Jump to content

What Would it Take for Hack to be the Starter in 2018?


Skeptable

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Skeptable said:

"mildly approach the way you referred to non-likeminded/non-conforming Jets fans as merely being trolls?" You think you are bucking some trend... You are the majority... The pessimistic view is the only view in Most Jets fans minds right now... 

Elite Safeties are more important then they ever have been in the NFL and teams are moving into this trend whether the fans see it or not...

ok?

ok?

None of this makes you right and me wrong... That is your opinion and I have mine... You say I refuse to accept something that has not been tested... That is true... I refuse to accept it... YOU SAY he has been tested but YOU are making assumptions about what the coaching staff is telling the fans... BUT THEY ARE ASSUMPTIONS... Move on... He hasn't played yet... If he doesn't play this year... You are right it means that he failed... Not playing in his rookie season is not a failure.... Period Stop....

You're the one who referred to those whom you disagree with as trolls, as though the issues many have with this FO/CS, or the players they've chosen, have no rational basis. I reserve my ire for the lousy Jets or those that made them Jets, not other fans. If you can't see a difference, go reread. It has nothing to do with trends or majorities or minorirties of opinion.

There's no basis for saying elite safeties are more important than they've ever been in NFL history. If it was true then there's no way Adams lasts to #6 in a draft that had no over-the-top-elite prospects at QB, LT, CB or WR. Today, RB is way down from where the position used to be valued, and a 2-down RB whose style doesn't point to a long career, was valued over safety. There were two safeties projected to go in the top 5-6 overall, but when it came time for teams to actually make their picks, nobody broke our door down to move up for Adams, and nobody else touched another safety until #15 in the most safety-rich draft in memory. Even with some inflation-driven safety contracts just-redone this year, there still isn't a safety in the NFL among the top 50 earners, and that'll drop even further once another year of others' contracts expire. So the assertion simply isn't factually true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 338
  • Created
  • Last Reply
On 7/5/2017 at 8:48 AM, thadude said:

What an amazing concept Hack has to actually outplay the other  qb's in practice and preaseason to earn the starting job

Its a flat IDIOTIC concept. No reason to think a 2nd year QB will outplay a 14 year veteran. What you look at is potential, and daily improvement.

You are SO trolling negative on Hack. What is your QB solution?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, johnnysd said:

Its a flat IDIOTIC concept. No reason to think a 2nd year QB will outplay a 14 year veteran. What you look at is potential, and daily improvement.

You are SO trolling negative on Hack. What is your QB solution?

 

Who cares if McCown is a 14 year veteran he is not good

 

But neither is Hackenberg

 

 

Gee I wonder if Dak Prescott or Carson Wentz could outplay McCown in TC and preseason.  He has soooo much experience 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

There's no basis for saying elite safeties are more important than they've ever been in NFL history. If it was true then there's no way Adams lasts to #6 in a draft that had no over-the-top-elite prospects at QB, LT, CB or WR. Today, RB is way down from where the position used to be valued, and a 2-down RB whose style doesn't point to a long career, was valued over safety. There were two safeties projected to go in the top 5-6 overall, but when it came time for teams to actually make their picks, nobody broke our door down to move up for Adams, and nobody else touched another safety until #15 in the most safety-rich draft in memory. Even with some inflation-driven safety contracts just-redone this year, there still isn't a safety in the NFL among the top 50 earners, and that'll drop even further once another year of others' contracts expire. So the assertion simply isn't factually true.

Damn you!

Also, this is where we are as a species right now... My opinion is just as good as yours even though mine is backed by my feelings and yours is backed by a mountain of facts... It is what it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, johnnysd said:

Its a flat IDIOTIC concept. No reason to think a 2nd year QB will outplay a 14 year veteran. What you look at is potential, and daily improvement.

You are SO trolling negative on Hack. What is your QB solution?

It's idiotic to think that a 2nd year QB should outplay a guy who's won 8 games in 10 years if he's going to start?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, thadude said:

Who cares if McCown is a 14 year veteran he is not good

 

But neither is Hackenberg

 

 

Gee I wonder if Dak Prescott or Carson Wentz could outplay McCown in TC and preseason.  He has soooo much experience 

 

Awesome non answer. You are just a troll.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, gEYno said:

It's idiotic to think that a 2nd year QB should outplay a guy who's won 8 games in 10 years if he's going to start?

Yes in the timeframe of TC. I have no doubt that both Petty and Hack will be better than him after a few regular season games. It's an idiotic arbitrary hurdle that does nothing to help the Jets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/30/2017 at 10:13 AM, Sperm Edwards said:

It's not about proving me right or wrong. My issue is more with statements akin to: When he gets onto the field he'll either perform acceptably or he'll exhibit general failure.

This uses the weak excuse, that Hackenberg hasn't yet failed on an NFL field in a regular season game, to suggest these 2 outcomes have an equal 1 in 2 chance of occurring. Like flipping a penny: it'll either come up heads or it'll come up tails. This has been discussed before recently.

