How does not starting Petty hurt the Jets?

[Philc1]

1 minute ago, Beerfish said:

These guys are working on their 9 lives of fireable offenses.

Drafting a lousy ILB in the 1st round

Reaching badly for a shot Qb in the 2nd round.

Going S, S in the 1st two rounds when premium positons are on the board for the taking.

Agree 100% the “great” 3-3 start isn’t fooling most jets fans with a clue this roster is still a dumpster fire just so happens a couple other teams either botched their seasons worse or are doing a better job of tanking for Darnold

 

I’m just scared we go 7-9, the media and Woody consider that a “good” season and we end up with Saquon Barkley and Brian Hoyer next year

 

[Beerfish]

I do not think this front office values RBs much at all so I'd be shocked if we took Barkley

[JohnnyLV]

1 hour ago, RESNewYork said:

Again how does that logically make sense to start the 2nd best player at their position if the coach needs to win, a coach on the hot seat.

And all I hear from the player quotes is them lauding the leadership of McCown, which I assume is beneficial to a young team

Are you intentionally being obtuse? I provided a long and CLEAR explanation on why starting McClown does not make any sense at all for the ORGANIZATION. It may make sense from the narrow standpoint that it makes sense for Bowles to try and keep his job. You seem to be missing that for this team in their current situation development of players is much much more important than squeaking out useless wins. The roster moves were done to create an environment that would allow that. And QB is the most important position of all. Did you not understand the investment analogy? This team is investing in their future. Therefore it is completely illogical to trot out the guy that has no place in that future. It is a short sighted dumb move that should not be allowed. Harsh reality is that Mac should have refused to sign McClown in the first place so as to not create this scenario in the first place. Every game McClown plays puts us farther and farther from having a competitive team long term and guarantees a cycle of mediocrity. Didn't you see the error of starting Fitzpatrick? By your posts I assume not.

[Philc1]

1 minute ago, Beerfish said:

I do not think this front office values RBs much at all so I'd be shocked if we took Barkley

Barkley will be the pick.  Even Mac knows picking defense again 4 years in a row will get him laughed out of the room but we won’t be picking high enough to get one of the good qbs

[Philc1]

1 minute ago, johnnysd said:

Are you intentionally being obtuse? I provided a long and CLEAR explanation on why starting McClown does not make any sense at all for the ORGANIZATION. It may make sense from the narrow standpoint that it makes sense for Bowles to try and keep his job. You seem to be missing that for this team in their current situation development of players is much much more important than squeaking out useless wins. The roster moves were done to create an environment that would allow that. And QB is the most important position of all. Did you not understand the investment analogy? This team is investing in their future. Therefore it is completely illogical to trot out the guy that has no place in that future. It is a short sighted dumb move that should not be allowed. Harsh reality is that Mac should have refused to sign McClown in the first place so as to not create this scenario in the first place. Every game McClown plays puts us farther and farther from having a competitive team long term and guarantees a cycle of mediocrity. Didn't you see the error of starting Fitzpatrick? By your posts I assume not.

Problem is Petty and Hack have had plenty of chances to earn the starting job and sucked

[JohnnyLV]

41 minutes ago, jetrider said:

 

We might have different QBs as well. It doesn't matter how much Macc likes a top tier QB, if Bowles puts defense at the top of the draft board, that's what Macc follows. Offense waits.

Macc didn't hire Bowles, he has no authority over Bowles. Nobody here seems to grasp that. Thread after thread, post after post, there's the same moronically twisted notion that Macc built a roster behind Bowles' back contrary to Bowles' needs. It's Bowles' team, Bowles' vision. Macc is the triggerman. Bowles is football, Macc is money management. There was a clear "same page" emphasis made by Woody when both were hired. Macc is not the runaway train he's painted to be. If Macc hired his own HC and overrode his decisions, it would be fair to blame Macc for everything he's unfairly blamed for now. His job is to make Bowles' plan work. Because of that, Macc is sandbagged by Bowles as much as certain players are.

I agree with that in terms of the draft. Clearly Bowles voice is louder than Macs in terms of the draft which is utterly ludicrous. On player personnel moves it is clear that those are in Macs wheelhouse because Bowles has been both surprised and angered by some of the moves.

