Jump to content

The Mike Glennon era is off to one heck of a start


RutgersJetFan

Recommended Posts

Confirming, Villian at the time said he did not want GLENNON at the rate Chicago paid.

He REALLY wanted GLENNON but we'll never truly know how much he'd have supported spending, because WE didn't sign him.

Thus we should take Villian at his word. He wouldn't have paid what Chicago did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 172
  • Created
  • Last Reply
16 hours ago, Smashmouth said:

When did I say it would be so much more for the Jets ? I was assuming a multiyear deal in the range of 18 mil per. for Glennon which would have been much worse than the 12 mil one year deal we gave Fitz and its not even close.

If you think for a sec the Jets and the entire organization didn't think they were playoff capable last year then you're the one not thinking.

If the Jets felt they were not playoff capable they would not have signed a few more 30 + vets last year and they certainly would not have signed Fitz. 

Also if you think the GM does not sit down and discuss the state of the team and how he proceeds to move forward with the owner of said team once again you're not thinking. With that being said the Moves Macc made, made it clear they felt they could make one last run, just like the moves he made this off-season made it clear we are in a full rebuild mode and probably intend to tank for a high pick. When I say TANK I mean tank by default.... of course the players and coaches always try to win but you can't win with a roster that's just been gutted to add all new young players unless somehow all those players happen to play at a very unexpected high level. Like they did aganist the Fins.

Glennon's deal is $15m/year with $18m guaranteed. Why would the Jets pay so much more than that? 

I surely do think he has discussions with the owner. What of it? It certainly doesn't mean the owner is force-feeding which players he must add regardless of cost, since his predecessor(s) surely had the same arrangement (unless you have actual knowledge to the contrary).

The only option left is the baseless idea that Maccagnan's first 2 seasons were the only ones in which Woody's GM was forced to employ the owner's plan instead of what the GM really wanted. 

Its entirely possible for Maccagnan to be a substandard GM independent of Woody. It's hardly far-fetched, since Woody's the one who hired him. The alternative idea is Maccagnan - the orchestrator of garbage - is the lone decision Woody ever got right. Lol to that suggestion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, batman10023 said:

The guys on here complaining about the pussification of the game aren't going to stop until someone dies.  And even then they are going to complain. 

"Football is war, there are always going to be casualties.  I don't watch games to see flags thrown!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/28/2017 at 9:59 PM, Sperm Edwards said:

Perhaps. Mind you, I don't have a dog in this race, but here's the funny part.

The time @Villain The Foe was having the most fun littering the most threads in advocating for getting Glennon was the prior year (2016) than this past offseason. At the time it would have allegedly cost a 2nd rounder, but back then Glennon still had a year left on his contract - plus the ability to tag him this year if needed - for a cheap-$ tryout. So we wouldn't need (and wouldn't have done) the $18m guaranteed Chicago gave him to be the top bidder. 

This means the net would have been

  • missing out on drafting Christian Hackenberg (~$3-4m savings, depending on when he gets cut)
  • failing to re-sign Ryan Fitzpatrick, whose cap hit is/was higher ($12m savings)
  • pay Glennon ~$1.7m for the 2016 season, where any extension beyond that could've been a non-guaranteed team option at a high amount ($15m+/year) that we wouldn't end up paying.

Net savings: $13-14m over doing what we did instead.

Then there's the further chance - if the stories are to be believed that someone else would have grabbed Hack before our 3rd round pick - that the next-best QB on our board would have been Dak Prescott, and maybe we'd have grabbed him in round 3 or 4. Then Glennon would have been let go to FA in 2017, or retained as a backup for 1/3 or less (of what he's getting now). If let go in 2017 (don't exercise team option for extension), we'd recover a comp pick in 2018.

Indirectly, trading our (2016) 2nd rounder to Washington for him may have been a far better move than what we did instead.

One-upping Chicago for him in 2017 though? Yeah, bullet dodged. Or it certainly looks that way so far.

This is a fantastic defense of Villan, and I am inclined to give you a star for the day for this fabulous post. The only slight problem is, Villan's argument had nothing to do with anything you posted, and everything to do with the fact that Villan thought he was a legitimate starting NFL QB. I am not one to burry a QB this early on, and I think Chicago's offensive offense plays into his struggles, but Villan has gone to bat vehemently for Geno Smith and Glennon now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, NoBowles said:

This is a fantastic defense of Villan, and I am inclined to give you a star for the day for this fabulous post. The only slight problem is, Villan's argument had nothing to do with anything you posted, and everything to do with the fact that Villan thought he was a legitimate starting NFL QB. I am not one to burry a QB this early on, and I think Chicago's offensive offense plays into his struggles, but Villan has gone to bat vehemently for Geno Smith and Glennon now. 

You should probably learn to spell elementary school words before trying to poke fun at anybody.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

You should probably learn to spell elementary school words before trying to poke fun at anybody.

