Case for Teddy?

[j4jets]

49 minutes ago, Philc1 said:

I don’t want Darnold to start week 1 but I definitely want him to start once McCown is injured or starts to suck

 

Playing Overrrated Teddy = Waste of time

 

And playing ‘never has been’ McCown is certainly not a waste of time. Thanks. So thoughtful. 

[j4jets]

48 minutes ago, Philc1 said:

I don’t know if any of these posters ever even watched Teddy Bridgewater play in Minnesota.  All he did was 2 yard passes and bubble screens and occasionally scramble.  Glorified 2008 Matt Cassel

2008 Matt Cassel >>>> 2017 McCown

but...

 

[Jet Nut]

1 hour ago, Philc1 said:

I don’t know if any of these posters ever even watched Teddy Bridgewater play in Minnesota.  All he did was 2 yard passes and bubble screens and occasionally scramble.  Glorified 2008 Matt Cassel

This is wrong.  For Teddy and Cassel

[Philc1]

7 hours ago, CanadaSteve said:

Thanks for the insight Mr. Spielman and coach Zimmer.....

If Teddy is so good why didn’t they resign him even as just a backup?  They only had $60 million in cap room

[Philc1]

40 minutes ago, j4jets said:

2008 Matt Cassel >>>> 2017 McCown

but...

 

2008 Cassel was a JAG who got a big contract and hype because he got to dump off to Welker for 15 games

[Philc1]

1 hour ago, j4jets said:

And playing ‘never has been’ McCown is certainly not a waste of time. Thanks. So thoughtful. 

McCown is a better player than the gimp

[Warfish]

5 minutes ago, Philc1 said:

McCown is a better player than the gimp

He's certainly good enough to win oh, about 33% of the games he starts.  

[Philc1]

2 minutes ago, Warfish said:

He's certainly good enough to win oh, about 33% of the games he starts.  

Oh I forgot the one legged qb has won multiple Super Bowls already

[j4jets]

5 hours ago, Philc1 said:

McCown is a better player than the gimp

Lololol, your man love for McCown is real!  

[Warfish]

5 hours ago, Philc1 said:

Oh I forgot the one legged qb has won multiple Super Bowls already

Apparently what you forgot was that we were talking about McCown.

[Philc1]

13 hours ago, j4jets said:

Lololol, your man love for McCown is real!  

Yeah I’m in love with McCown because I don’t think Teddy Bridgewater with a peg leg is actually better

[CanadaSteve]

23 hours ago, Philc1 said:

Oh right I forgot you think everything Mike Macagnan does is touched by the football gods

That is all your imagination there agenda man.  You should actually do some reading before you accuse someone of something, but that would go against, well, the agenda.

 

[Fantasy Island]

2 hours ago, Philc1 said:

Yeah I’m in love with McCown because I don’t think Teddy Bridgewater with a peg leg is actually better

The OC who helped McCown is gone.  Ground and Pound will be back so it doesn't matter.

[Jetsplayer21]

On 6/20/2018 at 11:15 AM, j4jets said:

I’m a little confused when people say we should trade Teddy Bridgewater (TB2). There are a few issues with that. He’s either healthy or he’s not. If he’s not healthy, he has no trade value. If he’s healthy, then he’s either playing well or he’s not. If he plays bad in preseason, he has no value. If he plays well, then we shouldn’t trade him.

This brings me to my main point. If TB2 plays lights out in the preseason, we need to start him and be committed to him until the wheels come off. Having a good QB was the only reason Jets traded up to the third. If TB2 ends up being what we hope Darnold would be, then TB2 should stay as long as he’s good. Let Darnold learn and only let him start at any point in the future when he’s better than TB2, whether that’s in 4 games, or 4 years (assuming we resign of course)

Why should the Jets trade TB2 if he’s healthy and plays in the season like he has all off-season? We need a franchise QB and I don’t care one bit if that’s Darnold or TB. 

He was signed for the rock bottom price of 500k guaranteed. I don’t think you can sign a guy for a 1 yr deal less than that. He has inflated stats from the minn dome. Even Case Keemun had crazy good stats there. Brett farve went there yr after he was with us, and had 1 of the best seasons of his career at 40 yrs old. The jet beat writers were told by Mac to build up his hype for teddy so they can get a good trade offer. Those that did will get the inside info during season as payback. Darnold can’t be the #3. Either he is starting or will be right behind McCown waiting to step in. 

