Mike Maccagnan has built a Jets team he can believe in

[Sperm Edwards]

2 minutes ago, David Harris said:

Mac had a vision for drafting a QB in the 2018 draft. He did all he could to tank 2017 as the GM.  Cut a bunch of mediocre vets while scouting the hell out of every college QB.

then he traded away THREE 2nd round picks in an almost unprecedented aggressive blind trade to a spot to obtain a franchise QB.

If Sam Darnold is what we think he is then Mac is single handedly the best GM in the history of the franchise. 

Tanking 2017, aggressive trade up = pushing all his chips in.

 

Which is why he first tried to sign Kirk Cousins instead, and would have drafted Mitch Trubisky if he'd fallen to #6 (whereas neither Goff nor Wentz were deemed worthy of missing out on Darron Lee and Christian Hackenberg and extending Mo). #judgment

He could have been the best GM in Jets history 5x already before this year's draft without flushing multiple seasons in the garbage along the way.

The three 2nds compensation was negotiated by someone else when the pick was put into play by the Colts, not by Macc.

Name all the GMs who you think would have allowed a 4th potential QB landing spot to leapfrog us while we stayed pat at #6 after Heimerdinger said, "Here's the best deal I could get to move up to #3: three 2nd rounders." Also after the command came from the acting owner to actually put more scouting resources into this class for this reason, after seeing the "usual" GM/scouts combo deduce that we'd be better off going with Hackenberg and pocket the profit of not trading up for either of 2 QBs who were both allstars by season 2.

[Bowles Movement]

6 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Which is why he first tried to sign Kirk Cousins instead, and would have drafted Mitch Trubisky if he'd fallen to #6 (whereas neither Goff nor Wentz were deemed worthy of missing out on Darron Lee and Christian Hackenberg and extending Mo). #judgment

He could have been the best GM in Jets history 5x already before this year's draft without flushing multiple seasons in the garbage along the way.

The three 2nds compensation was negotiated by someone else when the pick was put into play by the Colts, not by Macc.

Name all the GMs who you think would have allowed a 4th potential QB landing spot to leapfrog us while we stayed pat at #6 after Heimerdinger said, "Here's the best deal I could get to move up to #3: three 2nd rounders." Also after the command came from the acting owner to actually put more scouting resources into this class for this reason, after seeing the "usual" GM/scouts combo deduce that we'd be better off going with Hackenberg and pocket the profit of not trading up for either of 2 QBs who were both allstars by season 2.

Sperm-Goff and Wentz went 1 and 2. We had the 20th pick in first rd

Are you seriously complaining that he didn’t trade up to 1 when it took three second rd picks to move from 6 to 3???   Were you still complaining when Goff didn’t play at all the first year?  If so I’d love to see those posts

As far as discounting Macs successes, you’re being silly.   It’s his job as GM to be responsible for talent acquisition and day to day operations.   He is the general.  All wins and losses go on his ledger, whether it’s trade parameters or FA signings.  No one ever discounted Patton’s successes even tho he didn’t make every last decision

There are plenty of reasons to criticize Mac    If that’s what makes you happy, you can find better reasons.  Your current reasons don’t compute 

[Sperm Edwards]

1 hour ago, Bowles Movement said:

Sperm-Goff and Wentz went 1 and 2. We had the 20th pick in first rd

Are you seriously complaining that he didn’t trade up to 1 when it took three second rd picks to move from 6 to 3???   Were you still complaining when Goff didn’t play at all the first year?  If so I’d love to see those posts

As far as discounting Macs successes, you’re being silly.   It’s his job as GM to be responsible for talent acquisition and day to day operations.   He is the general.  All wins and losses go on his ledger, whether it’s trade parameters or FA signings.  No one ever discounted Patton’s successes even tho he didn’t make every last decision

There are plenty of reasons to criticize Mac    If that’s what makes you happy, you can find better reasons.  Your current reasons don’t compute 

When you find out after the fact what was offered, what he turned down, and how that ended up, then it's fair to criticize that not praise it. Especially when it would've meant saving 2 years and go add it up how much saved that could've been spent on others like a better OL. That move means no wasted 2016, no wasted 2017, no extension for Mo at 2 yrs $37m, no dicking around with Fitzpatrick at $12m and McCown for another $20m, and we'd still have this year's #1 and 2-3 more 2nd rounders. 