[Philc1]

3 minutes ago, johnnysd said:

I agree with that in terms of the draft. Clearly Bowles voice is louder than Macs in terms of the draft which is utterly ludicrous. On player personnel moves it is clear that those are in Macs wheelhouse because Bowles has been both surprised and angered by some of the moves.

What a cluster

[Matt39]

46 minutes ago, jetrider said:

 

We might have different QBs as well. It doesn't matter how much Macc likes a top tier QB, if Bowles puts defense at the top of the draft board, that's what Macc follows. Offense waits.

Macc didn't hire Bowles, he has no authority over Bowles. Nobody here seems to grasp that. Thread after thread, post after post, there's the same moronically twisted notion that Macc built a roster behind Bowles' back contrary to Bowles' needs. It's Bowles' team, Bowles' vision. Macc is the triggerman. Bowles is football, Macc is money management. There was a clear "same page" emphasis made by Woody when both were hired. Macc is not the runaway train he's painted to be. If Macc hired his own HC and overrode his decisions, it would be fair to blame Macc for everything he's unfairly blamed for now. His job is to make Bowles' plan work. Because of that, Macc is sandbagged by Bowles as much as certain players are.

There is some assumption here, but this is how I see it too if I were to guess. Making Bowles' Arizona defense work here seems to be the #1 priority. The Lee pick in a vacuum was fine, the Adams pick vacuum or not was god awful and beyond idiotic. 

[nycdan]

5 minutes ago, Beerfish said:

I do not think this front office values RBs much at all so I'd be shocked if we took Barkley

Normally I'd agree.  But I think Barkley COULD be so special that I wouldn't mind taking him if we missed on Darnold, Rosen and maybe Rudolph.  Barkley is being compared to AP and other all-time greats.  Most analysts say he's better than Elliot, Gurley and Fournette and from the limited clips I've seen, I'd agree.  But...and this is a big but...it only works if we also go all-in on Cousins and/or draft a real prospect with our next pick (maybe moving up to do it).  

[Philc1]

Just now, Matt39 said:

There is some assumption here, but this is how I see it too if I were to guess. Making Bowles' Arizona defense work here seems to be the #1 priority. 

Bowles’ Arizona defense?  

 

Why hey isn’t that defense in AZ not missing Bowles

[JohnnyLV]

3 minutes ago, Philc1 said:

Problem is Petty and Hack have had plenty of chances to earn the starting job and sucked

Such an idiotic statement. Did you actually watch Petty play this preseason. Yes, he struggled last year but was very clearly significantly improved from a year ago and in his last preseason action posted a perfect QB rating. Exactly what else is he supposed to do with this chance? I swear that Jets fans take joy in hating their own players and giggle with joy at declaring them busts and saying they "suck" without a shred of a cogent argument.

[Philc1]

Just now, nycdan said:

Normally I'd agree.  But I think Barkley COULD be so special that I wouldn't mind taking him if we missed on Darnold, Rosen and maybe Rudolph.  Barkley is being compared to AP and other all-time greats.  Most analysts say he's better than Elliot, Gurley and Fournette and from the limited clips I've seen, I'd agree.  But...and this is a big but...it only works if we also go all-in on Cousins and/or draft a real prospect with our next pick (maybe moving up to do it).  

We’re picking probably around #10.  Barkley will be there while all the good qb’s will be gone.  Mac will sign Brian Hoyer and the big media cover story will be “let’s ground n’ pound”

 

FML

 

[#27TheDominator]

6 minutes ago, Beerfish said:

I do not think this front office values RBs much at all so I'd be shocked if we took Barkley

They have paid Forte and Powell enough.

[Philc1]

1 minute ago, johnnysd said:

Such an idiotic statement. Did you actually watch Petty play this preseason. Yes, he struggled last year but was very clearly significantly improved from a year ago and in his last preseason action posted a perfect QB rating. 

No he wasn’t. Petty sucked in the Tennessee game.  Yay he played well against third stringers in the Snoopy Bowl — and this is after getting outplayed by Hack (who also stinks) during the entirety of TC

 

Nice personal attack.  Go root for Petty when he plays in Montreal in 3 years

 

 

 

[Philc1]

Just now, #27TheDominator said:

They have paid Forte and Powell enough.

