Jump to content

How much criticism should Macc be getting for whiffing on Watson?


Pointdexter

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, CanadaSteve said:

I agree.

All I have EVER said in any of these posts is I don't blame the guy for not taking a QB with the 6th overall pick that so many scouts and draft guru's had such polarizing opinions about.  He makes that pick and he is Paxton Lynch, he is fired next year. He had just taken a huge swing and miss with Hackenberg the year previous.

Its very easy for any person sitting on a fan-site to say what THEY would have done in the situation, but in reality, we don't.  Making draft picks and running an NFL franchise for $2 million a year is a pretty cushy job I am sure any of us would love to have and definitely not want to lose.  I'll be the first to admit that if I was in Mac's shoes and I just ****ed up like I did drafting Hackenberg, I would be a little leerie about picking my next QB.

Mac and his scouts are paid to find good players, QBs included.  If Watson turns out to be good, then Mac ****ed up.  There's no two ways about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 547
  • Created
  • Last Reply
On 10/31/2017 at 12:54 PM, UnitedWhofans said:

That is a fair statement. The question is when? After spending a second round pick on a QB the year before, do you gamble with a first? Only if you really believe that he is the guy.

I would rather kind of do what Washington did. Draft 2 QBs in the same draft

No, you have to keep taking one every year for a lot longer than that. 

You see, just because you take one and he looks good, doesn't mean he'll look good in years 2 or 3. Maybe entering a QBs 4th season, if he pans out, can you stop drafting QBs.

It also goes without saying that we should carry 4-6 of them on our roster up to that point. Because you just never know when they're going to stop producing as the league figures them out.

Get it now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/31/2017 at 7:54 AM, Pointdexter said:

There are no Deshaun Watsons in the upcoming draft. 

This was the best QB in college football the last 2 seasons.

This was the guy that ripped mighty Alabama's defense a new one....twice, when it counted the most.

The Jets haven't had their own franchise QB in 3 decades. Hack is garbage and everyone knew and still knows it.

So DW was right there, staring back at us at #6, a golden opportunity for a true franchise QB of our own, to a team who so desperately needs one.

And we draft safety.

And, no this isn't hindsight. Most fans who also follow cfb was screaming for this guy. The upside was way too good if it payed off. 

And we draft safety. 

Now we choose btw Rosen who emotionally/mentally may be fragile. Or Darnold who has a ton to prove in a sophomore slump. Or Lamar Jackson who looks as uncomfortable in the pocket as any QB I've seen.

So shouldn't Macc be held accountable for going safety when even most fans would have got it right with franchise QB???

This miss is as big as trading up for Dewayne Robertson.

He looks good now, but Kapernick also looked like a world better his first season and a half. There were LOTS of questions about Watson coming out. The whole leadership, "winner" type thing is a great trait, but does not have a direct relationship to success in the NFL.  He was thought to have a weak arm, tested as a VERY weak armed QB, though in watching him play, that seems untrue. He did not really pass the eye test. He looked like a very good college QB that threw a lot of jump balls and would struggle to adjust to the NFL. Passing on him was not shocking in itself, but he looks on a franchise QB path.

Picking a safety instead of him, was IDIOTIC., though I would not have loved the pick at the time.

Truth is, Jets should never have passed on Carr or Bridgewater either.

Here is the reality, though. The Jets as an organization are unwilling to make risky moves.  They should this over and over. They also are completely unwilling to realize it is time to build for the future. I mean we just traded for a cornerback as a stop gap for this season. And gave up a draft pick. In their minds, drafting a QB in RD1 is too risky.  I do not expect it to change much this coming offseason either. Expect us to pass on QB in next draft, draft secondary and sign a veteran retread loser.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/31/2017 at 10:58 AM, Augustiniak said:

mccags has one more draft to find a qb, and bowles has at most one more season to play this qb, or they're both gone.

I think Bowles should be gone at seasons end. Has shown NONE of the requisite necessities of an NFL head coach, AND continues to start an over the hill QB whose rating goes DOWN with ever quarter of the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, johnnysd said:

He looks good now, but Kapernick also looked like a world better his first season and a half. There were LOTS of questions about Watson coming out. The whole leadership, "winner" type thing is a great trait, but does not have a direct relationship to success in the NFL.  He was thought to have a weak arm, tested as a VERY weak armed QB, though in watching him play, that seems untrue. He did not really pass the eye test. He looked like a very good college QB that threw a lot of jump balls and would struggle to adjust to the NFL. Passing on him was not shocking in itself, but he looks on a franchise QB path.

