Jump to content

Jason La Confora: Cousins should choose Jets over Broncos


UntouchableCrew

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, JiF said:

Before Siemian got injured the Broncos were 3-4. 

After the Jets bye in week 11, they finished 1-5.  During that same time, the Broncos went 2-5 with one loss by 3 points on the very last game of the year whereas the Jets got blown out on the last game of the season.  Both teams ended 5-11. 

So, the idea the Broncos vets quit on the season while the Jets youngsters were giving it their all and being more "competitive" is complete and utter nonsense.  

So Trevor Simiens sterling 73.3 passer rating last year was what was keeping the team afloat? Get real. The Broncos collapsed and were blown out time and time again. They dogged half the season and had tons of locker room strife and finger pointing.

The Jets sucked but played hard, hanging with (and sometimes beating) playoff teams all year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 124
  • Created
  • Last Reply
5 minutes ago, JiF said:

Before Siemian got injured the Broncos were 3-4. 

After the Jets bye in week 11, they finished 1-5.  During that same time, the Broncos went 2-4 with one loss by 3 points on the very last game of the year whereas the Jets got blown out on the last game of the season.  Both teams ended 5-11. 

So, the idea the Broncos vets quit on the season while the Jets youngsters were giving it their all and being more "competitive" is complete and utter nonsense.  

give bowles credit for one thing - he said mccown was the leader of the team.  when he got hurt the offense had no guidance on the field.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Beerfish said:

Yeah i keep hearing this.  i have no clue where that comes from.  He acts like is a certain type of coach but his actual performance as a coach is highly suspect in many areas.

I don't disagree. A lot of times it just feels like certain guys are well liked so coaches who have worked with them talk them up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, JoJoTownsell1 said:

Broncos have a nice defense, that is aging and they are looking to unload Talib. It's a defense that was GREAT with Manning and is not on the way up. Meanwhile, their assets on Offense are two WRs that are 30yrs old and a crappy RB in CJ Anderson. 

I am not ruling out the Broncos, but without cap space they really aren't a more attractive landing spot than the Jets. To me the Vikings make the most sense for Cousins, but if not them I think it's truly a coin flip. Does Cousins fall in love with Elway and think he can win now with the Broncos or does he want to be a part of a team that is, in theory, on the way up. 

Both the Broncos and Jets were very bad last season.  I think the Broncos were bad because they were playing musical chairs at QB.  If you have 3 starters in one season, you're probably not winning a lot of games.  However, the Broncos still play great D.  The Jets, do nothing great. Hence when the 2 teams went head to head, the one team made the other quit.  

If you're comparing the 2, I'd say the team that at least does something well and made the other team quit is probably the team in a better situation.  I think having a GM who has built 2 teams that appeared in the SB in the last 5 years is probably the odds on favorite to turn it around compared to a team who hasnt been to a SB in 50 years and hasnt been to the playoffs in almost 10 years with a GM who seems lost. 

CJ Anderson isnt great but with a revolving door at QB and a shaky OL at times, he still eclipsed a 1,000 yards and average over 4 ypc.  I believe he also was #3 in receptions for the Broncos.

The idea that one team is on the up and the other is on the down is only because the Jets only have 1 way to go.  Whereas the Broncos are 3 years removed from a Lomboradi.  The reality?  The difference?  1 team is good at something with a proven head guy in charge and the other is good at nothing with an unproven guy in charge.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, UntouchableCrew said:

I don't disagree. A lot of times it just feels like certain guys are well liked so coaches who have worked with them talk them up.

I think the Bowles is like rex in some ways in that for parts of the job he has excellent qualifications but other parts he is so bad that he is overall a lousy head coach.

It has to be tough when hiring guys to know that a guy is a quality coordinator but not good HC material.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, JiF said:

Both the Broncos and Jets were very bad last season.  I think the Broncos were bad because they were playing musical chairs at QB.  If you have 3 starters in one season, you're probably not winning a lot of games.  However, the Broncos still play great D.  The Jets, do nothing great. Hence when the 2 teams went head to head, the one team made the other quit.  

