Look at Mahomes weapons!

[isired]

You are an elite grammarian. But a subpar humorist.

Super.

[GREENBEAN]

It’s great that he improved.  However, when it comes to measurables, he improved from bad to less bad.  That his team sucked is reason for hope that things can improve, it’s not evidence that they will.  At least not meaningfully.  Yes, I imagine Darnold’s advanced metrics won’t be worst in the league bad in time.  But that’s no evidence they will be good.  Hell, he didn’t even impress against the Bills second string.
Regarding Mahommes, it’s a fantasy.  Pure and simple.  You’re comparing someone putting up league MVP numbers to someone putting up bottom of the league numbers.  Maybe he wouldn’t be as good.  Probably, even.  But, at present, the gap between Mahommes/Watson/Lamar and Darnold is huge, by the numbers.  All of these guys could be, not the same, and still better than Darnold.
The Adams narrative is still hurting the team, and it effects decisions going forward.  It cost us a better QB and 4 other high picks.  It is a not insignificant part of the reason we suck (yeah, yeah, Macc would have blown the picks anyway).  Can we be happy that the player we chose is an All Pro?  You can.  You can be happy about whatever you like.  I want to win games and have a good team.  Unfortunately, in 3 years, our specific All Pro doesn’t really do much to make that happen.

Ok. Let’s start by saying that arguing hypotheticals is one of those delightful little exercises that no one can actually come out on top. It’s why so many people like to do it. I really don’t so I’ll try be quick in my worst way. Cuz we could do this all day and both think we’re right.

I don’t disagree that Mahomes, Watson etc are better than sam right now. It may even be that Sam never reaches where they are. Who knows? But the thing that people regularly excuse when trying to ram home the point you are making is the actual situation someone is In

You’re probably one who doesn’t buy the injury argument and all that.
But I’ll just say that Tom Brady looks like a completely different QB under pressure. Sam is under pressure literally every play. Situation makes all the difference. I won’t even get into the fact that Mahomes has been I. The same successful system his whole career.

If you look at Mahomes with the same drafting that we’ve had over the same period it would most likely be much more difficult for him. Fair enough? The weight on your side is we would have had 3 more second rd picks so there is validity there. Maybe we would have bolstered the offense with them. Problem is our drafting has been weak especially in the second rd.
So who knows?
The issue I take with the Sam sucks argument is that he is improving. We’ve had him for two years (2 systems) and he’s gotten steadily better while his surrounding situation has gotten worse. It may take him 3 more years to get to where we want him. Should we toss him before that if he’s steadily improving every year? Should we complain about a draft 4 years ago until that happens?

I mean hell. We took Herndon a full round before travis Kelce. Is that hurting our team? Yep. In the exact same way. We could do that for so many players and drafts.
The thing you want to do is pick players that are good and contribute. Best case is to actually pick good players at the positions we need of course, but good players are good players. It would be a real problem if we drafted a safety in the first two rds while we have Adams like we’ve done numerous times with the DT position.
Then I could see being bent out of shape.

So I obviously understand your point. I’m not a complete moron (some may argue) but I guess I just don’t see the reason to complain about the Adams vs Mahomes thing anymore. Especially when comparing a 22 yr old kid who looks every bit the part of a franchise QB in the making to that QB we passed on 4 drafts ago.

Make sense?




Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

[Jetsfan80]

5 hours ago, More Cowbell said:

That isn't  true

 Mahomes  knows he has the horses to compete, with Sam, it's  all onnhis shoulders righr now 

 That is a huge difference 

There's also a huge difference in the talent and ability of Mahomes and Darnold.  That is very clear but some here refuse to acknowledge it.  Yes, a QB needs help.  It's also true that great QB's prop up their teammates too. 

I would argue 75 % of a QB's success is about HIM, and about 25 % is his circumstances.  Many here would argue the exact opposite, and the data available just doesn't support that.  

