Poll: Christian Hackenberg - "I Still Have Hope" vs "He's a Sunk Cost"

[Pcola]

14 hours ago, 20andOut said:

Jets said plan all along was for him not to play a snap year one so can't hold that against him and the reports that he was awful were based on one disgruntled, just fired coach. Not saying he is going to be anything, just saying too soon to write him off.

I get the whole red shirt Year bull crap that the team is feeding everyone.  But what was the problem giving him one drive Week 17 in our blow out of Buffalo.  They played Jones and basically forfeited the game.

Was it worth sticking to the company lie rather than give him 5 minutes of game action?  Seriously, only the Jets.

[Pcola]

12 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

This statement infers that, if Hackenberg isn't good then you no longer think Mac and co are good talent evaluators; that anyone good that they did draft was either an easy pick (e.g. Leo), and with anyone else that pans out they just got lucky despite their incompetence.

I can only hope the Hack pick was Woody and the fact that they refused to play him even one snap last year was Macc telling Woody to stay the heck out of the draft room and let him do his job.

[Sperm Edwards]

1 minute ago, Pcola said:

I get the whole red shirt Year bull crap that the team is feeding everyone.  But what was the problem giving him one drive Week 17 in our blow out of Buffalo.  They played Jones and basically forfeited the game.

Was it worth sticking to the company lie rather than give him 5 minutes of game action?  Seriously, only the Jets.

I think they felt it helped to keep up the charade that the plan all along was to redshirt him at all costs. If they put him on the field in week 17 some could say it blew a hole in their bull****, after-the-fact story.

[Sperm Edwards]

Just now, Pcola said:

I can only hope the Hack pick was Woody and the fact that they refused to play him even one snap last year was Macc telling Woody to stay the heck out of the draft room and let him do his job.

You can hope it, but dream on. The only one on the team that had any ties to Hackenberg, however indirectly, is Maccagnan. Plus with Hackenberg looking pretty bad the prior 2 seasons it's hard to imagine Woody stepping in and force-feeding Hack to both GM and HC.

[rangerous]

16 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

This statement infers that, if Hackenberg isn't good then you no longer think Mac and co are good talent evaluators; that anyone good that they did draft was either an easy pick (e.g. Leo), and with anyone else that pans out they just got lucky despite their incompetence.

boy, you really don't like mac do you?  i guess you could say that. at this point i wouldn't say they are incompetent.  we've seen that side of the coin with idzik and tanny.  this is going to be mac's make/break draft.  if he gets it right then he should stay. but you know he is only responsible for the things he does.  it's up to bowles to put whatever players mac gets in the right position to succeed. 

[section314]

8 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

This statement infers that, if Hackenberg isn't good then you no longer think Mac and co are good talent evaluators; that anyone good that they did draft was either an easy pick (e.g. Leo), and with anyone else that pans out they just got lucky despite their incompetence.

The statement "Infers" nothing of the kind. What it says is that if you trust Macc as someone who is a good talent evaluator, you trust the pick. All the picks. If one player doesn't pan out, it doesn't change your opinion of Macc's ability to spot talent. I think you are a good poster. When you make absurd statements like this, it doesn't change my mind that you are a good poster.

[johnnyjet]

Without hope there is only despair.  I've had enough of that in my Jet life.  If he's good enough to win 11 games next year he's a franchise Qb.  If he sucks where we only win 2 we gat Sam........ Buts if mediocrity strikes again n he wins 4-8 we are screwed yet again.  So bring in a has been quitter like Cutler and get me the #1 pick in the 18 draft. 

[Bugg]

He's here and so is Petty anyway. Find out if they can play, wins and losses be damned. Or pick Watson or tank for Darnold. 

 

But watch, they'll pick a safety, win 6 games and fvkc this all up. AGAIN.

[20andOut]

2 hours ago, Pcola said:

 

17 hours ago, 20andOut said:

Jets said plan all along was for him not to play a snap year one so can't hold that against him and the reports that he was awful were based on one disgruntled, just fired coach. Not saying he is going to be anything, just saying too soon to write him off.

I get the whole red shirt Year bull crap that the team is feeding everyone.  But what was the problem giving him one drive Week 17 in our blow out of Buffalo.  They played Jones and basically forfeited the game.

Was it worth sticking to the company lie rather than give him 5 minutes of game action?  Seriously, only the Jets.

 

Would there have been any real value in throwing him out there for one meaningless series in week 17? Especially if the powers that be already knew he would be playing in a new offensive system with new coordinator in '17

[RutgersJetFan]

I don't understand what you guys are arguing about. Not putting on football pads and football cleats and not playing football makes football players better at playing football. That's just the way the sport works and obviously anyone who doesn't know that hasn't put on pads in their lives.