[Jetsplayer21]

On 6/22/2018 at 9:38 AM, CanadaSteve said:

Well, I guess we disagree.  I would start Bridgewater for three or four games and hand the reins over to Sam...if he is ready and deserves it.  I also do not have a problem with sitting Darnold for a whole season.  Let Bridgewater and McCown take it the whole season.

I don't see any such reality, but if that is how you see it, so be it.  At least, if Bowles was an actual coach, he should be looking at ALL the possible scenarios, one that includes Bridgewater starting.

But hey, I think we have run this disagreement into the ground.  Some of you guys see it one way, some of us see it as another.  So be it.

Minnesota is pretty close to Canada, isn’t it??

[JohnnyLV]

On 6/23/2018 at 7:17 AM, CanadaSteve said:

We are not going to agree.  I do not believing sitting someone stunts their growth.  Didn't hurt Aaron Rodgers.  NFL is one of the only major sports without a developmental system.  There just MIGHT be a reason why their draft failure rate is so high compared to other sports.  We disagree.  Easy as that.

I would like to hear an explanation of why sitting Darnold would be a good thing.  Aaron Rodgers is in my view a completely irrelevant comparison. GB had Favre. Rodgers was not starting until GB got rid of Fave period. There was literally no thought or decision process on whether to start Rodgers at all. But the biggest thing, is that GB had 2 a day practices and could work with Aaron almost year round.  Even sitting he was able to get a good amount of development but if they had a journeyman QB instead of Favre he very well may have started right away.

But the NFL is very very different than it was there. There are incredibly few practices for teams. If Darnold sits he will get roughly 28 more real practices with the Jets until NEXT year, and a handful of reps during each week of the regular season and then he is done being coached until OTAs

I just no possible benefit to him sitting. None. The only thing you do is delay his development another year. The sit Darnold for a year concept is completely bizzare to me. I can see arguments for 1 game or 3 but not past that.

 

 

[j4jets]

43 minutes ago, johnnysd said:

I would like to hear an explanation of why sitting Darnold would be a good thing.  Aaron Rodgers is in my view a completely irrelevant comparison. GB had Favre. Rodgers was not starting until GB got rid of Fave period. There was literally no thought or decision process on whether to start Rodgers at all. But the biggest thing, is that GB had 2 a day practices and could work with Aaron almost year round.  Even sitting he was able to get a good amount of development but if they had a journeyman QB instead of Favre he very well may have started right away.

But the NFL is very very different than it was there. There are incredibly few practices for teams. If Darnold sits he will get roughly 28 more real practices with the Jets until NEXT year, and a handful of reps during each week of the regular season and then he is done being coached until OTAs

I just no possible benefit to him sitting. None. The only thing you do is delay his development another year. The sit Darnold for a year concept is completely bizzare to me. I can see arguments for 1 game or 3 but not past that.

 

 

If Darnold shows in PS that he belongs in the NFL, he’ll start. My issue is more with TB vs McCown. JM serves absolutely ZERO a purpose in starting. TB has much more upside even if it’s as a trade bait QB. 

Having said that, if TB outplays Darnold and puts together a winning streak with good performances, I’d have no problem if we continued with the hot hand. Furthermore, if TB plays at a PB level, I’d have no problem tagging him and signing him long term. Not sure why that thought process is hard to grasp. The homers tend to think TB is a one legged QB who is about to get killed on the field while Darnold has already booked his ticket to Canton. I don’t care if our franchise QB is Darnold, TB or McCown. 

[j4jets]

2 hours ago, Jetsplayer21 said:

He was signed for the rock bottom price of 500k guaranteed. I don’t think you can sign a guy for a 1 yr deal less than that. He has inflated stats from the minn dome. Even Case Keemun had crazy good stats there. Brett farve went there yr after he was with us, and had 1 of the best seasons of his career at 40 yrs old. The jet beat writers were told by Mac to build up his hype for teddy so they can get a good trade offer. Those that did will get the inside info during season as payback. Darnold can’t be the #3. Either he is starting or will be right behind McCown waiting to step in. 

I think you’ll be shocked when you find out TB was better on the road, although it’s very comparable. 

Nand when was the last time beat writers sucked up a Jets GM? And Manish of all the people? Your theory sucks almost as much as McCown. 

[bla bla bla]

3 hours ago, j4jets said:

If Darnold shows in PS that he belongs in the NFL, he’ll start. My issue is more with TB vs McCown. JM serves absolutely ZERO a purpose in starting. TB has much more upside even if it’s as a trade bait QB. 