Lol

[August]

Petty sucked last season but that was last season, let's see if he improved and I'm not counting preseason as evidence either because he lit it up during last years preseason only to suck in real games. And I'd love for Petty to show enough to where we can comfortably go forward with him next year. And most importantly we'd be in a position where we can move down and collect draft picks since QB wouldn't be a priority. 

[Philc1]

2 minutes ago, August said:

Petty sucked last season but that was last season, let's see if he improved and I'm not counting preseason as evidence either because he lit it up during last years preseason only to suck in real games. And I'd love for Petty to show enough to where we can comfortably go forward with him next year. And most importantly we'd be in a position where we can move down and collect draft picks since QB wouldn't be a priority. 

Petty will eventually get his shot.  McCown will get hurt at some point and Hack is an abomination 

[JohnnyLV]

4 minutes ago, Philc1 said:

No he wasn’t. Petty sucked in the Tennessee game.  Yay he played well against third stringers in the Snoopy Bowl — and this is after getting outplayed by Hack (who also stinks) during the entirety of TC

 

Nice personal attack.  Go root for Petty when he plays in Montreal in 3 years

 

 

 

Yeah lets place more emphasis on the first preseason game when he threw 6 passes than the 3rd, (you know the one after he has had more practice and knows the offense better) where he put up a perfect passing rating and was in clear control of the offense. Wow. 

[Philc1]

1 minute ago, johnnysd said:

Yeah lets place more emphasis on the first preseason game when he threw 6 passes than the 3rd, (you know the one after he has had more practice and knows the offense better) where he put up a perfect passing rating and was in clear control of the offense. Wow. 

Petty did not have this amazing preseason you are making it to be.  Stop

[August]

7 minutes ago, Philc1 said:

Petty will eventually get his shot.  McCown will get hurt at some point and Hack is an abomination 

We shouldn't have to wait until McCown gets hurt or until week 15 though. 

[Warfish]

3 minutes ago, August said:

We shouldn't have to wait until McCown gets hurt or until week 15 though. 

We also shouldn't have to wait 40+ years between Super Bowls.

It is what it is, whining about it (or worse, living in a fantasy world where Petty is the answer to any question other than "...will be cut at the end of 2017?") won't change it.

Petty should have played better and made the decision for the team.  He didn't.  He had one good moment, then immediately got hurt.  Again.

And he almost assuredly will not be a NY Jet next year, so let it go.  Come week 15, we're going to see Hack.  Not Petty.

[jetrider]

13 minutes ago, johnnysd said:

I agree with that in terms of the draft. Clearly Bowles voice is louder than Macs in terms of the draft which is utterly ludicrous. On player personnel moves it is clear that those are in Macs wheelhouse because Bowles has been both surprised and angered by some of the moves.

Which ones? It was obviously Bowles who wanted all "celebrity" vets off the team. It was Bowles who proudly said, “I’m not afraid of the unknown. We don’t have the names that we had in the past, but that doesn’t mean we won’t have the players.” Petty, coincidentally, is the last remaining member of the Fitz, Decker, Marshall, Mangold subway gang. And what's up with Chad Hansen? Not healthy?

[August]

3 minutes ago, Warfish said:

We also shouldn't have to wait 40+ years between Super Bowls.

It is what it is, whining about it (or worse, living in a fantasy world where Petty is the answer to any question other than "...will be cut at the end of 2017?") won't change it.

Petty should have played better and made the decision for the team.  He didn't.  He had one good moment, then immediately got hurt.  Again.

And he almost assuredly will not be a NY Jet next year, so let it go.  Come week 15, we're going to see Hack.  Not Petty.

You keep purposefully shifting the point. No one said that Petty is the answer. The general consensus is that since 2017 is a rebuilding year, its best to see what we have in Petty so we know how to move forward at the position. He either plays decently which buys the organization more time until he's the bridge to Hackenberg, or he stinks and we get confirmation, or he plays well enough that he ends up being our starter for 6-8 years. Either way we get some answers. Playing McCown in a rebuilding year is a waste of time and it's repeating the same mistake again. 

