Bryce Petty really stinks

[Barkus]

38 minutes ago, BUM-KNEE said:

Id rather see Petty as a backup, not starting. 

I'd rather see him cut. He can't even complete simple passes. Sign a veteran and draft at least one and probably 2qbs. Cut hack if he can't beat out one of the rookies. Have a vet and 2 rookie Qbs next yr. 

[Rangers9]

32 minutes ago, 56mehl56 said:

Next week vs Chargers he might be laying on his back with Ingram and Bosa bringing the heat.  I see even more of the conservative BS next week , meaning don't expect many passes. 

A conservative game plan wasn't BS for a Qb who has played very little this season. And an offense that struggled mightily last week. But based on the Saints game I would throw long more often because these are plays that worked yesterday. You don't throw long that much. The numbers on long pass completion are low and when you do it you can hurt a drive. On the other hand how many third and longs do you have if the running game isn't working. A good percentage of running plays end up with 3 yards or under. 

[TuscanyTile2]

4 minutes ago, Barkus said:

I'd rather see him cut. He can't even complete simple passes. Sign a veteran and draft at least one and probably 2qbs. Cut hack if he can't beat out one of the rookies. Have a vet and 2 rookie Qbs next yr. 

Same here.  Petty has never impressed me.  I don't even get the "he'd be a good backup!" talk.  Petty feels like a 3rd stringer or a guy like Joel Stave (a guy teams sign as an emergency QB when their other QBs get injured).  Josh McCown is what I'd consider to be a good backup QB. 

[peebag]

1 hour ago, gEYno said:

It's not about McCown being better.  It's about Petty being so bad that he doesn't belong on the field.  Something that yesterday only furthered.

hmm....McCown 95 games played...Petty 8 games played....

yep...bad.

[ZachEY]

4 minutes ago, UnitedWhofans said:

I agree except that ranking the prospects is very tenuous.

Hackenberg is by far the biggest knock against Maccagnan

The Hackenberg pick is, and was a joke.  But, it is also just a part (a large part, but just a part) of a complete failure after 3-seasons to identify a QB.

The failure in 3 seasons to find a QB who can start in season 4, and the fact that the team is not meaningfully better after 3 seasons than when he took over, is enough to say his tenure has been unsuccessful.

[August]

1 hour ago, MaxAF said:

One game. Complete assessment of Petty for many on here. Some never had any confidence in him.. Hasn't started or practiced with the first team all year. O- line didn't give him much support. Run game was marginal. Game plan scheme sucked. I guess many on here expected him to go 32-38 with 4tds and no INTs. He threw a few nice balls. Looked shaky on some plays. He needs experience and game time for me to give him a full evaluation. 

The problem isn't the amount of games it's just that so far Petty has shown absolutely nothing. Jimmy G in 5/6 starts have shown a lot more. 

[UnitedWhofans]

Just now, gEYno said:

The Hackenberg pick is, and was a joke.  But, it is also just a part (a large part, but just a part) of a complete failure after 3-seasons to identify a QB.

The failure in 3 seasons to find a QB who can start in season 4, and the fact that the team is not meaningfully better after 3 seasons than when he took over, is enough to say his tenure has been unsuccessful.

Part of that blame goes to Woody though who I have to believe forced the win now moves of 2015 given his past.

[ZachEY]

3 minutes ago, peebag said:

hmm....McCown 95 games played...Petty 8 games played....

yep...bad.

Yes, lets give him another 87 starts and hope he can reach Josh McCown levels.

Maybe, just maybe, Petty doesn't have what it takes, and there's not some anti-Petty conspiracy.

[ZachEY]

2 minutes ago, UnitedWhofans said:

Part of that blame goes to Woody though who I have to believe forced the win now moves of 2015 given his past.

Your speculation is irrelevant.  And, even if true, I'm not sure what part of a "win-now" plan included drafting poorly and signing bad free agents?

[peebag]

3 minutes ago, gEYno said:

Yes, lets give him another 87 starts and hope he can reach Josh McCown levels.

Maybe, just maybe, Petty doesn't have what it takes, and there's not some anti-Petty conspiracy.

Maybe he is bad, maybe he isn't.  Too bad there wasn't a season available where there was lowered expectations of the team and you could start a young qb to get that experience.

[Rangers9]

Whenever I hear Petty talk after a game it's always about him and his development and learning. Nothing about winning and losing and the team. I will say this one more time. It's not the pre-season when it doesn't count and you can learn all you want to learn. That's what Bowles has been saying all along. He gave Hack and Petty lots of reps and action in exhibition games to see what they could do. Neither of them was able to win the job and be the best Qb on the team. I want a coach who wants to win games. If you want to develop players go to a developmental league or the minors. 