[jetophile]

They say the Hope is happiness;

But genuine Love prize the past,

And Memory wakes the the thoughts that bless:

They rose the first - they set the last.

Listen, Byron, you fruit, who the fukk is they? 

[ScarletKnight89]

I don't care what any expert says. I'm not writing a second round pick off until I it least see him play. The Jets drafted him and basically said 2016 was going to be a red shirt year for him. It wasn't like they were anticipating him coming in and playing right away. So nothing that happened with him last year came as a surprise. He just didn't play. Something everyone expected. The Jets said he was a project.

The reports on him last year were overly negative from the media but I take that with a grain of salt because the season was so bad and the QB position was a huge topic due to Fitz's poor play. Had the Jets been winning games I bet the feeling from the press on Fitz would have been more neutral. But the press loves to pile on in this town. Especially in regards to the Jets.

I have to see him it least start to get some serious time in pre season games before I say he sucks.

[nicg4360]

On top of that the Jets did not help Hackenbergs cause when they chose to ride with 4 QB's on the roster. It was widely realized that he was getting 0 reps with the starters. He never climbed the qb ladder until the current QB's fell like flies to injury nearing the end of the year. What would be the point of risking yet another qb to injury and even damaging his psyche more when he was ill prepared to start. It was not Hackenbergs fault he did not start ...The CS took little effort into developing in his "redshirt" year.

Sent from my Moto Z using JetNation.com mobile app

[Pcola]

2 hours ago, 20andOut said:

Would there have been any real value in throwing him out there for one meaningless series in week 17? Especially if the powers that be already knew he would be playing in a new offensive system with new coordinator in '17

The only experience is game experience.  If he was so intelligent that he could pick up O'Brien's system as a freshman, then why couldn't he even hand the ball off.  There is zero acceptable explanations for how they handled Hack last year.  In the Jets mind, there were only 50 (at most) better prospects in the entire draft.

[HighPitch]

What is a "sunk cost"?

lol

[The Crusher]

1 minute ago, HighPitch said:

What is a "sunk cost"?

lol

Money you sink into something and never get back?

[Beerfish]

Perhaps the biggest fail in a long list of 2nd round fails by the jets.  The guy projects nothing as far as being a good starter, let alone anything in this league.  He was shot coming into the league.  The next 7th rounder QB we draft will be ahead of him the very quickly.  Just a terrible ill thought out pick,.

[Scott Dierking]

9 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Plus no matter how many times some still stick to repeating the lie that team announced in advance they were going to redshirt him this year, repetition doesn't make it true. It never happened, which is why no one can find the team even alluding to this in the spring & summer. Maccagnan said the opposite in early May, right after drafting him: Hackenberg would compete for the starting QB job (so it goes without saying he'd be competing for the #2 job), to dress up every week, which is the exact opposite of redshirting him. They stashed him that far down after seeing him day in day out in practice, and couldn't justify putting him ahead of anyone on the depth chart. 

 

Well, the real truth is that Maccagnan gave himself room on both sides of the aisle on this:

-GM Mike Maccagnan told WEPN-FM in New York on Monday that Hackenberg could play as a rookie.

and

-...in a perfect world, you like to give guys a chance to sort of grow, develop before you have to throw them in the fire.

So in typical GM fashion he hedged his bets. He certainly said he "could" play, but also said sometimes it is best to develop and watch.

 

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/05/02/maccagnan-says-hackenberg-could-play-this-year/

[thadude]

c. Won't be in the NFL after next season.

[T0mShane]

Good QBs are sociopaths. When Hackenberg nearly broke out into tears during that softball-toss with Gruden, you knew he wasn't gonna make it. Bottom line, the second he faced a scad of adversity at PSU, he folded up and implicitly pointed fingers at Franklin. Then all Franklin did was have God remove Hack's emo balls from his program then proceed to take a scrub QB and become one of the better teams in the country. 

[BRONX DUDE]

21 hours ago, JohnJ said:

As the Jets will have shown that they had lost Hope at that point.

 

If they don't take a QB my hope will go up.....yikes

 

.

drink the green kool aid

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

suck for sam 2017

[JohnJ]

45 minutes ago, BRONX DUDE said:

drink the green kool aid

suck for sam 2017

I'll take a sip once I see Hack play. Gotta be careful, I've become allergic to that sh*te 

[JetFanatic]

I don't know why but I get a funny feeling when I think about Christian Hackenberg.  He was never given a shot here.  Poor kid got ragged on in his rookie year.  I think he comes out fighting and surprising.

[HighPitch]

1 hour ago, The Crusher said:

Money you sink into something and never get back?

