set. He may end up as 2017's most overpaid free agent. Mar 5 - 10:22 PM Source: Charles Robinson on Twitt For what it's worth, this same author (tweeting his own article in 3rd person here) said Dak Prescott was unfit to be Romo's backup last year because he was 2-3 years away from being able to start even one NFL game. Without Kellen Moore backing up Romo, he classified their situation as a debacle. So there's that . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Crusher Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 14 hours ago, Villain The Foe said: Im quoting a disgruntled employee because based on how the Jets pampered Hack this season. When the coaching staff is afraid to put a 2nd round pick into preseason games its fair to say that this disgruntled employee may have a point. Two words: Secret weapon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrazyCarl40 Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 42 minutes ago, Scott Dierking said: You say a lot of smart things on this site, and typically hold GM's accountable. To sign a qb in free agency at high dollars (assumedly to a long term contract) and then draft another qb the same year with a top 10 draft choice, to me, would be the epitome of stupidity. GM's are paid to have a conviction and evaluate talent. If you sign a qb in free agency to that kind of deal, he BETTER be your solution for the future. You can't hedge on that kind of decision. Rosters and salary caps do not allow "stacking" of positions. Especially when there are holes all over. If the Jets did this it would be roster suicide, and I believe that you would kill them for it. No GM in the NFL has that luxury. Make a decision and live with it. Actually it does, because of the lengthy NFL QBs' careers. It is less risky long term than putting all the teams' eggs in the Mike Glennon basket and maxing out the cap around him. The holes elsewhere are meaningless to fill without a QB worthy of building around. Hitting instead of missing on a starting QB is worth more than one perceived hole elsewhere on the team. That it's somehow better and more acceptable for a GM to draft a project QB in round 4, then the following year draft another project in round 2 and also pay nearly the same annual rate for UFA Ryan Fitzpatrick while carrying 4 QBs, then the year after that pick up yet another UFA or high draft pick QB, etc. I'd say the team is already throwing those extended resources at the position, except they're just spreading it over an extra year. No GM has that luxury to do that? Tell that to Eagles fans, since their GM did that and much more in one offseason. Any GM that burns 2-3 years worth of #1 picks on a QB (by trading up, or by failing to trade down if they earned the high pick naturally) is also doing the same thing in effect. That is no less "stacking" the position by using the resources of multiple high picks on 1 position. What do you honestly care if they fill the position by throwing the same team resources to gamble on two QBs vs one QB? If they did this and then the team likes Glennon, they will have little trouble getting a high pick back a year later for the drafted one (unless it's Hackenberg, lol ). If we need to stay away from UFAs like Matt Forte, Jarvis Jenkins, Antonio Cromartie, etc, because gambling on Glennon or Taylor cost $14m instead of $7m (while also drafting a QB at #6), then I could easily live with that tradeoff. (sorry for the length; you know it's what I do, lol) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Brown Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 4 hours ago, Villain The Foe said: If we are not in position to draft him the Macc needs to depend on his scouts that earn a paycheck to find that diamond in the rough. Example, my favorite qb next year is easily Baker Mayfield from Oklahoma. In other words, you don't have to pass on an "Alex Smith" in free agency in order to find a qb in the draft. How many times have we seen the most coveted qb end up being either a bust or not being as good as some qb drafted in a later round? Indeed JaMarcus I can throw 50 yards from my knees Russell comes easily to mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetFaninMI Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 19 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said: For what it's worth, this same author (tweeting his own article in 3rd person here) said Dak Prescott was unfit to be Romo's backup last year because he was 2-3 years away from being able to start even one NFL game. Without Kellen Moore backing up Romo, he classified their situation as a debacle. So there's that . True enough. I just thought it was amazing that 2 talent evaluations could be so far apart. Just a little food for thought in this Glennon love fest topic. Make no mistake. I don't "hate" Glennon. I don't know the man so it would be irrational to "hate" him. I just think he is the wrong choice for this team at this time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 What's funny is that Bears fans are hating the fact that Glennon is being linked to the Bears. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 1 minute ago, JetFaninMI said: True enough. I just thought it was amazing that 2 talent evaluations could be so far apart. Just a little food for thought in this Glennon love fest topic. Make no mistake. I don't "hate" Glennon. I don't know the man so it would be irrational to "hate" him. I just think he is the wrong choice for this team at this time. And I don't love Glennon myself. Just saying some guy who writes a dozen articles a year on Yahoo isn't necessarily a QB guru, and he thought less of Prescott (for 2016-2017 at least) than Glennon. Also my main objection to signing him would be that the GM would bet the next 2 seasons on him because he cost a guaranteed $14-15m/year instead of merely $7-8m/year, and that's some pretty strong myopia, given the historical success rate for such a move. The team's cap limit over the next 2 seasons will be some $345m. The $10-15m disparity (in guaranteed salary) over that two year span is not a reason to bet the other ~$320m in spending on another team's castoff QB succeeding as the starting QB for those 2 seasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villain The Foe Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 35 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said: For what it's worth, this same author (tweeting his own article in 3rd person here) said Dak Prescott was unfit to be Romo's backup last year because he was 2-3 years away from being able to start even one NFL game. Without Kellen Moore backing up Romo, he classified their situation as a debacle. So there's that . lol. Thats too hilarious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 2 minutes ago, August said: What's funny is that Bears fans are hating the fact that Glennon is being linked to the Bears. What is not funny is that, for a UFA QB with a choice, the freaking Bears (sans Alston Jeffery no less) are considered to be a better spot/situation than the Jets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FTL Jet Fan Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 Ok so if Glennon goes to the Bears and we make a push for Taylor, what makes us think he would want to come here besides paying him a ridiculous amount of money. I still don't believe the Bills will let go of Taylor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 31 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said: Actually it does, because of the lengthy NFL QBs' careers. It is less risky long term than putting all the teams' eggs in the Mike Glennon basket and maxing out the cap around him. The holes elsewhere are meaningless to fill without a QB worthy of building around. Hitting instead of missing on a starting QB is worth more than one perceived hole elsewhere on the team. That it's somehow better and more acceptable for a GM to draft a project QB in round 4, then the following year draft another project in round 2 and also pay nearly the same annual rate for UFA Ryan Fitzpatrick while carrying 4 QBs, then the year after that pick up yet another UFA or high draft pick QB, etc. I'd say the team is already throwing those extended resources at the position, except they're just spreading it over an extra year. No GM has that luxury to do that? Tell that to Eagles fans, since their GM did that and much more in one offseason. Any GM that burns 2-3 years worth of #1 picks on a QB (by trading up, or by failing to trade down if they earned the high pick naturally) is also doing the same thing in effect. That is no less "stacking" the position by using the resources of multiple high picks on 1 position. What do you honestly care if they fill the position by throwing the same team resources to gamble on two QBs vs one QB? If they did this and then the team likes Glennon, they will have little trouble getting a high pick back a year later for the drafted one (unless it's Hackenberg, lol ). If we need to stay away from UFAs like Matt Forte, Jarvis Jenkins, Antonio Cromartie, etc, because gambling on Glennon or Taylor cost $14m instead of $7m (while also drafting a QB at #6), then I could easily live with that tradeoff. (sorry for the length; you know it's what I do, lol) agree to disagree here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 13 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said: What is not funny is that, for a UFA QB with a choice, the freaking Bears (sans Alston Jeffery no less) are considered to be a better spot/situation than the Jets. Has Glennon said that? That is all that matters.EDIT, just saw it, never mind Gladly, according to reports this morning, the Jets do not view Glennon as $14m a year material Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guilhermezmc Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 Fvck glennon, darnold is the future Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 21 