Despite the Ugly Rumor Jets Still In Glennon Hunt!!!!!

[ScarletKnight89]

4 minutes ago, Gee Andrezzi said:

Osweiler screwed the market up getting paid so much and doing so little with plenty of weapons. Paying Glennon $15 mil a year will be as dumb as drafting hackenburg so early

Not disagreeing. Osweiller definitely hurt the market.

But the idea some fans have of getting a guy with any semblance of talent for less than $10 million a year is delusional at this point in todays NFL. Everyone is looking for a QB.

You want a guy on the cheap, you have to draft him. And if he's any good, you'll be paying $15-$20 million a year in a few years anyway.

Otherwise you have to take your pick of the Fitz's, Hoyer's, and McCown's of the world and hope they give you more good than bad.

[UntouchableCrew]

Just now, Warfish said:

If they're already realized Hack was a mistake, why the hell would we want the fool who MADE that mistake to have the power to make another mistake the very next year?

Under your scenario, Macc should no longer be the GM for making that kind of mistake.  And he certainly shouldn't be trusted to be picking the next QB.

In either case, there is still nothing gained signing a "Bridge" veteran JAG for the first year of what is an obvious rebuild effort.  Wins, in 2017, simply do not matter, and in fact could be seen as a bad thing if you're of the "suck for the #1 pick in 2018" crowd.  

But be assured, starting Hoyer does nothing for this franchise's future and nothing for it's 2017 campaign.

The fact that we've drafted two QBs (Petty and Hackeberg) in the first four rounds that have shown little signs of life on a QB needy team is a huge indictment of Mac and his ability to evaluate a QB. The Hackenberg pick in particular is without question the biggest mistake of his tenure thus far. I don't really think there's much to argue about that unless you're a huge Jets/Mac/Hack apologist. There's literally nothing to draw from on that front that's a positive, all signs indicate the guy isn't even close to being an NFL QB.

So in that sense, I agree with you. It is a very real question as to whether Mac should be the guy drafting our next QB. 

That said, it still doesn't mean we shouldn't be willing to make a move for the right guy. We have the number 6 pick -- theoretically if we think Watson or Trubisky can be the franchise you take them, end of story. You don't hold off because that guy who totally sucks was picked in error last year. That's the kind of thinking that continues to set us back.

The only logical reason to start Hackenberg in 2017 is because you want Sam Darnold in 2018. Starting Hack is easily the most surefire way to tank for the top pick.

[Gee Andrezzi]

1 minute ago, ScarletKnight89 said:

Not disagreeing. Osweiller definitely hurt the market.

But the idea some fans have of getting a guy with any semblance of talent for less than $10 million a year is delusional at this point in todays NFL. Everyone is looking for a QB.

You want a guy on the cheap, you have to draft him. And if he's any good, you'll be paying $15-$20 million a year in a few years anyway.

Otherwise you have to take your pick of the Fitz's, Hoyer's, and McCown's of the world and hope they give you more good than bad.

Well that's the thing, Glennon doesn't have any talent, he would literally be in the same situation he was in Tampa if he came to us. An average offensive team with a maybe above average defense. I'm not paying him to be a career backup, that's why hack and petty are there for.

Completely agree with the drafting part. A lot of things are based on systems too. Hack looked like a god when he played under bill o'briens pro style offense as a freshman. Osweiler looked like a freshman  still in college under that same system.

IMHO, our best bet is playing Hack (petty already had his shot, and proved he's not a starter) let Hack get it and see if he can figure it out. 

Nobody thought Jeff Garcia would be a competent starter either... 

[JiFtheOracle]

14 minutes ago, UntouchableCrew said:

The fact that we've drafted two QBs (Petty and Hackeberg) in the first four rounds that have shown little signs of life on a QB needy team is a huge indictment of Mac and his ability to evaluate a QB. The Hackenberg pick in particular is without question the biggest mistake of his tenure thus far. I don't really think there's much to argue about that unless you're a huge Jets/Mac/Hack apologist. There's literally nothing to draw from on that front that's a positive, all signs indicate the guy isn't even close to being an NFL QB.

So in that sense, I agree with you. It is a very real question as to whether Mac should be the guy drafting our next QB. 

