All,Four QBs Could Be Gone Before Pick 6

[Adoni Beast]

7 minutes ago, Augustiniak said:

the johnsons are businessmen, and they understand the marketing value of a shiny new qb.  tannenbaum got it too.  sadly if the johnsons weren't prodding mccagnan and his staff to do the work they should have been doing on their own volition, we'd definitely end up with the best defensive prospect in the draft again.

Probably. At least I can say I’m even more encouraged than I was. This report confirms Chris and Woody told Mac “okay you get a shot at Cousins, blank check it. If you can’t get him, its trade up time, because you won too many games this year.” 

I assumed the Jets would trade up, now I feel its basically confirmed. I’m sure Bowles is pissed, he’d trot McCown out there forever. He’s got some serious heat on his seat though lemme tell you. With our free agency + all the first round talent we’ve drafted under Bowles and if we sign Honey Badger, his D better produce.

If we draft a QB he better look good too, or Bowles is gone, and they have his replacement on staff already, Jerem Bates.

Jeremy Bates would continue the NFL trend of The Shanahan Tree, McVay and Shanahan Jr, young offensive coaches. THey also have their DC on staff already in Dennard Wilson.

[UnitedWhofans]

6 minutes ago, ScarletKnight89 said:

I agree. But it would have been easier to start Petty or Hack right away is my point as oppose to bringing them in when the team is still technically alive for a playoff spot, however unlikely it may be. Players want to win. The 3-2 start changed the entire dynamic of the season and I understand why it did that.

I understand too. But IMO, you can't tank a season immediately or give the impression of doing so in New York. You can get away with it in Cleveland but not New York. You'd get killed.

 

[Augustiniak]

3 minutes ago, Adoni Beast said:

Probably. At least I can say I’m even more encouraged than I was. This report confirms Chris and Woody told Mac “okay you get a shot at Cousins, blank check it. If you can’t get him, its trade up time, because you won too many games this year.” 

I assumed the Jets would trade up, now I feel its basically confirmed. I’m sure Bowles is pissed, he’d trot McCown out there forever. He’s got some serious heat on his seat though lemme tell you. With our free agency + all the first round talent we’ve drafted under Bowles and if we sign Honey Badger, his D better produce.

If we draft a QB he better look good too, or Bowles is gone, and they have his replacement on staff already, Jerem Bates.

Jeremy Bates would continue the NFL trend of The Shanahan Tree, McVay and Shanahan Jr, young offensive coaches. THey also have their DC on staff already in Dennard Wilson.

bowles definitely has more to lose.  all mccagnan has to do is forfeit picks and trade up and he's got a pass for 2-3 years.  bowles can get fired simply by not playing the rookie.  bowles can hide hackenberg but not someone like mayfield.  

[peebag]

1 hour ago, Scott Dierking said:

Just me, but I never enter a game where I expect to lose, or where I succumb to losing. It is not the way athletes are wired nor the way programs are built.

It is a fan mentality strung together through hindsight. Even in all those scenarios that you listed, and their possible outcomes, there is no guarantee that is the way it would have played out.

Lat year at this time, the board jockey6 geniuses here were telling us that Sam Darnold is this "can't miss" prospect, that is one in a generation. Just a year later, he is in a group of 4 that there is no consensus built around.

You can have this "we must lose" attitude. But it is not for me. Once you build a losrer's mentality, you are a loser.

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't 5-11 losing?

[Scott Dierking]

1 minute ago, peebag said:

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't 5-11 losing?

Of course it is a losing season. Bu that does not change the way I approach any single game.

[slats]

2 hours ago, New York Mick said:

Not once in the history of the NFL have 4 QBs gone in the top five. It’s not going to happen. GMs aren’t desperate fans.

http://www.nfl.com/draft/history/fulldraft?type=position

 

2 hours ago, Jets1958 said:

It’s possible, but highly unlikely. And if so, then the Jets get either Chubb or Barkley. Not such a bad thing either.

 

2 hours ago, Untouchable said:

Meh

I don’t care what anyone says, I’m not buying that 4 QB’s end up going in the Top 5.