[HawkeyeJet]

3 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

There's also a huge difference in the talent and ability of Mahomes and Darnold.  That is very clear but some here refuse to acknowledge it.  Yes, a QB needs help.  It's also true that great QB's prop up their teammates too. 

I would argue 75 % of a QB's success is about HIM, and about 25 % is his circumstances.  Many here would argue the exact opposite, and the data available just doesn't support that.  

What data supports your position?

[Jetsfan80]

4 minutes ago, HawkeyeJet said:

What data supports your position?

That QB's performance tends to remain about constant no matter the talent around them.

Whereas WR's and RB's performances many times are tied to QB's.

Hell, even Joe Montana won 2 SB's without Jerry Rice.  

Very few WR's "fixed" bad/average QB's.  The only one I would argue is Randy Moss, who might be the GOAT at his position.

[More Cowbell]

28 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

There's also a huge difference in the talent and ability of Mahomes and Darnold.  That is very clear but some here refuse to acknowledge it.  Yes, a QB needs help.  It's also true that great QB's prop up their teammates too. 

I would argue 75 % of a QB's success is about HIM, and about 25 % is his circumstances.  Many here would argue the exact opposite, and the data available just doesn't support that.  

What i am saying is when Mahomes needs a play to be made, he has many guys who are play makers who he can rely on and get the ball to. Who on the Jets can Darnold rely on to make a play for him. That is what I mean that Darnold has to really rely on himself

[Jetsfan80]

1 minute ago, More Cowbell said:

What i am saying is when Mahomes needs a play to be made, he has many guys who are play makers who he can rely on and get the ball to. Who on the Jets can Darnold rely on to make a play for him. That is what I mean that Darnold has to really rely on himself

I like Crowder a lot.  And it sure seems like a lot of people want to pay Robby Anderson $12-13M a year.  

His weapons are certainly near the bottom of the league but I wouldn't say they're definitively the worst group.  Certainly good enough for a QB like Mahomes to still be an elite QB if that was his receiving group.  

[More Cowbell]

Just now, Jetsfan80 said:

I like Crowder a lot.  And it sure seems like a lot of people want to pay Robby Anderson $12-13M a year.  

Anderson does not make enough plays a game to be the guy the way Kelce or Hill is. Crowder is ok but for whatever reason, he disappears  for long periods of time. When Mahones needs a play, he knows he can rely on about 4 different guys and one of them will be there for him. 

[jgb]

49 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

There's also a huge difference in the talent and ability of Mahomes and Darnold.  That is very clear but some here refuse to acknowledge it.  Yes, a QB needs help.  It's also true that great QB's prop up their teammates too. 

I would argue 75 % of a QB's success is about HIM, and about 25 % is his circumstances.  Many here would argue the exact opposite, and the data available just doesn't support that.  

The same arguments that Sam is truly great but held back by a terrible situation could be applied threefold to Josh Rosen, who most here now acknowledge as a BUST. Really the only difference between the two is Rosen had the (mis)fortune of a streaky-but-competent backup waiting in the wings.

Yes, Sam Darnold could be great if he was a Chief or Raven.

Yes, Josh Rosen could be great if he was in a better situation.

However, we know Mahomes and Lamar are great in good situations.

That beats "could" every day of the week and ten times on Sundays.

[CTM]

On 1/13/2020 at 2:22 PM, HawkeyeJet said:

guess the part that I am talking about is more so a question of how/what drives the development of young quarterbacks. Is Patrick Mahomes "this" player if he's drafted by the Jets and had the same exact surroundings and coaching etc that Darnold has had.  I personally don't think so.  I actually don't think he'd be close.  I could be wrong there.  It's not a question of talent.  He's supremely talented.  But lots of 1st round QBs are supremely talented and fail miserably.  Why is that?  Is it all a mental thing that can't be judged predraft?  That's possible.  Is it landing spot?  Coaching?  

Earlier in thread you said coaching is most important in young QB development , now this. It actually relates to the discussion in the other Darnold micro phallus thread.