Nothing exists purely inside a vacuum. It's a whole cascade of events. 

Also go back and read more in this thread if you want more reasons why he's terrible. I'm hardly criticizing him solely for that move (though it's significant; people are quick to forget we were as desperate for drafting a QB in 2016 as we were in 2018). Anyway it's not my responsibility to know you're only going to jump in and start reading on page 5. I think my replies are plenty long enough as it is without enumerating every reason in every single post  

[Pac]

16 hours ago, Jets Voice of Reason said:

Also stop with the second year of rebuild sh*t. This is rebuild number two because plan A was so bad he had to blow it up again. 

The architect of plan A is in the UK.

This is clearly the 2nd year of the rebuild.  Don't understand why some people can't see or choose to ignore what is so painfully obvious.

[BROOKLYN JET]

On 8/3/2018 at 11:50 AM, dbatesman said:

Executive of Every Year

Perpetual rebuilds

[Jet Nut]

On 8/3/2018 at 10:40 PM, Sperm Edwards said:

When you find out after the fact what was offered, what he turned down, and how that ended up, then it's fair to criticize that not praise it. Especially when it would've meant saving 2 years and go add it up how much saved that could've been spent on others like a better OL. That move means no wasted 2016, no wasted 2017, no extension for Mo at 2 yrs $37m, no dicking around with Fitzpatrick at $12m and McCown for another $20m, and we'd still have this year's #1 and 2-3 more 2nd rounders. 

Nothing exists purely inside a vacuum. It's a whole cascade of events. 

Also go back and read more in this thread if you want more reasons why he's terrible. I'm hardly criticizing him solely for that move (though it's significant; people are quick to forget we were as desperate for drafting a QB in 2016 as we were in 2018). Anyway it's not my responsibility to know you're only going to jump in and start reading on page 5. I think my replies are plenty long enough as it is without enumerating every reason in every single post  

We still would have had to blow up the roster.  We would have had to pay Fitz, weren't going into the season with a rookie & Geno.  And when have we paid McCown 20 mil.?  Drafting a QB has nothing to do with Mo.

Nothing exists in a vacuum is right.  Like going on now about extending Snacks.  With Mo needing to be signed.  And possibly Sheldon.   Or thinking it's would be great in this vacuum to have this seasons draft picks back, completely ignoring the move up to grab Wentz would have cost us more picks that we used on Darnold.  A better prospect.  A vacuum?  

[CanadaSteve]

It just never seems to matter in Jets world; Either the GM/Coach is the worst at their jobs and should be fired after one year if the Super Bowl doesn't parade down Park Avenue. 

And any opinion otherwise, even if you criticize some of the moves and praise some of the moves, gets you lumped into a category.  It would be interesting to actually have a conversation where people could discuss "Yes, that was a terrible decision IN HINDSIGHT," and "Yes, that was a great move IN HINDSIGHT."  However, it always seems to be Terrible move in hindsight, lucky move in hindsight, idiotic move in hindsight, no credit is necessary because it was an obvious move in hindsight.....

Blaming begins in 3,2,1...........

[jgb]

12 hours ago, Jet Nut said:

We still would have had to blow up the roster.  We would have had to pay Fitz, weren't going into the season with a rookie & Geno.  And when have we paid McCown 20 mil.?  Drafting a QB has nothing to do with Mo.

Nothing exists in a vacuum is right.  Like going on about now extending Snacks.  With Mo needing to be signed.  And possibly Sheldon,   Or thinking it's would be great in this vacuum to have this seasons picks back, completely ignoring the move up to wWentz would have cost us more picks that we used on Darnold.  A vacuum.  

