Chance jets have to face Brady/Tannehill/Trubisky 6 times a yea

[thadude]

2 hours ago, Warfish said:

As a reminder, "sucky Tannehill" beat us and our "elite" defense twice last year.

And he's batting .500 against us in his career so far overall.

As perfectly average as Tanny is, WE would be lucky to have even that level of quality at QB.

 

 

 

Because Bowles's defense was hot garbage last season

 

Ryan Tannehill blows.  Mentally weak QB.  And I'll go on record I don't think Trubisky will be as good as Tyrod Taylor if Buffalo is dumb enough to draft him in the top 10

 

[JiFtheOracle]

13 minutes ago, Warfish said:

You can do whatever you like.

It's within your freedom of expression to sound like an idiot, if that's your thing.

And the "supposedly" only reinforces the idiocy of this line of discussion.  

There is no supposedly, until Hack takes an NFL snap, he's not better than Tannehill. 

It's amazing to me we're even having this exchange.  What an embarrassing fanbase we are some days....

Thank you, I will.

I dont really care what people think and I'm pretty confident my opinion on a particular player, doesnt make me an idiot.  Especially when it's accurate.  

Does that logic not apply to Mitchell Trubisky since he's never taken an NFL snap.  And technically Hack has in the preseason.  

I'm not embarrassed.  Someone started a thread claiming we should all be shaking in our boots at the scary potential of having to face Tannehill and Trubisky twice a year and we're all laughing because that's laughable.  I think you're making this out to be a lot bigger deal than it is. You're calling me an idiot because I'm not afraid of the threat of Tannehill and Trubisky twice a year because supposedly they're better than the Jets QB's.

And there is literally nothing wrong with saying this player sucks when its true, no matter how much better they are than the guy playing the same positoin for the Jets. And in this case that claim is debatable.  Tannehill is awful, he might not be better than McCown.  

Sorry bud, this a Wafish thingy and that' cool but calling us all idiots because we have an opinion?  Really?  That seems pretty silly to me.

 

 

 

 

[jeremy2020]

4 hours ago, Warfish said:

Mock if you like, both are 100x better than any prospect WE have at current.

That doesn't mean much. Half the div1 teams have a better NFL QB than the Jets do right now

[UntouchableCrew]

Seriously guys, Tannehill's best season isn't even better than Fitzpatrick's 2015 season for us, and half the people on this board wanted him gone. The guy is a nobody -- the fact that he's .500 against us for his career is an indictment of him -- we have a losing record during that span. He's the ultimate example of a below average QB who puts up empty stats in crappy seasons.

[thadude]

1 hour ago, Augustiniak said:

seriously. last season he completed 67% of his passes for 19 tds and 12 picks.  

Tannehill has always been a big checkdown guy hence the high completion percentage 

 

watch the tape all his throws are to WR screens or the running back.  He's scared of throwing downfield

 

 

Most overrated player in the NFL 

 

[thadude]

5 minutes ago, UntouchableCrew said:

Seriously guys, Tannehill's best season isn't even better than Fitzpatrick's 2015 season for us, and half the people on this board wanted him gone. The guy is a nobody -- the fact that he's .500 against us for his career is an indictment of him -- we have a losing record during that span. He's the ultimate example of a below average QB who puts up empty stats in crappy seasons.

The fact that the dolphjns had zero drop off at all last year when Matt Moore, who is also a total JAG, became their starter says alot

[Ken Schroy]

Tannehill doesn't scare anyone. Trubisky is a big question mark. I'll take my chances. I don't want Mac reaching for anyone, unless he really sees something when most don't. I doubt it though.

[varjet]

I am not saying that the Jets should use the 6th pick (or another) to draft a QB.

But at this point, unless there is knowledge that we don't know, the Jets do not have a QB as good as Tannehill.  I do not believe that McCown can be called that.  

It would be nice to go straight to a franchise QB, but when you can't do that you just need to keep trying to improve the position and the team as a whole.

I think the best way to do that is to take the best players we can and trade SR and CP for more picks this year.