If you think Mahommes is simply a product of his coaching and surrounding talent and Darnold his, then you are essentially saying that there is zero to little predictive value in collegiate career. And to be fair, many still believe that ... equating drafting a qb to a blindfolded game of darts so you arent alone in that thinking.

However, Qbase proves that there are collegiate traits that predict NFL success and they are reasonably accurate in predicting good players and very good at predicting who to avoid.

Such a system would be impossible if young QB were simply a victim or beneficiary of pro circumstance. No?

 

[nico002]

27 minutes ago, jgb said:

The same arguments that Sam is truly great but held back by a terrible situation could be applied threefold to Josh Rosen, who most here now acknowledge as a BUST. Really the only difference between the two is Rosen had the (mis)fortune of a streaky-but-competent backup waiting in the wings.

Yes, Sam Darnold could be great if he was a Chief or Raven.

Yes, Josh Rosen could be great if he was in a better situation.

However, we know Mahomes and Lamar are great in good situations.

That beats "could" every day of the week and ten times on Sundays.

You’re ignoring the fact that Darnold has had multiple games where his elite ability has been on full display. Dallas, Washington, Raiders, etc this year alone. Rosen hasn’t had a single game like that in his career... 

[ZachEY]

2 hours ago, GREENBEAN said:

Ok. Let’s start by saying that arguing hypotheticals is one of those delightful little exercises that no one can actually come out on top. It’s why so many people like to do it. I really don’t so I’ll try be quick in my worst way. Cuz we could do this all day and both think we’re right.

I don’t disagree that Mahomes, Watson etc are better than sam right now. It may even be that Sam never reaches where they are. Who knows? But the thing that people regularly excuse when trying to ram home the point you are making is the actual situation someone is In

You’re probably one who doesn’t buy the injury argument and all that.
But I’ll just say that Tom Brady looks like a completely different QB under pressure. Sam is under pressure literally every play. Situation makes all the difference. I won’t even get into the fact that Mahomes has been I. The same successful system his whole career.

If you look at Mahomes with the same drafting that we’ve had over the same period it would most likely be much more difficult for him. Fair enough? The weight on your side is we would have had 3 more second rd picks so there is validity there. Maybe we would have bolstered the offense with them. Problem is our drafting has been weak especially in the second rd.
So who knows?
The issue I take with the Sam sucks argument is that he is improving. We’ve had him for two years (2 systems) and he’s gotten steadily better while his surrounding situation has gotten worse. It may take him 3 more years to get to where we want him. Should we toss him before that if he’s steadily improving every year?  Should we complain about a draft 4 years ago until that happens?

I mean hell. We took Herndon a full round before travis Kelce. Is that hurting our team? Yep. In the exact same way. We could do that for so many players and drafts.
The thing you want to do is pick players that are good and contribute. Best case is to actually pick good players at the positions we need of course, but good players are good players. It would be a real problem if we drafted a safety in the first two rds while we have Adams like we’ve done numerous times with the DT position.
Then I could see being bent out of shape.

So I obviously understand your point. I’m not a complete moron (some may argue) but I guess I just don’t see the reason to complain about the Adams vs Mahomes thing anymore. Especially when comparing a 22 yr old kid who looks every bit the part of a franchise QB in the making to that QB we passed on 4 drafts ago.

Make sense?




Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

The issue is, I don't think Sam today looks every bit the part of a franchise QB.  He looks like someone we hope can get better with better tools.  The problem is, Sam looks like Sam at USC.  If you look at the body of work, and not just the Rose Bowl, you see a guy who's inconsistent, sometimes careless with the football, and throws off his back foot.  That's awful familiar.  And, no one is ignoring context, they're saying that context is only a part of the equation.  Context doesn't make Sam go from worst to the top.  There's room for a middle ground, and that's the whole point.  What if Darnold's situation improving only moves him to the middle of the pack.  At that point, do you pay him 100M?  That's why these questions matter now.  We are running out of rookie deal before we have to decide if we're committing to him for a decade.