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said: What is not funny is that, for a UFA QB with a choice, the freaking Bears (sans Alston Jeffery no less) are considered to be a better spot/situation than the Jets. How often do top free agents want to come here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 5 minutes ago, Scott Dierking said: agree to disagree here. Fine by me. It's likely going to be a moot point because (due to alleged mutual interest with Chicago) it's doubtful they ink Glennon anyway, and most rumors (for whatever rumors are worth) have Taylor going to Cleveland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slats Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 35 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said: And I don't love Glennon myself. Just saying some guy who writes a dozen articles a year on Yahoo isn't necessarily a QB guru, and he thought less of Prescott (for 2016-2017 at least) than Glennon. Also my main objection to signing him would be that the GM would bet the next 2 seasons on him because he cost a guaranteed $14-15m/year instead of merely $7-8m/year, and that's some pretty strong myopia, given the historical success rate for such a move. The team's cap limit over the next 2 seasons will be some $345m. The $10-15m disparity (in guaranteed salary) over that two year span is not a reason to bet the other ~$320m in spending on another team's castoff QB succeeding as the starting QB for those 2 seasons. I think he'd absolutely have to go all in on Glennon if he gave him that kind of money. He can't draft another QB at #6 overall, he'd need to bring in players that are going to help his newly minted starting QB have success. The question then becomes, is Mike Glennon the guy you wanna build a championship team around? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 Just now, August said: How often do top free agents want to come here? Almost any, if we're the top bidder. You're weighing that on the Jets signing a low percentage of the league's top FAs, but nobody signs a high percentage of top FAs because there's only so much cap room for one team to spend. The team didn't ink a couple hundred million dollars in contracts by signing solely backup-demand players. Wisdom of the contract aside, who was the top FA 3-4 DE/4-3 DT in 2016? Answer: Mo Wilkerson Wisdom of the contract aside, who was the top FA CB in 2015? Answer: Darrelle Revis Wisdom of the contract aside, who was the top FA WR in 2014? Answer: Eric Decker Wisdom of the contract aside, who was the top FA RB in 2014? Answer: Chris Johnson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villain The Foe Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 1 hour ago, Charlie Brown said: Indeed JaMarcus I can throw 50 yards from my knees Russell comes easily to mind. Exactly. Every year fans talk about tanking for the "top guy" yet we can look at this current decade and lets look at the trend. 1. 2011: Andy Dalton was a 2nd round pick the same year Cam went #1 in the draft. The problem is the other QB's drafted before Dalton are Jake Locker, Blaine Gabbert and Christian Ponder. For what its worth, the very next pick after Dalton was Kaepernick, a guy who today is a shell of himself but career wise is also miles ahead of the guys mentioned above and also was a starting QB in a SB. 2. 2012: Russell Wilson was a 3rd round pick the same year Luck went #1 in the draft. Also, RG3 and Ryan Tannehill were top 3 and top 10 picks along with Brandon Weeden and Brock Osweiler being drafted before him. Russell Wilson has been by far the better QB of this class. 3. 2013: Ironically Mike Glennon was a 3rd round pick the same year that EJ Manuel and Geno Smith was picked ahead of him. Today we're talking about Glennon getting a "pay day" meanwhile Manuel and Smith are afterthoughts today. 4. 2014: Derek Carr was a 2nd round pick the same year that Blake Bortles, Johnny Manziel and Teddy Bridgewater all went into the first round. 2 seasons later Derek Carr was included in "NFL MVP" talks for his performance with the Raiders. 5. 2016: Dak Prescott was a 4th round pick the same year that Jared Goff was the first QB picked in the draft by a team that mortgaged their future in order to pick him.Other notable names that was picked ahead of Prescott, Carson Wentz, Paxton Lynch, Christian Hackenberg, Cody Kessler, Jacoby Brissett and Connor Cook. Ironically, the 4th rounder Connor Cook was considered a "1st round franchise talent" the year before. 