Having said that, if TB outplays Darnold and puts together a winning streak with good performances, I’d have no problem if we continued with the hot hand. Furthermore, if TB plays at a PB level, I’d have no problem tagging him and signing him long term. Not sure why that thought process is hard to grasp. The homers tend to think TB is a one legged QB who is about to get killed on the field while Darnold has already booked his ticket to Canton. I don’t care if our franchise QB is Darnold, TB or McCown. 

I think most people who are pro Sam are not against Teddy, it’s more about supporting a top prospect on a rookie contract instead of paying a QB with 1 good knee $20m+ per year.

That’s nothing against Teddy, it just doesn’t make sense in my mind to pay a QB that much when the golden goose in the NFL is a QB on a rookie deal. The only way I don’t trade Teddy is if Sam looks like he doesn’t belong in the NFL.

[Jetsplayer21]

5 hours ago, j4jets said:

I think you’ll be shocked when you find out TB was better on the road, although it’s very comparable. 

Nand when was the last time beat writers sucked up a Jets GM? And Manish of all the people? Your theory sucks almost as much as McCown. 

Well I hope darnold will put together seasons than the 1 McCown had last yr. Better than dome teddy had with 2 good knees and a competent offense.

  So you admit jet beat writers have sucked up to jets gms and don’t buy the teddy stroke jobs to please mac ? ? kinda of contradicting yourself there buddy boy. If teddy gets traded, you mannish will remind Mac about his great teddy b articles as playing a part. 

[Sperm Edwards]

On 6/21/2018 at 11:26 PM, Dcat said:

"the future is Hackenberg". 

I can honestly say I have never seen that comment before.  There was never anything clear about Hackenberg.  It was never clear in the first place why he was drafted at all.  

I’d seen it here, and in various articles (though it requires more effort than I care to spend 2 years later, in the first minute looking I can still find one here or there with this more or less as the title).

He was drafted because yet another Jets GM stinks at this. That’s the guy who bet his job on the pick, so he clearly believed. Most were critical (if not very critical) of the pick; and the overwhelming majority of those who thought it was a good pick were PSU alumni and Jets fans who talk (or post) as though the Jets can do no wrong and rationalize all acts as though its roots were in wisdom.

[CanadaSteve]

6 hours ago, johnnysd said:

I would like to hear an explanation of why sitting Darnold would be a good thing.  Aaron Rodgers is in my view a completely irrelevant comparison. GB had Favre. Rodgers was not starting until GB got rid of Fave period. There was literally no thought or decision process on whether to start Rodgers at all. But the biggest thing, is that GB had 2 a day practices and could work with Aaron almost year round.  Even sitting he was able to get a good amount of development but if they had a journeyman QB instead of Favre he very well may have started right away.

But the NFL is very very different than it was there. There are incredibly few practices for teams. If Darnold sits he will get roughly 28 more real practices with the Jets until NEXT year, and a handful of reps during each week of the regular season and then he is done being coached until OTAs

I just no possible benefit to him sitting. None. The only thing you do is delay his development another year. The sit Darnold for a year concept is completely bizzare to me. I can see arguments for 1 game or 3 but not past that.

 

I find it funny you use the picture of the flogged horse, and then go on to continue the conversation.

You don't like the Rodgers comparison, you don't like the 48 percent failure rate of QB's selected with the top three picks, which would be well over fifty percent if we were to use top 10 picks, you don't like the lack of a developmental league and how it could improve overall quality of the game, you don't like the suggestion of starting Bridgewater to try and raise his trade value, and you don't like every other comment pointed out.  But you want to hear an explanation.

Got it......Let me try a different one then:

 

[CanadaSteve]

4 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I’d seen it here, and in various articles (though it requires more effort than I care to spend 2 years later, in the first minute looking I can still find one here or there with this more or less as the title).

He was drafted because yet another Jets GM stinks at this. That’s the guy who bet his job on the pick, so he clearly believed. Most were critical (if not very critical) of the pick; and the overwhelming majority of those who thought it was a good pick were PSU alumni and Jets fans who talk (or post) as though the Jets can do no wrong and rationalize all acts as though its roots were in wisdom.

To be fair, I saw a lot of Mock drafts on this board, including my own, that had him as a 6th-7th round pick to see if there was something there.  But the whole idea he was drafted in the 2nd round is THE most dumbfounding thing Mac did.  He clearly got a free pass for that one from Woody, because that kind of whiff can cost you your job in their business.

Who knows, maybe that was part of the deal with the devil he had to make in order to still land Darnold this year.....:)

[CanadaSteve]

8 hours ago, Jetsplayer21 said:

Minnesota is pretty close to Canada, isn’t it??