And, to the other point, if you want to stop talking about the draft, stop talking about how others wouldn't have succeeded here.  Stop comparing him to Mahommes.  Look at the 1st post in the thread.  No one is starting new threads about who we should have drafted, but plenty of people start new threads, frequently, about who we should have drafted and why we actually shouldn't have.

[ZachEY]

Just now, nico002 said:

 You’re ignoring the fact that Darnold has had multiple games where his elite ability has been on full display. Dallas, Washington, Raiders, etc this year alone. Rosen hasn’t had a single game like that in his career... 

This is the heart of green goggles.  Games, that by NFL standards, are average to above average to good, largely against bad teams, are described as "elite."

Dallas - 23/32 for 338 with 2 TD and 1 INT

Washington - 19/30 for 293 with 4 TD and 1 INT

Oakland - 20/29 for 315 with 2 TD and no INT

These are nice performances, all good enough to win... But, calling this elite is absurd.  Especially in a thread that's about a guy for whom these would be very average stats.

[Paradis]

1 hour ago, nico002 said:

You’re ignoring the fact that Darnold has had multiple games where his elite ability has been on full display. Dallas, Washington, Raiders, etc this year alone. Rosen hasn’t had a single game like that in his career... 

ELITE ability you say? 

Did you post this before or after your meds?

[jgb]

1 hour ago, nico002 said:

You’re ignoring the fact that Darnold has had multiple games where his elite ability has been on full display. Dallas, Washington, Raiders, etc this year alone. Rosen hasn’t had a single game like that in his career... 

Not ignoring anything. Just pointing out that the argument “well his supporting cast stinks so he will automatically be good with a better one,” is lazy and not does not advance any reasonable analysis.

YOUR argument however IS interesting and actually based on data and not feelings. Thank you.

[joewilly12]

Sam Darnold needs better players at OL-RB-WR ASAP 

[HawkeyeJet]

2 hours ago, CTM said:

Earlier in thread you said coaching is most important in young QB development , now this. It actually relates to the discussion in the other Darnold micro phallus thread.

If you think Mahommes is simply a product of his coaching and surrounding talent and Darnold his, then you are essentially saying that there is zero to little predictive value in collegiate career. And to be fair, many still believe that ... equating drafting a qb to a blindfolded game of darts so you arent alone in that thinking.

However, Qbase proves that there are collegiate traits that predict NFL success and they are reasonably accurate in predicting good players and very good at predicting who to avoid.

Such a system would be impossible if young QB were simply a victim or beneficiary of pro circumstance. No?

 

I'm not saying that at all.  Never once have I said that all QBs are created equal and the only thing that matters is where or who they land with.  I do absolutely believe that if a QB is selected in the 1st round(especially the top half of the first round) it is widely believed and accepted that they have all the requisite physical tools to "succeed" at QB in the NFL.  That is certainly not to say that all of them have identical physical tools, but they all contain the baseline physically attributes needed.

Since you mention QBASE, I'll use it as a way to try and illustrate the point I'm curious about.  This is now the third time in this thread I'm saying i'm simply curious, and not stating it's a "fact".  I'll also add that QBASE is certainly an interesting tool and I look at it every year now.

For the last 5 years of that model, the projected "best" prospects are Baker Mayfield, Marcus Mariotta and Jared Goff.  The 3 Worst(as far as 1st round QBs go) are Wintson, Wentz and Watson.  

So what makes me curious is why they missed so badly on the "best" prospects, but also seemingly missed on a good portion of the worst too.  Watson and Wentz have both been in the MVP discussion very early in their NFL career.  But QBASE did not project them positively at all. 

If you look at organizational wins in the 3 seasons leading into any of the 1st round QBs form the last 5 years, Watson and Wentz to the organizations tied for 2nd in most wins at 27.  

Conversely, Mayfield and Mariota went to teams with a combined 4 and 13 wins over that 3 years prior to their arrival but were both projected to be very good.  Mayfield has the 4th highest QBASE score ever.