1 year later he's a fourth round pick. Similar to a guy like Matt Barkley, a guy who in 2012 Fans were talking about how he's a 1st round franchise guy and 1 year later he's picked in the 4th round. The only year to get it right was 2015 with Winston/Mariota. In otherwords, every year since 2011 the Jets as well as other teams had the opportunity to get a franchise QB/solid QB without purposely tanking their season in order to take the "best available QB", which more often than not ended up either being a bust or not better than the guys picked up later on in the draft. There's no reason for Jets fans to feel like Sam Darnold is so damn good that we shouldnt pick up Glennon in free agency because he'll be "Just good enough" to knock us out of the Darnold sweepstakes. How about evaluate the QB class and find some guys with traits that can be beneficial to the team. The probability that some QB in the 2017 draft will end up being better than Sam Darnold based on past history is definitely there. Not saying that he will bust, but teams who think that the answer to all their problems is simply getting a QB really are missing the point. Every team outside of a Tom Brady-led team that have made it to the SB pretty much had a solid cast of players at all levels. Plenty of teams that "only have a QB" have made it to the playoffs. But I dont see the Lions, Colts, Saints, Packers, Chargers, Redskins, Bill consistently making noise during playoff time. The majority of those teams barely make the playoffs at all. Sam Darnold wont be the answer if Sam Darnold is the only player on the team, same with Mike Glennon. However, signing Mike Glennon now along with providing some other guys via Free agency such as Nick Perry, and Thomas Jefferson on the defensive side of the ball will help. Bringing in a seasoned guy in Mike Glennon will greatly help the development of the young guys like Robby Anderson, Devin Smith and Charone Peake given that you dont have to worry about grooming a rookie QB that also has to learn the game the same time you have WR's looking to also learn the game. When you have a rookie QB its good to have veteran WR's. When you have young WR's its good to have a veteran QB. We can then go to the draft and trade down to the mid rounds and begin picking up Olinemen such as Garrett Bolle and a RB such as Christian McCaffery...maybe even pick a DB in the 2nd round to compliment Skrine, Williams and Burris since this is a deep DB class. A situation like that you've put together a team with a solid safety, a pass rushing OLB, a solid QB to help develop your WR's a versatile RB...and young but learning LT with help from Jame Carpenter etc. We can do this now and then next year still decide that "When Sam Darnold is off the board" we can then draft a guy like Baker Mayfield and sit him for a season behind Glennon. Or if he's outperforming Glennon then sit/cut Glennon. But to put the entire franchise on a rookie after tanking the season before to get him is just totally asinine and a waste of fan years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 16 minutes ago, slats said: I think he'd absolutely have to go all in on Glennon if he gave him that kind of money. He can't draft another QB at #6 overall, he'd need to bring in players that are going to help his newly minted starting QB have success. The question then becomes, is Mike Glennon the guy you wanna build a championship team around? I agree that's 99% the most likely thing that would happen, as it's what is almost exclusively done around the league no matter how many times it fails. However, after inking Daniel at $7m per, then Bradford at $18m per, I don't think Philadelphia then regretted using far more than the #6 overall pick on Wentz. They traded their #8 overall in 2016, their 1st rd pick in 2017, their 2nd rd pick in 2018, their 3rd rd pick in 2016, and swapped their '17 4th pick for the same round in '16. Just the trade-up for Wentz alone, in the absence of Daniel and Bradford, is more team resources than signing Glennon/Taylor at $14-15m, plus then using the #6 overall pick on Watson (or whomever). IMO an $8m/yr (for 2 years) upgrade in paying $7m vs $15m at QB, isn't enough to bet the team on him for 2 entire seasons. Yeah I know they got a pick back for Bradford, but that was after the fact and they still ate his signing bonus. Financially it was the equivalent of paying $17m for Daniel last year, and they were prepared to go into the season with all 3 (they'd have little choice) if Minnesota didn't suddenly need a QB later in the offseason. Had they used Bradford and he got injured (pretty decent probability), IIRC they were on the hook for a guaranteed 2nd season of Bradford as well. Just saying, while hardly an ideal outcome, since one of the two is guaranteed to be unnecessary in hindsight, it isn't unprecedented. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slats Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 14 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said: I agree that's 99% the most likely thing that would happen, as it's what is almost exclusively done around the league no matter how many times it fails. However, after inking Daniel at $7m per, then Bradford at $18m per, I don't think Philadelphia then regretted using far more than the #6 overall pick on Wentz. They traded their #8 overall in 2016, their 1st rd pick in 2017, their 2nd rd pick in 2018, their 3rd rd pick in 2016, and swapped their '17 4th pick for the same round in '16. Just the trade-up for Wentz alone, in the absence of Daniel and Bradford, is more team resources than signing Glennon/Taylor at $14-15m, plus then using the #6 overall pick on Watson (or whomever). IMO an $8m/yr (for 2 years) upgrade in paying $7m vs $15m at QB, isn't enough to bet the team on him for 2 entire seasons. Yeah I know they got a pick back for Bradford, but that was after the fact and they still ate his signing bonus. Financially it was the equivalent of paying $17m for Daniel last year, and they were prepared to go into the season with all 3 (they'd have little choice) if Minnesota didn't suddenly need a QB later in the offseason. Had they used Bradford and he got injured (pretty decent probability), IIRC they were on the hook for a guaranteed 2nd season of Bradford as well. Just saying, while hardly an ideal outcome, since one of the two is guaranteed to be unnecessary in hindsight, it isn't unprecedented. Let me just say that if the Jets can sign Glennon for $15M/year, then draft a franchise QB #6 overall, and then subsequently trade Glennon to a team whose starter has broken his leg a week before the regular season for a first round pick plus, that, well, I'd be in favor of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 1 hour ago, Sperm Edwards said: Almost any, if we're the top bidder. You're weighing that on the Jets signing a low percentage of the league's top FAs, but nobody signs a high percentage of top FAs because there's only so much cap room for one team to spend. The team didn't ink a couple hundred million dollars in contracts by signing solely backup-demand players. Wisdom of the contract aside, who was the top FA 3-4 DE/4-3 DT in 2016? Answer: Mo Wilkerson Wisdom of the contract aside, who was the top FA CB in 2015? Answer: Darrelle Revis Wisdom of the contract aside, who was the top FA WR in 2014? Answer: Eric Decker Wisdom of the contract aside, who was the top FA RB in 2014? Answer: Chris Johnson But then you can also talk about how free agents used us as leverage to get a higher pay raise from the teams they actually want to sign with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AFJF Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 2 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said: Actually it does, because of the lengthy NFL QBs' careers. It is less risky long term than putting all the teams' eggs in the Mike Glennon basket and maxing out the cap around him. The holes elsewhere are meaningless to fill without a QB worthy of building around. Hitting instead of missing on a starting QB is worth more than one perceived hole elsewhere on the team. That it's somehow better and more acceptable for a GM to draft a project QB in round 4, then the following year draft another project in round 2 and also pay nearly the same annual rate for UFA Ryan Fitzpatrick while carrying 4 QBs, then the year after that pick up yet another UFA or high draft pick QB, etc. I'd say the team is already throwing those extended resources at the position, except they're just spreading it over an extra year. No GM has that luxury to do that? Tell that to Eagles fans, since their GM did that and much more in one offseason. Any GM that burns 2-3 years worth of #1 picks on a QB (by trading up, or by failing to trade down if they earned the high pick naturally) is also doing the same thing in effect. That is no less "stacking" the position by using the resources of multiple high picks on 1 position. What do you honestly care if they fill the position by throwing the same team resources to gamble on two QBs vs one QB? If they did this and then the team likes Glennon, they will have little trouble getting a high pick back a year later for the drafted one (unless it's Hackenberg, lol ). If we need to stay away from UFAs like Matt Forte, Jarvis Jenkins, Antonio Cromartie, etc, because gambling on Glennon or Taylor cost $14m instead of $7m (while also drafting a QB at #6), then I could easily live with that tradeoff. (sorry for the length; you know it's what I do, lol) Jets have been trying the "conventional" approach for decades. How has that worked? Spot on...the more QBs, the better! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AFJF Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 59 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said: I agree that's 99% the most likely thing that would happen, as it's what is almost exclusively done around the league no matter how many times it fails. However, after inking Daniel at $7m per, then Bradford at $18m per, I don't think Philadelphia then regretted using far more than the #6 overall pick on Wentz. They traded their #8 overall in 2016, their 1st rd pick in 2017, their 2nd rd pick in 2018, their 3rd rd pick in 2016, and swapped their '17 4th pick for the same round in '16. Just the trade-up for Wentz alone, in the absence of Daniel and Bradford, is more team resources than signing Glennon/Taylor at $14-15m, plus then