I'm Gonna get Killed for this But...

[JetBlue]

I wonder if in the long run we would have been better off staying at 6, if none of the top 4 make it to six, try to trade down a few spots and take Lamar Jackson.  We would then be in position to use our two second round picks plus, to take advantage of this deep draft.  Their will be quality OLmen and edge rushers we could add. Even running backs.  To me, Bridgewater or Mckown starts 8 or 9 games unless Jackson is dominant in TC, which is rather unlikely.  In fact they probably start the season no matter who we draft with the exception being Rosen.  I think with some development Jackson could be something special.   It will be very interesting to see what happens over the next few years with these 5 quarterbacks.   In fact I wouldn't be surprised if Mason Rudolph is as good as any of them in 5 years.  Whoever we pick at 3 BETTER be all that.   Because if quarterbacks drafted after turn out to be as good or even better, it will be a fail.  Not an epic one, but a fail nonetheless.  

[JoJoTownsell1]

2 minutes ago, JetBlue said:

I wonder if in the long run we would have been better off staying at 6, if none of the top 4 make it to six, try to trade down a few spots and take Lamar Jackson.  We would then be in position to use our two second round picks plus, to take advantage of this deep draft.  Their will be quality OLmen and edge rushers we could add. Even running backs.  To me, Bridgewater or Mckown starts 8 or 9 games unless Jackson is dominant in TC, which is rather unlikely.  In fact they probably start the season no matter who we draft with the exception being Rosen.  I think with some development Jackson could be something special.   It will be very interesting to see what happens over the next few years with these 5 quarterbacks.   In fact I wouldn't be surprised if Mason Rudolph is as good as any of them in 5 years.  Whoever we pick at 3 BETTER be all that.   Because if quarterbacks drafted after turn out to be as good or even better, it will be a fail.  Not an epic one, but a fail nonetheless.  

How often do teams trade down for their Franchise QB?

If you're in the market for a franchise QB and you've identified 3 or 4 guys that can be that man, the only option is trading down from 6. The only complaint anyone should have is winning 5 meaningless games this past season.

[nycdan]

It's not crazy to wonder, but if you turn it around, and put us back at 6, we'd be losing our collective stool samples right now thinking about how BUF was going to trade up to get a top guy and we would miss out entirely.  Jackson is intriguing but I don't see many people who project him to be a franchise guy the way these other four seem to be getting credit for.  Would Jackson, Ragnow, Sony Michel and a 2nd round pick next year be better for us than Rosen or Mayfield?  Fair question.  I think after 40 years of wandering the QB desert, though, it's not unreasonable to go all-in for a guy with the best chance to lead us to the promised land.

 

[Patriot Killa]

Definitely will get killed for this...I don’t agree with you at all lol.

[The Walrus]

Buffalo would be sitting at 3 right now and we'd be disgusted in the inaction of the Jets for a rival team to jump us.

[Patriot Killa]

4 minutes ago, The Walrus said:

Buffalo would be sitting at 3 right now and we'd be disgusted in the inaction of the Jets for a rival team to jump us.

This times 10000...can we ever fully be satisfied with a move from front office? Jesus 

[JetFaninMI]

The trade had to be made. I had no problem with it and even if the guy they pick is a bust at least they had the balls to take the shot. That's all you can ask when it comes to the crap shoot that is drafting a college QB. I would make the deal over and over again.

[Thai Jet]

13 minutes ago, JoJoTownsell1 said:

How often do teams trade down for their Franchise QB?

If you're in the market for a franchise QB and you've identified 3 or 4 guys that can be that man, the only option is trading down from 6. The only complaint anyone should have is winning 5 meaningless games this past season.

It was GREAT during last year....not so much now.

[Larz]

Too risky 

You might wind up holding your nuts 

I like the bold move 

Go get your guy Macc! 

[Untouchable]

I don’t want anything to do with a QB who is an athlete first and foremost.

When does that ever really work out?

These guys always either get injured or the league figures them out after a season or two.

Give me a guy who can consistently beat you from the pocket. 

 

[Mo Lew]

I think push comes to shove Mac knew what he was doing and 3 was exactly where he wanted to be.


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

[The Crusher]

19 minutes ago, nycdan said:

It's not crazy to wonder, but if you turn it around, and put us back at 6, we'd be losing our collective stool samples right now thinking about how BUF was going to trade up to get a top guy and we would miss out entirely.  Jackson is intriguing but I don't see many people who project him to be a franchise guy the way these other four seem to be getting credit for.  Would Jackson, Ragnow, Sony Michel and a 2nd round pick next year be better for us than Rosen or Mayfield?  Fair question.  I think after 40 years of wandering the QB desert, though, it's not unreasonable to go all-in for a guy with the best chance to lead us to the promised land.

 

If he had all three QBs close it’s the right way to get your guy.  Staying at 6 he might be forced to move hard and fast the night of the draft. He wold have gotten fleeced and thrown on a pile trash. The cheapest way to three was the way he did it . Cost go’s up every day till the draft. 