I also think it's unlikely that four QBs go in the top five, and that fans (like Jet fans) who are QB starved have these QBs rated exaggeratingly high. Barkley, Chubb, Nelson, and Fitzpatrick are all legitimate top five candidates. Cleveland could easily take Barkley #1 if they have the QBs rated close, but are afraid of NYG or Indy taking him. Giants could not be thinking QB at all, but always love another pass rusher. The Colts have never been linked to a QB, and it would be pretty shocking if they did take one. And every year QBs get hyped and then fall during the actual draft. 

All that said, I'd be looking to have trade parameters in place with Indy -especially if Mac has one or two QBs rated above all others- and then pull the trigger if his guy is there. Because we are QB starved, and McCown and Bridgewater are barely an appetizer. 

[peebag]

15 minutes ago, Scott Dierking said:

Of course it is a losing season. Bu that does not change the way I approach any single game.

Is this Mo Wilk?

[Augustiniak]

10 minutes ago, slats said:

 

 

I also think it's unlikely that four QBs go in the top five, and that fans (like Jet fans) who are QB starved have these QBs rated exaggeratingly high. Barkley, Chubb, Nelson, and Fitzpatrick are all legitimate top five candidates. Cleveland could easily take Barkley #1 if they have the QBs rated close, but are afraid of NYG or Indy taking him. Giants could not be thinking QB at all, but always love another pass rusher. The Colts have never been linked to a QB, and it would be pretty shocking if they did take one. And every year QBs get hyped and then fall during the actual draft. 

All that said, I'd be looking to have trade parameters in place with Indy -especially if Mac has one or two QBs rated above all others- and then pull the trigger if his guy is there. Because we are QB starved, and McCown and Bridgewater are barely an appetizer. 

right now it's tough to see who cracks the top 6 instead of the 4 qbs, chubb and barkley.  nelson should not be there.  minkah isn't that good, if he were considered an elite cb maybe, but he's more of a safety hybrid.  so these are probably the top 6 picks.  and indy is sitting pretty, b/c you have denver and the jets who will be looking to leapfrog each other and teams like miami and maybe buffalo, if they haven't traded with the giants. 

[jetstream23]

2 hours ago, Larz said:

I think fans like the QBs more than the GM's do and one of them is probably in for a slide 

This.  The paranoia here is crazy.  It's only because the Jets are so QB-starved that everyone is thinking of the worst case scenario.

 

Although, the Jets are absolutely stellar at turning worst case scenarios into reality.  So there's that.

[jetstream23]

39 minutes ago, Adoni Beast said:

This type of thinking by the Johnsons has me more excited and confident that we will trade up for a quarterback. I no longer feel Mac will be stingy with losing picks, like he did when he balked on trading up for Wenzt or Goff.

I’m sure the Johnsons will mandate a trade up happens at whatever price the asking team requests. 

They obviously like Mac overall. But it looks like they want to make sure he gets this team a quarterback, and then they’ll let him draft and manage the cap how he sees fit after that. Ownership saw enough empty seats last year to know the stadium will be even more empty if we don’t a quarterback.

Bingo!  (Not to be confused with Mingo.)  If ownership is supportive and possibly even pushing to get one of these QBs then Macc probably has the green light to go up as high as he thinks is necessary.  I could see the Jets sending a 1, 2 and a 1 next year to the Giants to move up to #2.  And when everyone goes batsh!t crazy over giving up a #1 next year I'll just suggest we think of it as having traded a previous #1 like Pryor, Quinton Coples or Vernon Gholston in order to move up.  

[Augustiniak]

4 minutes ago, jetstream23 said:

This.  The paranoia here is crazy.  It's only because the Jets are so QB-starved that everyone is thinking of the worst case scenario.

 

Although, the Jets are absolutely stellar at turning worst case scenarios into reality.  So there's that.

maybe.  but do you want to be mccagnan, explaining to everyone why you risked this and lost and wound up with another defensive player in the first round?  this is the problem when you wait 4 years to really draft your new starting qb when you become gm of a team.  most gms get more than 1 shot, but he waited too long and he can't afford to screw it up this time - even the johnsons are telling him to trade up!

