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

[#27TheDominator]

On 3/19/2017 at 7:31 AM, UnitedWhofans said:

In this league, the unknown is more valuable than the know and crappy (Rob Johnson).

If Rob Johnson were 32 years old in 2017 he would be signing for $17M per. 

10 hours ago, SAR I said:

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

67.2% 3,086 yards, 31TD/9INT 8.4 ypa

58.9% 2,955 yards, 20TD/10INT 7.5 ypa

Which one would you take?  I don't think it's who you think it is. 

15 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. 

All great competitors are sociopaths.  That is why I am such a monster.  You couldn't hope to stop me. 

[Bruce Harper]

Still have hope as I haven't seen the dude play.  He has tools and is not stupid.  I remember hearing whispers about Pennington being a wasted pick and then he burst on the scene (pre-injuries) in impressive fashion.  Can't write him off yet.  

[#27TheDominator]

I have hope.  The problem with this board is that everybody with hope is talking franchise/Dan Marino.  I have hope he will be Glenn Foley.  Maybe belong on an NFL roster.  Maybe not, but worth finding out.  He flashed against the Giants and I wanted to see more of him.  Once I did, I wished I hadn't.  Apparently the coaches and staff felt the same. 

[Big Blocker]

Of course since he's not taken the field and done poorly, Hack can't be written off.  Yet.

And on that basis there is no reason not to hope that he can get it done.

But as a betting proposition, there's little reason to have confidence he will.  Last season, with the problems Smith and Fitz were having, the Jets turned to Petty rather than Hackenberg.  I don't know how else to look at that but that Petty outplayed Hackenberg in practice.  And yet when Petty played, he was underwhelming.

At this point I think it is realistic to think Petty can be a backup, perhaps, but is not likely to become a solid starter.  And Hackenberg ended the season behind Petty on the depth chart.

What reason is there to think he will suddenly become a significantly better player?  Cant think of any good reason.

[Bruce Harper]

4 minutes ago, Big Blocker said:

Of course since he's not taken the field and done poorly, Hack can't be written off.  Yet.

And on that basis there is no reason not to hope that he can get it done.

But as a betting proposition, there's little reason to have confidence he will.  Last season, with the problems Smith and Fitz were having, the Jets turned to Petty rather than Hackenberg.  I don't know how else to look at that but that Petty outplayed Hackenberg in practice.  And yet when Petty played, he was underwhelming.

At this point I think it is realistic to think Petty can be a backup, perhaps, but is not likely to become a solid starter.  And Hackenberg ended the season behind Petty on the depth chart.

What reason is there to think he will suddenly become a significantly better player?  Cant think of any good reason.

Or one could argue that they had the good sense not to throw Hack to the wolves.  I wouldn't put too much stock in the fact that Petty played ahead of him last year.

[joewilly12]

[Big Blocker]

4 minutes ago, Bruce Harper said:

Or one could argue that they had the good sense not to throw Hack to the wolves.  I wouldn't put too much stock in the fact that Petty played ahead of him last year.

If he was ready to play, they would have played him.  Why was he not ready? 

What is going to happen now to make him ready?

I'm not saying it can't happen.  But it's hard to see what exactly it is that is supposed to transform Hackenberg into something more than he was last year, when he could not pass Petty on the depth chart.  I think that in fact does mean something. 

[Bruce Harper]

1 minute ago, Big Blocker said:

If he was ready to play, they would have played him.  Why was he not ready? 

What is going to happen now to make him ready?

I'm not saying it can't happen.  But it's hard to see what exactly it is that is supposed to transform Hackenberg into something more than he was last year, when he could not pass Petty on the depth chart.  I think that in fact does mean something. 

I too think the odds are against it but I'd like to see him throw a few balls before I write him off.  And I think they were committed to red-shirting him last year so that he could get his bearings (just like they did with Petty).  I don't think it means they think Petty is better (although he very well could be).  If they were in contention for the playoffs I might be more concerned that Petty went in ahead of him but with nothing substantial to gain by playing Hack last year it is just as likely that they just stuck to their red-shirt plan.