By my reckoning, Trubisky falls somewhere between the 4-6th best player the Jets can draft this year (below the guaranteed stars, but below those athletically or otherwise flawed).

 

[Warfish]

23 minutes ago, JiF said:

Thank you, I will.

No need to thank me, I did not grant you your rights.

23 minutes ago, JiF said:

I dont really care what people think and I'm pretty confident my opinion on a particular player, doesnt make me an idiot.  Especially when it's accurate.  

Most idiots think they're right.  With that said JiF, I don't think you're an idiot.

23 minutes ago, JiF said:

Does that logic not apply to Mitchell Trubisky since he's never taken an NFL snap.  And technically Hack has in the preseason.  

Yes.  One can say Trubs is a better prospect than Hack, if they like.  But neither has taken a single NFL snap that counts as yet, that would be the extent of it.  

23 minutes ago, JiF said:

I'm not embarrassed.  Someone started a thread claiming we should all be shaking in our boots at the scary potential of having to face Tannehill and Trubisky twice a year and we're all laughing because that's laughable.  I think you're making this out to be a lot bigger deal than it is.

Perhaps.  Perhaps not.  I think people who are literally the worst in the NFL at a thing (in this case, QB) should maybe not talk sh*t about other teams at that spot.  

I also think describing a player who is generally average as a #1 QB as "sucks" is a pretty big reach.

I liken this entire debate to the same kind of foolishness as the "Brady sucks" and "Brady is gay" stuff.  

Given who we have, such talk, by us, is patently laughable.

23 minutes ago, JiF said:

You're calling me an idiot because I'm not afraid of the threat of Tannehill and Trubisky twice a year because supposedly they're better than the Jets QB's.

I'm saying it's idiotic to claim we're better than those QB's today, because it's rather obvious that we're not.

23 minutes ago, JiF said:

Tannehill is awful, he might not be better than McCown.

JN really needs a facepalm gif.

Once again, if we had had the "awful" play of a QB as "awful" as Tannehill the last five years, we may be looking at being int he postseason 4-of-5 of those seasons.

Either you get it or you don't mate, really.  

[Skeptable]

1 hour ago, JiF said:

I will mock because this thread his hysterical.

First off, Trubisky isnt in the league and I would suspect if the Jets really really want him, they can have him.  I would hope that they see that in the history of the NFL, a underclassman with 1 year of starting experience has never worked and therefore, pass on Mitchell, but I digress.  The idea that he is instantly better than McCown, Petty or Hack for that matter, is mock worthy. 

And this thread, wasnt comparing the AFCE QB's.  This thread was created to strike fear into the hearts of Jets fans at the idea of having to face Mitchell Trubisky and Ryan Tannehill 4 out of the 16 games they play.  Forgive me for not shivering in fear from the idea of having to face these 2 amazingly unbeatable QB's.

And I would also like to point out that Southern Jet is an enormous UNC homer.

 

 

 

Well said. 

[JiFtheOracle]

1 minute ago, Warfish said:

No need to thank me, I did not grant you your rights.

Most idiots think they're right.  With that said JiF, I don't think you're an idiot.

Yes.  One can say Trubs is a better prospect than Hack, if they like.  But neither has taken a single NFL snap that counts as yet, that would be the extent of it.  

Perhaps.  Perhaps not.  I think people who are literally the worst in the NFL at a thing (in this case, QB) should maybe not talk sh*t about other teams at that spot.  

I also think describing a player who is generally average as a #1 QB as "sucks" is a pretty big reach.

I liken this entire debate to the same kind of foolishness as the "Brady sucks" and "Brady is gay" stuff.  

Given who we have, such talk, by us, is patently laughable.

I'm saying it's idiotic to claim we're better than those QB's today, because it's rather obvious that we're not.

JN really needs a facepalm gif.

Once again, if we had had the "awful" play of a QB as "awful" as Tannehill the last five years, we may be looking at being int he postseason 4-of-5 of those seasons.

Either you get it or you don't mate, really.  

If I controlled anything that happens with the New York Jets, maybe I'd see your point.  Unfortunately for all of us, I do not.  So everyone is fair game, including Jets players.