[Barkus]

18 minutes ago, August said:

The problem isn't the amount of games it's just that so far Petty has shown absolutely nothing. Jimmy G in 5/6 starts have shown a lot more. 

Yes, I've seen enough. Petty will be 27 in May, if he can't throw a simple pass to an open WR now, he never will. Jimmy G took over a 1-10 squad and they have won 3 games in a row with him! 

[joewilly12]

Bryce Petty is a product of the environment here, years of sitting behind old loser NFL re-tread QB's who accomplished nothing here but personal bests. 

[Anthony Jet]

I don’t see how Mac can be lambasted about petty. He was an early 4th rd pick, he seems like a serviceable back up. How is that a swing and miss? Granted there were definitely better players there for the taking but most QBs taken 3rd or later are usually projected as back up/ spot starter 

[joewilly12]

Just now, Anthony Jet said:

I don’t see how Mac can be lambasted about petty. He was an early 4th rd pick, he seems like a serviceable back up. How is that a swing and miss? Granted there were definitely better players there for the taking but most QBs taken 3rd or later are usually projected as back up/ spot starter 

3 years as GM without a decent NFL caliber QB. 

[Anthony Jet]

Just now, joewilly12 said:

3 years as GM without a decent NFL caliber QB. 

What does that have to do with petty not being a terrible pick. 

Thats says more to him being a bad GM

what I’m saying is the petty pick wasn’t terrible. Our expectations of petty are way off 

[Tony MaC]

What that last game proved to me was that Bowles was completely justified in not playing Bryce over McCown this year.

I remember that there was an argument that Bryce would be better for Anderson than McCown because he had a better arm. Thinking about it, with his inferior vision I don't think Robby A. would get nearly the production he got if Petty was slinging him the ball.

They were wise not to sacrifice the development of the entire offense for the development of one player. 

[NoBowles]

1 hour ago, gEYno said:

I'm not arguing that a player should "show they can play day 1," but even Eli Manning showed plenty of reasons to believe he could put it all together and become a high-end guy even if he's wasn't there and wasn't consistent.  What I am saying, is generally that the cream rises to the top.  Guys who have the skill set will find their way to success, even if it's not immediate.  I think a QB being "ruined" is a concept vastly overstated by fans.  You don't see that potential from a Bryce Petty.  Sanchez is a guy that people were patient with, because every now and again, he would make a hell of a throw.  But, it was also clear, from his college tape, that he was inaccurate.  The best way to measure this is completion percentage, but ultimately, it's really just about his ability to put the ball in the right spot consistently.  Sanchez wasn't able to do that.  Add to it that he never learned to protect the football, and that it seems, as you kind of state above, that he struggled with things like processing speed, and it didn't work out for him.  I don't agree that the Jets were responsible for his failures, I think, he just couldn't throw a football accurately, and had some other problems.  No different, IMO, than how Stephen Hill was a phenomenal athlete, who happened to have bad hands.  Not much to do about that.

The stat I'm mostly referencing is QBASE, which has pretty good predictive validity, though it also has some big misses, as nothing is perfect nor should it be expected to be.

I guess everyone has different perceptions of patients and each situation. I can specifically remember Giants fans in late year 1 and year 2 of Manning saying if his last name wasn't Manning, he is a 4th round draft pick, he was a huge bust, has shown nothing, has no accuracy, is too mopey, and on and on. With Sanchez, I remember in his first year everyone saying how bad he sucked, and he was terrible, and a bust, and costing us the SB and on and on. Yes, with both there were also people who thought they showed promise as well.

I really don't want to get into a Sanchez debate, but Sanchez was an immature frat boy who needed to mature and act like an adult. Instead he had Rex yucking it up with him and allowing him to continue to be an immature little sh*t. IMO Sanchez was a case study on how not to develop a QB.

As for being ruined, another area I will respectfully disagree with you on that one. I think the most challenging aspect of NFL QB's is the mental aspect, and once a lack of confidence sets in, for whatever reason, its very, very hard to get that back. Bad habits as well. 

Im not a huge believer in QBASE personally.

[Jetsplayer21]

44 minutes ago, Rangers9 said:

Whenever I hear Petty talk after a game it's always about him and his development and learning. Nothing about winning and losing and the team. I will say this one more time. It's not the pre-season when it doesn't count and you can learn all you want to learn. That's what Bowles has been saying all along. He gave Hack and Petty lots of reps and action in exhibition games to see what they could do. Neither of them was able to win the job and be the best Qb on the team. I want a coach who wants to win games. If you want to develop players go to a developmental league or the minors. 