That's the thing.  He did not test as a "VERY weak armed QB."  It is not a test.  It is some nerds with a radar gun in the stands.  The player doesn't know he is being tested for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, CanadaSteve said:

Sorry to disappoint, but there is no ball washing.  Its just amusing that all the Mac haters that congregated since year 2 of his regime without a Super Bowl are, to say the least, predictable.

Should be the same in 2020 after our next GM hasn't won a Super Bowl yet.

You use the words "Super Bowl" a bit too loosely for my liking. I think the first step is to have a winning record, which Mac isn't even close since his 2nd year. Just because he's in his 3rd season doesn't mean he gets a pass, something his ball washers give him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Augustiniak said:

yet, every year there are qbs who come into the nfl who show promise and are competent.  prescott, dalton, garropolo, carr, bridgewater, cousins, wilson, all not first rounders.  the jets decision makers are truly afraid of making a mistake at qb, but all they're showing is they're not up to the task.  i have no doubt mccags will go after cousins like a mo fo, b/c that would be the easy way out, he could still draft his BAP and take a LT in the first round, and never risk failing or succeeding by drafting a potential franchise qb.  i'm also beginning to wonder if the flawed power structure on the jets is discouraging him from drafting  a qb that high, since bowles may not play him anyway, and mccags can't fire bowles.

Compared to the importance of QB play in the NFL, this league could use a developmental league.  I wonder what you are wondering.

There is definitely a disconnect, and yes, at some point you have to play your cards with a QB.  The first cards were a pair of deuces in drafting Hack....Lets hope IF he gets another shot he hits a pair of aces. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, j4jets said:

You use the words "Super Bowl" a bit too loosely for my liking. I think the first step is to have a winning record, which Mac isn't even close since his 2nd year. Just because he's in his 3rd season doesn't mean he gets a pass, something his ball washers give him. 

I will try and refrain dangling the term Super Bowl like a participle...:cool:

The whole thing went to sh*t after that first season.  We had no business being 10-6, and no business having Ryan Fitzpatrick start, have a career season, then hold out.  It was a perfect storm that might have cost us much more than we will ever know.  I for one have liked a bunch of Mac's moves, but unfortunately he has dropped the ball in the main area: QB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

False

Sorry....I guess there was one guy.  Out of dozens. If you need me to research it, I will.  Although Kiper IMO sucks, which is why I didn't list him. 

Where did you see him going?

And I stand by what I think: I will not fault the guy for reaching on Watson.  You can disagree all you want, but I will stand by what I said and take the beating. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, detectivekimble said:

Mac and his scouts are paid to find good players, QBs included.  If Watson turns out to be good, then Mac ****ed up.  There's no two ways about it.

And so did the 10 other teams that didn't draft him.

As I stated to Sperm, MY opinion.  I don't fault him for not drafting Watson at 6.  You guys are all allowed to fault him if you choose.  At the end of the day, doesn't really matter.  None of us have any say in how it all goes down anyway.  Just a bunch of guys throwing ideas back and forth that they disagree about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, CanadaSteve said:

Sorry....I guess there was one guy.  Out of dozens. If you need me to research it, I will.  Although Kiper IMO sucks, which is why I didn't list him. 

Where did you see him going?

And I stand by what I think: I will not fault the guy for reaching on Watson.  You can disagree all you want, but I will stand by what I said and take the beating. 

Oh, Kiper has no idea what teams are likely to do and what players they’re likely to draft. Not like you do, nor like a couple of people running websites.

Your opinion of him or my opinion of him and his aptitude is irrelevant. He has an idea what teams are looking for in an NFL player, and has been the biggest name in NFL draft commentary for 3 decades. 

A QB is a reach because you think #6 is too high for a franchise QB where #11 or #16 or so is not too high. For a player that’s going to be at the team’s most important position for years. But a strong safety, regardless of his draft grade, is wise.

A strong safety is always a reach at #6, no matter how highly anyone has him rated, unless the team drafting him has already filled the more important parts of its roster far more than the 2017 Jets had done by then. And even then, IMO it’s still kind of a reach anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, CanadaSteve said:

And so did the 10 other teams that didn't draft him.