[Sperm Edwards]

2 hours ago, Scott Dierking said:

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.

No doubt. I take for granted there would have been no reason to re-sign messiah 1 at $12m if messiah 2 looked the part, as you also say. 

Not the same as "Maccagnan said when they drafted him he'd be redshirted all season without any chance given as a rookie." You don't believe that either.

[thadude]

6 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

No doubt. I take for granted there would have been no reason to re-sign messiah 1 at $12m if messiah 2 looked the part, as you also say. 

Not the same as "Maccagnan said when they drafted him he'd be redshirted all season without any chance given as a rookie." You don't believe that either.

The packers told HOF franchise Qb Brett Favre to go away based on how Aaron Rodgers looked in practice

 

The jets have scrub career backup  journeyman Ryan Fitzpatrick a $12 million contract extension based on how Bryce Petty and Christian Hackenburg looked in practice 

 

[thadude]

1 hour ago, #27TheDominator said:

I have hope.  The problem with this board is that everybody with hope is talking franchise/Dan Marino.  I have hope he will be Glenn Foley.  Maybe belong on an NFL roster.  Maybe not, but worth finding out.  He flashed against the Giants and I wanted to see more of him.  Once I did, I wished I hadn't.  Apparently the coaches and staff felt the same. 

Neither one of these clowns Petty or Hack could tie Foley's shoes

 

Petty is a career backup/3rd stringer.  Hack won't even be on an NFL roster in 2018.

[UntouchableCrew]

At this juncture I strongly suspect he'll never start a game for the Jets and will be out of the league in short order. I certainly hope that's not the case and he takes some kind of miraculous leap in 2017 but all the evidence points to the idea that the kid simply can't play.

[peebag]

1 minute ago, UntouchableCrew said:

At this juncture I strongly suspect he'll never start a game for the Jets and will be out of the league in short order. I certainly hope that's not the case and he takes some kind of miraculous leap in 2017 but all the evidence points to the idea that the kid simply can't play.

Please list the evidence.

[Scott Dierking]

11 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

No doubt. I take for granted there would have been no reason to re-sign messiah 1 at $12m if messiah 2 looked the part, as you also say. 

Not the same as "Maccagnan said when they drafted him he'd be redshirted all season without any chance given as a rookie." You don't believe that either.

Jets were engaged with Fitz re-signig, BEFORE the draft took place. I seriously hope, and I seriously doubt, that the drafting of Hack was meant to be a spur to the Fitz discussions. 

As I said previously, Macc played both sides of this immediately after the draft:

-That Hack would have an opportunity to earn time.

-That it would be in his best interests to allow him to process the game.

I would say that neither "redshirt from day one" and "Hack had every opportunity to time" proponents can argue that the ultimate signing of Fitz (which the Jets seemed to  want to do even as Free Agency was happening, and that continued), pushed Hack to a redshirt candidate. I don't think that is undeniable. And I don't believe that even if Hack looked like Bart Starr in OTAs and summer practice, it would have deterred the Jets from the Fitz pursuit. That seemed like a marriage last March.

[Scott Dierking]

10 minutes ago, thadude said:

The packers told HOF franchise Qb Brett Favre to go away based on how Aaron Rodgers looked in practice

 

 

 

Aaron Rodgers did not start a game his first 3 years in the league.

[joewilly12]

16 hours ago, The Crusher said:

Money you sink into something and never get back?

Like a PSL 

[Sperm Edwards]

Just now, thadude said:

The packers told HOF franchise Qb Brett Favre to go away based on how Aaron Rodgers looked in practice

 

The jets have scrub career backup  journeyman Ryan Fitzpatrick a $12 million contract extension based on how Bryce Petty and Christian Hackenburg looked in practice 

 

Throw Geno in there as well.