The problem is, in using this type of logic, I could make the same excuse for literally anybody on planet earth having such a 50/50 chance at being a good NFL QB. Not just Hackenberg, but you or I as well.

In reality, he has an infinitely better chance than you or I, but it still isn't as good as 50/50 based on his body of work to date. He was considered a long shot prospect who needed serious muscle memory work that could take years to truly become 2nd-nature (if it ever takes), even under duress, rather than a merely raw prospect who needed experience in a relatively foreign system. Yet we still took him in the 2nd round against better advice. He was so much worse than expected that we carried 4 QBs last year and wouldn't even let him on the field in a single, meaningless, December game.

If a GM wants to look like a genius for making a questionable pick that pans out, he should prepare for the proportional opposite of such kudos if the pick fails as expected. It's why "reach" picks are scrutinized every year, even though they sometimes pan out. 

 I disagree with this one. Hack played college ball and had some success at least early on. Enough success that Mac used a second round pick on him. You or I or anyone on the planet who has not played at the collegiate level could never be considered to play in the NFL. At least by today's standards. So I disagree with the given example. I get your point though.

 I don't think Hack will measure up. He may yet be a serviceable NFL QB but until he proves it in game action I have a lot of doubts. You are 100% right about his play to date and make no mistake I don't think the guy should have been picked at all much less in the second round.

 I thought then and still do now that Mac thinks he has an "eye" for talent and goes against his scouts and guys around him on draft picks. What else could explain some of the picks this man has made? The fact that none of his picks (except for the no brainer ones) have panned out supports this. When all is said and done I'm pretty sure that Bowles will be toast this off season with Mac to follow this season or next.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, johnnysd said:

Yes in the timeframe of TC. I have no doubt that both Petty and Hack will be better than him after a few regular season games. It's an idiotic arbitrary hurdle that does nothing to help the Jets

I disagree.  And, despite the fact that I agree that thadude is generally a troll, I don't disagree with his question regarding Wentz or Prescott.

There is one definitive measure of better just like there's no definitive measure of BAP.  So, maybe Hack makes more mistakes but also makes more big plays.  That's better enough to start over McCown.  But, if heading into the season, McCown is clearly the best QB on the roster, then 1) he should start, and 2) that's pretty damning of a 2nd year-2nd round QB.  Once again, 8 wins in 10 years.  So, it's not idiotic, or arbitrary, and it's hardly a hurdle.  It's more like a curb to be stepped over.  If Hack can't step over the curb, I'm not willing to risk the development of every other young player on offense just to "see what we have" in Hack, because at that point, we'd already know.

Also, how can you have "no doubt" that Petty and Hack will be better than McCown?  Petty has played a few games, and thus far, he is not.  And Hack has not shown anything positive in years.  "No doubt" sounds more like wishful thinking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, gEYno said:

I disagree.  And, despite the fact that I agree that thadude is generally a troll, I don't disagree with his question regarding Wentz or Prescott.

There is one definitive measure of better just like there's no definitive measure of BAP.  So, maybe Hack makes more mistakes but also makes more big plays.  That's better enough to start over McCown.  But, if heading into the season, McCown is clearly the best QB on the roster, then 1) he should start, and 2) that's pretty damning of a 2nd year-2nd round QB.  Once again, 8 wins in 10 years.  So, it's not idiotic, or arbitrary, and it's hardly a hurdle.  It's more like a curb to be stepped over.  If Hack can't step over the curb, I'm not willing to risk the development of every other young player on offense just to "see what we have" in Hack, because at that point, we'd already know.

Also, how can you have "no doubt" that Petty and Hack will be better than McCown?  Petty has played a few games, and thus far, he is not.  And Hack has not shown anything positive in years.  "No doubt" sounds more like wishful thinking.

I do not agree with a single word. You develop a young QB but committing 100% to him. The half measures that Jets apply and this nonsense of having to beat out McCown is a guaranteed method of continuing the QB merry go round. As long as Hack shows improvement and hard work you start him completely regardless of whether McCown is better on opening day

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, johnnysd said:

I do not agree with a single word. You develop a young QB but committing 100% to him. The half measures that Jets apply and this nonsense of having to beat out McCown is a guaranteed method of continuing the QB merry go round. As long as Hack shows improvement and hard work you start him completely regardless of whether McCown is better on opening day

Hack didn't merit a roster spot last year and only got one because of his draft position with the team holding 4 QBs.  He could "improve" and still only merit being a 3rd string QB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, gEYno said:

Hack didn't merit a roster spot last year and only got one because of his draft position with the team holding 4 QBs.  He could "improve" and still only merit being a 3rd string QB.

Fans do not decide the merit of roster spots, GMs do. regardless the genius of the fans and what they think they know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Scott Dierking said:

Fans do not decide the merit of roster spots, GMs do. regardless the genius of the fans and what they think they know.

Cool - so lets shut down the board because in the end, the GMs and the coaches are the ones who make the decisions, so what are we doing here again?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...