I laugh at anyone who actually thought he would ever be more than a Mark Sanchez type backup. I mean if we let him play through it, I’m sure he could play at the Sanchez level lol. I know it’s hard to think backup when we can’t even find a consistent starter, but I’m ok with petty as #2. Nothing more. I know he won’t get a better offer either, he is a #3 on most teams . 

[ZachEY]

51 minutes ago, peebag said:

Maybe he is bad, maybe he isn't.  Too bad there wasn't a season available where there was lowered expectations of the team and you could start a young qb to get that experience.

Or, maybe the people who drafted him, and see him everyday, don't have him included in the future of the organization, and don't even feel he's worth developing, so they'd rather get some competence at the QB position to help the rest of the players on the team.

[ZachEY]

7 minutes ago, NoBowles said:

I guess everyone has different perceptions of patients and each situation. I can specifically remember Giants fans in late year 1 and year 2 of Manning saying if his last name wasn't Manning, he is a 4th round draft pick, he was a huge bust, has shown nothing, has no accuracy, is too mopey, and on and on. With Sanchez, I remember in his first year everyone saying how bad he sucked, and he was terrible, and a bust, and costing us the SB and on and on. Yes, with both there were also people who thought they showed promise as well.

I really don't want to get into a Sanchez debate, but Sanchez was an immature frat boy who needed to mature and act like an adult. Instead he had Rex yucking it up with him and allowing him to continue to be an immature little sh*t. IMO Sanchez was a case study on how not to develop a QB.

As for being ruined, another area I will respectfully disagree with you on that one. I think the most challenging aspect of NFL QB's is the mental aspect, and once a lack of confidence sets in, for whatever reason, its very, very hard to get that back. Bad habits as well. 

Im not a huge believer in QBASE personally.

What are we even debating at this point?  That fans are reactionary?  I think we're both gonna be on the same side of that one.

Our difference of opinion is more on how much being a quality QB can be taught vs. how much it just is.  I don't think any amount of teaching, because, remember the traffic lights, the joe girardi sliding lessons, etc. were going to make Sanchez a QB.  He was a "frat boy," but more importantly, in my opinion, was simply that he did not throw the football accurately with regularity.  I think that is a physical skill that you either have, or you don't.  Sanchez didn't have it.  It's hard, most people don't.  But, I don't think putting him on the Packers, Steelers, Pats, etc, was going to help him.  In fact, Garrapolo is the first person who was under Brady who looks to show some promise, despite all the learning and coaching he received.  Same could be said about everyone under P.Manning.  They all flopped.  That's why, as I said, I think QBs are born, and then polished.

I don't disagree that the mental aspect is important.  I just think "ruined" is too definitive.  I think if a guy has talent, he won't be destroyed for good.  It may take him longer, it may take him a change of scenery, but if you don't have a 'short memory' you're never going to succeed, even if you're Brady/Manning/Rodgers/etc.  

[NoBowles]

1 hour ago, gEYno said:

Agreed.

The argument against Mac shouldn't be Petty.  It's kind of Hack, but it's really the total body of work at the most important position, by far, in the NFL.

We currently have no one, and we're in a position (barring major shake-up) to get at best, the 3rd best prospect in the draft.

This is pretty disastrous when, in today's NFL, you really only have one job.  Find a QB.

I agree with you.

You and I disagree to the extent that Bowles is influencing this, but at the end of the day I agree completely.

[peebag]

12 minutes ago, gEYno said:

Or, maybe the people who drafted him, and see him everyday, don't have him included in the future of the organization, and don't even feel he's worth developing, so they'd rather get some competence at the QB position to help the rest of the players on the team.

true, but they sure don't have a large body of work to compare.

[munchmemory]

If you can't hit wide open receivers with simple passes, what hope do we have with Petty?  IMO, none.   Petty is like the many QBs we have signed/drafted over the years:  Head scratchers or JAGs. (BTW, did you guys hear the stat during our game?  We lead the NFL in the number of QB changes (11) over the past 18 years.  Insane.)

If we somehow cut Petty and Hack at the end of the season, how many teams would be waiting to sign either?  Again, IMO, none.

[ZachEY]

4 minutes ago, NoBowles said:

I agree with you.

You and I disagree to the extent that Bowles is influencing this, but at the end of the day I agree completely.

