Implications for Hackenberg of drafting or not drafting a QB at #6

[dbatesman]

10 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

Second round picks are like throwaway picks that can be wantonly tossed in the fire. Fourth round picks are practically encumbrances. Neither 2nd nor 4th round picks should even count in the extremely rare instances where they lol "makes a roster." AS. IF. I sometimes buy flat screen TVs to stack in front of the flat screens I bought last week. 

should of thrown in a 2nd in the Clady trade, rare missed opportunity for Maccc

[RutgersJetFan]

22 minutes ago, Lil Woody said:

Who cares/ It's just the business side of it. What does it matter how much we spent?

I know about one group of people who definitely care.

[JoJoTownsell1]

2 hours ago, thadude said:

Way things are going we are headed towards a 1-15 season.  If we draft a safety at 6 we might not win a game next year

If the difference between us winning zero games and winning a few games comes down to whether we draft or not then we are likely winning zero games no matter what. 

[JoJoTownsell1]

2 hours ago, JETSfaninNE said:

I voted disagree on both.  I don't think picking a QB at 6 or not picking one at 6 is an admission either way.  If they pick one at 6 that just means they see someone with MORE potential than Petty and Hack.  If they don't pick a QB at 6 that doesn't mean their opinion on Hack is any different, he will be judged appropriately in TC/PS.

Agreed. If they love one of the QBs, they should take him. Regardless of what they think of hack. And if they don't like any of these QBs they shouldn't take him even if they hate hack. 

Forcing a pick based on needs for a team as bad as this is a recipe for disaster. And that's especially true at QB. 

More importantly, this draft has no sure thing at QB but has a ton of depth with guys like trubisky, Watson, kizer, mahomes, Peterman, kaaya, Kelly, Webb... So there is no need to force a pick at 6 when you can find a relatively equal prospect in the later rounds and hope to pull a Dak/Wilson miracle. 

[thadude]

2 hours ago, Lil Woody said:

Who cares/ It's just the business side of it. What does it matter how much we spent? The guy is on a 1 year deal with no guaranteed dollars pushed towards the following season like that idiot Fitz signing. It's not like there were some great FAs we missed out on as a result. We went for the FA targets, got what we needed to fill holes and then got McCown.

McCown is more of a waste of time than a waste of $.  He's a terrible player in his mid-30's who won't be here after next season

 

Shoulda drafted another Qb and have all 3 compete instead

[thadude]

2 hours ago, dbatesman said:

should of thrown in a 2nd in the Clady trade, rare missed opportunity for Maccc

We should give our next 10 2nd round picks to New England for the rights to Aaron Hernandez that way we can draft a safety at 6

[thadude]

55 minutes ago, JoJoTownsell1 said:

If the difference between us winning zero games and winning a few games comes down to whether we draft or not then we are likely winning zero games no matter what. 

I'm so sick of us picking mediocre defensive players every year

[Rangers9]

If we draft Trebusky or Watson it means that Hack or Petty not in long range plans. Probably a Qb selected that high will be our starter sometime in 2017. If we draft a Qb in like round 5 or 6 then Hack has a chance. The idea of bringing in a bunch of young Qbs into camp to me is not a great strategy. There is limited playing time and reps so better to make a decision and commit to one guy. We have a good vet Qb on the roster but unfortunately he is injury prone. If he starts I don't see him lasting an entire year. Plus the guy is 38.

[Fantasy Island]

8 hours ago, thadude said:

I still don't understand why we signed Josh McCown

Because they know the chances of Hackenberg starting are the same as winning the lottery.  Mac screwed up, plain and simple.  Bad picks happen to every team.  He should just cut his losses and try drafting a QB again this year and the next and the next until we get it right.

[JoJoTownsell1]

11 minutes ago, thadude said:

I'm so sick of us picking mediocre defensive players every year

Leonard Williams isn't mediocre, but I tend to agree.  Bowles is a defensive coach, let him use that skill set to work magic on the defensive side of the ball with the numerous first round picks we currently have on our roster (Williams/Mo/Sheldon/Pryor/Lee/Claiborne). 

Meanwhile, we have only 1 first rounder on the offensive side of the ball and that's Carpenter and he was a late first rounder. 

If Bowles can't make the defense work with all that talent (even if some of those guys aren't as good as we had hoped), then why keep Bowles around?  

[Rangers9]

If they draft one of those guys high I could see them trading either Petty or Hack, whoever  gives them the best return. There was some interest in Petty last season with the number of injuries of Qbs. Then they got a chance to see him play so maybe not so much interest. 

[section314]

13 hours ago, j4jets said:

Didn't you say that for all the tests you failed, including the one you took with a cup in your hand?

LOL....I'm like LT used to be, get other guys to pee for me.

[Paradis]

23 hours ago, Sarge4Tide said:

What does it say about Hackenberg if the Jets draft or do not draft) a QB at #6?

It's both an admission but also jockeying about how to keep his job. Drafting a QB at 6 is a minefield for the GM when it comes to handling the team's QB position in 2017

[thadude]

15 hours ago, Fantasy Island said:

Because they know the chances of Hackenberg starting are the same as winning the lottery.  Mac screwed up, plain and simple.  Bad picks happen to every team.  He should just cut his losses and try drafting a QB again this year and the next and the next until we get it right.