That said, it still doesn't mean we shouldn't be willing to make a move for the right guy. We have the number 6 pick -- theoretically if we think Watson or Trubisky can be the franchise you take them, end of story. You don't hold off because that guy who totally sucks was picked in error last year. That's the kind of thinking that continues to set us back.

The only logical reason to start Hackenberg in 2017 is because you want Sam Darnold in 2018. Starting Hack is easily the most surefire way to tank for the top pick.

I think you're spot on with this take.  And I'm not one to defend Big Mac. I think he's been a disaster thus far.  That said, he's not the only GM in the NFL that cant evaluate talent at the QB position.  It's epidemic at this point which is why you see QB's over drafted every year.  These kids arent getting taught how to play the position at a pro level, they're taught to win games and make money for their respective schools.  The QB farm system is proper ****ed hence a guy like Mike Glennon who hasnt played Football in 2 years becoming the hottest commodity at QB in the league.  Think about that for a second, he would probably be out of the league/or resigned to career back if actually played the last 2 years.  And instead, he's going to sign a 15+ million dollar contract.  Crazy.  

I'm not sure there is this great GM out there who has a knack for finding QB's and just because Mac has sucked thus far, doesnt mean he should stop trying.

[NoBowles]

2 hours ago, win4ever said:

 

I think Glennon has upside for sure, but I'm sort of thinking in percentages of probability.

I'd say there is 10% chance, Glennon is an absolute stud, next Brees situation where he sets franchise for 10 years.

20% chance he's a second tier starting QB, not going to carry team but certainly won't drag it down.

40% chance he's an average to below average QB who goes back and forth from starting material to highly qualified back up.

20% chance, he's a career back up.

10%, he's horrible.

Obviously these are just random numbers I'm throwing out there, but I think for him to pay off, he has to perform in the top 30% tier. So there is a 70% shot it doesn't work out for us with the projected money he is going to make. If he came cheaper, our chances increase in return of investment, so I would have no problem bringing him in.

I think Glennon has a better profile than Osweiller, but it's hard to tell because the Bucs sucked, and Lovie Smith is an offensive idiot. The theory being in a better system, Glennon should improve. With Osweiller, the theory was that he had such a good team that he just needs to play it safe and they would win, and in a more open system, he'd thrive. They surrounded him with Hopkins, and loads of speed in Fuller/Braxton and Miller but he didn't improve.


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

 

I love the probability distribution approach. I would probably take it a bit further though, and look at an expected return for all options, including doing nothing at all, drafting a Watson, signing Taylor, ect. and then it comes down to how good of a scout you are to assign the probabilities for each distribution. I would hope the Jets are looking at it like this.

What I would say is for me, I would have given Osweiler a far lesser probability in the top 2 tiers than I would give Glennon. Your quick and dirty probs looks reasonable to me for Glennon.

For Osweiler, I would have probably had something like a 2$, 10%, 70%, 18% (for last two combined because I don't care and it won't impact because at the contracts given they will be cut in either scenario.)

I thought the Osweiller contract that even Denver was offering was flat out stupid, the one Houston gave him was just asinine.

 

[Warfish]

12 minutes ago, UntouchableCrew said:

We have the number 6 pick -- theoretically if we think Watson or Trubisky can be the franchise you take them, end of story.

The general consensus seems to be that these guys are not franchise QB's.  This is a very down year for QB's.  And even the best picks are massive risks with limited realistic upside.

So yeah, we already have that in Hack.

And again, I don't care if we think Hack was a mistake, he must be played and prove it or not before we move on.

No overspending on an old downside Veteran placeholder.

No overspending on some other teams backup QB because "maybe he'll..."

No drafting a QB now just because we're feeling desperate for some hope.

We're rebuilding.  If the right QB isn't there, you play your "mistakes" and let them get beat to hell while you build the rest of the roster.

Then, if and when a legit QB is available (or can be traded up in a draft to get), you make your move.

Patience is required, no matter how many years we've sucked already or how many QB's have already failed here.  

[Beerfish]

SWEEPSTAKES!!!!

[Gee Andrezzi]

12 minutes ago, Warfish said:

The general consensus seems to be that these guys are not franchise QB's.  This is a very down year for QB's.  And even the best picks are massive risks with limited realistic upside.

So yeah, we already have that in Hack.

And again, I don't care if we think Hack was a mistake, he must be played and prove it or not before we move on.

No overspending on an old downside Veteran placeholder.