Stepping back it looks like a lesson in why you don't acquire high priced veterans in their 30s without a QB. It's one thing if they had a starting QB already and then, last minute, he gets hurt and there isn't much choice. It's another thing to spend all spring and almost into August with 3 QBs the rest of the team has no confidence in for the upcoming season. It's a real downer for these veterans - especially veterans on defense - to feel their productive years (for some, their last productive years) are being wasted on others' tryouts, no matter how much they're being paid.

Right or wrong (and it is wrong) it's still a real downer for them. That that leads then to put pressure on a weak HC and GM to sign even a career loser like Fitzpatrick, and hand him the starting job no questions asked. That doesn't mean they (he) still should have succumbed to the pressure, since they shouldn't - you can't have the tail (tails, lol) wagging the dog - but it's largely a mess of his own design. 

[UntouchableCrew]

Just now, peebag said:

Please list the evidence.

1. When he was drafted it was perceived as a huge reach and it was widely reported there were many NFL teams that had him graded as undraftable.

2. He didn't play at all in the Jets first two preseason games, virtually unheard of for a second round pick.

3. In his best sample size of NFL action against the Eagles where he played virtually the whole game he gave one of the worst performances by an NFL QB I have ever seen. At this point it became apparent why he didn't play in the first two preseason games.

4. Despite the fact that the season was a complete and utter disaster at the QB position and we benched our starter and lost our backup for the season it was clear that playing Hackenberg was never even considered. He wasn't even active for almost the entire season -- another project who clearly isn't starting material played ahead of him. Find me a 2nd round QB who wouldn't have played significant minutes under that circumstance.

5. Multiple leaks from outgoing coaches suggesting the kid was simply dreadful. I take these with a grain of salt but the fact that it clearly correlates with everything else I've seen and heard is troubling to say the least.

Look, if people want to roll with the idea that Hack is some huge unknown, more power to them. I just see zero reason to believe in him other than inherent optimism and blind faith in Maccagnan, while there are very clear and obvious indications he's terrible.

[chirorob]

On 3/18/2017 at 6:33 PM, RutgersJetFan said:

its called a redshirt season and it happens all the time do you really think you know more than mmaccaggnnann I mean really

I kinda do, yeah.   I built franchises you could only dream of in Madden.  I had a fantasy team mortals can only dream of.   I have thousands of posts on a Jets Internet Forum.

It's funny.  They said he would not start for at least a year, then didn't start him, then people became unglued.  My opinion, 95% of QBs are better off taking at least 1 year to learn before being thrown out there.

[Sperm Edwards]

12 minutes ago, Scott Dierking said:

Jets were engaged with Fitz re-signig, BEFORE the draft took place. I seriously hope, and I seriously doubt, that the drafting of Hack was meant to be a spur to the Fitz discussions. 

As I said previously, Macc played both sides of this immediately after the draft:

-That Hack would have an opportunity to earn time.

-That it would be in his best interests to allow him to process the game.

I would say that neither "redshirt from day one" and "Hack had every opportunity to time" proponents can argue that the ultimate signing of Fitz (which the Jets seemed to  want to do even as Free Agency was happening, and that continued), pushed Hack to a redshirt candidate. I don't think that is undeniable. And I don't believe that even if Hack looked like Bart Starr in OTAs and summer practice, it would have deterred the Jets from the Fitz pursuit. That seemed like a marriage last March.

I don't know. While not necessarily the purpose, I think he felt it was a good fit to draft a project that could "prove" to Fitzpatrick that he could hold onto the starting job for more than just the upcoming season, and thereby escalate the 2nd/3rd year money in the offer, from $6m to $12m.

That doesn't therefore mean the rookie they drafted - while during a time the two sides supposedly weren't currently speaking - wasn't given the chance to suit up (as starter or as the #2) right from the moment they drafted him. Keep in mind, whether or not Fitz was later signed, two QBs suit up every week. Those that suit up on gameday are not redshirted. 