And the rest of the QBS from that class have results that vary.  Mahomes was ranked 4th overall according to QBASE and went to the team that won 32 games in the 3 years(the best "situation" of any QB drafted).  So he was pretty highly regarded and went to a very good team.  It's worked out well.  

Does any of that prove anything I am saying MIGHT be true?  No it doesn't prove anything.  I think it at least would give someone a reason to pause though.  The overarching point i'm trying to make is that I don't think there are a ton of QBS historically that went to really bad teams and went on to have outstanding NFL careers.  Is that a coincidence?  I don't think so.  

And one last thing, I'm not trying to stand up for Darnold.  I had big issues with him prior to the draft(on this board) and I have said many times this year he has issues that aren't simply his surroundings.  

[isired]

If you look at the body of work, and not just the Rose Bowl, you see a guy who's inconsistent, sometimes careless with the football, and throws off his back foot.  That's awful familiar.

Brett Favre?

[UnknownJetFan]

On 1/13/2020 at 9:05 AM, TeddEY said:

Whatever you need to tell yourself to make peace with the fact that we took a strong safety over him and then used 4 high picks on a QB who isn’t close to as good as one we could have had for just one pick.

Nobody new that at the time and Mahomes on the Jets would not have Andy Reid which is a big difference compared to sh$tshow of HCs we have been trotting out there for decades.

[ZachEY]

23 minutes ago, isired said:

 

Brett Favre?

It's a good comparison.  One that I've even made before.  The issue is that Brett Favre, without Brett Favre's arm, is a very different player.  Sam Darnold does not have Brett Favre's arm.

[ZachEY]

1 hour ago, HawkeyeJet said:

I'm not saying that at all.  Never once have I said that all QBs are created equal and the only thing that matters is where or who they land with.  I do absolutely believe that if a QB is selected in the 1st round(especially the top half of the first round) it is widely believed and accepted that they have all the requisite physical tools to "succeed" at QB in the NFL.  That is certainly not to say that all of them have identical physical tools, but they all contain the baseline physically attributes needed.

 Since you mention QBASE, I'll use it as a way to try and illustrate the point I'm curious about.  This is now the third time in this thread I'm saying i'm simply curious, and not stating it's a "fact".  I'll also add that QBASE is certainly an interesting tool and I look at it every year now.

 For the last 5 years of that model, the projected "best" prospects are Baker Mayfield, Marcus Mariotta and Jared Goff.  The 3 Worst(as far as 1st round QBs go) are Wintson, Wentz and Watson.  

So what makes me curious is why they missed so badly on the "best" prospects, but also seemingly missed on a good portion of the worst too.  Watson and Wentz have both been in the MVP discussion very early in their NFL career.  But QBASE did not project them positively at all. 

 If you look at organizational wins in the 3 seasons leading into any of the 1st round QBs form the last 5 years, Watson and Wentz to the organizations tied for 2nd in most wins at 27.  

Conversely, Mayfield and Mariota went to teams with a combined 4 and 13 wins over that 3 years prior to their arrival but were both projected to be very good.  Mayfield has the 4th highest QBASE score ever.

And the rest of the QBS from that class have results that vary.  Mahomes was ranked 4th overall according to QBASE and went to the team that won 32 games in the 3 years(the best "situation" of any QB drafted).  So he was pretty highly regarded and went to a very good team.  It's worked out well.  

Does any of that prove anything I am saying MIGHT be true?  No it doesn't prove anything.  I think it at least would give someone a reason to pause though.  The overarching point i'm trying to make is that I don't think there are a ton of QBS historically that went to really bad teams and went on to have outstanding NFL careers.  Is that a coincidence?  I don't think so.  

And one last thing, I'm not trying to stand up for Darnold.  I had big issues with him prior to the draft(on this board) and I have said many times this year he has issues that aren't simply his surroundings.  

This isn't comprehensive, but for Wentz, they speak about not really knowing how to value his support and his competition.  For Watson, the model had him lower because it becomes more conservative when a lot of NFL caliber talent is around him.