No overspending on some other teams backup QB because "maybe he'll..."

No drafting a QB now just because we're feeling desperate for some hope.

We're rebuilding.  If the right QB isn't there, you play your "mistakes" and let them get beat to hell while you build the rest of the roster.

Then, if and when a legit QB is available (or can be traded up in a draft to get), you make your move.

Patience is required, no matter how many years we've sucked already or how many QB's have already failed here.  

Agreed. Hack has to play...

a 2nd round pick cannot go without at least playing a little whether it's QB, WR, DL, OL, CB

its a 2nd round pick!!!

[Charlie Brown]

52 minutes ago, prime21 said:

15 mil puts him in the middle of the pack as far as QB salaries go.  We wouldn't be paying him top dollar.

Tyrod will get the same thing if he's released.

Taylor should be Option B if available. We need an upgrade at the QB position.  

This idea that we are going to magically start drafting Namath's Part II is funny to me.  How has that worked out for this franchise for the last 15+ years????

The truth is that no NFLteam can survive bad QB play, no one.  

The suck for luck sounds good in theory but when you look at the results, the Jets with Sanchez  had better results !!!

You don't want Glennon fine don't come back with ride with Hoyer.  Nuts ? 

And the Petty and Hack option sounds good but what if they both suck, now you draft a new QB and under that scenario you could be looking at another 5 years of horrific QB play and your team will have morphed into the recent Cleveland Browns  

 

[Tinstar]

"Just when I thought I was out"

[Gee Andrezzi]

3 minutes ago, Charlie Brown said:

Taylor should be Option B if available. We need an upgrade at the QB position.  

This idea that we are going to magically start drafting Namath's Part II is funny to me.  How has that worked out for this franchise for the last 15+ years????

The truth is that no NFLteam can survive bad QB play, no one.  

The suck for luck sounds good in theory but when you look at the results, the Jets with Sanchez  had better results !!!

You don't want Glennon fine don't come back with ride with Hoyer.  Nuts ? 

And the Petty and Hack option sounds good but what if they both suck, now you draft a new QB and under that scenario you could be looking at another 5 years of horrific QB play and your team will have morphed into the recent Cleveland Browns  

 

If petty and hack suck (we know petty does already) then that's fine. We're not winning a super bowl this year no matter who we sign in free agency anyway. I'm still not letting go of Hack though. He has potential just hasn't gotten enough game reps

And you do realize you have to draft a QB to find out if they're great or not? Did you know tom Brady was a future hall of gamer when he almost went undrafted? Russell Wilson? Dak? Dan Marino got passed by the steelers in the draft, he would've been terry Bradshaw's heir apparent.

Cleveland's situation is totally different.. their best player right now is a converted college QB to WR..they could've got Carson went s last year but traded the pick away.

we actually have talent, just gotta find the right QB for our system.

[FTL Jet Fan]

29 minutes ago, Warfish said:

The general consensus seems to be that these guys are not franchise QB's.  This is a very down year for QB's.  And even the best picks are massive risks with limited realistic upside.

So yeah, we already have that in Hack.

And again, I don't care if we think Hack was a mistake, he must be played and prove it or not before we move on.

No overspending on an old downside Veteran placeholder.

No overspending on some other teams backup QB because "maybe he'll..."

No drafting a QB now just because we're feeling desperate for some hope.

We're rebuilding.  If the right QB isn't there, you play your "mistakes" and let them get beat to hell while you build the rest of the roster.

Then, if and when a legit QB is available (or can be traded up in a draft to get), you make your move.

Patience is required, no matter how many years we've sucked already or how many QB's have already failed here.  

Do you think that's Mac's mindset going into this year? 

[ScarletKnight89]

51 minutes ago, Gee Andrezzi said:

Well that's the thing, Glennon doesn't have any talent, he would literally be in the same situation he was in Tampa if he came to us. An average offensive team with a maybe above average defense. I'm not paying him to be a career backup, that's why hack and petty are there for.

Completely agree with the drafting part. A lot of things are based on systems too. Hack looked like a god when he played under bill o'briens pro style offense as a freshman. Osweiler looked like a freshman  still in college under that same system.

IMHO, our best bet is playing Hack (petty already had his shot, and proved he's not a starter) let Hack get it and see if he can figure it out. 

Nobody thought Jeff Garcia would be a competent starter either... 