[peebag]

1 minute ago, jetstream23 said:

Bingo!  (Not to be confused with Mingo.)  If ownership is supportive and possibly even pushing to get one of these QBs then Macc probably has the green light to go up as high as he thinks is necessary.  I could see the Jets sending a 1, 2 and a 1 next year to the Giants to move up to #2.  And when everyone goes batsh!t crazy over giving up a #1 next year I'll just suggest we think of it as having traded a previous #1 like Pryor, Quinton Coples or Vernon Gholston in order to move up.  

That's not going to happen.

The only good thing coming out of this upcoming draft is Mac and Bowles walking papers.

[kelly]

"  all 4 QBs will be gone before pick #6 "..

fixed ^ ^ 

[PepPep]

3 hours ago, Joe Willie White Shoes said:

Good thing the Jets won all those games last year, because now there might not be a QB to pick ar 6. This is a likely scenario -Cleveland takes a QB at 1, the Giants take one at 2, Indy takes a non QB, Buffalo trades up to 4 (or 3) and takes a QB, Denver takes a QB at 5. Playing McCown last year over Petty/ Hackenberg was idiotic. Two less wins and the Jets have the number 2 pick, which was the preseason plan. Now......It’s either sit tight at 6 and hope two teams pick nonQBs  or give up a boatload of picks to outbid the Bills to trade up. 

You have no idea who will take QBs and who will not, at least not at this point. Giants have been rumored to NOT take a QB, Browns have been rumored to pass on a QB at 1 (meaning you can hop them for a QB if you move up to 3), Broncos could or could not take a QB. If the guy they want is off the board I don't see why they would pull the trigger on a QB who is their second choice.   

Buffalo may or may not move up. But if they do, they too would have to give up a boat load of picks. That's how it works. Odds are there WILL be a top 4 QB for the Jets at 6. Odds are it WON'T be their top choice. If they are really set on getting 'THEIR GUY' they would need to move up as well. 

Personally, I think they should broker a deal RIGHT NOW, giving up their 1st, 2nd and 4th for the Colts pick at 3. At least that way they are guaranteed a shot at one of the top 3 QBs and give themselves an opportunity to move back down on draft day if 'THEIR GUY' is gone. OR if the first two picks are QBs, the Jets can punt on taking a QB until Rd. 2 (Seahawks pick) and take the top player at his position other than QB...although that would be the worst case scenario (Chubb, Nelson, etc.)    

[FidelioJet]

9 minutes ago, PepPep said:

You have no idea who will take QBs and who will not, at least not at this point. Giants have been rumored to NOT take a QB, Browns have been rumored to pass on a QB at 1 (meaning you can hop them for a QB if you move up to 3), Broncos could or could not take a QB. If the guy they want is off the board I don't see why they would pull the trigger on a QB who is their second choice.   

Buffalo may or may not move up. But if they do, they too would have to give up a boat load of picks. That's how it works. Odds are there WILL be a top 4 QB for the Jets at 6. Odds are it WON'T be their top choice. If they are really set on getting 'THEIR GUY' they would need to move up as well. 

Personally, I think they should broker a deal RIGHT NOW, giving up their 1st, 2nd and 4th for the Colts pick at 3. At least that way they are guaranteed a shot at one of the top 3 QBs and give themselves an opportunity to move back down on draft day if 'THEIR GUY' is gone. OR if the first two picks are QBs, the Jets can punt on taking a QB until Rd. 2 (Seahawks pick) and take the top player at his position other than QB...although that would be the worst case scenario (Chubb, Nelson, etc.)    

I think getting to 3 before the draft will be tough - as I think Indy will take Barkley if he's there and not trade out. 

I do although think getting to 4 now is possible....It's free for Clevelend to move to 6 - whoever Cleveland would get at 4 they will get at 6.  So if Cleveland thinks they're going to draft a player at 4 and doesn't want to trade down to 12 - they can make this move now rather than later.  There is a risk that The Jets won't need to trade up if Barkely/Chubb go to the Giants/Indy.  Cleveland's leverage goes down (again, assuming they want the player and not go all the way down to 12)

[slats]

26 minutes ago, Augustiniak said:

right now it's tough to see who cracks the top 6 instead of the 4 qbs, chubb and barkley.  nelson should not be there.  minkah isn't that good, if he were considered an elite cb maybe, but he's more of a safety hybrid.  so these are probably the top 6 picks.  and indy is sitting pretty, b/c you have denver and the jets who will be looking to leapfrog each other and teams like miami and maybe buffalo, if they haven't traded with the giants. 