[Grandy]

28 minutes ago, JetBlue said:

I wonder if in the long run we would have been better off staying at 6, if none of the top 4 make it to six, try to trade down a few spots and take Lamar Jackson.  We would then be in position to use our two second round picks plus, to take advantage of this deep draft.  Their will be quality OLmen and edge rushers we could add. Even running backs.  To me, Bridgewater or Mckown starts 8 or 9 games unless Jackson is dominant in TC, which is rather unlikely.  In fact they probably start the season no matter who we draft with the exception being Rosen.  I think with some development Jackson could be something special.   It will be very interesting to see what happens over the next few years with these 5 quarterbacks.   In fact I wouldn't be surprised if Mason Rudolph is as good as any of them in 5 years.  Whoever we pick at 3 BETTER be all that.   Because if quarterbacks drafted after turn out to be as good or even better, it will be a fail.  Not an epic one, but a fail nonetheless.  

Lamar Jackson will not be a good QB, and is not worth making an investment in.

[Untouchable]

Just now, Mo Lew said:

I think push comes to shove Mac knew what he was doing and 3 was exactly where he wanted to be.


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

I know people love to sh*t on Macc and some of it is definitely warranted, but he’s going to look like a goddamn genius if the Jets walk away with Darnold/Rosen at #3 and he didn’t have to give up a single future 1st round pick in the process.

[RESNewYork]

35 minutes ago, JetBlue said:

I wonder if in the long run we would have been better off staying at 6, if none of the top 4 make it to six, try to trade down a few spots and take Lamar Jackson.  We would then be in position to use our two second round picks plus, to take advantage of this deep draft.  Their will be quality OLmen and edge rushers we could add. Even running backs.  To me, Bridgewater or Mckown starts 8 or 9 games unless Jackson is dominant in TC, which is rather unlikely.  In fact they probably start the season no matter who we draft with the exception being Rosen.  I think with some development Jackson could be something special.   It will be very interesting to see what happens over the next few years with these 5 quarterbacks.   In fact I wouldn't be surprised if Mason Rudolph is as good as any of them in 5 years.  Whoever we pick at 3 BETTER be all that.   Because if quarterbacks drafted after turn out to be as good or even better, it will be a fail.  Not an epic one, but a fail nonetheless.  

JetBlue, I've been saying this for a long time. Lots of butt fumbles, down votes. But yes I would have preferred staying at 6, taking Jackson, and keeping the 2nd round picks to bolster other position groups.

To add, there have been recent articles that Jackson ran a similar offense at Lousiville to the Patriots, Arians joking he would come out of retirement if the Cardinals picked Jackson.

There are no guarantees but I am the most confident in saying there is not another player in this draft who would have given the Jets a bigger offensive boost than Jackson for 2018. Period. He knows how to create offense with a subpar offensive line and weapons, which he did all of last season. 

Jackson didn't win the pre-draft process but I believe he ends being the most productive QB from this class.

[Patriot Killa]

15 minutes ago, Untouchable said:

I know people love to sh*t on Macc and some of it is definitely warranted, but he’s going to look like a goddamn genius if the Jets walk away with Darnold/Rosen at #3 and he didn’t have to give up a single future 1st round pick in the process.

Preach it brother.

[Jetsplayer21]

41 minutes ago, JoJoTownsell1 said:

How often do teams trade down for their Franchise QB?

If you're in the market for a franchise QB and you've identified 3 or 4 guys that can be that man, the only option is trading down from 6. The only complaint anyone should have is winning 5 meaningless games this past season.

How often do teams find their franchise qb in top 10 ? Ha

[Jetsplayer21]

19 minutes ago, Mo Lew said:

I think push comes to shove Mac knew what he was doing and 3 was exactly where he wanted to be.


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

Which must mean mayfield ha

[ASH1962]

For once I agree and stand behind what Mac did 1000%. You cannot wait for your QB to come to you, you HAVE TO go get him.

 

You want to blame someone for having to trade up blame the idiot HC who had to play Josh McCown and win 5 games. Winning 5 games means nothing, much more productive to go 1-15 or winless. The only thing that happened was we screwed our position costing us 3 #2's, and they both got rewarded for going 5-11 in 2 consecutive seasons.

Now we made a great trade to move up to 3, time to go get a guy that even Bowltite cannot ruin.

[rangerous]

fair question but mac is showing why he deserves the big bucks.  there must be something he saw or knew to make the trade. granted he took petty and hack and passed on watson and mahomes but just maybe one or three  of this year's group rank higher than those of the previous 3 drafts.

here's to hoping he gets it right. 

[MDL_JET]

Tomorrow is Wednesday. Then after that is draft day.  Must. Happen. Faster. 

[Patriot Killa]

17 minutes ago, MDL_JET said:

Tomorrow is Wednesday. Then after that is draft day.  Must. Happen. Faster. 