I don't know if he doesn't have any talent though. Clearly people around the league think there is something there. Maybe not a star, but a capable starter. I'm not saying he is or he isn't. He's got a big arm, but lacks mobility. There are people who like him around the league though and think he can play. But it's always a gamble.

He's started 18 NFL games, so right around a full season of work. He's thrown 30 TD's to 15 INT's for 4100 yards and completed just under 60% of his passes. Not great, but not bad either. Tampa should have gave him a better look. But that organization has switched coaches a few times and that helps fail guys like Glennon who get pushed aside for the Josh McCown's of the world. Then Tampa had the top pick and got a really talented player in Winston. So while I don't love him, I understand the interest in him. People think he hasn't been given a fair chance.

[Warfish]

4 minutes ago, FTL Jet Fan said:

Do you think that's Mac's mindset going into this year? 

I would certainly hope so.

But honestly, who knows....

[Gee Andrezzi]

13 minutes ago, ScarletKnight89 said:

I don't know if he doesn't have any talent though. Clearly people around the league think there is something there. Maybe not a star, but a capable starter. I'm not saying he is or he isn't. He's got a big arm, but lacks mobility. There are people who like him around the league though and think he can play. But it's always a gamble.

He's started 18 NFL games, so right around a full season of work. He's thrown 30 TD's to 15 INT's for 4100 yards and completed just under 60% of his passes. Not great, but not bad either. Tampa should have gave him a better look. But that organization has switched coaches a few times and that helps fail guys like Glennon who get pushed aside for the Josh McCown's of the world. Then Tampa had the top pick and got a really talented player in Winston. So while I don't love him, I understand the interest in him.

Definitely. At 6'6" the prototype size is appealing especially when you factor in the big arm strength.

but I'm not giving a guy 15 million a year when he has no track record of being good or above decent. Yea his stat numbers are not too shabby, but in terms of wins and losses those stats directly resulted in them getting Winston #1 overall so these numbers are a little inflated, he's not a winner.

id much rather draft a QB like brad kaaya in the 3rd or 4th round and hopefully he can be a diamond in the rough like dak or Russell Wilson

 

[thadude]

If Mac doesn't sign Glennon he's unemployed after next season

[#27TheDominator]

28 minutes ago, Gee Andrezzi said:

Definitely. At 6'6" the prototype size is appealing especially when you factor in the big arm strength.

but I'm not giving a guy 15 million a year when he has no track record of being good or above decent. Yea his stat numbers are not too shabby, but in terms of wins and losses those stats directly resulted in them getting Winston #1 overall so these numbers are a little inflated, he's not a winner.

id much rather draft a QB like brad kaaya in the 3rd or 4th round and hopefully he can be a diamond in the rough like dak or Russell Wilson

 

His eyes are at 6'7", but his shoulder is only at 6'1".  Have you seen that neck? I never heard he had a big arm.  I have heard "certainly sufficient."  Not too many people were referencing a cannon coming out.  To be fair, Glennon didn't play that many games the year they went 2-14.  That was mostly on McCown.  The stats he provided directly resulted in them getting Mike Williams. 

[Gee Andrezzi]

4 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

His eyes are at 6'7", but his shoulder is only at 6'1".  Have you seen that neck? I never heard he had a big arm.  I have heard "certainly sufficient."  Not too many people were referencing a cannon coming out.  To be fair, Glennon didn't play that many games the year they went 2-14.  That was mostly on McCown.  The stats he provided directly resulted in them getting Mike Williams. 

*mike Evans

but yea you're totally right...

Lets just draft a 3rd QB and hope the west coast offense system will fit one of the 3 young guys strengths well

 

[#27TheDominator]

2 minutes ago, Gee Andrezzi said:

*mike Evans

but yea you're totally right...

Lets just draft a 3rd QB and hope the west coast offense system will fit one of the 3 young guys strengths well

 

Oops.  Maybe we will end up with Mike Williams this year.

[UntouchableCrew]

2 hours ago, Warfish said:

The general consensus seems to be that these guys are not franchise QB's.  This is a very down year for QB's.  And even the best picks are massive risks with limited realistic upside.

So yeah, we already have that in Hack.

And again, I don't care if we think Hack was a mistake, he must be played and prove it or not before we move on.

No overspending on an old downside Veteran placeholder.

No overspending on some other teams backup QB because "maybe he'll..."