As I stated to Sperm, MY opinion.  I don't fault him for not drafting Watson at 6.  You guys are all allowed to fault him if you choose.  At the end of the day, doesn't really matter.  None of us have any say in how it all goes down anyway.  Just a bunch of guys throwing ideas back and forth that they disagree about.

The Bears, Titans, Chargers, Panthers, Bengals, Saints, and maybe even the Jaguars already had QBs.  Because the Browns and 49ers passed on Watson, it was okay for Mac to have?  There's a reason that the Browns and 49ers are what they are.

Again, if Watson turns out to be good, Mac ****ed up royally.  And after watching some of the throws that Watson made against Seattle, it sure looks like Mac ****ed up.

Mac has painted himself into a corner this point.  He will try like hell to land THE QB prospect in the 2018 draft.  And don't be surprised if he trades the farm.  He knows it's his last chance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Oh, Kiper has no idea what teams are likely to do and what players they’re likely to draft. Not like you do, nor like a couple of people running websites.

Your opinion of him or my opinion of him and his aptitude is irrelevant. He has an idea what teams are looking for in an NFL player, and has been the biggest name in NFL draft commentary for 3 decades. 

A QB is a reach because you think #6 is too high for a franchise QB where #11 or #16 or so is not too high. For a player that’s going to be at the team’s most important position for years. But a strong safety, regardless of his draft grade, is wise.

A strong safety is always a reach at #6, no matter how highly anyone has him rated, unless the team drafting him has already filled the more important parts of its roster far more than the 2017 Jets had done by then. And even then, IMO it’s still kind of a reach anyway.

The idea that #6 is a reach high for a potential franchise QB but #12 isn't is ridiculous.  Houston even traded a 2018 first rounder to move up for Watson.  And the "experts" still gave the pick an A.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000804541/article/2017-nfl-draft-quicksnap-grades-for-all-32-teams

https://www.si.com/nfl/2017/04/29/nfl-draft-grades-team-picks-results-analysis

Taking a SS with the #6 pick, however, IS ridiculous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, bitonti said:

hard to get lucky if you don't try

 

Agree with you. This was the whole post though

Am I the only person who believes that to find a QB you need LUCK?

Teams spend millions of dollars on GMs and scouts and they run these QBs through workouts and background checks and everything else but in the end, if they find a QB, they got LUCKY. 

There has only been 2 occasions in my football watching lifetime that the consensus #1 cant miss QB worked out, Peyton and Luck. Everyone else who got a QB in the draft got lucky.

Draftniks, draft experts, and especially fans on here. If you were praying and hoping the Jets drafted Watson, you were lucky because you are wrong most of the time just like the pros.

Brady was passed over and over till the 6th round. Rogers was the 2nd QB taken and went at the end of the 1st round. Brees was taken in the 2nd round. Those are the 3 most prolific passers in the game today. 

Texans got lucky with Watson. This is the same team, coaches, management, that signed Brock Osweiler to big money to be there starting QB and had to give up draft capital in a trade just to get rid of him. 

It probably has to do with not having a real metric when measuring QBs. There is so much translation to what you're seeing and nothing definitive. 

Example after example of how lucky a team was to get a solid/franchise QB. So fans claiming Watson was a no brainer and you knew he was going to be great stop. You got lucky, just like the paid professionals have to get lucky.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, detectivekimble said:

The Bears, Titans, Chargers, Panthers, Bengals, Saints, and maybe even the Jaguars already had QBs.  Because the Browns and 49ers passed on Watson, it was okay for Mac to have?  There's a reason that the Browns and 49ers are what they are.

Again, if Watson turns out to be good, Mac ****ed up royally.  And after watching some of the throws that Watson made against Seattle, it sure looks like Mac ****ed up.

Mac has painted himself into a corner this point.  He will try like hell to land THE QB prospect in the 2018 draft.  And don't be surprised if he trades the farm.  He knows it's his last chance.

This is why Macc cannot be in charge of this process next year

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Oh, Kiper has no idea what teams are likely to do and what players they’re likely to draft. Not like you do, nor like a couple of people running websites.

Your opinion of him or my opinion of him and his aptitude is irrelevant. He has an idea what teams are looking for in an NFL player, and has been the biggest name in NFL draft commentary for 3 decades. 