I think, one other issue is that there's an artifact that allows spread QBs with high completion percentages who play a lot of games, to rise more than it should.

Like any tool, use with caution.

[GREENBEAN]

There's also a huge difference in the talent and ability of Mahomes and Darnold.  That is very clear but some here refuse to acknowledge it.  Yes, a QB needs help.  It's also true that great QB's prop up their teammates too. 
I would argue 75 % of a QB's success is about HIM, and about 25 % is his circumstances.  Many here would argue the exact opposite, and the data available just doesn't support that.  

Not untrue. But I would also say comfort in a system is also a factor.
Mahomes- same system his entire career.
Darnold - 2nd system in two years.


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

[joewilly12]

Patrick Mahomes inherited a really good roster Sam Darnold did not. 

[Jetsfan80]

43 minutes ago, GREENBEAN said:

Not untrue. But I would also say comfort in a system is also a factor.
Mahomes- same system his entire career.
Darnold - 2nd system in two years.

 

A QB who is limited by a system or can't adapt to a new system will never be elite.  

[CTM]

1 hour ago, HawkeyeJet said:

I'm not saying that at all.  Never once have I said that all QBs are created equal and the only thing that matters is where or who they land with.  I do absolutely believe that if a QB is selected in the 1st round(especially the top half of the first round) it is widely believed and accepted that they have all the requisite physical tools to "succeed" at QB in the NFL.  That is certainly not to say that all of them have identical physical tools, but they all contain the baseline physically attributes needed.

Since you mention QBASE, I'll use it as a way to try and illustrate the point I'm curious about.  This is now the third time in this thread I'm saying i'm simply curious, and not stating it's a "fact".  I'll also add that QBASE is certainly an interesting tool and I look at it every year now.

For the last 5 years of that model, the projected "best" prospects are Baker Mayfield, Marcus Mariotta and Jared Goff.  The 3 Worst(as far as 1st round QBs go) are Wintson, Wentz and Watson.  

So what makes me curious is why they missed so badly on the "best" prospects, but also seemingly missed on a good portion of the worst too.  Watson and Wentz have both been in the MVP discussion very early in their NFL career.  But QBASE did not project them positively at all. 

If you look at organizational wins in the 3 seasons leading into any of the 1st round QBs form the last 5 years, Watson and Wentz to the organizations tied for 2nd in most wins at 27.  

Conversely, Mayfield and Mariota went to teams with a combined 4 and 13 wins over that 3 years prior to their arrival but were both projected to be very good.  Mayfield has the 4th highest QBASE score ever.

And the rest of the QBS from that class have results that vary.  Mahomes was ranked 4th overall according to QBASE and went to the team that won 32 games in the 3 years(the best "situation" of any QB drafted).  So he was pretty highly regarded and went to a very good team.  It's worked out well.  

Does any of that prove anything I am saying MIGHT be true?  No it doesn't prove anything.  I think it at least would give someone a reason to pause though.  The overarching point i'm trying to make is that I don't think there are a ton of QBS historically that went to really bad teams and went on to have outstanding NFL careers.  Is that a coincidence?  I don't think so.  

And one last thing, I'm not trying to stand up for Darnold.  I had big issues with him prior to the draft(on this board) and I have said many times this year he has issues that aren't simply his surroundings.  

I think it's too early to look at some of those QB's, QBase projects prductivity years 3-5, most of those guys haven't been in the league for 5 complete years. Wentz was 20th in DVOA this year and has lost a lot of rookie year shine. Remains to be see where he ends up. Goff has been good but down this year but has already hit his targetted DYAR. Mayfield had a great rookie year and a poop second year, what will next year bring ?  Will he continue posing topless and doing commercials or will he go back to working his butt off to be the best. I don't know. You left off the true worst Josh Allen for some reason who has been underwhelming. Watson looks like a miss (although to be fair they didn't predict -DYAR like they did Allen). I also know they consistantly tweak thier formulas and are likely thinking of better ways to account for the proliferation of mobile QB's on the NFL level as well as the spread offense in college. THey presented an alternate model based on functional mobility in 2018