using the #6 overall pick on Watson (or whomever). IMO an $8m/yr (for 2 years) upgrade in paying $7m vs $15m at QB, isn't enough to bet the team on him for 2 entire seasons. Yeah I know they got a pick back for Bradford, but that was after the fact and they still ate his signing bonus. Financially it was the equivalent of paying $17m for Daniel last year, and they were prepared to go into the season with all 3 (they'd have little choice) if Minnesota didn't suddenly need a QB later in the offseason. Had they used Bradford and he got injured (pretty decent probability), IIRC they were on the hook for a guaranteed 2nd season of Bradford as well. Just saying, while hardly an ideal outcome, since one of the two is guaranteed to be unnecessary in hindsight, it isn't unprecedented. It's almost like the Eagles treated the QB position like the most important spot on the field. So strange. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 42 minutes ago, slats said: Let me just say that if the Jets can sign Glennon for $15M/year, then draft a franchise QB #6 overall, and then subsequently trade Glennon to a team whose starter has broken his leg a week before the regular season for a first round pick plus, that, well, I'd be in favor of that. lol, so would I. I'm basically in favor of any means to an end that nets us a reliable starting QB for years to come (i.e. such a QB who's relatively young), even if it means pissing away the upcoming season or two, since we're not winning a SB without one anyway. To that point, I'm in favor of the fastest means to that end, which would include not putting all our "new QB" eggs into the Glennon basket for the upcoming 2 seasons before seeking out the next one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 1 minute ago, AFJF said: It's almost like the Eagles treated the QB position like the most important spot on the field. So strange. The Eagles were in LOVE with a qb that was there. They made the moves in order to make that happen, good for them. Who is the qb that the Jets should be in LOVE with here? Just because a player has the position qb attached to him does not mean the Jets should jump at him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 1 minute ago, Sperm Edwards said: lol, so would I. I'm basically in favor of any means to an end that nets us a reliable starting QB for years to come (i.e. such a QB who's relatively young), even if it means pissing away the upcoming season or two, since we're not winning a SB without one anyway. To that point, I'm in favor of the fastest means to that end, which would include not putting all our "new QB" eggs into the Glennon basket for the upcoming 2 seasons before seeking out the next one. So you are GM here, because that is a game you love to play. If you were Macs you would: 1. Go all in on Glennon-m $15mm /year average salary for minimum 4 year contract? 2. Then draft Watson at 6? Is that correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thadude Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 1 hour ago, Scott Dierking said: Has Glennon said that? That is all that matters.EDIT, just saw it, never mind Gladly, according to reports this morning, the Jets do not view Glennon as $14m a year material Why? because we love watching crappy quarterbacks while paying interior DL $20 mil per? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 10 minutes ago, August said: But then you can also talk about how free agents used us as leverage to get a higher pay raise from the teams they actually want to sign with. None of us like it, but the reality is it happens to everybody. Revis used the Patriots to get a higher contract from the Jets. One could argue he did that twice, if (as I've heard here and there) he truly wanted to come right back to the Jets after his one year in Tampa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thadude Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 1 hour ago, Guilhermezmc said: Fvck glennon, darnold is the future So easy to go 1-15 theres like an app on the smartphone for it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 11 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said: None of us like it, but the reality is it happens to everybody. Revis used the Patriots to get a higher contract from the Jets. One could argue he did that twice, if (as I've heard here and there) he truly wanted to come right back to the Jets after his one year in Tampa. Revis didn't "use" the Patriots they weren't going to bring him back unless he took a dramatically lower pay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thadude Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 3 minutes ago, August said: Revis didn't "use" the Patriots they weren't going to bring him back unless he took a dramatically lower pay. Not true. The pats offered Revis a big contract in 2015 we outbid them. Belichick sent Woody a Christmas thank you card this year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.