No drafting a QB now just because we're feeling desperate for some hope.

We're rebuilding.  If the right QB isn't there, you play your "mistakes" and let them get beat to hell while you build the rest of the roster.

Then, if and when a legit QB is available (or can be traded up in a draft to get), you make your move.

Patience is required, no matter how many years we've sucked already or how many QB's have already failed here.  

Well, the general consensus is often wrong. Again, lack of faith that Mac will make the right pick aside, if you believe in the top QBs you make the pick. You're siding with the consensus and don't think they're good -- that's fine and understandable. I personally think Watson is the real deal, and no, we sure as hell don't have that in Hackenberg.

You keep saying Hack "must be played." Everything I've read and seen basically indicates Christian Hackenberg is so bad, so far away from being an NFL starter that playing him literally isn't an option. I mean, go watch that Eagles/Jets preseason game. The guy was playing against guys who wouldn't make an NFL squad and he looked utterly hopeless, humiliatingly bad. Had he been a 6th round pick he clearly would not have made the roster. Do we still "have" to play him? What other rookie QB in history has been hidden during the preseason to avoid disaster in the press?

I absolutely agree on not overspending on a Glennon/Taylor type. That gets us nowhere. But I couldn't disagree more that we HAVE to play Hack or that he should preclude us from making another, potentially better draft pick at the position. That's completely backward with the long term goals of this team.

[Gee Andrezzi]

27 minutes ago, UntouchableCrew said:

Well, the general consensus is often wrong. Again, lack of faith that Mac will make the right pick aside, if you believe in the top QBs you make the pick. You're siding with the consensus and don't think they're good -- that's fine and understandable. I personally think Watson is the real deal, and no, we sure as hell don't have that in Hackenberg.

You keep saying Hack "must be played." Everything I've read and seen basically indicates Christian Hackenberg is so bad, so far away from being an NFL starter that playing him literally isn't an option. I mean, go watch that Eagles/Jets preseason game. The guy was playing against guys who wouldn't make an NFL squad and he looked utterly hopeless, humiliatingly bad. Had he been a 6th round pick he clearly would not have made the roster. Do we still "have" to play him? What other rookie QB in history has been hidden during the preseason to avoid disaster in the press?

I absolutely agree on not overspending on a Glennon/Taylor type. That gets us nowhere. But I couldn't disagree more that we HAVE to play Hack or that he should preclude us from making another, potentially better draft pick at the position. That's completely backward with the long term goals of this team.

Hack and Petty both should've played this year anyway. Bowles kept playing fitz for no reason, we probably would've had a top 3 pick this year if he benched fitz all year.

Playing Hack now is the right decision cause we will see what he can do in a different system now. What point is drafting a 2nd rounder at any position and not playing them when they're perfectly healthy? The fact that he plays QB makes him playing even more imperative.

the sooner we play him and see what he can do, the sooner we can give up on him

[jack48]

The pursuit of a guy like Cutler hits me as Vinnie Redux.  A veteran with loose cannon tendecncies on the field who suddenly gets it?  I wonder myself.  Don't get the Glennon hunger.  Guy has done nothing to warrant the money.  Not saying he is bad, just that he has not done anything.

[Il Mostro]

If they do not snag Glennon, don't be shocked if the Jets make a draft day deal for AJ McCarron -- giving up way too much in the process.  It is the most Jetsy move possible.  They tear down the rest of the team but still will not go with either of the kids at QB.

[UntouchableCrew]

30 minutes ago, Gee Andrezzi said:

Hack and Petty both should've played this year anyway. Bowles kept playing fitz for no reason, we probably would've had a top 3 pick this year if he benched fitz all year.

Playing Hack now is the right decision cause we will see what he can do in a different system now. What point is drafting a 2nd rounder at any position and not playing them when they're perfectly healthy? The fact that he plays QB makes him playing even more imperative.

the sooner we play him and see what he can do, the sooner we can give up on him

Agreed that Petty should have played more last year. We had nothing to lose.

I'm not theoretically against playing Hackenberg. I just don't think his 2nd round selection means you have to play him if you've seen him every day in practice and know he isn't even close, which appears to be the case.