Ok.  I figured such but its a funny term

[Sperm Edwards]

4 hours ago, Scott Dierking said:

Well, the real truth is that Maccagnan gave himself room on both sides of the aisle on this:

-GM Mike Maccagnan told WEPN-FM in New York on Monday that Hackenberg could play as a rookie.

and

-...in a perfect world, you like to give guys a chance to sort of grow, develop before you have to throw them in the fire.

So in typical GM fashion he hedged his bets. He certainly said he "could" play, but also said sometimes it is best to develop and watch.

 

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/05/02/maccagnan-says-hackenberg-could-play-this-year/

That's the article I remember. It means they could play him or they could let him hold a clipboard for a while (which itself doesn't necessarily mean sit him through week 17).

It flies in the face of the made-up idea that the team had announced, from the day they drafted him, that he would absolutely be redshirted all season long with no chance to play even if he looked good.

My position is he did not look good to them, and based on that they then decided to stash him (they certainly weren't cutting him). Not this idea that the team was never going to let him play no matter what, with the "proof" being that they didn't play him. Remember, Bowles also gave him a chance to be Fitz's backup in October after Geno went down, and he lost another battle to Bryce Petty that would have ultimately led to him starting games (if he was better as a rookie).

That doesn't necessarily mean anything as to what he may bring in the future, but we're only talking about his rookie season here.

[Sperm Edwards]

12 hours ago, section314 said:

The statement "Infers" nothing of the kind. What it says is that if you trust Macc as someone who is a good talent evaluator, you trust the pick. All the picks. If one player doesn't pan out, it doesn't change your opinion of Macc's ability to spot talent. I think you are a good poster. When you make absurd statements like this, it doesn't change my mind that you are a good poster.

Of course it infers just that. If I'm to accept Hackenberg's eventual development as an indication of his astute talent evaluation skills, rather than just blind luck on a low-percentage draft pick, then it's absolutely a fair inference to take the opposite in reverse. Otherwise the inference is if he hits on a reach of a pick then he's a good talent evaluator; if he misses on a reach of a pick he's still a good talent evaluator. Put another way: heads I win, tails you lose.

Also, disagree with me all you want; I certainly invite dissent myself. As long as they aren't personal shots lofted, there is no reason for me (or anyone) to take a post personally. 

[JohnJ]

3 hours ago, T0mShane said:

Good QBs are sociopaths. When Hackenberg nearly broke out into tears during that softball-toss with Gruden, you knew he wasn't gonna make it. Bottom line, the second he faced a scad of adversity at PSU, he folded up and implicitly pointed fingers at Franklin. Then all Franklin did was have God remove Hack's emo balls from his program then proceed to take a scrub QB and become one of the better teams in the country. 

Maybe Mac should hire an FBI Profiler for this draft to help him with the QB's?

[Sperm Edwards]

12 hours ago, rangerous said:

boy, you really don't like mac do you?  i guess you could say that. at this point i wouldn't say they are incompetent.  we've seen that side of the coin with idzik and tanny.  this is going to be mac's make/break draft.  if he gets it right then he should stay. but you know he is only responsible for the things he does.  it's up to bowles to put whatever players mac gets in the right position to succeed. 

I don't think he's a good GM, if that's what you mean. However one feels he compares to Idzik and Tannenabaum is irrelevant, since those two were fired and deservedly so. He should be measured against the types of GM you'd want the Jets to have, not the type you wouldn't. 

I think Bowles (like Maccagnan) is in over his head. However even with his obvious faults/blunders that have nothing to do with the roster, in fairness to him he's been given a mish-mash of a roster. The guy has wanted a speedy defense since they hired him in January of 2015 and he's been furnished with mostly slow players in his front 7.

Across the DL they're all DT bodies with 4.9 speed or slower.  People find fault with Bowles for not running some allegedly "obvious" 4-3 front that some mistakenly feel this D is build to run, while ignoring the blatant reality that they are and would be the slowest 4-man DL in the NFL bar none. Behind this slow DL, you have a slow LB corps plus an often clueless Darron Lee. David Harris was slow even back when he was more than half a decade younger; the (so far) over-hyped Jenkins isn't exactly a speed demon himself (and Mauldin even slower still). This is not a front 7 that helps out its secondary by getting to the QB quick, either sacking him or forcing him into an ill-advised throw. They were a bunch of big slowpokes plus one (often clueless) fast rookie Darron Lee. Well, Lee is fast on a track, and will get faster with more experience, but he didn't play quite so fast as a rookie acclimating to the pro game. Meanwhile Bowles is blamed for the repeated lack of pressure on opposing QBs in a pass-first league, despite these roster handicaps handed to him.