Further not only are you examples not even through the 5 year period, you are only listing 6 cherry picked  QB's so there just isn't enough to make any assertion as to it's predictive ability. Winston and Mariotta are the only players you listed who have played 5 years, and Mariotta is in bust land (which qbase projected a 22.8% chance) and Winston is in jag land (a 25.8% chance). Obviously not a great year, However, 2016 has them nailing Goff (adequate starter), Lynch (bust), Hackenberg (bust) and culling out Dak Prescott as a less hyped player with a 50% chance of being adequate starter or better. Wentz looks like a potential miss but I'm not convinced he's going to be a anything more than an overpaid & adequate player long term.

At the end of day, nobody is suggesting Qbase is infallible, how could it be, but when you look longer term to include as many projections as possible the results are very compelling:

 

[NYJ1]

You mean I've been saying how untalented this team is and only NOW Jets fans are understanding me? 

[Jetsfan80]

4 hours ago, nico002 said:

You’re ignoring the fact that Darnold has had multiple games where his elite ability has been on full display. Dallas, Washington, Raiders, etc this year alone. Rosen hasn’t had a single game like that in his career... 

What you consider "elite ability" is quite flawed when it comes to discussing Sam vs other QB's.

[ZachEY]

19 minutes ago, NYJ1 said:

You mean I've been saying how untalented this team is and only NOW Jets fans are understanding me? 

Indeed.  Up until you said something, we all thought this team was really good.  Thank you.

[CTM]

1 minute ago, Jetsfan80 said:

What you consider "elite" QB play is quite flawed when it comes to discussing Sam.

Darnold had elite mono 

[Jetsfan80]

25 minutes ago, NYJ1 said:

You mean I've been saying how untalented this team is and only NOW Jets fans are understanding me? 

Yes, you were the only one around here suggesting the Jets have a sh*tty roster.  Wow, what a Nostradamus you are. 

[Jetsfan80]

4 minutes ago, CTM said:

Darnold had elite mono 

I sure hope so.  I'd be very disappointed to find out the chick from Morristown he banged was anything less than a NYC 8.  

[CTM]

4 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Yes, you were the only one around here suggesting the Jets have a sh*tty roster.  Wow, what a Nostradamus you are. 

Playoff roster

[Jetty]

On 1/13/2020 at 10:26 PM, bealeb319 said:

Yes. Kelce is better than kittle. Statistically and in every other way. This is a super easy one...this week in football - kittle 3 receptions for 16 yards. Kelce - 10 receptions for 134 yards and three touchdowns. Which one was more valuable to their team this week?

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using JetNation.com mobile app
 

Since you like to look at stats, look up what team is a top 3 passing team, then look up what team is a top 3 rushing team. Then think about how that can affect stats.

Any one who WATCHES the game, knows Kittle is better. Aside from his catching and playmaking, have you seen Kittle’s blocking ability?

[Jetster]

12 hours ago, joewilly12 said:

Patrick Mahomes inherited a really good roster Sam Darnold did not. 

Sam Darnold is Archie Manning. Good QB, horrible team. So Patrick Mahomes put up 51 on a horrible Texas defense with weapons galore against a bunch of no names. Sam Darnolds offense scored 34 points 3 weeks a row with the 32nd ranked oline in the league. 

[Jetster]

7 hours ago, Young Jetty said:

Since you like to look at stats, look up what team is a top 3 passing team, then look up what team is a top 3 rushing team. Then think about how that can affect stats.

Any one who WATCHES the game, knows Kittle is better. Aside from his catching and playmaking, have you seen Kittle’s blocking ability?

It just amazes me that Macc took ANOTHER TE in Wesco? If he thought we needed another TE why didn't draft Kittle in 2018. I know Herndon was suspended but was a rookie TE going to fill in immediately? JD just grabbed Griffin off the scrap heap to contribute. 

I think our drafting changes dramatically now with Joe D in charge.