[thadude]

No more Hoyer, no more Bryce Sh-tty, no more Hackenturd hey hey now

 

SIGN GLENNON 

[JetFaninMI]

8 hours ago, thadude said:

If Mac doesn't sign Glennon he's unemployed after next season

LOL. An easy statement to make since Mac is treading on thin ice as it is. Here's one for ya. If Mac signs Glennon he will be fired after next season. Especially when they go 6-10 and miss out on the best prospects in that draft. To quote Henry Hill "You ARE a funny guy".

[JetFaninMI]

7 hours ago, Gee Andrezzi said:

Hack and Petty both should've played this year anyway. Bowles kept playing fitz for no reason, we probably would've had a top 3 pick this year if he benched fitz all year.

Playing Hack now is the right decision cause we will see what he can do in a different system now. What point is drafting a 2nd rounder at any position and not playing them when they're perfectly healthy? The fact that he plays QB makes him playing even more imperative.

the sooner we play him and see what he can do, the sooner we can give up on him

Yes!

[JetFaninMI]

Here's one for the Glennon worshiper's. 5-13 in games started. Where do I sign up for 15 mil a season? Here's the response:

Yeah but he was 10/11 in games started this year.

Yeah but he has a 2 to 1 TD/INT ratio.

Or something to that effect. I thought this sh*t was over but like a bad penny Glennon just keeps turning up. Without that Giraffe neck he's only 6'0' too.

[ATX Jetsfan]

4 minutes ago, JetFaninMI said:

Here's one for the Glennon worshiper's. 5-13 in games started. Where do I sign up for 15 mil a season? Here's the response:

Yeah but he was 10/11 in games started this year.

Yeah but he has a 2 to 1 TD/INT ratio.

Or something to that effect. I thought this sh*t was over but like a bad penny Glennon just keeps turning up. Without that Giraffe neck he's only 6'0' too.

How much do you think he should be worth? Just curious. 

[JetFaninMI]

9 minutes ago, ATX Jetsfan said:

How much do you think he should be worth? Just curious. 

I wouldn't sign him. At this time, with this roster, I would pass. You have to be sensible. The guy is unproven and could put this team back in the future further than they are now in terms of cap space and future QB development.

[ATX Jetsfan]

2 minutes ago, JetFaninMI said:

I wouldn't sign him. At this time, with this roster, I would pass. You have to be sensible. The guy is unproven and could put this team back in the future further than they are now in terms of cap space and future QB development.

Fair enough. But my point is that in this NFL, 15 million dollars is what you have to pay for a starting QB. Its just the way it is. That's about 9% of the cap. Its a large number, but not unexpected. Like him or not. 27 year olds with his starting experience with 4000yds and a 2:1 TD/Int ratio are going to get paid in this league. 

[JetFaninMI]

4 minutes ago, ATX Jetsfan said:

Fair enough. But my point is that in this NFL, 15 million dollars is what you have to pay for a starting QB. Its just the way it is. That's about 9% of the cap. Its a large number, but not unexpected. Like him or not. 27 year olds with his starting experience with 4000yds and a 2:1 TD/Int ratio are going to get paid in this league. 

LOL Told ya someone would respond with that. How about 5-13 in games started? How about passed over for an unproven rookie granted with lots of potential but still an unproven rookie? How about not starting a game in 2+ years? Pass.

[ATX Jetsfan]

Just now, JetFaninMI said:

LOL Told ya someone would respond with that. How about 5-13 in games started? How about passed over for an unproven rookie granted with lots of potential but still an unproven rookie? How about not starting a game in 2+ years? Pass.

Your opinion of him is irrelevant. Facts are facts. Players with that resume are going to get paid. I am not advocating signing him, just pointing out that 15 million is not too high for a player like him in this league. The Buccs were a very bad team those years, they had a chance to take a Jameis Winston. They had a good QB, and they decided to go for it and draft a potential great QB. So they took it. 

5-13 and he put up 4000 yards and didn't turn over the ball. That should tell you more about the team than his level of play. 

[Gee Andrezzi]

17 minutes ago, ATX Jetsfan said:

Your opinion of him is irrelevant. Facts are facts. Players with that resume are going to get paid. I am not advocating signing him, just pointing out that 15 million is not too high for a player like him in this league. The Buccs were a very bad team those years, they had a chance to take a Jameis Winston. They had a good QB, and they decided to go for it and draft a potential great QB. So they took it. 

5-13 and he put up 4000 yards and didn't turn over the ball. That should tell you more about the team than his level of play. 

