Jump to content

Adam Schefter: I expect Sam Darnold to start for the Jets next season


Maxman

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Charlie Brown said:

IMO Sam Darnold was progressing in his rookie season under Jermey Bates and I see the Green Bay as my evidence.  Played great that game.

When Darnold was drafted he was raw and NOT READY for the NFL!

NOT READY!!!!  

THAT IS WHY I DIDN'T WANT SAM DARNOLD DRAFTED!!!

I knew that the Jets suck at developing anyone at the QB position..... so I said No!

Think they had no skill players, No OL and in Jermey Bates a coach who had been out of the NFL for years as thier OC!

So for people to say Darnold's College tape wasn't perfect, they are right! But how could it be when he was a PROJECT!!!

So Sam plays well at times, for example look at what he did with the Rams this year.  And before people respond with silliness look at HOF bound QB Russell Wilson did aaginst the same team and defense. And that was only one game!  Sam was in fact awful for most of the season to me but the Jets STUNK this year putting Darnold aside.

So at this point it might be time to move on from Darnold, and I'm fine with that--- but at the end of the day I will accept and go with whatever JD and Selah decide.

Bottom line none of us have a choice , we're all Jet fans or we wouldn't be on here debating these topics.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, 56mehl56 said:

So you agree to disagree with McCown as well then.

You do realize McCown had one of, if not the best, season of his career in a version of that offense under Morton/Bates? 

Aren’t you disagreeing with McCown when he says

“I think given his talent level and the type of kid he is,” McCown said, “letting him have a go with a new offense would be wise just from the standpoint of how much you believe in the guys you hired.”

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, 56mehl56 said:

He's an NFL QB , the onus is on him to master his craft , so he should know what he's doing in all situations. Did Gase give him the best condition to work under , probably not. But we have no idea how much time Gase and staff spent with Sam each week preparing him for the upcoming games . At some point Sam needs to put on the big boy pants and stop relying on others for excuses.  IMO Sam's always relied on his athleticism and natural instincts to carry him along . I question if he's just another above average athlete with no passion for the game. 

This is just an odd post..... Of course players must master their craft!

Glad you caught on to this fact but coaches are there for a reason!

For exmple, Ali was the greatest fighter of his generation but he had his manager, Angelo Dundee, there to guide him at critical moments in scores of fights for a REASON-----And it wasn't becuase Ali was an "average athlete' or had no "passion" for his sport.

Simple, coaches are there to guide even the best in the world at what they do to get back on track as needed or for the player or athlete to exceed even what they thought was possible.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Charlie Brown said:

This is just an odd post..... Of course players must master their craft!

Glad you caught on to this fact but coaches are there for a reason!

For exmple, Ali was the greatest fighter of his generation but he had his manager, Angelo Dundee, there to guide him at critical moments in scores of fights for a REASON-----And it wasn't becuase Ali was an "average athlete' or had no "passion" for his sport.

Simple, coaches are there to guide even the best in the world at what they do to get back on track as needed or for the player or athlete to exceed even what they thought was possible.

Yes, Sam Darnold is just like Muhammad Ali.

  • WTF? 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, C Mart said:

You do realize McCown had one of, if not the best, season of his career in a version of that offense under Morton/Bates? 

Aren’t you disagreeing with McCown when he says

“I think given his talent level and the type of kid he is,” McCown said, “letting him have a go with a new offense would be wise just from the standpoint of how much you believe in the guys you hired.”

 

Of course McCown is going to say and believe this, he's mentored Sam and is a friend.  To me the more telling point is that he actually admitted that Sam had problems in his progressions and made poor choices due to it. Not many close confidants would divulge that . If it came from a talking head or analyst I'd give it less credence , but coming from McCown IMO this is more damning. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Charlie Brown said:

This is just an odd post..... Of course players must master their craft!

Glad you caught on to this fact but coaches are there for a reason!

For exmple, Ali was the greatest fighter of his generation but he had his manager, Angelo Dundee, there to guide him at critical moments in scores of fights for a REASON-----And it wasn't becuase Ali was an "average athlete' or had no "passion" for his sport.