Do you really believe though, that Bowles, doesn't think it's vital to success to have a good QB?

This is the problem I have with criticism of most coaches, not just Bowels.  The arguments fans make against them, generally assume they are absolutely clueless.  Which, is just silly.

There are arguments to be made that Bowles is doing a bad job, it's just that those aren't the arguments made here on JN.

[NoBowles]

1 minute ago, gEYno said:

What are we even debating at this point?  That fans are reactionary?  I think we're both gonna be on the same side of that one.

Our difference of opinion is more on how much being a quality QB can be taught vs. how much it just is.  I don't think any amount of teaching, because, remember the traffic lights, the joe girardi sliding lessons, etc. were going to make Sanchez a QB.  He was a "frat boy," but more importantly, in my opinion, was simply that he did not throw the football accurately with regularity.  I think that is a physical skill that you either have, or you don't.  Sanchez didn't have it.  It's hard, most people don't.  But, I don't think putting him on the Packers, Steelers, Pats, etc, was going to help him.  In fact, Garrapolo is the first person who was under Brady who looks to show some promise, despite all the learning and coaching he received.  Same could be said about everyone under P.Manning.  They all flopped.  That's why, as I said, I think QBs are born, and then polished.

I don't disagree that the mental aspect is important.  I just think "ruined" is too definitive.  I think if a guy has talent, he won't be destroyed for good.  It may take him longer, it may take him a change of scenery, but if you don't have a 'short memory' you're never going to succeed, even if you're Brady/Manning/Rodgers/etc.  

I think in a market like NY, the fans have more of an impact than some people think with an organizations decision making process, particularly with the Jets who have a very weak owner.

Hell, look at what happened with the Giants and Eli. There is zero doubt in my mind that the entire org including Mara was in on benching Manning to evaluate Geno and possibly Web. The fan outlast lead Mara to fire the HC, fire the Gm and put Eli back in as starter.

I think there are good and bad fits for certain QB's. I think a very tiny portion of QB's who even get drafted have the ability to play QB at a high level, so I agree to an extent that they are born or not born. But I do think that some coaches and systems are a better fit than others, and I think some coaches have a better idea on how to polish a QB than others do.

I also think accuracy is a combination of many things, footwork, mechanics, mental capacity to process information at a very quick rate, anticipation. Mechanics and footwork are muscle memory. Mental capacity to process information at a  very quick rate is what separates the men from the boys IMO. Some of that you are born with, some of it is prep, some of it is learned IMO. IMO nothing can simulate real game situations and actual real game experience. The speed and pressure is something that cannot be replicated. Some guys are born with the ability to handle it, some learn it, some never can. I also think that people underestimate what confidence or a lack of confidence can do for an athlete.

[NoBowles]

4 minutes ago, gEYno said:

Do you really believe though, that Bowles, doesn't think it's vital to success to have a good QB?

This is the problem I have with criticism of most coaches, not just Bowels.  The arguments fans make against them, generally assume they are absolutely clueless.  Which, is just silly.

There are arguments to be made that Bowles is doing a bad job, it's just that those aren't the arguments made here on JN.

Here is my honest opinion, I think Bowles wants good QB play, but on his list of things he thinks he needs to win, it falls below getting his pieces on defense. And I honestly believe Rex was the same way.

Do I think Bowles would be a better HC if he had a QB, of course I do. But I also heard him tell me "I won't draft a player in the first round who won't play right away." Well, that rules out a hell of a lot of QB's if your not drafting 1-3 overall, which has not happened.

You really think if Bowles was pounding the table for Watson that Maccagnan would not have drafted him for Bowles? Make the same case for Lynch or Lee. 

When Bowles wanted Fitzpatrick, Maccagnan got him for him. Bowles did not say, lets see who is available in the draft or FA, he made it clear he wanted Fitzpatrick back and Maccagnan got him. In fact, it was what I cited as the biggest reason I wanted Fitzpatrick back, because it was clear that Bowles wanted him, and I want to evaluate a HC with the QB he wants.

 

[SMC]

Petty is awful and old (already 26).  While I agree that Hack is the biggest offense against Macc, I think Petty, even as a 4th rounder, is an indictment against Macc.

Fourth round picks are rotation players and some are starter quality.  When a GM drafts a 4th rounder he thinks that player will get playing time on the active roster.  The baseline is, the belief that the player "should be on the field."  Petty fails that test.  Forget about good starter or even starter.  Petty doesn't even look back-up quality.  He doesn't look like he should be in the NFL.