Wrong...

players like Glennon are getting paid because guys like Osweiler are below average setting the QB market at $72 mill contracts. Cutler, Sam Bradford..etc..etc even flacco,although he won a ring so he kind of had a reason to get paid

Glennon is the most unproven out of those QB's sooo idk how you can say he was good..he was average at best

 

[flgreen]

None of the free-agent quarterbacks will solve the Jets’ problems

•  
•  
• Tweet
•  
• email

The Jets should stick to Bryce Petty and Ryan Fitzpatrick under center next season.

 (BRAD PENNER/USA TODAY SPORTS)

MANISH MEHTA

NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

Wednesday, March 8, 2017, 6:05 PM

The fabric of the Jets universe has officially unraveled: Gang Green lost out on the Brian Hoyer Sweepstakes!

Mike Maccagnan and Todd Bowles will never be the same: Tyrod Taylor is officially off the table!

How will the Jets recover from such seismic blows?

Should Woody Johnson sell the team now that the free-agent quarterback pool has shrunk? (Okay, don't answer that question.)

Jets Free Agency Tampering Period Tracker: Here's the latest

The contrived hysteria in the run-up to the official start of NFL free agency on Thursday is truly something to behold. Middling players morph into giants of the game. Players not worthy of being retained by their own teams, for Pete's sake, become legends.

It's a world where the movements of Brian Freakin' Hoyer are tracked with frightening precision. I must have not been watching the Red Zone Channel when this injury-prone journeyman on his sixth team in nine years became Johnny U. (I heard Hoyer's a great guy, for whatever that's worth.)

Hoyer, who visited with Jets brass last year on the same night several veteran leaders went out on the town with Ryan Fitzpatrick to catch a hockey game, agreed to a deal with Kyle Shanahan's 49ers on Wednesday.

 

Brian Hoyer.

 (ANDY LYONS/GETTY IMAGES)

The Jets must soldier on without him.

Tyrod Taylor is a better quarterback than Eli Manning

Although Taylor is a decent player, it was hardly soul-crushing news when the Bills announced that they restructured the quarterback's deal to keep him in Buffalo.

The Jets like impending free agent Mike Glennon, but they believe he's headed to the Bears. Maccagnan would be willing to pay $14 million per season for the Tampa Bay backup, but the feeling on One Jets Drive is that the final price tag will be steeper. The absolute worst thing for the Jets right now would be to overpay for this quarterback with a 5-13 career record as a starter.

As a wise man told me recently, "Real talk: Glennon is going to get some GM fired."

"We have our eye on a few people," Bowles said about free-agent quarterback options last week at the Scouting Combine.

Jets are keeping a close eye on Tyrod Taylor situation with Bills

The remaining signal-caller options for the Jets aren't very appealing, but everyone already knew that.

Mike Glennon.

 (JUSTIN K. ALLER/GETTY IMAGES)

The powers that be weren't particularly interested in a 33-year-old Jay Cutler or Colin Kaepernick last week. Case Keenum and Matt McGloin are still out there. Josh McCown appears destined for the Cowboys, who will cut Tony Romo. And no, Romo isn't signing with the Jets unless he's blackballed by the rest of the league. The Eagles are looking to trade backup Chase Daniel.

My understanding is that Mark Sanchez would be amenable to returning to the Jets as a veteran mentor for Bryce Petty and Christian Hackenberg, but the team hasn't shown serious interest.

Geno Smith, rehabbing from ACL surgery, makes little sense for myriad reasons.

Maccagnan's QB quagmire should land Jets in tank if no draft fix

Maccagnan and Bowles have refrained from dropping the "R" word in public, but the Jets are obviously in full-fledged rebuilding mode. Why not just play Petty and Hackenberg in 2017 with an eye toward landing one of the coveted quarterback prospects like USC's Sam Darnold or UCLA's Josh Rosen in next year's draft?

If we're to believe Johnson that there is no playoff mandate this season, then why not give the two project signal callers on the roster a look-see as the rest of the young players around them develop? Or select a quarterback in a premium round of the upcoming draft.

There's no reason to overreact to "losing" out on any of these free-agent quarterbacks. None of them moves the needle.

The Jets will have to endure short-term pain before having any chance to become a sustainable winner. Hoyer or Taylor wouldn't have changed that.