A QB is a reach because you think #6 is too high for a franchise QB where #11 or #16 or so is not too high. For a player that’s going to be at the team’s most important position for years. But a strong safety, regardless of his draft grade, is wise.

A strong safety is always a reach at #6, no matter how highly anyone has him rated, unless the team drafting him has already filled the more important parts of its roster far more than the 2017 Jets had done by then. And even then, IMO it’s still kind of a reach anyway.

If you are asking for my opinion, I think Watson would have been a HUGE reach at 6...bigger than Trubinsky was for the Bears.

The majority of stuff I read on him had me thinking he would have been a better 2nd round risk.  Perhaps that is why I am not that upset by Mac not picking him.  If I had more time, I would watch more college stuff to judge myself...alas. 

Again, when a team needs a QB, all the talk will center around it until one is found, no matter who is doing the picking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, detectivekimble said:

The Bears, Titans, Chargers, Panthers, Bengals, Saints, and maybe even the Jaguars already had QBs.  Because the Browns and 49ers passed on Watson, it was okay for Mac to have?  There's a reason that the Browns and 49ers are what they are.

Again, if Watson turns out to be good, Mac ****ed up royally.  And after watching some of the throws that Watson made against Seattle, it sure looks like Mac ****ed up.

Mac has painted himself into a corner this point.  He will try like hell to land THE QB prospect in the 2018 draft.  And don't be surprised if he trades the farm.  He knows it's his last chance.

This is exactly right. It isn't just the miss with Hackeneberg. It's the QB's he passed or missed on, while we desperately need one. Yes, he's not the only one who has missed.

But as you said he will do whatever it takes to get one now. Or he won't be here long term.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, CanadaSteve said:

And that is fair.  It is unfortunate that this league has come down to judging all involved by how good you did at drafting QB's. 

I still am a firm believer this league needs a developmental league.  If you need QB's this bad, than there should be a place where guys can actually play to get better at their position before entering the NFL.  The college ranks just do not count.

It would not make $, so it won't happen. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, RESNewYork said:

Agree with you. This was the whole post though

Am I the only person who believes that to find a QB you need LUCK?

Teams spend millions of dollars on GMs and scouts and they run these QBs through workouts and background checks and everything else but in the end, if they find a QB, they got LUCKY. 

There has only been 2 occasions in my football watching lifetime that the consensus #1 cant miss QB worked out, Peyton and Luck. Everyone else who got a QB in the draft got lucky.

Draftniks, draft experts, and especially fans on here. If you were praying and hoping the Jets drafted Watson, you were lucky because you are wrong most of the time just like the pros.

Brady was passed over and over till the 6th round. Rogers was the 2nd QB taken and went at the end of the 1st round. Brees was taken in the 2nd round. Those are the 3 most prolific passers in the game today. 

Texans got lucky with Watson. This is the same team, coaches, management, that signed Brock Osweiler to big money to be there starting QB and had to give up draft capital in a trade just to get rid of him. 

It probably has to do with not having a real metric when measuring QBs. There is so much translation to what you're seeing and nothing definitive. 

Example after example of how lucky a team was to get a solid/franchise QB. So fans claiming Watson was a no brainer and you knew he was going to be great stop. You got lucky, just like the paid professionals have to get lucky.

Elway, Eli Manning, Rothlsisberger, Rivers (all 3 in the same draft and Rivers and Eli traded for each other on draft day), Bradshaw, off the top off my head, all worked out.   

"You fail to score on 100% of the shots you don't take." Wayne Gretzky

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Matt39 said:

The between the lines of the Cimini article suggests Bowles didnt feel like coaching a rookie QB. They also had Trubisky as their top rated QB. 

Yep.  Just like Todd didnt want Lynch.  It's clear as day, Todd doesnt want to waste his time developing a QB.  

They're talking about it on local radio too laughing hysterically at how stupid the Jets are.  They had Trubisky rated higher.  Un-*******-real.  This dude is an absolute dope.  They thought Watson was a "decent" prospect who needed developing?  WTF?  What is Trubisky?  And apparently they were already developing Petty and Hackenberg.

Cant make this sh*t up.  This ******* franchise.  Un-*******-real.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, JiF said:

Yep.  Just like Todd didnt want Lynch.  It's clear as day, Todd doesnt want to waste his time developing a QB.  