So is New York, both city and state, and further south than us.

[Sperm Edwards]

12 minutes ago, CanadaSteve said:

To be fair, I saw a lot of Mock drafts on this board, including my own, that had him as a 6th-7th round pick to see if there was something there.  But the whole idea he was drafted in the 2nd round is THE most dumbfounding thing Mac did.  He clearly got a free pass for that one from Woody, because that kind of whiff can cost you your job in their business.

Who knows, maybe that was part of the deal with the devil he had to make in order to still land Darnold this year.....:)

Hard to say what was the most dumbfounding. He’s the most famous, of course. It’s one thing to draft a bust in round 2. But a bust is chiefly thought of as someone who can’t hack it as a starter (or isn’t a very good starter). This one he drafted couldn’t beat out Bryce Petty for the #2 (and before that, the #3) QB slot behind such football giants as Fitzpatrick and Geno. 

He and Bowles should have both been fired. People make too much of moving up to #3. The pick was in play, and we were facing the prospects of having yet another QB-needy team picking ahead of us if he yet again sat on his hands. Find me a GM who was in a “This is your final chance: draft us a FQB or you’re fired!” scenario who wouldn’t have done that. Some questioned the necessity, but none of those doing said questioning were in his position of must-do-must-do. The whole exercise was because of Indy’s stupidity. They were facing, at worst, the #1 non-QB pick in the draft, and they ultimately gave it up early for a few 2nd rounders and a guard, lol. Then it turns out Darnold slipped to them and they could have had a good amount more than that. 

[jetspenguin]

9 hours ago, Jetsplayer21 said:

He was signed for the rock bottom price of 500k guaranteed. I don’t think you can sign a guy for a 1 yr deal less than that. He has inflated stats from the minn dome. Even Case Keemun had crazy good stats there. Brett farve went there yr after he was with us, and had 1 of the best seasons of his career at 40 yrs old. The jet beat writers were told by Mac to build up his hype for teddy so they can get a good trade offer. Those that did will get the inside info during season as payback. Darnold can’t be the #3. Either he is starting or will be right behind McCown waiting to step in. 

You were making valid points until you said this. Lost all credibility with that line. There is NOTHING to suggest that, no link, no inside info, nada. In fact the beat writers would LOVE to report during this dead time that Mac tried to feed them some bullshyt because he doesnt believe in another failed player he signed. 

[slats]

6 hours ago, j4jets said:

If Darnold shows in PS that he belongs in the NFL, he’ll start. My issue is more with TB vs McCown. JM serves absolutely ZERO a purpose in starting. TB has much more upside even if it’s as a trade bait QB. 

Having said that, if TB outplays Darnold and puts together a winning streak with good performances, I’d have no problem if we continued with the hot hand. Furthermore, if TB plays at a PB level, I’d have no problem tagging him and signing him long term. Not sure why that thought process is hard to grasp. The homers tend to think TB is a one legged QB who is about to get killed on the field while Darnold has already booked his ticket to Canton. I don’t care if our franchise QB is Darnold, TB or McCown. 

Why are the people who prefer to get Darnold's career started "homers"?

The thing for me is that Bridgewater's ceiling is somewhere around a poor man's Alex Smith, probably minus the running component at this time. He's an accurate game-manager type, and that's about it. He's not a guy who puts the team on his shoulders and carries them across the goal line. He was absolutely beloved in Minnesota, and by Zimmerman specifically, and still they decided that he wasn't worth the $500K guaranteed that the Jets offered. That doesn't tell you something about where he might be at? You keep downplaying that knee injury, too. It was catastrophic and scared off the entire league. He won't have any trade value (even) until he demonstrates that the leg can hold up in extended action in the preseason. 

Meanwhile, Darnold's ceiling is still to be determined. He's a kid who went from LB to the #1 NFL QB prospect over the course of just three years! He was a dramatically better prospect than Bridgewater coming out of school and remains a much better prospect today. They've thrown everything at him in spring practices, and he's had no problem keeping up. Unlike Teddy, this is a kid who did put USC on his shoulders and win football games. This is a big-play QB, a QB who extends plays and hits home runs. This is a talent you look to get on the field and nurture. 

2 hours ago, bla bla bla said:

I think most people who are pro Sam are not against Teddy, it’s more about supporting a top prospect on a rookie contract instead of paying a QB with 1 good knee $20m+ per year.

That’s nothing against Teddy, it just doesn’t make sense in my mind to pay a QB that much when the golden goose in the NFL is a QB on a rookie deal. The only way I don’t trade Teddy is if Sam looks like he doesn’t belong in the NFL.