 

[Skeptable]

1 hour ago, JiF said:

This whole post is just all sorts of jacked up.

Ryan Tannehill and Mitchel Trubisky will never win a SB.  Ever.  Unless they're a back up somewhere.

So a fan base cant talk sh*t about a player if said player is supposedly better than the player they have playing the same position?  WTF?  Why? Who cares? 

Fitz threw for 4k, 31/15 and you just listed him as the worst QB in the NFL but those stats make Tannehill a good player?  Confusing contradiction, to say the least.

Who cares if they're better than what the Jets have?  They suck and should not be fear by any team, ever. 

The reality is, you dont know if Mitchel will be better than Hack.  At one point, Hack was considered the best NFL QB prospect in the Nation.  Trubisky is a nobody that was created in pre-draft hype.  A 3 star duel threat recruit who couldnt even win the starting job until another player graduated.  He's trying to accomplish something nobody has ever done before.  Hack was the #1 QB prospect in the nation and a 5 star recruit and if you go by just historical references, he technically has  a better shot of succeeding than Trubiksy.

 

 

 

 

Nailed it.

[Skeptable]

42 minutes ago, JiF said:

Thank you, I will.

I dont really care what people think and I'm pretty confident my opinion on a particular player, doesnt make me an idiot.  Especially when it's accurate.  

Does that logic not apply to Mitchell Trubisky since he's never taken an NFL snap.  And technically Hack has in the preseason.  

I'm not embarrassed.  Someone started a thread claiming we should all be shaking in our boots at the scary potential of having to face Tannehill and Trubisky twice a year and we're all laughing because that's laughable.  I think you're making this out to be a lot bigger deal than it is. You're calling me an idiot because I'm not afraid of the threat of Tannehill and Trubisky twice a year because supposedly they're better than the Jets QB's.

And there is literally nothing wrong with saying this player sucks when its true, no matter how much better they are than the guy playing the same positoin for the Jets. And in this case that claim is debatable.  Tannehill is awful, he might not be better than McCown.  

Sorry bud, this a Wafish thingy and that' cool but calling us all idiots because we have an opinion?  Really?  That seems pretty silly to me.

 

 

 

 

Someone else that agrees that McCown might actually be better then Tannehill

[Bleedin Green]

3 minutes ago, Warfish said:

No need to thank me, I did not grant you your rights.

Most idiots think they're right.  With that said JiF, I don't think you're an idiot.

Yes.  One can say Trubs is a better prospect than Hack, if they like.  But neither has taken a single NFL snap that counts as yet, that would be the extent of it.  

Perhaps.  Perhaps not.  I think people who are literally the worst in the NFL at a thing (in this case, QB) should maybe not talk sh*t about other teams at that spot.  

I also think describing a player who is generally average as a #1 QB as "sucks" is a pretty big reach.

I liken this entire debate to the same kind of foolishness as the "Brady sucks" and "Brady is gay" stuff.  

Given who we have, such talk, by us, is patently laughable.

I'm saying it's idiotic to claim we're better than those QB's today, because it's rather obvious that we're not.

JN really needs a facepalm gif.

Once again, if we had had the "awful" play of a QB as "awful" as Tannehill the last five years, we may be looking at being int he postseason 4-of-5 of those seasons.

Either you get it or you don't mate, really.  

Just about the only thing I agree about with this post is JN's need for a facepalm gif.  Your determination of who can or can't judge the quality of a quarterback makes no sense.  If your argument was that bad NFL QBs don't really have room to judge other NFL QBs, you might have an argument there.  When you attempt to apply that to all people, not just players, then by that logic, that means pretty much not one single fan can ever judge any player.  That is, of course, pure nonsense.  Instead, you try to make some sort of connection between the performance of a player/team and the knowledge of their fans, which has literally no connection to each other.  Even if we were to go by this supposed "logic", your own opinion is therefore by default also meaningless and wrong, which creates a bit of conundrum.

Then you seriously try to make some sort of comparison about the supposed similarity of criticizing the play of Tannehill and Brady?  And somehow we should believe a mediocre QB who had his team make the playoffs for the first time in his career, with his backup actually getting them in, would have been a surefire ingredient for the success of past crappy Jets teams.  Never mind that the evidence contradicts that.