Poke fun? At a demigod like you? Never.

as for the spelling, yeah, I'm litery the warlds werst ever speller. But my W2's have been aight despite my misfortunes.

but I digest 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/29/2017 at 11:20 AM, Dcat said:

geez your post is as dumb as a door knob.  Play was over, Adams was already wrapped up, "defenseless" player... it's in the rules genius, look it up.  :rolleyes:

Hmmmm you must have time to criticize others. Interesting.

thats a persnal attack too chachie

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/29/2017 at 4:01 PM, The Crusher said:

I still miss Dexter McDougle in case anybody was wandering. 

"That's the old Crusher place. They say that at midnight on football Sundays, if you're real quiet, you can still hear the booming stomps as he wanders the halls calling out, searching for his long lost cornerback.

"Deeeeeeexterrrrr. Deeeeeeeeeeeexterrrrrrrrr."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/30/2017 at 6:20 PM, Bleedin Green said:

No person in the history of all of the interwebs does a better job of patting themselves on the back about something they were wrong about than good ole Villain.  It's pretty much his trademark at this point.

I take being wrong in stride just as I do being correct. Difference isn't me, but those who are around when I'm wrong and not around when I'm right. ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/30/2017 at 10:43 PM, NoBowles said:

This is a fantastic defense of Villan, and I am inclined to give you a star for the day for this fabulous post. The only slight problem is, Villan's argument had nothing to do with anything you posted, and everything to do with the fact that Villan thought he was a legitimate starting NFL QB. I am not one to burry a QB this early on, and I think Chicago's offensive offense plays into his struggles, but Villan has gone to bat vehemently for Geno Smith and Glennon now. 

I'm also going to bat for Baker Mayfield. 

Oh, and I went to bat for Geno to get the start over Fitz because Fitz had no future here, Geno had the possibility of having one. 

I feel the same way today about McCown starting over Petty, that doesn't mean that I think Petty is a legit starting qb or if my thoughts on Petty, Geno, Glennon are all equally the same. It's called circumstances. McCown has no future here after fans scream to pay him 12 million next year because he played better than Glennon and won just enough games to miss the playoffs. 

Then we would have wasted the opportunity to see on the field Petty as well as Hack in his 3rd season...for a guy who has no future after signing him to a stupid contract that fans will quickly pretend like they didn't support in order to talk about how Villain was wrong on Glennon.

 

Lol. I come here just for these two threads. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More bad news for Glennon. After learning that he'll be benched for Trubisky after a 1-3 start, an anonymously leaked sex tape has surfaced that reportedly shows the 27 year old signal caller engaged in an explicit sexual act. Here is an exclusive clip from the nearly 18 minute long video:

 

 

man_file_1066419_1162533.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Villain The Foe said:

I'm also going to bat for Baker Mayfield. 

Oh, and I went to bat for Geno to get the start over Fitz because Fitz had no future here, Geno had the possibility of having one. 

I feel the same way today about McCown starting over Petty, that doesn't mean that I think Petty is a legit starting qb or if my thoughts on Petty, Geno, Glennon are all equally the same. It's called circumstances. McCown has no future here after fans scream to pay him 12 million next year because he played better than Glennon and won just enough games to miss the playoffs. 

Then we would have wasted the opportunity to see on the field Petty as well as Hack in his 3rd season...for a guy who has no future after signing him to a stupid contract that fans will quickly pretend like they didn't support in order to talk about how Villain was wrong on Glennon.

 

Lol. I come here just for these two threads. 

Lol, yeah, that’s not even close to what you did with Geno

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/1/2017 at 6:17 AM, NoBowles said:

Poke fun? At a demigod like you? Never.

as for the spelling, yeah, I'm litery the warlds werst ever speller. But my W2's have been aight despite my misfortunes.

but I digest 

Define alright.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, NoBowles said:

Lol, yeah, that’s not even close to what you did with Geno

OK. We can always go back to ignoring one another too. That worked well. No need to poke your head out when you think it's of good convenience, because I know what I've said about Geno and I also know that my w2's are just as good if not better and I did that with hood grammar and a sharp mind. ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Villain The Foe said:

OK. We can always go back to ignoring one another too. That worked well. No need to poke your head out when you think it's of good convenience, because I know what I've said about Geno and I also know that my w2's are just as good if not better and I did that with hood grammar and a sharp mind. ?

Congrats

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Villain The Foe said:

OK. We can always go back to ignoring one another too. That worked well. No need to poke your head out when you think it's of good convenience, because I know what I've said about Geno and I also know that my w2's are just as good if not better and I did that with hood grammar and a sharp mind. ?

Please tell me what "hood grammar" is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Villain The Foe said:

I'm also going to bat for Baker Mayfield. 

Oh, and I went to bat for Geno to get the start over Fitz because Fitz had no future here, Geno had the possibility of having one. 

I'm being totally honest, your support of Mayfield is what scares the Hell out of me about him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Villain The Foe said:

I just said that given that I thought the w2 mention was a little lame on a football forum. I have no idea what hood grammar is, just made that up on the fly. ?

 

Agree, mentioning W2 is very lame, but IMO so is going after grammar and spelling on a message board.... hence the lame response.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, HighPitch said:

Hmmmm you must have time to criticize others. Interesting.

thats a persnal attack too chachie

Apparently you are upset that you were flagged in the other thread for being a hypocrite regarding grammar corrections..  Sorry, but it is what it is.  Carry on, bro, carry on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...