1

Absolutely. The first four years of Darnold's contract will pay him less than one year of Kirk Cousins in the Minnesota who saw fit to pass on Teddy to pay him. That's A LOT of money freed up to build a team around what you hope/expect to be a franchise caliber QB. That's something you want to take advantage of ASAP. Think Russell Wilson in Seattle. Spend that money and put a team around your young QB. 

Also agree with your trade requirements. Teddy was brought in on a flier as a potential insurance policy against McCown getting hurt or the rookie they picked (they never expected to land Sam) not being close to ready. If McCown is healthy and Darnold looks the part at the end of training camp, Teddy is expendable and it would be criminal not to get what they can for him. Getting a second day pick back after giving up three of them for their QB, plus another $5M to spend in free agency, is the right way to build the team around Darnold. 

[slats]

7 hours ago, johnnysd said:

I would like to hear an explanation of why sitting Darnold would be a good thing.  Aaron Rodgers is in my view a completely irrelevant comparison. GB had Favre. Rodgers was not starting until GB got rid of Fave period. There was literally no thought or decision process on whether to start Rodgers at all. But the biggest thing, is that GB had 2 a day practices and could work with Aaron almost year round.  Even sitting he was able to get a good amount of development but if they had a journeyman QB instead of Favre he very well may have started right away.

But the NFL is very very different than it was there. There are incredibly few practices for teams. If Darnold sits he will get roughly 28 more real practices with the Jets until NEXT year, and a handful of reps during each week of the regular season and then he is done being coached until OTAs

I just no possible benefit to him sitting. None. The only thing you do is delay his development another year. The sit Darnold for a year concept is completely bizzare to me. I can see arguments for 1 game or 3 but not past that.

 

 

2

I asked a similar question on the previous page of this thread: 

On 6/23/2018 at 10:22 AM, slats said:

Opening day 2019, who's the better starting QB? The Sam Darnold who started 10+ games his rookie year? Or the Sam Darnold who sat the entire season? 

If you actually, honestly believe it's the latter, I'd love it if you could explain to me how that works. 

Thanks!

Crickets. 

[UntouchableCrew]

@slats infusing too much logic into this thread.

[CanadaSteve]

3 hours ago, slats said:

I asked a similar question on the previous page of this thread: 

Crickets. 

Apparently you either couldn't, or didn't read any of my stuff....

[CanadaSteve]

2 hours ago, UntouchableCrew said:

@slats infusing too much logic into this thread.

Yeah....TONS

[slats]

7 hours ago, CanadaSteve said:

Apparently you either couldn't, or didn't read any of my stuff....

I’ve been all over this thread. If you have a thesis on how not playing Darnold makes Darnold better than playing Darnold, I have yet to see it outside of “some QBs drafted high played and sucked.” Don’t really see how that’s an argument for not playing the general consensus #1 QB in this past year’s draft. 

[JohnnyLV]

9 hours ago, CanadaSteve said:

Apparently you either couldn't, or didn't read any of my stuff....

 don't like the Rodgers comparison, you don't like the 48 percent failure rate of QB's selected with the top three picks, which would be well over fifty percent if we were to use top 10 picks, you don't like the lack of a developmental league and how it could improve overall quality of the game, you don't like the suggestion of starting Bridgewater to try and raise his trade value, and you don't like every other comment pointed out

 

None of these things are actual relevant to WHY you think Darnold sitting for a year is the right move. What does 50% failure rate have to do with anything? Do you think it somehow becomes higher than 50% if he starts? EVERYONE thinks there should be a developmental league but there really isnt and Darnold wouldnt really be the best candidate anyway. How does playing BW for trade value make Darnold better. I dont get it

[Jetsplayer21]

On 6/23/2018 at 5:55 PM, Warfish said:

He's certainly good enough to win oh, about 33% of the games he starts.  

When you play for the browns and jets lol. If he played on the pats, or a good team. I’m not going to judge darnold either of he only wins 33% of the games he starts if he too doesn’t get much help on O. Next Off season hopefully we can. 

[CanadaSteve]

5 hours ago, slats said:

I’ve been all over this thread. If you have a thesis on how not playing Darnold makes Darnold better than playing Darnold, I have yet to see it outside of “some QBs drafted high played and sucked.” Don’t really see how that’s an argument for not playing the general consensus #1 QB in this past year’s draft. 

Yup....okay Slats.  Whatever you need

This flogging of this horse has gotten old.