They're talking about it on local radio too laughing hysterically at how stupid the Jets are.  They had Trubisky rated higher.  Un-*******-real.  This dude is an absolute dope.  They thought Watson was a "decent" prospect who needed developing?  WTF?  What is Trubisky?  And apparently they were already developing Petty and Hackenberg.

Cant make this sh*t up.  This ******* franchise.  Un-*******-real.  

You dont get the sense that Todd thinks the QB is important. Just another position on offense he can fill with a veteran, who can do his job for him. This regime is something else- lets skip all the hard parts and kick the can down the road to save our jobs every year. Woody may actually buy into it which really sucks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since Big Mac has taken over the Jets, the following teams have found their franchise QB and/or have hope that they have him on their roster:

Bucs, Titans, Bills, Rams, Eagles, Cowboys, Broncos, Texans, Bears, Vikings, 49'ers.

Indy has Brissett, infinitely better than anything the Jets have and they have Luck.

KC has back up plan for when Alex Smith is done.

Cleveland has played 3 young QB's in that time frame, Hogan, Kessler and Kizer.  Even the 49'ers allowed their rookie QB to play Football.

That is almost half the league addressing the QB position with urgency. 

Meanwhile, in Jets land...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Matt39 said:

You dont get the sense that Todd thinks the QB is important. Just another position on offense he can fill with a veteran. This regime is something else- lets skip all the hard parts and kick the can down the road to save our jobs every year. Woody may actually buy into it which really sucks.

Wasn't Parcells this way too?  Refused to play rookie QB's, really never even wanted to draft them, always wanted a Vet.  He didn't want to have to teach them the game. I can remember him specifically saying this at some point.  It's the one actual pass down Todd took from Parcells and it's absolutely the most moronic line of thinking in the history of man kind.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, JiF said:

Wasn't Parcells this way too?  Refused to play rookie QB's, really never even wanted to draft them, always wanted a Vet.  He didn't want to have to teach them the game. I can remember him specifically saying this at some point.  It's the one actual pass down Todd took from Parcells and it's absolutely the most moronic line of thinking in the history of man kind.

 

I mentioned that yesterday. Parcells could get away with it by the time he got to the Jets because he was Bill Parcells. Simms was his guy with the Giants and he drafted Bledsoe #1 overall in New England. He didnt start his coaching career tying himself to mediocre spot starters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, CanadaSteve said:

And so did the 10 other teams that didn't draft him.

As I stated to Sperm, MY opinion.  I don't fault him for not drafting Watson at 6.  You guys are all allowed to fault him if you choose.  At the end of the day, doesn't really matter.  None of us have any say in how it all goes down anyway.  Just a bunch of guys throwing ideas back and forth that they disagree about.

Oh yes the “our stupid GM is just as stupid as other GM’s so he’s actually good” argument 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Matt39 said:

I mentioned that yesterday. Parcells could get away with it by the time he got to the Jets because he was Bill Parcells. Simms was his guy with the Giants and he drafted Bledsoe #1 overall in New England. He didnt start his coaching career tying himself to mediocre spot starters.

And Parcells drafted Chad Pennington in the first round less than 2 years after Vinny had the best season of any Jet qb ever since Joe Namath and even the backup Ray Lucas had looked good in regular season games

 

No excuse for Macagnan passing on Watson and a bunch of other good prospects for a mediocre Safety

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, JiF said:

Wasn't Parcells this way too?  Refused to play rookie QB's, really never even wanted to draft them, always wanted a Vet.  He didn't want to have to teach them the game. I can remember him specifically saying this at some point.  It's the one actual pass down Todd took from Parcells and it's absolutely the most moronic line of thinking in the history of man kind.

 

Parcells may not have played rookie qb’s but he sure as heck drafted them

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Philc1 said:

And Parcells drafted Chad Pennington in the first round less than 2 years after Vinny had the best season of any Jet qb ever since Joe Namath and even the backup Ray Lucas had looked good in regular season games

True, the Keyshawn trade set the Jets up with all of those picks in 2000 which was Parcells.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Matt39 said:

True, the Keyshawn trade set the Jets up with all of those picks in 2000 which was Parcells.

The bottom line is you keep drafting qb’s until you have one.  Parcells used a first round pick on Chad when he had Vinny and Lucas who were both way better than crappy Petty and Hackentard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...