I do blame Macc for snacks. He knew he has a wet noodle coach in Bowles and should’ve signed good soldier Harrison rather than surly Wilk and/or Sheldon. He whiffed mightily on that one and left Bowles with guys he couldn’t or wouldn’t control. He and Bowles turned the strength of the team into a glaring weakness within two years. Bowles should’ve been fired for that, although I know that’s not macc’s call. At least Rex was a defensive head coach and knew an entire half of the field. Bowles is only a secondary head coach. He doesn’t know jack else. AND his secondary stinks. Why do we have this guy again? The only thing saving Macc from 100% of the fans being against him is that compared to Bowles, he appears competent.

[Jet Nut]

3 hours ago, jgb said:

I do blame Macc for snacks. He knew he has a wet noodle coach in Bowles and should’ve signed good soldier Harrison rather than surly Wilk and/or Sheldon. He whiffed mightily on that one and left Bowles with guys he couldn’t or wouldn’t control. He and Bowles turned the strength of the team into a glaring weakness within two years. Bowles should’ve been fired for that, although I know that’s not macc’s call. At least Rex was a defensive head coach and knew an entire half of the field. Bowles is only a secondary head coach. He doesn’t know jack else. AND his secondary stinks. Why do we have this guy again? The only thing saving Macc from 100% of the fans being against him is that compared to Bowles, he appears competent.

Snacks is a great guy.  He wasn't as good as Mo at the time.  Mo was coming off 10.5, 6 & 12 sack seasons.  Turned out he became a dog once he was paid but at the time he had to be paid.  Didn't work out but at the time I'd take Mo & Sheldon over Snacks with someone like McClendon.  Snack's a run stuffing, 2 down player.  Seriously for what the Giants are overpaying and what we get at the position, it's not a big loss to me.  Giants will dump him as soon as the contract allows them to

Bowles sure as shlt knew how to work and run a defense when he had some players in AZ.  Let's see what he does with CBs this year that allow him to run his blitz packages.  If nothing changes, you're right and he'll be heading out the door. 

[ljr]

Secondary is what Bowles should know the most about ... WTF is Skrine doing still back there !!! ?

[Philc1]

5 hours ago, jgb said:

I do blame Macc for snacks. He knew he has a wet noodle coach in Bowles and should’ve signed good soldier Harrison rather than surly Wilk and/or Sheldon. He whiffed mightily on that one and left Bowles with guys he couldn’t or wouldn’t control. He and Bowles turned the strength of the team into a glaring weakness within two years. Bowles should’ve been fired for that, although I know that’s not macc’s call. At least Rex was a defensive head coach and knew an entire half of the field. Bowles is only a secondary head coach. He doesn’t know jack else. AND his secondary stinks. Why do we have this guy again? The only thing saving Macc from 100% of the fans being against him is that compared to Bowles, he appears competent.

Such a dumb move letting snacks go and instead paying Mo more than twice the money.  Not like we didn’t even have depth at DE at the time with Sheldon and Leo

[Philc1]

13 hours ago, CanadaSteve said:

It just never seems to matter in Jets world; Either the GM/Coach is the worst at their jobs and should be fired after one year if the Super Bowl doesn't parade down Park Avenue. 

And any opinion otherwise, even if you criticize some of the moves and praise some of the moves, gets you lumped into a category.  It would be interesting to actually have a conversation where people could discuss "Yes, that was a terrible decision IN HINDSIGHT," and "Yes, that was a great move IN HINDSIGHT."  However, it always seems to be Terrible move in hindsight, lucky move in hindsight, idiotic move in hindsight, no credit is necessary because it was an obvious move in hindsight.....

Blaming begins in 3,2,1...........

We hate Mac because he didn’t win a super bowl in his first year?  How about he hasn’t even made a playoff game yet something our last 4 regimes all did within 3 years

[Dunnie]

We hate Mac because he didn’t win a super bowl in his first year?  How about he hasn’t even made a playoff game yet something our last 4 regimes all did within 3 years

Don't you think the problem might have been that he was not able to make the roster moves he wanted?