If you're comparing the 2, I'd say the team that at least does something well and made the other team quit is probably the team in a better situation.  I think having a GM who has built 2 teams that appeared in the SB in the last 5 years is probably the odds on favorite to turn it around compared to a team who hasnt been to a SB in 50 years and hasnt been to the playoffs in almost 10 years with a GM who seems lost. 

CJ Anderson isnt great but with a revolving door at QB and a shaky OL at times, he still eclipsed a 1,000 yards and average over 4 ypc.  I believe he also was #3 in receptions for the Broncos.

The idea that one team is on the up and the other is on the down is only because the Jets only have 1 way to go.  Whereas the Broncos are 3 years removed from a Lomboradi.  The reality?  The difference?  1 team is good at something with a proven head guy in charge and the other is good at nothing with an unproven guy in charge.

 

I think they're both iffy situations. With Broncos, it's pressured to win now while the window is still open with their defense. And after 2-3 years who's left and would they be basically turning over the roster at that point? 

And obviously with the Jets, it's an unproven team and you're going in blind with just hoping they build something good around you. If not, then in 2-3 years they could be turning over the team to a new HC and GM too. 

Broncos are good short term. Jets are better fit long term but it's putting a lot of confidence in their plan. 

He might as well just go to the damn Vikings or Jags. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Beerfish said:

I think the Bowles is like rex in some ways in that for parts of the job he has excellent qualifications but other parts he is so bad that he is overall a lousy head coach.

It has to be tough when hiring guys to know that a guy is a quality coordinator but not good HC material.

I was debating the merits of hiring a "CEO" type coach vs. a "guru" type coach recently with some friends. Despite Pederson's success this year I really think the CEO is the way to go. Organized, smart, analytical. Excellent gameday coach, team always disciplined and prepared. Having a brilliant Xs and Os guy calling plays for one side of the ball can be successful but I think it's more of a crap shoot and harder to sustain success.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, JiF said:

Both the Broncos and Jets were very bad last season.  I think the Broncos were bad because they were playing musical chairs at QB.  If you have 3 starters in one season, you're probably not winning a lot of games.  However, the Broncos still play great D.  The Jets, do nothing great. Hence when the 2 teams went head to head, the one team made the other quit.  

If you're comparing the 2, I'd say the team that at least does something well and made the other team quit is probably the team in a better situation.  I think having a GM who has built 2 teams that appeared in the SB in the last 5 years is probably the odds on favorite to turn it around compared to a team who hasnt been to a SB in 50 years and hasnt been to the playoffs in almost 10 years with a GM who seems lost. 

CJ Anderson isnt great but with a revolving door at QB and a shaky OL at times, he still eclipsed a 1,000 yards and average over 4 ypc.  I believe he also was #3 in receptions for the Broncos.

The idea that one team is on the up and the other is on the down is only because the Jets only have 1 way to go.  Whereas the Broncos are 3 years removed from a Lomboradi.  The reality?  The difference?  1 team is good at something with a proven head guy in charge and the other is good at nothing with an unproven guy in charge.

 

Elway has a history of drafting really really bad QBs. 

Brock Osweiller in the 2nd

Zak Dysert in the 7th

Trevor Semien 7th

Paxton Lynch 1st. 

 

Kind of makes Macc look like a QB guru. He got lucky Peyton had neck issues and the Colts got the 1st pick and were quick to bail on Peyton to land Luck. Ironically, Elway's best draft picks were 1st round Defensive players like Von Miller. His offensive draft picks (he didn't pick Demayrius) have all been busts or sub par. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, JoJoTownsell1 said:

Elway has a history of drafting really really bad QBs. 

Brock Osweiller in the 2nd

Zak Dysert in the 7th

Trevor Semien 7th

Paxton Lynch 1st. 

 

Kind of makes Macc look like a QB guru. He got lucky Peyton had neck issues and the Colts got the 1st pick and were quick to bail on Peyton to land Luck. Ironically, Elway's best draft picks were 1st round Defensive players like Von Miller. His offensive draft picks (he didn't pick Demayrius) have all been busts or sub par. 

Brock was drafted before Elway came aboard. And are we really condemning him for two 7th round flyer? The only true QB Elway drafted with the intention of him turning out to be good was Lynch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Patriot Killa said:

Brock was drafted before Elway came aboard. And are we really condemning him for two 7th round flyer? The only true QB Elway drafted with the intention of him turning out to be good was Lynch.