Simple, coaches are there to guide even the best in the world at what they do to get back on track as needed or for the player or athlete to exceed even what they thought was possible.

But your just making the assumption that Gase didn't help or coach Sam . You read the quote from Gase where he said he failed Sam to some degree as gospel, but when Sam says he failed Gase and the team - crickets . Bottom both are just saying the "right" things.   Is it all Sam's fault he hasn't progressed - NO , but as a high level athlete he needs to be held accountable.

  • Upvote 1
  • WTF? 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Waka Flocka Flacco said:

Yes, Sam Darnold is just like Muhammad Ali.

No not all.   
But the point was a rather simple one, that even the best boxer of all time needed guidance and proper coaching and that Darnold who is currently a poor QB and hardly the best if his generation definitely needs correct coaching.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Skeet Ulrich said:

Rich Gannon won a MVP. I can say with a lot of certainty that Darnold will never win a MVP. Processes the game too slowly, is too inaccurate, is too injury prone/misses too many game.

Speaking of Rich Gannon, the bolded is exactly what people said about him three years into the league! 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, 56mehl56 said:

Of course McCown is going to say and believe this, he's mentored Sam and is a friend.  To me the more telling point is that he actually admitted that Sam had problems in his progressions and made poor choices due to it. Not many close confidants would divulge that . If it came from a talking head or analyst I'd give it less credence , but coming from McCown IMO this is more damning. 

It’s no secret young QBs have the same issues. And every QB admits in their career they saw ghosts.  I have yet to hear one QB say differently.  

So what is so wrong if LaFluer does become the OC and runs the Shanahan O system?  It’s proven to be a successful system for years with dozens of QBs. 

Let’s see what Douglas, Saleh and LaFluer decide.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Skeet Ulrich said:

Rich Gannon won a MVP. I can say with a lot of certainty that Darnold will never win a MVP. Processes the game too slowly, is too inaccurate, is too injury prone/misses too many game.

Lol I am sure this is exactly what was said about him early in his career.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/15/2021 at 4:18 PM, BornJetsFan1983 said:

Darbold didnt look too bad his rookie deal, he literally had top 5 game of the week and other good performances after getting adjusted to the system. This idea he sucked wiht bowles is not accurate. The last 3 or 4 games he looked pretty damn good and was leading the team to TD's and nachoes man

He was a bottom 3 QB in the NFL his rookie year.  And cherry picking games where he looked good does not a franchise QB make.  You can't suck for 12 of your 16 games and be a starting QB in the NFL.  

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jetsfan80 said:

He was a bottom 3 QB in the NFL his rookie year.  And cherry picking games where he looked good does not a franchise QB make.  You can't suck for 12 of your 16 games and be a starting QB in the NFL.  

If it’s true and NFL GMs are high on Darnold what a gift. Monetize that asset immediately before he stinks again under his third HC next year.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, 56mehl56 said:

But your just making the assumption that Gase didn't help or coach Sam . You read the quote from Gase where he said he failed Sam to some degree as gospel, but when Sam says he failed Gase and the team - crickets . Bottom both are just saying the "right" things.   Is it all Sam's fault he hasn't progressed - NO , but as a high level athlete he needs to be held accountable.

Very good point. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, bitonti said:

Again I'll name that when you go through every bum that was ever drafted at 2 overall to play qb. Not around 2 overall, exactly at 2

By the way I do regret a deal the Jets made but it's not Adams. It was when the Jets passed on Quenton Nelson and 3 2nd Rd picks for Sam Darnold. They could have just stuck at 6. 

Nelson was such a clean prospect. Team leader. Sewell is Quenton Nelson but at tackle. Instant all pro. It's a chance to rebuild the line. It's a chance to build an identity.

And most importantly it's a very low risk pick compared to the qb 

Put it another way. Do you play poker? Fields or Wilson is going all in on a coin flip. AKs vs pocket queens.

Sewell is like AA over 22... He's got the best pff grade in history the only sophomore Outland trophy winner. it would be hitting the two out card if he doesn't pan out 

Are you familiar with the concept of statistical significance?

An exact slot number, vs within a couple picks in either direction, is as relevant as what day of the week a player was born. Never mind I’m not suggesting they must draft a QB #2, or in the first round at all.