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

[Jet Nut]

20 minutes ago, Philc1 said:

Such a dumb move letting snacks go and instead paying Mo more than twice the money.  Not like we didn’t even have depth at DE at the time with Sheldon and Leo

Really?  Who do we need more today.  A DE who had 10 sacks on his resume last season or a NT who plays on running plays only?

Trashing after knowing how it turned out, after Mo took the money and stopped playing like Mo doesnt make the choice wrong.

[Philc1]

21 minutes ago, Dunnie said:

Don't you think the problem might have been that he was not able to make the roster moves he wanted?

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
 

No and there’s literally no indication that’s even remotely true

[Philc1]

8 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

Really?  Who do we need more today.  A DE who had 10 sacks on his resume last season or a NT who plays on running plays only?

Trashing after knowing how it turned out, after Mo took the money and stopped playing like Mo doesnt make the choice wrong.

I love jets fans defending bad moves that ended badly

[jgb]

22 minutes ago, Dunnie said:

Don't you think the problem might have been that he was not able to make the roster moves he wanted?

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
 

Someone has to answer for 4 FAs (or more) that rejected more money from jets to play elsewhere this offseason alone.

[Jet Nut]

3 minutes ago, Philc1 said:

I love jets fans defending bad moves that ended badly

I love fans who criticize everything as a MMNQB.  You would have been alone taking Snacks over Mo before Mo turned into a dog.

[Jet Nut]

7 minutes ago, jgb said:

Someone has to answer for 4 FAs (or more) that rejected more money from jets to play elsewhere this offseason alone.

Which 4, or more are those? 

Cousins to Minny doesnt count, theyre loaded, a SB team.  Not a knock on us or that needs to be answered

 

[jgb]

6 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

Which 4, or more are those? 

Cousins to Minny doesnt count, theyre loaded, a SB team.  Not a knock on us or that needs to be answered

 

They all count. They all count. I am quoting @Sperm Edwards with the 4 FAs data point.

[Jet Nut]

35 minutes ago, Philc1 said:

We hate Mac because he didn’t win a super bowl in his first year?  How about he hasn’t even made a playoff game yet something our last 4 regimes all did within 3 years

And unlike the other regimes Macc did what Jets fans wanted the FO to do for years.  Gut the roster and rebuild.  Fans want all the players theyre tired of gone then want to whine that it might take a few seasons to get to the plays.  Then the wish we did the half assed fix to make the playoffs?  

[Jet Nut]

2 minutes ago, jgb said:

They all count. They all count. I am quoting @Sperm Edwards with the 4 FAs data point.

Im seriously asking.  I have no idea other than Cousins, who doesnt count to me.  Cousins would have taken that situation because he wants to win over anyone.  Its definitely his best chance to win.  Not that he didnt or wouldnt come here.

 

[jgb]

3 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

Im seriously asking.  I have no idea other than Cousins, who doesnt count to me.  Cousins would have taken that situation because he wants to win over anyone.  Its definitely his best chance to win.  Not that he didnt or wouldnt come here.

 

Here's the thing. Each individual that accepted less money elsewhere can be explained away. But for there to be more than one in an offseason, even if each one of them has a perfectly reasonable justification, is a disturbing and unacceptable trend. Let's wait for Sperm to name the 4. 

It's like an employee I had who was late to work constantly. Every time he was late he had a really good reason. Car trouble, kids sick, etc. But it was the trend that got him canned.

[Philc1]

17 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

I love fans who criticize everything as a MMNQB.  You would have been alone taking Snacks over Mo before Mo turned into a dog.

I didn’t think we needed to resign Mo four years ago

[Philc1]

12 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

And unlike the other regimes Macc did what Jets fans wanted the FO to do for years.  Gut the roster and rebuild.  Fans want all the players theyre tired of gone then want to whine that it might take a few seasons to get to the plays.  Then the wish we did the half assed fix to make the playoffs?  

Mac gutted the roster he built and got rid of the veterans he brought in here like Brandon Marshall and Darrelle Revis

[Philc1]

26 minutes ago, jgb said:

Someone has to answer for 4 FAs (or more) that rejected more money from jets to play elsewhere this offseason alone.