As I said, I'd have a trade in place to move up to three before the draft and, if the QB I like is there, I pull the trigger. The position is too important to dick around. 

Historically I don't believe that four QBs have ever gone in the top five and, also historically, QBs rated very highly predraft drop to the bottom of the first or out of it altogether frequently. I personally would not take a chance that the QB I want would be there at #6, but I also think it's possible (or even probable) that at least one of the top four guys is there, at least. But again, at QB, I'm gonna go after my guy rather than see who falls. 

You have a draft this year where a RB and a guard are widely considered the BAPs. It's not a usual year. It's a shame that Denver didn't land Cousins because Nelson never would've gotten beyond that pick, but he may not get past #2 to the Giants, either. 

[jetstream23]

45 minutes ago, Augustiniak said:

maybe.  but do you want to be mccagnan, explaining to everyone why you risked this and lost and wound up with another defensive player in the first round?  this is the problem when you wait 4 years to really draft your new starting qb when you become gm of a team.  most gms get more than 1 shot, but he waited too long and he can't afford to screw it up this time - even the johnsons are telling him to trade up!

He spent his first few years trying to get a Russell Wilson or Derek Carr outside Round 1 and ended up with Petty and Hack.  Complete misfires and those were the perfect picks to use on guys who would likely be a starting OG or one of our Safeties now (imagine not needing to use BOTH top picks last year on S and taking someone like Dalvin Cook in Round 2).  In any case, Macc needs to swing for the fences now.  This is his last at-bat unless he hits a HR.  

[Augustiniak]

2 minutes ago, slats said:

As I said, I'd have a trade in place to move up to three before the draft and, if the QB I like is there, I pull the trigger. The position is too important to dick around. 

Historically I don't believe that four QBs have ever gone in the top five and, also historically, QBs rated very highly predraft drop to the bottom of the first or out of it altogether frequently. I personally would not take a chance that the QB I want would be there at #6, but I also think it's possible (or even probable) that at least one of the top four guys is there, at least. But again, at QB, I'm gonna go after my guy rather than see who falls. 

You have a draft this year where a RB and a guard are widely considered the BAPs. It's not a usual year. It's a shame that Denver didn't land Cousins because Nelson never would've gotten beyond that pick, but he may not get past #2 to the Giants, either. 

i think part of the issue this year for the jets is the success the rams and eagles had in trading up.  then you have kc and houston last year.  so there is definitely a recency bias here, teams are willing to go for broke and this is a good year to do it. 

unless something screwy happens, the jets will be considering a tradeup for either mayfield or allen, and we know how most feel around here about allen.

[sciond]

let's be honest no matter who is available there are no guarantees Macc drafts a QB. He most likely sticks to hi BPA policy

[Augustiniak]

1 minute ago, jetstream23 said:

He spent his first few years trying to get a Russell Wilson or Derek Carr outside Round 1 and ended up with Petty and Hack.  Complete misfires and those were the perfect picks to use on guys who would likely be starting a starting OG or one of our Safeties now (imagine not needing to use BOTH top picks last year on S and taking someone like Dalvin Cook in Round 2).  In any case, Macc needs to swing for the fences now.  This is his last at-bat unless he hits a HR.  

agreed.  mccags thought he could find a qb the same way he found brandon shell.  but the reality is that he's been gunshy about picking a qb, late 2nd is not that high for a qb.  he should have taken a shot year 2 or 3, then he'd have 1 more legit shot before getting axed.

[slats]

2 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

I think getting to 3 before the draft will be tough - as I think Indy will take Barkley if he's there and not trade out. 

I do although think getting to 4 now is possible....It's free for Clevelend to move to 6 - whoever Cleveland would get at 4 they will get at 6.  So if Cleveland thinks they're going to draft a player at 4 and doesn't want to trade down to 12 - they can make this move now rather than later.  There is a risk that The Jets won't need to trade up if Barkely/Chubb go to the Giants/Indy.  Cleveland's leverage goes down (again, assuming they want the player and not go all the way down to 12)

3

What the Jets need to do is put trade parameters in place for if/when it makes sense for both teams to make the move - presumably when the Colts are on the clock and Barkley is off the board and a QB the Jets want is there. I don't think Barkley makes it out of the top two and is a strong possibility for #1 overall with Cleveland content to take the best QB available at #4, but not wanting to lose out on Barkley to NYG or Indy. I think Cleveland keeps both their picks, but if they do go QB #1 I guess that puts the #4 in play. 