While you certainly are making a pretty strong argument that some people don't quite understand how to evaluate QBs, I don't think it really went the way you intended.

[Bleedin Green]

20 minutes ago, JiF said:

If I controlled anything that happens with the New York Jets, maybe I'd see your point.  Unfortunately for all of us, I do not.  So everyone is fair game, including Jets players.

 

No, it's all your fault JiF.  Don't you know that?  Get it together!

[Jet_Engine1]

3 hours ago, Warfish said:

No, the worst QB to get would be, in order:

1. Fitz

2. Geno

3. Sanchez

4. Hack

5. Petty

Not one of those guys can hold Tannehills jockstrap so far in their careers.

I think it's folks like yourself who have it twisted.  When all you have is a steaming wet pile of poop in your hand, you don't have alot of room to make fun of average.

Remind me of Sanchez playoff record vs Tannehills......

 

Just because Mark lost his mind under pressure doesn't erase the fact that while he was the Starting QB of USC, Tannehill was a TA&M Wideout for a reason.

[JiFtheOracle]

5 minutes ago, Bleedin Green said:

Just about the only thing I agree about with this post is JN's need for a facepalm gif.  Your determination of who can or can't judge the quality of a quarterback makes no sense.  If your argument was that bad NFL QBs don't really have room to judge other NFL QBs, you might have an argument there.  When you attempt to apply that to all people, not just players, then by that logic, that means pretty much not one single fan can ever judge any player.  That is, of course, pure nonsense.  Instead, you try to make some sort of connection between the performance of a player/team and the knowledge of their fans, which has literally no connection to each other.  Even if we were to go by this supposed "logic", your own opinion is therefore by default also meaningless and wrong, which creates a bit of conundrum.

Then you seriously try to make some sort of comparison about the supposed similarity of criticizing the play of Tannehill and Brady?  And somehow we should believe a mediocre QB who had his team make the playoffs for the first time in his career, with his backup actually getting them in, would have been a surefire ingredient for the success of past crappy Jets teams.  Never mind that the evidence contradicts that.

While you certainly are making a pretty strong argument that some people don't quite understand how to evaluate QBs, I don't think it really went the way you intended.

The real interesting question under this Warfish logic is, which fan base is allowed to make fun of other teams QB's?  The Pats or the Packers?

[SKILLit]

if we dont get one this year, i hope we bomb it so we get that kid supposedly the next superstar next draft..

[Warfish]

So all the Tannehill haters, tell me this:

If you could go back in time, and have Tannehill play for the Jets the last five years, or let the actual events of the last five years play out exactly like they did, which would you choose and why?

Hint:  It's not about Tannehill being Joe Namath, it's about what we've had being utter and complete incompetant sh*t, and how that fact destroyed some pretty talented rosters in recent years.

[dbatesman]

4 minutes ago, Warfish said:

If you could go back in time, and have Tannehill play for the Jets the last five years, or let the actual events of the last five years play out exactly like they did, which would you choose and why?

If Tannehill played for the Jets the last five years, the actual events of the last five years would have played out exactly like they did.

[Lil Woody]

6 minutes ago, Warfish said:

So all the Tannehill haters, tell me this:

If you could go back in time, and have Tannehill play for the Jets the last five years, or let the actual events of the last five years play out exactly like they did, which would you choose and why?

Hint:  It's not about Tannehill being Joe Namath, it's about what we've had being utter and complete incompetant sh*t, and how that fact destroyed some pretty talented rosters in recent years.

Seems to me you are asking if I would rather be mired in mediocrity and have a guy just good enough to keep losing with or would I rather be in rebuild?

I guess I'd rather be in rebuild. 

Why? Because ascension is better than stagnation.

[Warfish]

Just now, Lil Woody said:

Seems to me you are asking if I would rather be mired in mediocrity and have a guy just good enough to keep losing with or would I rather be in rebuild?

I guess I'd rather be in rebuild. 

Why? Because ascension is better than stagnation.