Because the entire league thinks Mac and Bowles are a joke and they know the ownership doesn’t care.  Thank God we ended up with Darnold instead of Mayfield otherwise this would have been a new low in Jet offseasons

[CrazyCarl40]

21 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

I love fans who criticize everything as a MMNQB.  You would have been alone taking Snacks over Mo before Mo turned into a dog.

Nah. I said multiple time that Snacks was the real deal and Mo was propped by Snacks and the majority of his sacks were empty and meaningless based on when they came in the game. 

[Jet Nut]

9 minutes ago, jgb said:

Here's the thing. Each individual that accepted less money elsewhere can be explained away. But for there to be more than one in an offseason, even if each one of them has a perfectly reasonable justification, is a disturbing and unacceptable trend. Let's wait for Sperm to name the 4. 

It's like an employee I had who was late to work constantly. Every time he was late he had a really good reason. Car trouble, kids sick, etc. But it was the trend that got him canned.

Well who are those players that we lose every year?  Im not explaining anyone away.  Im just saying Cousins, a QB that sought after is different.  Especially when a SB favorite is looking for their FQB.  Not really the usual FA situation.

 

[Jet Nut]

3 minutes ago, CrazyCarl40 said:

Nah. I said multiple time that Snacks was the real deal and Mo was propped by Snacks and the majority of his sacks were empty and meaningless based on when they came in the game. 

Dont know, I never heard that anywhere.  

I dont dislike Snacks but given that sacks come on passing downs and Snacks played on running downs only doesnt seem to make it sound all that true.  Just like sacks being meaningless because when they came in the game.  I assume that means games that have already been decided.  When teams turn away from the pass and try to run out the clock?  When are sacks meaningless?

[CrazyCarl40]

5 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

Dont know, I never heard that anywhere.  

I dont dislike Snacks but given that sacks come on passing downs and Snacks played on running downs only doesnt seem to make it sound all that true.  Just like sacks being meaningless because when they came in the game.  I assume that means games that have already been decided.  When teams turn away from the pass and try to run out the clock?  When are sacks meaningless?

Most of Mo’s sacks came with snacks on the field on first or second down. He rarely had a sack on 3rd down and hardly in the second half. I posted the stats several times in different threads. 

[Jet Nut]

12 minutes ago, CrazyCarl40 said:

Most of Mo’s sacks came with snacks on the field on first or second down. He rarely had a sack on 3rd down and hardly in the second half. I posted the stats several times in different threads. 

How are 1st and 2nd down sacks "empty and meaningless" though?  

[NYDreamer]

You know, I'm excited about the potential future of this team and have to tip my hat to Mike Mac.   Think about it:

Potential Future Offense:

QB Darnold, LT Garcia, WR Hanson , RB Cannon, TE Herndon, FB D. Flowers

[CrazyCarl40]

1 hour ago, Jet Nut said:

How are 1st and 2nd down sacks "empty and meaningless" though?  

Because they don’t end drives? 

[Jet Nut]

3 minutes ago, CrazyCarl40 said:

Because they don’t end drives? 

So any play that doesnt come on 3rd or 4th down is  "empty and meaningless"?  Sorry, a 10 yard sack on 2nd down is meaningful and changes what the opponent has to do.  Can agree that a 3rd down sack can be a lot more meaningful but cant agree that and other down is  "empty and meaningless".

And while we try and figure out the worth of sacks it doesnt make a run stuffer who was replaced any more valuable

[CrazyCarl40]

10 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

So any play that doesnt come on 3rd or 4th down is  "empty and meaningless"?  Sorry, a 10 yard sack on 2nd down is meaningful and changes what the opponent has to do.  Can agree that a 3rd down sack can be a lot more meaningful but cant agree that and other down is  "empty and meaningless".

And while we try and figure out the worth of sacks it doesnt make a run stuffer who was replaced any more valuable

A sack on first down in the first quarter is less valuable than a sack on third down in the fourth quarter. Mo had lots of the first variety and seldom anybof the second. And then he dogged it after getting paid. Not sure this is the hill you want to die on.