[Augustiniak]

Just now, slats said:

What the Jets need to do is put trade parameters in place for if/when it makes sense for both teams to make the move - presumably when the Colts are on the clock and Barkley is off the board and a QB the Jets want is there. I don't think Barkley makes it out of the top two and is a strong possibility for #1 overall with Cleveland content to take the best QB available at #4, but not wanting to lose out on Barkley to NYG or Indy. I think Cleveland keeps both their picks, but if they do go QB #1 I guess that puts the #4 in play. 

i actually think darnold/rosen go 1/2 whether the giants keep the pick or trade to buffalo.  i also think cleveland trades with indy to secure barkley.

if this happens, would the jets trade up for allen or mayfield, would the broncos?  

[shawn306]

Too me this is not a big deal. This isn't going to be the last QB class to ever come out of college. 

This whole tanking stuff is a load of crap. You play the damn schedule and you finish where you finish.

[slats]

10 minutes ago, Augustiniak said:

i actually think darnold/rosen go 1/2 whether the giants keep the pick or trade to buffalo.  i also think cleveland trades with indy to secure barkley.

if this happens, would the jets trade up for allen or mayfield, would the broncos?  

That's a likely scenario. I think another one is Cleveland taking Barkley #1. I don't see Indy trading down one spot to lose Barkley if he's there, if Cleveland wants him that badly, I think they have to take him #1. Allen seems to get more love outside of this board than he gets here, and Cleveland has been linked to him. Having Tyrod on board gives them cover to bring Allen along slowly if that's the way they decide to go. 

Buffalo trading up to #2 would require NYG to be willing to drop to #12. Would they do that? Or take a QB themselves or Chubb or Nelson? Any of those options is a real possibility. 

I could talk myself into or out of any of the top five (or six or seven) QBs in this year's draft. They all have flaws. Mac isn't the only risk-averse GM in the NFL. Others will be tempted to take the safest option over one of the QBs just as Mac will. We'll see how it plays out. 

[Augustiniak]

5 minutes ago, slats said:

That's a likely scenario. I think another one is Cleveland taking Barkley #1. I don't see Indy trading down one spot to lose Barkley if he's there, if Cleveland wants him that badly, I think they have to take him #1. Allen seems to get more love outside of this board than he gets here, and Cleveland has been linked to him. Having Tyrod on board gives them cover to bring Allen along slowly if that's the way they decide to go. 

Buffalo trading up to #2 would require NYG to be willing to drop to #12. Would they do that? Or take a QB themselves or Chubb or Nelson? Any of those options is a real possibility. 

I could talk myself into or out of any of the top five (or six or seven) QBs in this year's draft. They all have flaws. Mac isn't the only risk-averse GM in the NFL. Others will be tempted to take the safest option over one of the QBs just as Mac will. We'll see how it plays out. 

 

schefter scoffed at the browns taking barkley at 1 this am.  so i'm assuming he's plugged in.  he said probably darnold.  then figure rosen goes next, somewhere, not to the jets.  but i could see the giants trading out easily, gettlemen could get a nice haul from buffalo for this pick.

ultimately, mccagnan is unlikely to trade up beyond 4 i predict, though if he really wants mayfield he'll have to jump the broncos.

[jetstream23]

14 minutes ago, Augustiniak said:

agreed.  mccags thought he could find a qb the same way he found brandon shell.  but the reality is that he's been gunshy about picking a qb, late 2nd is not that high for a qb.  he should have taken a shot year 2 or 3, then he'd have 1 more legit shot before getting axed.