I thought Mac's philosophy was draft a QB every year til you get one?  So why sign an old piece of crap like McClown?

 

 

Agree if Mac actually has any conviction he would have stuck to his philosophy and drafted another one this year.  Not necessarily in the first round but anywhere in rounds 2-7

[thadude]

14 hours ago, JoJoTownsell1 said:

Leonard Williams isn't mediocre, but I tend to agree.  Bowles is a defensive coach, let him use that skill set to work magic on the defensive side of the ball with the numerous first round picks we currently have on our roster (Williams/Mo/Sheldon/Pryor/Lee/Claiborne). 

Meanwhile, we have only 1 first rounder on the offensive side of the ball and that's Carpenter and he was a late first rounder. 

If Bowles can't make the defense work with all that talent (even if some of those guys aren't as good as we had hoped), then why keep Bowles around?  

We're drafting nothing but defense again this year for the umpteenth time in a row and I guarantee Tom Brafy will have zero issue with lighting these scrubs up

[Fantasy Island]

1 hour ago, thadude said:

I thought Mac's philosophy was draft a QB every year til you get one?  So why sign an old piece of crap like McClown?

 

 

Agree if Mac actually has any conviction he would have stuck to his philosophy and drafted another one this year.  Not necessarily in the first round but anywhere in rounds 2-7

Suggesting Mac has a plan is being way too kind.

[rangerous]

21 hours ago, JoJoTownsell1 said:

Exactly. I don't think mccown is good enough to win games on his own. I'm all for tanking but you also need a borderline competent QB to help develop the young wrs and properly evaluate the line. Either way, if he gets the job he'll likely get hurt before he wins too many games.

i get the part about "tanking' to land a great qb prospect but the key word here is prospect. for that reason i hope this team fights like nails each and every game. i also hope mccown doesn't start game 1. lwt it be hack or petty or someone else.

and let me add that there have been quite a few pumped up usc qb's over the past 15 seasons and none has been worth anything.  remember leinart? that guy was great in college but then went hollywood when he got drafted.  maybe darnold is the guy. i'd just be very careful.

[Lil Woody]

9 minutes ago, rangerous said:

 let me add that there have been quite a few pumped up usc qb's over the past 15 seasons and none has been worth anything. 

That's meaningless imo. Stanford couldn't produce a QB after Elway until Luck came by.  Notre Dame hasn't produced sh*t since Montana. Nobody from Tennessee since Manning. Elite QBs are exceptionally rare. Name me the QB schools we are supposed to be drafting from.  Even the best ones only produce one or maybe two great QBs over time. Here's an article on which schools can be considered QB U.  Check out the names of the players they produced over the past 25 years. How many fit the criteria of success we are looking for?

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000359077/article/what-school-is-qb-u-usc-among-teams-that-can-make-claim

[rangerous]

6 minutes ago, Lil Woody said:

That's meaningless imo. Stanford couldn't produce a QB after Elway until Luck came by.  Notre Dame hasn't produced sh*t since Montana. Nobody from Tennessee since Manning. Elite QBs are exceptionally rare. Name me the QB schools we are supposed to be drafting from.  Even the best ones only produce one or maybe two great QBs over time. Here's an article on which schools can be considered QB U.  Check out the names of the players they produced over the past 25 years. How many fit the criteria of success we are looking for?

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000359077/article/what-school-is-qb-u-usc-among-teams-that-can-make-claim

yep, usc has really produced some qb all pros, not.  my point is usc pumps up their players, especially qb's and especially for the past ten years.  rodney peete? todd marinovich?  really? the only qb on that list that has amounted to anything is palmer followed by sanchez.  the rest are pretty much over hyped scrubs. i'm just sayin they need to be very careful when looking at darnold.

[Lil Woody]

18 minutes ago, rangerous said:

yep, usc has really produced some qb all pros, not.  my point is usc pumps up their players, especially qb's and especially for the past ten years.  rodney peete? todd marinovich?  really? the only qb on that list that has amounted to anything is palmer followed by sanchez.  the rest are pretty much over hyped scrubs. i'm just sayin they need to be very careful when looking at darnold.

I agree. But my point was just that a schools history doesn't mean much at all. All of them were underwhelming. It's always just about the prospect in front of you. Whatever campus they got their cocks sucked on shouldn't really be part of the decision making process imo, unless maybe we are looking at positional coaching and if there were elements of a pro-style of offense.

[thadude]

On April 15, 2017 at 1:50 PM, Fantasy Island said:

Suggesting Mac has a plan is being way too kind.

There is no plan

 

Mac actually is not doing "Suck for Sam" --- that's what's so depressing about this offseason

[Big Blocker]

I said Agree on both questions. I did not go with strongly agree since they might not pick a Qb at 6 if Trubinsky has been taken by someone else, and I can't predict if they will take Watson there in such a situation. 

But in any event I am reasonably sure that the Jets are already down on Hackenberg's prospects.