I'm just saying - and it doesn't even sound like you disagree - that the decision to keep him off the field at all costs didn't happen until they'd had a bunch of practices with him with the team. I was at one over the summer before Fitz was re-signed, and many others attended even more; Hackenberg was getting plenty of reps. If he looked the part as a rookie then they'd have used him, as that was in everyone's interest (especially the GM whom so many say "reached" for Hackenberg that early). Would have been a nice f-you for him.

Hopefully he gets to say that to them all this season.

[Scott Dierking]

6 minutes ago, UntouchableCrew said:

2. He didn't play at all in the Jets first two preseason games, virtually unheard of for a second round pick.

 

Since I had referenced Aaron Rodgers earlier, I thought that I would look at  his rookie pre-season stats. He only played in the 3rd game of that pre-season. He was a 1st round pick.

Unheard of? Hardly.

[Scott Dierking]

2 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I don't know. While not necessarily the purpose, I think he felt it was a good fit to draft a project that could "prove" to Fitzpatrick that he could hold onto the starting job for more than just the upcoming season, and thereby escalate the 2nd/3rd year money in the offer, from $6m to $12m.

That doesn't therefore mean the rookie they drafted - while during a time the two sides supposedly weren't currently speaking - wasn't given the chance to suit up (as starter or as the #2) right from the moment they drafted him. Keep in mind, whether or not Fitz was later signed, two QBs suit up every week. Those that suit up on gameday are not redshirted. 

I'm just saying - and it doesn't even sound like you disagree - that the decision to keep him off the field at all costs didn't happen until they'd had a bunch of practices with him with the team. I was at one over the summer before Fitz was re-signed, and many others attended even more; Hackenberg was getting plenty of reps. If he looked the part as a rookie then they'd have used him, as that was in everyone's interest (especially the GM whom so many say "reached" for Hackenberg that early). Would have been a nice f-you for him.

Hopefully he gets to say that to them all this season.

If Mac drafted Hack as only a prod to Fitz, then shame on him and we are in big trouble. I can't believe that. We seem to be done here. Thanks

[#27TheDominator]

7 minutes ago, thadude said:

Neither one of these clowns Petty or Hack could tie Foley's shoes

 

Petty is a career backup/3rd stringer.  Hack won't even be on an NFL roster in 2018.

Your recollection of Glenn Foley seems to be way too rosy.  Petty is already better.  That isn't saying much, but it is true. 

[peebag]

9 minutes ago, UntouchableCrew said:

1. When he was drafted it was perceived as a huge reach and it was widely reported there were many NFL teams that had him graded as undraftable.

2. He didn't play at all in the Jets first two preseason games, virtually unheard of for a second round pick.

3. In his best sample size of NFL action against the Eagles where he played virtually the whole game he gave one of the worst performances by an NFL QB I have ever seen. At this point it became apparent why he didn't play in the first two preseason games.

4. Despite the fact that the season was a complete and utter disaster at the QB position and we benched our starter and lost our backup for the season it was clear that playing Hackenberg was never even considered. He wasn't even active for almost the entire season -- another project who clearly isn't starting material played ahead of him. Find me a 2nd round QB who wouldn't have played significant minutes under that circumstance.

5. Multiple leaks from outgoing coaches suggesting the kid was simply dreadful. I take these with a grain of salt but the fact that it clearly correlates with everything else I've seen and heard is troubling to say the least.

Look, if people want to roll with the idea that Hack is some huge unknown, more power to them. I just see zero reason to believe in him other than inherent optimism and blind faith in Maccagnan, while there are very clear and obvious indications he's terrible.

Maybe the plan was that since this cat was so young, that they would sit him the entire season so that his first introduction to NFL wasn't a complete mindf*ck.