Lynch is even worse than Hack and Petty and elway traded up for him

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Patriot Killa said:

He’s not. Even though I’m back to leaning towards a young guy .. this wasn’t a bad article at all and it had some pretty solid points in it. 

Cousins is what? 29. That's not that old for a QB. A RB, sure. But not a QB. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, UntouchableCrew said:

So Trevor Simiens sterling 73.3 passer rating last year was what was keeping the team afloat? Get real. The Broncos collapsed and were blown out time and time again. They dogged half the season and had tons of locker room strife and finger pointing.

The Jets sucked but played hard, hanging with (and sometimes beating) playoff teams all year. 

I'm very real.  The Jets finished 1-4, getting blown out and forced to quit by the Broncos.  The Broncos proceed to win the following week finishing 2-3 during the same time frame. They fought tooth and nail week 17 while the Jets got blown out. 

Yet I'm supposed to accept your logic the Jets were playing hard and Broncos werent?  No.  You're wrong.  The facts say so.  You dont make another team quit if you've mailed it in.  You dont follow up and win the very next week, if you've mailed it in.  And you dont fight tooth and nail in week 17 for a meaningless victory, if you've mailed it.

I'm using fact.  You're using feelings. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Patriot Killa said:

Brock was drafted before Elway came aboard. And are we really condemning him for two 7th round flyer? The only true QB Elway drafted with the intention of him turning out to be good was Lynch.

Elway was there since 2011.  Osweiler came out in 2012.  The next 3 QBs taken were Wilson, Foles and Cousins. He played with Elway's son Jack at ASU, the link was pretty widely reported at the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

Elway was there since 2011.  Osweiler came out in 2012.  The next 3 QBs taken were Wilson, Foles and Cousins. He played with Elway's son Jack at ASU, the link was pretty widely reported at the time.

Assumed he came in 2013 when Denver went to the Super Bowl.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Philc1 said:

If we gave Cousins a 6 year deal no reason to think he couldn’t play well the duration of the deal barring a freak injury

I’m sure he’d play fine as well. I’m not against it honestly. Yet he is almost a whole decade older than one of these rookies ..and I guess the excitement of having a rookie QB who may potentially grow to be a better QB has gotten to me.(only would take a shot on Rosen/Darnold at #1 or #2) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JiF said:

I'm very real.  The Jets finished 1-4, getting blown out and forced to quit by the Broncos.  The Broncos proceed to win the following week finishing 2-3 during the same time frame. They fought tooth and nail week 17 while the Jets got blown out. 

Conveniently ignoring that McCown had a 94.5 rating and the Jets non-competitiveness was clearly related to his absence. I mean, clearly Bryce Petty's passer rating of 55.1 wouldn't lead to a dropoff. I guess we should praise the Broncos for winning two of their last five after losing 8 in a row, 6 by double digits...? 

1 minute ago, JiF said:

Yet I'm supposed to accept your logic the Jets were playing hard and Broncos werent?  No.  You're wrong.  The facts say so.  You dont make another team quit if you've mailed it in.  You dont follow up and win the very next week, if you've mailed it in.  And you dont fight tooth and nail in week 17 for a meaningless victory, if you've mailed it.

I'm using fact.  You're using feelings. 

Actually you're just choosing to ignore the far more encompassing facts I've outlined over a much larger sample size. I basically provided clear evidence how the Jets were much more competitive over the first 12 weeks of the season and since you've made up your mind that the narrative isn't true you're just grasping at straws to argue otherwise.

Review:

Before the McCown injury the Jets were 5-7 with one loss of 10 points or more. They beat three playoff teams and lost by less than 10 to four more.

The Broncos lost eight consecutive games after their bye week buy an average score of 30-13. Six of those 8 games were by double digits. Two of them were by 25 or more points. They were 0-5 against playoff teams and only one of those losses was within 10 points. There were multiple reports of finger pointing and turmoil in the locker room.

There's just no argument to be made that the Jets weren't more competitive. They played more playoff teams, beat them more often, had a better point differential, and far fewer blowout losses. The article that was posted clearly outlines this... You claim I'm using feelings when in reality it's extremely clear you're the one pushing an agenda here.