And, not, the Jets fans have never "run out of town" a good player.  NY fans are patient with "glimpses" from young players.  We've seen it in all 4 major sports.  Fans are patient with young players because any glimpse gives them "hope" and on bad teams "hope" is the most valuable currency.

[ZachEY]

13 minutes ago, NoBowles said:

I think in a market like NY, the fans have more of an impact than some people think with an organizations decision making process, particularly with the Jets who have a very weak owner.

Hell, look at what happened with the Giants and Eli. There is zero doubt in my mind that the entire org including Mara was in on benching Manning to evaluate Geno and possibly Web. The fan outlast lead Mara to fire the HC, fire the Gm and put Eli back in as starter.

I think there are good and bad fits for certain QB's. I think a very tiny portion of QB's who even get drafted have the ability to play QB at a high level, so I agree to an extent that they are born or not born. But I do think that some coaches and systems are a better fit than others, and I think some coaches have a better idea on how to polish a QB than others do.

I also think accuracy is a combination of many things, footwork, mechanics, mental capacity to process information at a very quick rate, anticipation. Mechanics and footwork are muscle memory. Mental capacity to process information at a  very quick rate is what separates the men from the boys IMO. Some of that you are born with, some of it is prep, some of it is learned IMO. IMO nothing can simulate real game situations and actual real game experience. The speed and pressure is something that cannot be replicated. Some guys are born with the ability to handle it, some learn it, some never can. I also think that people underestimate what confidence or a lack of confidence can do for an athlete.

I generally agree with most of this.  Can we just start calling each other names now?

[NoBowles]

Just now, gEYno said:

I generally agree with most of this.  Can we just start calling each other names now?

lol sure, you go first

[ZachEY]

9 minutes ago, NoBowles said:

Here is my honest opinion, I think Bowles wants good QB play, but on his list of things he thinks he needs to win, it falls below getting his pieces on defense. And I honestly believe Rex was the same way.

Do I think Bowles would be a better HC if he had a QB, of course I do. But I also heard him tell me "I won't draft a player in the first round who won't play right away." Well, that rules out a hell of a lot of QB's if your not drafting 1-3 overall, which has not happened.

You really think if Bowles was pounding the table for Watson that Maccagnan would not have drafted him for Bowles? Make the same case for Lynch or Lee. 

When Bowles wanted Fitzpatrick, Maccagnan got him for him. Bowles did not say, lets see who is available in the draft or FA, he made it clear he wanted Fitzpatrick back and Maccagnan got him. In fact, it was what I cited as the biggest reason I wanted Fitzpatrick back, because it was clear that Bowles wanted him, and I want to evaluate a HC with the QB he wants.

 

I don't think Bowles would pound the table for Watson, because he's too conservative for that.  But, I do think that it's Mac's job to say, this is what we're doing.  But, GM responsibility... we've already litigated and re-litigated that one.

[NoBowles]

2 minutes ago, gEYno said:

I don't think Bowles would pound the table for Watson, because he's too conservative for that.  But, I do think that it's Mac's job to say, this is what we're doing.  But, GM responsibility... we've already litigated and re-litigated that one.

Fair enough, and I am fine agreeing to disagree on our GM's responsibility, but even if Mac has the responsibilities you think he has, I personally want a HC who will pound the table for a QB, not a safety and not an ILB.

At the end of the day, I think we both agree that we want both of them gone, so the rest of this is just time killing on a Monday afternoon. And me trying to prove to @Maxman that I am actually capable of friendly football conversations  

[ZachEY]

4 minutes ago, NoBowles said:

Fair enough, and I am fine agreeing to disagree on our GM's responsibility, but even if Mac has the responsibilities you think he has, I personally want a HC who will pound the table for a QB, not a safety and not an ILB.

At the end of the day, I think we both agree that we want both of them gone, so the rest of this is just time killing on a Monday afternoon. And me trying to prove to @Maxman that I am actually capable of friendly football conversations  

When I say, he wouldn't for Watson, I mean because Watson wasn't protypical.  I'm confident Bowles wants a QB, badly.  Having a QB literally feeds his family.

[MaxAF]

3 hours ago, August said:

The problem isn't the amount of games it's just that so far Petty has shown absolutely nothing. Jimmy G in 5/6 starts have shown a lot more. 

I agree, but Garrapollo was under Brady and Bellicheat for 4 years. I think that makes a difference. He might be better than Petty also.

[kelly]

22 hours ago, FloridaJetsFan said:

And if Hackenburg is THAT much worse - hoo boy!

" Bryce Petty really stinks "..

...