[Jetsplayer21]

I have no problem with his not playing at all last yr. But this yr he better playing significant garbage time. Which there should be plenty of that 

[SAR I]

On 3/18/2017 at 6:45 PM, TuscanyTile2 said:

Would be interesting to take a poll of people's current opinion of Hack.  I would assume he's going to get some reps next year.  Maybe he'll surprise to the upside?  If so, it would be interesting to see people's thoughts about him before he even took a regulation NFL snap.

Personally I still have hope for the guy though of course he could completely bomb.  In any case, I'm 100% behind the Jets pulling the "suck for Sam" move.  But it certainly would be even better if we had the solution at QB in-house already.
 

What if I told you that the Sam Darnold of 2013 is currently a New York Jet and has yet to take a single snap in a regular season game?

Check out Darnold's whopping 10 game resume as a USC starter vs. Hackenberg's first 12 game resume as a Penn State starter before O'Brien left, before the sanctions. 

You may be pleasantly surprised.

SAR I

[Maxman]

We have no choice but to have hope. He hasn't played though, so it is too early to write him off.

[Be_a_Jet]

For me it's not even a matter of being pessimistic or jaded fan. I hated the Hackenberg pick the moment it happened and If anything - early reports are more negative than good in regards to his practice abilities since wearing the green and white. 

After that first drive in his first preseason game I was ready to sack up and admit I was wrong. I want to be wrong. But I really thought he was a sh*t quarterback prospect out of college. He hasn't moved the needle for me. 

[rangerous]

7 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I don't think he's a good GM, if that's what you mean. However one feels he compares to Idzik and Tannenabaum is irrelevant, since those two were fired and deservedly so. He should be measured against the types of GM you'd want the Jets to have, not the type you wouldn't. 

I think Bowles (like Maccagnan) is in over his head. However even with his obvious faults/blunders that have nothing to do with the roster, in fairness to him he's been given a mish-mash of a roster. The guy has wanted a speedy defense since they hired him in January of 2015 and he's been furnished with mostly slow players in his front 7.

Across the DL they're all DT bodies with 4.9 speed or slower.  People find fault with Bowles for not running some allegedly "obvious" 4-3 front that some mistakenly feel this D is build to run, while ignoring the blatant reality that they are and would be the slowest 4-man DL in the NFL bar none. Behind this slow DL, you have a slow LB corps plus an often clueless Darron Lee. David Harris was slow even back when he was more than half a decade younger; the (so far) over-hyped Jenkins isn't exactly a speed demon himself (and Mauldin even slower still). This is not a front 7 that helps out its secondary by getting to the QB quick, either sacking him or forcing him into an ill-advised throw. They were a bunch of big slowpokes plus one (often clueless) fast rookie Darron Lee. Well, Lee is fast on a track, and will get faster with more experience, but he didn't play quite so fast as a rookie acclimating to the pro game. Meanwhile Bowles is blamed for the repeated lack of pressure on opposing QBs in a pass-first league, despite these roster handicaps handed to him.

mac is not being compared to idzik or tanny.  the thing is he's coming on the heels of some pretty poor management so he's starting at a disadvantage.

you have a point with the dline although that same dline , with snacks, was able to pressure the qb in 2015 and they did so with a slower lb corps.  they got better play out of the secondary.

as for the current lb corps, i can't speak about the overall talent or how good jenkins and lee may be. the lb's and secondary were frequently out of position and that led to big plays. it's all supposed to work together.

darrin lee clueless? maybe, but he's a rookie and maybe he was trying to do too much. let's see what he does this season.

[Scott Dierking]

9 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

That's the article I remember. It means they could play him or they could let him hold a clipboard for a while (which itself doesn't necessarily mean sit him through week 17).

It flies in the face of the made-up idea that the team had announced, from the day they drafted him, that he would absolutely be redshirted all season long with no chance to play even if he looked good.

My position is he did not look good to them, and based on that they then decided to stash him (they certainly weren't cutting him). Not this idea that the team was never going to let him play no matter what, with the "proof" being that they didn't play him. Remember, Bowles also gave him a chance to be Fitz's backup in October after Geno went down, and he lost another battle to Bryce Petty that would have ultimately led to him starting games (if he was better as a rookie).

That doesn't necessarily mean anything as to what he may bring in the future, but we're only talking about his rookie season here.

You also have to remember, at the time he was saying all of this, the messiah, Fitzpatrick, was not on the roster and they were in negotiation stance. So there is a little bit of gamesmanship in his comments, also. 

That said, Hackenberg did not show enough between then and August to deflect the idiotic signing of Fitz. But, I don't think that was a fair expectation.

[ZachEY]