[JetFreak89]

27 minutes ago, Philc1 said:

No he wasn’t. Petty sucked in the Tennessee game.  Yay he played well against third stringers in the Snoopy Bowl — and this is after getting outplayed by Hack (who also stinks) during the entirety of TC

 

Nice personal attack.  Go root for Petty when he plays in Montreal in 3 years

 

 

 

This is flat out false. Hack played better in the early stages of TC but after the first PS game or so, Petty picked it up and started clawing 1st team reps away from Hack. There were a number of days where the reporters named Petty the best QB of the day. 

[Warfish]

Just now, August said:

No one said that Petty is the answer.

Then why whine about him not playing?

Just now, August said:

The general consensus is that since 2017 is a rebuilding year, its best to see what we have in Petty so we know how to move forward at the position.

Anyone paying attention knows how we're "moving forward at the position".  Hint:  it isn't Petty.

We're drafting a QB.  Signing (or worse, retaining) a Vet.  And giving the stinky turd that is Hack to-date one more year.

Just now, August said:

He either plays decently which buys the organization more time until he's the bridge to Hackenberg, or he stinks and we get confirmation, or he plays well enough that he ends up being our starter for 6-8 years.

So Petty isn't the answer, but he could be a starter for 6-8 years, possibly.  

I'll repeat:  Petty is going to get cut at the end of the year, and vanish like every other fan-over-obsessed NY Jets #3 QB before him.  

Just now, August said:

Either way we get some answers.

Team already has the answers.  And has shown you the answer via their actions.

You just refuse to listen.

Just now, August said:

Playing McCown in a rebuilding year is a waste of time and it's repeating the same mistake again. 

You'd have a point, sort of, if you wanted to play Hack.  

[JetFreak89]

7 minutes ago, August said:

You keep purposefully shifting the point. No one said that Petty is the answer. The general consensus is that since 2017 is a rebuilding year, its best to see what we have in Petty so we know how to move forward at the position. He either plays decently which buys the organization more time until he's the bridge to Hackenberg, or he stinks and we get confirmation, or he plays well enough that he ends up being our starter for 6-8 years. Either way we get some answers. Playing McCown in a rebuilding year is a waste of time and it's repeating the same mistake again. 

This, in my opinion, is the worst part of all of this. We literally JUST went through this exact situation with Fitzpatrick. We all already know the ending to this story. We witnessed it with our own eyes and yet fans want a repeat of the 2015 and 2016 seasons. Holy sh*t! 

[JetFreak89]

2 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Then why whine about him not playing?

Anyone paying attention knows how we're "moving forward at the position".  Hint:  it isn't Petty.

We're drafting a QB.  Signing (or worse, retaining) a Vet.  And giving the stinky turd that is Hack to-date one more year.

So Petty isn't the answer, but he could be a starter for 6-8 years, possibly.  

I'll repeat:  Petty is going to get cut at the end of the year, and vanish like every other fan-over-obsessed NY Jets #3 QB before him.  

Team already has the answers.  And has shown you the answer via their actions.

You just refuse to listen.

You'd have a point, sort of, if you wanted to play Hack.  

Your argument is laughable. Let's throw away Petty because of his first 4 games with the utter clusterf*** of a team that was last year but let's give Hack a chance even though he hasn't shown 1/10th of the potential of Petty. Makes total sense! 

[JohnnyLV]

31 minutes ago, Philc1 said:

Petty did not have this amazing preseason you are making it to be.  Stop

He did enough to get a chance to start.

[JohnnyLV]

19 minutes ago, jetrider said:

Which ones? It was obviously Bowles who wanted all "celebrity" vets off the team. It was Bowles who proudly said, “I’m not afraid of the unknown. We don’t have the names that we had in the past, but that doesn’t mean we won’t have the players.” Petty, coincidentally, is the last remaining member of the Fitz, Decker, Marshall, Mangold subway gang. And what's up with Chad Hansen? Not healthy?

He was surprised by Harris, angered by Sheldon. There were others. In terms of Hansen, Bowles playes veterans. I need to stop posting. I get so frustrated that clearly Bowles, the Jets organization and many fans absolutely refuse to learn from previous mistakes,

[Warfish]

8 minutes ago, JetFreak89 said:

Your argument is laughable. Let's throw away Petty because of his first 4 games with the utter clusterf*** of a team that was last year but let's give Hack a chance even though he hasn't shown 1/10th of the potential of Petty. Makes total sense! 