I have been sitting here wishing today was Wednesday so I didn’t have to wait another full day.

[HessStation]

Staying at 6 and letting the chips fall might be a better argument but we won't know that until the draft. If it goes Allen at 1, Barkley at 2, and if we find out Colts were on Chubb, and the Browns stay at 4, then there might be an argument and or if Mayfield, Rosen or Darnold are still around after 6.

[RSJ]

Tomorrow is Wednesday. Then after that is draft day.  Must. Happen. Faster. 

I dont know why the NFL moved it back two weeks and put it on Thursday night.


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

[HighPitch]

F off u and your last minute sissys. 

6 was good but 3 is better. F the 2nd rounders we need a good qb

[Obrien2Toon]

1 hour ago, Grandy said:

Lamar Jackson will not be a good QB, and is not worth making an investment in.

Could be a good WR

[HighPitch]

God thursday cant come soon enough. Im signing off till then. Cant take this sissy loser talk. 

 

[Lith]

1 minute ago, HighPitch said:

F off u and your last minute sissys. 

6 was good but 3 is better. F the 2nd rounders we need a good qb

Exactly.  When you need a QB, and you see someone you like, you don't cross your fingers and hope he falls to you.  You go get your guy.  I have no issue whatsoever with the trade.  By moving to 3, we are guaranteed to get one of the top QBs --at 6 we might have had to settle for the last of the top 4.  Or we might have missed all of them.  The trade was the right move, now they have to follow it up with the right pick on Thursday night.

[JoJoTownsell1]

2 hours ago, Jetsplayer21 said:

How often do teams find their franchise qb in top 10 ? Ha

Ha

[k-met57]

3 hours ago, JetBlue said:

I wonder if in the long run we would have been better off staying at 6, if none of the top 4 make it to six, try to trade down a few spots and take Lamar Jackson.  We would then be in position to use our two second round picks plus, to take advantage of this deep draft.  Their will be quality OLmen and edge rushers we could add. Even running backs.  To me, Bridgewater or Mckown starts 8 or 9 games unless Jackson is dominant in TC, which is rather unlikely.  In fact they probably start the season no matter who we draft with the exception being Rosen.  I think with some development Jackson could be something special.   It will be very interesting to see what happens over the next few years with these 5 quarterbacks.   In fact I wouldn't be surprised if Mason Rudolph is as good as any of them in 5 years.  Whoever we pick at 3 BETTER be all that.   Because if quarterbacks drafted after turn out to be as good or even better, it will be a fail.  Not an epic one, but a fail nonetheless.  

the only way we should have stayed at 6 is if we end up with Baker. We could have waited for him or traded for 5.

[southparkcpa]

3 hours ago, nycdan said:

It's not crazy to wonder, but if you turn it around, and put us back at 6, we'd be losing our collective stool samples right now thinking about how BUF was going to trade up to get a top guy and we would miss out entirely.  Jackson is intriguing but I don't see many people who project him to be a franchise guy the way these other four seem to be getting credit for.  Would Jackson, Ragnow, Sony Michel and a 2nd round pick next year be better for us than Rosen or Mayfield?  Fair question.  I think after 40 years of wandering the QB desert, though, it's not unreasonable to go all-in for a guy with the best chance to lead us to the promised land.

 

Wandering 40 years....    that’s a little unfair to Browning Nagle. ?

[Jetsplayer21]

Just now, k-met57 said:

the only way we should have stayed at 6 is if we end up with Baker. We could have waited for him or traded for 5.

We could have gotten baker, darnold, or Rosen at 6. Likely 1 of 3. Not 100% chance of course. If Mac liked all 4 even greater chance we get 1 at 6. If not, we get the very best player on D ( Chubb a rare rushing talent ) or the best player on O in draf ( Barkley). Plus 2 very good players in this yrs 2nd, and another next yr. i wasn’t in favor of the trade, but it is water under the bridge now. I was shamed for rooting jets to lose and only win 3 games. Would be picking 2nd with all 3 of our 2nd round picks back..

[JetBlue]

4 hours ago, HighPitch said:

F off u and your last minute sissys. 

6 was good but 3 is better. F the 2nd rounders we need a good qb

Tell me how you really feel. Btw **** you too.  It is possible to share your opinion without resorting to insults. 

[Simijet]

5 hours ago, Untouchable said:

I know people love to sh*t on Macc and some of it is definitely warranted, but he’s going to look like a goddamn genius if the Jets walk away with Darnold at #3 and he didn’t have to give up a single future 1st round pick in the process.

Fixed

[Fantasy Island]

5 hours ago, Untouchable said:

I know people love to sh*t on Macc and some of it is definitely warranted, but he’s going to look like a goddamn genius if the Jets walk away with Darnold/Rosen at #3 and he didn’t have to give up a single future 1st round pick in the process.

That is a big f***ing  IF.  Mac will screw this up because it is what he does.