You see a lot of "ascension" these past five years?

You see alot of it now?

/facepalmmadeoffacepalms

[Lil Woody]

Just now, Warfish said:

You see a lot of "ascension" these past five years?

You see alot of it now?

/facepalmmadeoffacepalms

That's not what you said though. You asked would I rather be stuck with Tannenhill or be exactly where we are right now?

Tannenhill = stagnation

Rebuild = ascension - or at least the chance at one.

Both options suck. One has some potential to not suck.

[mkajet01]

Love Trubisky

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[Jet Nut]

7 hours ago, SouthernJet said:

It appears Bills making big push for Trubisky if he is still there when they pick. Typical Jets Luck. Good luck next 4 years.

If you like a guy take him higher than you have him boarded, cause someone else has him high also. ...Polian

Too bad we don't teams teams without a QB most sundays.  What luck, a rookie QB and a mediocre Tannehill.  

Never mind if we like Trubinski we can just draft him.  

Love the Jets fan paranoia act

[rangerous]

8 hours ago, T0mShane said:

I'll take 4-2 every year. That'd be ok

yeah those two bills losses will sting.

[rangerous]

2 hours ago, Warfish said:

So all the Tannehill haters, tell me this:

If you could go back in time, and have Tannehill play for the Jets the last five years, or let the actual events of the last five years play out exactly like they did, which would you choose and why?

Hint:  It's not about Tannehill being Joe Namath, it's about what we've had being utter and complete incompetant sh*t, and how that fact destroyed some pretty talented rosters in recent years.

i don't think it would've mattered.  tannenhill would've failed here just as much as any other qb.  that's just the way it's been.  and with tannnenhill we would've seen a crybaby like the second coming of dave brown.

[thadude]

2 hours ago, Warfish said:

So all the Tannehill haters, tell me this:

If you could go back in time, and have Tannehill play for the Jets the last five years, or let the actual events of the last five years play out exactly like they did, which would you choose and why?

Hint:  It's not about Tannehill being Joe Namath, it's about what we've had being utter and complete incompetant sh*t, and how that fact destroyed some pretty talented rosters in recent years.

Tannehill is not good, never was, and yes I would take your boy Fitzputrid over him

 

Watch the games, he's Captain Checkdown 

[thadude]

2 hours ago, dbatesman said:

If Tannehill played for the Jets the last five years, the actual events of the last five years would have played out exactly like they did.

Aside from 2015 the Dolphins always had better rosters than us

 

How anyone can consider Tannehill "good" is mind boggling 

[ZachEY]

In sum, if you're a fan of a bad team, you can't offer objective analysis because, glass houses and such.

[Lil Woody]

13 hours ago, gEYno said:

In sum, if you're a fan of a bad team, you can't offer objective analysis because, glass houses and such.

I call that the "Oh yeah who's YOUR team?" defense. 

 

Jets fan: "Man the 49ers suck. Their ownership is a mess and they just can't get out of their own way."

49ers fan: "Oh yeah? WHO'S YOUR TEAM???"

Jets fan: "The Jets"

49ers fan: "HAHAHA. What do YOU know about anything then?"

Jets fan: "I'd say quite a bit. I played through High School, gave my best shot in college during the open tryouts but just wasn't good enough unfortunately.  I now coach the game. I've been an insanely passionate fan for almost 40 years. I follow all teams and most of the major college conferences.  I have studies all aspects of the game to an unhealthy level and even care about the minutia of salary caps and league bylaws that most fans don't bother with and I have read just about every book out there. I became a Jets fan because my Dad used to take me to the games as a kid and that was some of my favorite childhood memories. What about you?"

49ers fan: "Uhhhhhh. the Jets suck!"

Jets fan: "Oh, ok."

 

As if a fan of a sport is able or unable to provide a fair and objective analysis or carry on a conversation based of the whether or not the local team that he prefers has had success recently.  It is by far the stupidest fan response I have ever heard.  I've met very knowledgeable Browns fans who I had very good conversations with.  Alternatively I have seen soooo many Patriots and Giants fans who are just ESPN regurgitators without a single thought of their own. 