Are the Jets really a better destination? Maybe not (I'd pick Denver if I was Cousins) but your efforts to discount the "Jets were more competitive" narrative are just out of touch with reality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Editor: “**** it’s the offseason and we need clicks.”

 

Associate editor: “Some contrarian sh*t?”

 

Editor: “Sure, Yeah, but...”

 

LaCanfora: “We can say that the Jets are a premier landing spot for free agents.”

 

Associate editor: “Dude, come on.”

 

Editor: “Run with it.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, UntouchableCrew said:

Conveniently ignoring that McCown had a 94.5 rating and the Jets non-competitiveness was clearly related to his absence. I mean, clearly Bryce Petty's passer rating of 55.1 wouldn't lead to a dropoff. I guess we should praise the Broncos for winning two of their last five after losing 8 in a row, 6 by double digits...? 

Actually you're just choosing to ignore the far more encompassing facts I've outlined over a much larger sample size. I basically provided clear evidence how the Jets were much more competitive over the first 12 weeks of the season and since you've made up your mind that the narrative isn't true you're just grasping at straws to argue otherwise.

Review:

Before the McCown injury the Jets were 5-7 with one loss of 10 points or more. They beat three playoff teams and lost by less than 10 to four more.

The Broncos lost eight consecutive games after their bye week buy an average score of 30-13. Six of those 8 games were by double digits. Two of them were by 25 or more points. They were 0-5 against playoff teams and only one of those losses was within 10 points. There were multiple reports of finger pointing and turmoil in the locker room.

There's just no argument to be made that the Jets weren't more competitive. They played more playoff teams, beat them more often, had a better point differential, and far fewer blowout losses. The article that was posted clearly outlines this... You claim I'm using feelings when in reality it's extremely clear you're the one pushing an agenda here.

Are the Jets really a better destination? Maybe not (I'd pick Denver if I was Cousins) but your efforts to discount the "Jets were more competitive" narrative are just out of touch with reality.

Arguing the 5th worst team against the 6th worst team in football?  Damn.  I guess it really is the offseason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Greensleeves said:

Misleading stat - the Broncos QBs had 10 more INTs than the Jets. Their QB play was much worse than the Jets.

True, but it still puts things in relative perspective. The idea that the Broncos defense is a lockdown defense is one of yesteryear -- they weren't that great last season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, MDL_JET said:

I think they're both iffy situations. With Broncos, it's pressured to win now while the window is still open with their defense. And after 2-3 years who's left and would they be basically turning over the roster at that point? 

And obviously with the Jets, it's an unproven team and you're going in blind with just hoping they build something good around you. If not, then in 2-3 years they could be turning over the team to a new HC and GM too. 

Broncos are good short term. Jets are better fit long term but it's putting a lot of confidence in their plan. 

He might as well just go to the damn Vikings or Jags. 

Agreed.  It's not cut and dry.  If I'm Kirk and all things are equal, I'm probably looking at the top guy.  Who do I have the most faith to build around me now and in the future?  I think we're all lying to ourselves if you're answer is Mac > Elway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JoJoTownsell1 said:

Elway has a history of drafting really really bad QBs. 

Brock Osweiller in the 2nd

Zak Dysert in the 7th

Trevor Semien 7th

Paxton Lynch 1st. 

 

Kind of makes Macc look like a QB guru. He got lucky Peyton had neck issues and the Colts got the 1st pick and were quick to bail on Peyton to land Luck. Ironically, Elway's best draft picks were 1st round Defensive players like Von Miller. His offensive draft picks (he didn't pick Demayrius) have all been busts or sub par. 

lol at listing 7th round picks but still Mac drafted a QB in the 2nd round who is the only QB ever to be drafted in the 1st 2 rounds to never seen any playing time in his first 2 seasons.  I'm pretty sure that doesnt make Mac look like a QB guru. 

Osweiler sucks but he's career 13-12 and led 2 teams to the playoffs.  Siemian, a 7th round pick, is 13-11 as a starter, Lynch 1-3.  

Pretty sure Elway has the edge here over Mac. IDK just me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...