Take it up with Macc and Bowles, not me.  I'm simply telling you whats going to happen. 

Same way I told folks Watson was the real deal, and same as I told you were were never going 0-16 or drafting #1/#1.  Don't get pissed at me that you folks utterly lack any objective analytical skills.

With that said, feel free to live in the same fantasy world August (and many Jets Fans) always live in, where some no name, no talent 4th round pick nobody QB is possibly the answer, possibly!, if only he gets that same old fair chance, with weapons blah blah blah.

It's like Jets fans live in a perpetual state of reality denial when it comes to the QB position.  One one hand, we have half the board uber-pissed that if we don't draft #1/#1, we have no chance NONE of getting a QB.  The other half is uber-pissed we're not starting a 4th round pick made of eggshell at QB, because he possibly could be the answer for 6-8 years.  Funny enough, it's some of the SAME PEOPLE arguing both sides.

And a year from now, when petty is gone and unsigned elsewhere (or, like the last version of Petty, is the #2 someplace like Cleveland or in San Fran) all the folks pining to see him play will have moved on to the next overhyped Jets #3 QB.

[nycdan]

18 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Then why whine about him not playing?

Anyone paying attention knows how we're "moving forward at the position".  Hint:  it isn't Petty.

We're drafting a QB.  Signing (or worse, retaining) a Vet.  And giving the stinky turd that is Hack to-date one more year.

So Petty isn't the answer, but he could be a starter for 6-8 years, possibly.  

I'll repeat:  Petty is going to get cut at the end of the year, and vanish like every other fan-over-obsessed NY Jets #3 QB before him.  

Team already has the answers.  And has shown you the answer via their actions.

You just refuse to listen.

You'd have a point, sort of, if you wanted to play Hack.  

You have picked an odd hill to die on.  You seem determined to label Petty a bust based on how the team is using (or not using) him.  Nobody is saying he's 'the answer' but you seem to not even be interested in seeing whether his week 3 performance was an aberration or progress.  Which is fine except it leaves you defending playing McCown the rest of the year and I just don't get what you could possibly see in that scenario that makes you prefer it.  

Here's how I (personally) break it down:

• Do you think the Jets, with McCown starting, have any realistic shot at the playoffs?  (for me, the answer is No).
• Do you think McCown should be brought back next year to bridge and/or mentor a new QB?  (again, No).
• Do you think Petty has an realistic chance to perform as well or better than McCown, if given a shot?  (for me, the answer is Yes).
• Would you be okay with Petty getting a shot and, worst case, failing to show anything?  (Yes, because it is new information that helps us make a better decision next offseason.)

Sure, we've seen many prospects come and go.  Nagle, Clemens, Geno, etc.  Maybe it's akin to trying to catch lightning in a bottle.  But if we don't actually give them a reasonable chance to succeed, and keep playing the washed-out vet who gives us no real chance to succeed, then we definitely aren't going to get anywhere and we'll just keep sitting in the dark.  Personally, I see no downside to this.  Clearly Bowles does.  I'm just curious if Bowles is doing it for the benefit of the team, or for the benefit of his job security.  Because I care a lot about one and nothing about the other.

 

[nycdan]

5 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Take it up with Macc and Bowles, not me.  I'm simply telling you whats going to happen. 

Same way I told folks Watson was the real deal, and same as I told you were were never going 0-16 or drafting #1/#1.  Don't get pissed at me that you folks utterly lack any objective analytical skills.

With that said, feel free to live in the same fantasy world August (and many Jets Fans) always live in, where some no name, no talent 4th round pick nobody QB is possibly the answer, possibly!, if only he gets that same old fair chance, with weapons blah blah blah.

It's like Jets fans live in a perpetual state of reality denial when it comes to the QB position.  One one hand, we have half the board uber-pissed that if we don't draft #1/#1, we have no chance NONE of getting a QB.  The other half is uber-pissed we're not starting a 4th round pick made of eggshell at QB, because he possibly could be the answer for 6-8 years.  Funny enough, it's some of the SAME PEOPLE arguing both sides.