And if any of you guys use the "Who's YOUR team?" defense. Please stop. It makes you look really dumb.

[Maxman]

On 4/12/2017 at 9:28 AM, JiF said:

Tannehill and Trubisky lol

I thought the same thing. Plus with Brady in his 40's his run is almost over.

The division will look much better in a year or two from the Jets perspective.

[Warfish]

1 hour ago, Lil Woody said:

And if any of you guys use the "Who's YOUR team?" defense. Please stop. It makes you look really dumb.

The objectivity and perspective of Jets Fans is questionable at best.

For example, Jet fans routinely, to this day, say "Brady sucks".  The greatest QB in NFL history.

Jet Fans defend pathetic performance by our QB's (who apparently don't "suck"), like Geno Smith, Mark Sanchez and Fitzy.  

And yet we loudly, arrogantly, proclaim other QB's whose production is solid (average) as being literally the worst QB's in the league.

We proclaim Hack "better" than Trubisky, despite them not being considered equivalent by anyone outside NY, and Hack having a year in the pros where he was incappable of taking a snap outside one, short and ineffective, preseason appearance.

That's not the "whose your team" defense.  

Once again, folks can say they prefer Geno, or Fitz, to Tannehill.  Best of luck making that argument, given that a Tannehill-led Jets team, with the talent we had, is likely a contender every year the guy's been in the league, and the guys we've had were contenders exactly once in that time.

There is far too much an "all or nothing" attitude here about QB.  We've had nothing, for a loooooong time.  Personally I'll take "NFL average" over nothing, rather than just call everyone sh*t until we luck into the next Payton Manning.

Average QB play, which Tannehill provides, goes a long way to competativeness in the NFL.

[dbatesman]

1 minute ago, Warfish said:

The objectivity and perspective of Jets Fans is questionable at best.

For example, Jet fans routinely, to this day, say "Brady sucks".  The greatest QB in NFL history.

Jet Fans defend pathetic performance by our QB's (who apparently don't "suck"), like Geno Smith, Mark Sanchez and Fitzy.  

And yet we loudly, arrogantly, proclaim other QB's whose production is solid (average) as being literally the worst QB's in the league.

We proclaim Hack "better" than Trubisky, despite them not being considered equivalent by anyone outside NY, and Hack having a year in the pros where he was incappable of taking a snap outside one, short and ineffective, preseason appearance.

That's not the "whose your team" defense.  

Once again, folks can say they prefer Geno, or Fitz, to Tannehill.  Best of luck making that argument, given that a Tannehill-led Jets team, with the talent we had, is likely a contender every year the guy's been in the league, and the guys we've had were contenders exactly once in that time.

There is far too much an "all or nothing" attitude here about QB.  We've had nothing, for a loooooong time.  Personally I'll take "NFL average" over nothing, rather than just call everyone sh*t until we luck into the next Payton Manning.

Average QB play, which Tannehill provides, goes a long way to competativeness in the NFL.

The only thing questionable is how someone can waste as many words being laughably wrong as you do. Tannehill has had exactly one average season, and the Dolphins finished 8-8 that year. But by all means, hit us with some more objectivity about how the Jets would be a contender every year with a guy who's never appeared in a playoff game (and choked away two different chances to do so to the Rex/Geno Jets), gets sacked about as often as Blake Bortles, and whose career ANY/A puts him slightly ahead of Alex Smith and slightly behind Jay Cutler among active QBs.

[ZachEY]

2 hours ago, dbatesman said:

The only thing questionable is how someone can waste as many words being laughably wrong as you do. Tannehill has had exactly one average season, and the Dolphins finished 8-8 that year. But by all means, hit us with some more objectivity about how the Jets would be a contender every year with a guy who's never appeared in a playoff game (and choked away two different chances to do so to the Rex/Geno Jets), gets sacked about as often as Blake Bortles, and whose career ANY/A puts him slightly ahead of Alex Smith and slightly behind Jay Cutler among active QBs.

The argument for Tannenhill is akin to saying I'd rather make $9 an hour than $8.  Yeah, you're better off, but you're still poor.