Gun shy is the perfect description of him.  He tries to make safe bets ala signing "known quantities" like Revis, etc.  And, when he takes a QB in Round 2 or 4 he can always say, "Well, it was never a sure thing and these guys are projects."  Everyone knows there's no guarantee taking a QB after Round 1.  But, could you imagine if the Jets were at #1 or #2 this year.  That would be EVEN more stressful for Macc because he'd actually have to choose between the QBs.  At this point, his built in excuse if the guy he gets doesn't work out will be, "Well, we really wanted the QBs who were taken at #1, #3 and #5, but they were gone so we got our 4th guy."  The pressure to choose between the 4/5 QBs would have had Macc drinking 37 Starbucks a day!

[ScarletKnight89]

1 hour ago, UnitedWhofans said:

I understand too. But IMO, you can't tank a season immediately or give the impression of doing so in New York. You can get away with it in Cleveland but not New York. You'd get killed.

 

Yeah I get it but I don't think it would have been purposefully tanking a season if you started Petty for example to start. Petty stinks but I for example would have been able to buy into the idea that you wanted to see him grow with the offense and possibly turn into a starting caliber QB as the season develops. Obviously he would have fell flat on his face but I just think it's different when you make him the opening day starter. They tanked the season anyway when they gutted the roster the way they did and started McCown anyway.

After gutting the roster the way they did it didn't matter how good McCown played last year. It does nothing for us. We probably shouldn't have even brought him in but I bought into the whole "veteran mentor" idea as well and I get why a team would want a guy on the roster with experience.  

[T0mShane]

FWIW, the Broncos sent their full contingent (GM, HC, OC) out to see Mayfield yesterday, and the Giants sent their OC. Both the Giants and Broncos arranged private meetings with him. Maccagnan was there, but no mention of whether or not he met with Mayfield after. 

[Jack Straw]

3 hours ago, JETSfan4life_1 said:

The only QB JETS should be looking at from this draft is Lamar Jackson. A bit raw but has better skills set than all these other QB's.  All these other OB's are scrap for the practice squad

Mayfield - Johnny Manz.. 2.0

Dornald - Matt Leinart

Rosen - Brady Quinn

Allen - Blaine Gabbert

This might be the laziest post I've ever read on JetNation, and THAT is saying something.

[dbatesman]

2 minutes ago, Jack Straw said:

This might be the laziest post I've ever read on JetNation, and THAT is saying something.

"Dornald" FTW

[David Harris]

Yeah it’s infuriating 

[smaxor5]

Do you really think Trumaine Johnson signs here if we lose 16 games?  Honey Badger consideres signing here? Let me help you: No. 

Stop complaining about tangible progress the team is showing.  It's so dumb.

[Warfish]

4 hours ago, Joe Willie White Shoes said:

This is a likely scenario -Cleveland takes a QB at 1, the Giants take one at 2, Indy takes a non QB, Buffalo trades up to 4 (or 3) and takes a QB, Denver takes a QB at 5.

Why are you presuming the Jets would pick a QB at #6 regardless?  Under Bowles and Macc?  

4 hours ago, Joe Willie White Shoes said:

Playing McCown last year over Petty/ Hackenberg was idiotic.

Please link your post here at JN saying this BEFORE the start of last season, thanks.

4 hours ago, Joe Willie White Shoes said:

Two less wins and the Jets have the number 2 pick, which was the preseason plan.

Shows tanking is a stupid and unreliable tactic, since players and coaches simply do not tank.  Ever.

4 hours ago, Joe Willie White Shoes said:

Now......It’s either sit tight at 6 and hope two teams pick nonQBs  or give up a boatload of picks to outbid the Bills to trade up. 

Or, as Macc and Bowles are likely to do, pick a pass rusher or defensive back at 6 like they want to because BAP, then pick a 2nd/3rd tier QB prospect in the 2nd. 

Then tell us they'll "play the QB who gives us the best chance to win, and that QB is McCown".

No point crying over things that were never going to happen anyway.

[Warfish]

1 minute ago, smaxor5 said:

Honey Badger consideres signing here?

Link to report that "Honey Badger" is considering signing with the NY Jets please.

 

[Jack Straw]

5 minutes ago, smaxor5 said:

Do you really think Trumaine Johnson signs here if we lose 16 games?  Honey Badger consideres signing here? Let me help you: No. 

Stop complaining about tangible progress the team is showing.  It's so dumb.

2015: 10-6

2016: 5-11

2017: 5-11

2018: "Stop complaining about tangible progress the team is showing! It's so dumb" - smaxor5