And a year from now, when petty is gone and unsigned elsewhere (or, like the last version of Petty, is the #2 someplace like Cleveland or in San Fran) all the folks pining to see him play will have moved on to the next overhyped Jets #3 QB.

Fair points.  We've certainly seen a lot of them come and go.  But you are saying on the one hand that you trust the team's evaluation of Petty as sufficient reason to label him a bust.  But this is the same team that passed on Watson (who you loved, and Mahomes who many others did) for a Safety, and took Hack in the 2nd round.   

[Warfish]

7 minutes ago, nycdan said:

You have picked an odd hill to die on.

No dying here my friend.

Quote

You seem determined to label Petty a bust based on how the team is using (or not using) him.

To be a bust, you had to have been thought of as having real, serious potential.  Petty doesn't qualify.  He was never that highly considered.

But to be clear, I am telling you what is obvious:  the organization does not see Petty as any form of answer, and his time here is almost assuredly short.  

What I think doesn't matter.

Quote

Nobody is saying he's 'the answer' but you seem to not even be interested in seeing whether his week 3 performance was an aberration or progress.

Whats more likely, his "Week 3 of Preseason" performance vs. NFL #3's is the real Petty, or the sh*theap of actual vs. NFL #1 play Petty put out, and his multiple injuries so far, is the real Petty?

Pretty clear how the organization sees it, and theirs is the only opinion that matters.

I'd love to see Petty play over McCown.  Why not?  But it isn't going to happen.

Quote

 Which is fine except it leaves you defending playing McCown the rest of the year and I just don't get what you could possibly see in that scenario that makes you prefer it.  

I'm not defending anything, I'm telling you how it is. 

Quote

Here's how I (personally) break it down:

• Do you think the Jets, with McCown starting, have any realistic shot at the playoffs?  (for me, the answer is No).

Nope.  8-8 at best.  5-11 or 6-10 most likely.

Quote

• Do you think McCown should be brought back next year to bridge and/or mentor a new QB?  (again, No).

Absolutely not.  I wouldn;t have signed him this year.  I would have gone in with Watson, Hack and Petty.  Or at worst, Petty, Hack and some mid-round QB draft pick.

But what I would do is irrelevant, what the team will do is what matters, and they will draft a QB, retain McCown (or bring in another Vet), retain Hack one more year, and dump Petty at the first opportunity after 2017 is over.

Quote

• Do you think Petty has an realistic chance to perform as well or better than McCown, if given a shot?  (for me, the answer is Yes).

I do, yes.  

Quote

• Would you be okay with Petty getting a shot and, worst case, failing to show anything?  (Yes, because it is new information that helps us make a better decision next offseason.)

I'd be perfectly fine with Petty getting ANOTHER shot.  Yes.  But I'm not holding my breath about it, because it isn't going to happen outside injury.  Macc is invested in Hack, not in Petty.

Quote

Sure, we've seen many prospects come and go.  Nagle, Clemens, Geno, etc.  Maybe it's akin to trying to catch lightning in a bottle.  But if we don't actually give them a reasonable chance to succeed, and keep playing the washed-out vet who gives us no real chance to succeed, then we definitely aren't going to get anywhere and we'll just keep sitting in the dark.

4th round pick nobodies don't get six chances mate.  They usually don;t get any chances.  Petty already had one chance, he did nothing.  And got hurt.  Twice.

[bitonti]

Bryce Petty is a good prospect. He's got confidence and the most raw talent of any of the 3 (terrible) Jets QBs. 

That being said he's fragile. He had the job last year and got hurt and he was making a move for the job in preseason this year when he got hurt again

Bryce Petty's durability is holding him back. 

[nycdan]

7 minutes ago, bitonti said:

Bryce Petty is a good prospect. He's got confidence and the most raw talent of any of the 3 (terrible) Jets QBs. 

That being said he's fragile. He had the job last year and got hurt and he was making a move for the job in preseason this year when he got hurt again

Bryce Petty's durability is holding him back. 

So if he is healthy right now, why not put him in.  If he gets hurt again, so be it.  Move on.  But to not play him because he 'might' get hurt?  Not sure that makes so much sense.