Now...going forward, if Petty ain't the answer and we don't see a healthy dose of Hackensack....then I'll agree.  But at this point, there's absolutely nothing that says this kid can't play in the NFL.

Nothing.

[UntouchableCrew]

2 minutes ago, Scott Dierking said:

Since I had referenced Aaron Rodgers earlier, I thought that I would look at  his rookie pre-season stats. He only played in the 3rd game of that pre-season. He was a 1st round pick.

Unheard of? Hardly.

No, actually "He received his first extended look in the opening preseason game against the San Diego Chargers after replacing Favre."

Played in his very first preseason game relieving Favre. Not sure where you got your info.

[UntouchableCrew]

2 minutes ago, peebag said:

Maybe the plan was that since this cat was so young, that they would sit him the entire season so that his first introduction to NFL wasn't a complete mindf*ck.

Now...going forward, if Petty ain't the answer and we don't see a healthy dose of Hackensack....then I'll agree.  But at this point, there's absolutely nothing that says this kid can't play in the NFL.

Nothing.

I just think that's naive, wishful thinking and as I outlined there is definitely evidence that he can't play. But to each his own.

[Sperm Edwards]

Just now, Scott Dierking said:

If Mac drafted Hack as only a prod to Fitz, then shame on him and we are in big trouble. I can't believe that. We seem to be done here. Thanks

I don't think he literally chose Hackenberg over someone else because that would help future negotiations with Fitzpatrick. Or I sure hope not, anyway. But it would make sense for him to then use it further the negotiation for a 3-yr deal he left on the table since the winter. Fitz seems to have still scoffed at it anyway, as he still ultimately turned down the multi-year deal. 

Good talk.

[Scott Dierking]

9 minutes ago, UntouchableCrew said:

No, actually "He received his first extended look in the opening preseason game against the San Diego Chargers after replacing Favre."

Played in his very first preseason game relieving Favre. Not sure where you got your info.

My bad, you are correct. The site that I used for stats showed he had nothing for the first 2 games. 

 

[PepPep]

On 3/18/2017 at 10:32 PM, jdeacon said:

Like charlie in its always sunny, hes the ultimate wildcard

[Larz]

its unrealistic to hope that they go into this season with hack and petty.  a veteran will be added

I can only hope that Hack is developed whatever happens and gets reps with the #1's

 

[Big Blocker]

5 hours ago, Bruce Harper said:

I too think the odds are against it but I'd like to see him throw a few balls before I write him off.  And I think they were committed to red-shirting him last year so that he could get his bearings (just like they did with Petty).  I don't think it means they think Petty is better (although he very well could be).  If they were in contention for the playoffs I might be more concerned that Petty went in ahead of him but with nothing substantial to gain by playing Hack last year it is just as likely that they just stuck to their red-shirt plan.

I think the red-shirt stuff was after the fact putting lipstick on a pig.  If he was good enough to play, they would have played him.

[nicg4360]

I'm may be in left field here but does anyone remember petty had the most chemistry with Robby Anderson and pretty much all other receivers were touch and go because he worked with him in practice. Hack had none zero zilch practice time as the 4th qb. Why would they put him out there....I get it he was a 2nd round pick blah blah blah...He was being blanketed because he sucked blah blah blah. He was a forth string QB. Had nothing to do with wether he sucked or not. Regardless of his talent he had no reps with any starters he would have been setup to fail.

Sent from my Moto Z using JetNation.com mobile app

[ChuckkieB]

I really want to believe that Hackenberg will surprise us all in 2018 and become the Jets starting QB, but my jaded outlook and very negative intuition, cultivated by rooting for this team for 40+ years, tells me that Hackenberg is toast.  I've never wanted to be more wrong about anything in my life.

[Dcronin]

How in the hell would anyone here know?

[thadude]

2 hours ago, Big Blocker said:

I think the red-shirt stuff was after the fact putting lipstick on a pig.  If he was good enough to play, they would have played him.

Yes