And you’re behaving this way because you know no team has overused high draft picks like that on the same OL position in back to back seasons and won anything, and this is your manner of deflecting. 

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Irish Jet said:

So because those lines haven’t been constructed in exactly that way they’re suddenly not worth it?

Cleveland gave a second contract to a former Top 10 pick as well as spending one on a tackle. That is a similar level of investment, more even in terms of the cap. Their priority was the same and look at what it’s done for them. Best in the league, blowing teams away.  6-10 to 11-5.

You’re far too obsessed with allocation of resources when all that matters is what the end result is on the field. A dominant line will almost always lead to success. The dominant interior which you’ve previously compared it to does not, which is why that comparison to Mac’s love of DT’s doesn’t hold.

It’s totally different to spend on a FA and burn a top 2 pick. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, k-met57 said:

Lol I am sure this is exactly what was said about him early in his career.

 

6 hours ago, greenwichjetfan said:

Speaking of Rich Gannon, the bolded is exactly what people said about him three years into the league! 

Two candidates to cash in their 401k’s and “invest” in Powerball tickets 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Are you familiar with the concept of statistical significance?

An exact slot number, vs within a couple picks in either direction, is as relevant as what day of the week a player was born. Never mind I’m not suggesting they must draft a QB #2, or in the first round at all.

And you’re behaving this way because you know no team has overused high draft picks like that on the same OL position in back to back seasons and won anything, and this is your manner of deflecting. 

Rhetorical question 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

It’s totally different to spend on a FA and burn a top 2 pick. 

Different yes but I wouldn’t say totally different. It’s still a significant investment. 

And if the impact on the field is worth it then what would it matter? 

I think it probably comes down to a difference of opinion on the value of dominant O-line play, which I think Becton/Sewell could almost ensure we have for 5+ years.

I also don’t like the QB prospects. Obviously if the Jets like one of them then I’d be happy to see us go with one. I’d be shocked if Fields doesn’t bust and would be stunned if Sewell did. I think the difference in quality is immense. 

  • Upvote 1
  • WTF? 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Irish Jet said:

Different yes but I wouldn’t say totally different. It’s still a significant investment. 

And if the impact on the field is worth it then what would it matter? 

I think it probably comes down to a difference of opinion on the value of dominant O-line play, which I think Becton/Sewell could almost ensure we have for 5+ years.

I also don’t like the QB prospects. Obviously if the Jets like one of them then I’d be happy to see us go with one. I’d be shocked if Fields doesn’t bust and would be stunned if Sewell did. I think the difference in quality is immense. 

It is totally different. Totally, completely different.

If you can find a team willing to fork over a top 10 (never mind top 3) draft pick for a player that can be had as a mid-priced FA, then it’d at least be in the ballpark.

You never burn such a high pick on a position you can fill via FA any year, let alone one that’s the only position the team’s already filled. You sign the FA and keep your ultra high pick on a position that can’t be filled as easily (or cheaply) or if a player like Fields is a mistake then trade down & pocket the windfall of high picks in return for someone else’s lack of foresight. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Are you familiar with the concept of statistical significance?

An exact slot number, vs within a couple picks in either direction, is as relevant as what day of the week a player was born. Never mind I’m not suggesting they must draft a QB #2, or in the first round at all.

And you’re behaving this way because you know no team has overused high draft picks like that on the same OL position in back to back seasons and won anything, and this is your manner of deflecting. 

I'm not going to post my resume but I assure you Sperm I'm aware of statistical significance. There's only been like 75 drafts there's not much enough samples in all of football for 99.5 percent significance, whether it be draft picks or anything else. This isn't baseball. 

I'm acting this way because you're acting this way

Why does it have to be back to back seasons or the same position 

Sewell and Becton is nick and brick. Is that a good comparison? It's not perfect but it's close enough. 

Bottom line is that the best lines in the game have 2 or 3 pro bowl or all pro 

1 dude is not enough and I don't understand why you believe it is. Signing thuney for more than a rookie contract Sewell? Why is that so smart? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, bitonti said:

Drafting the tackle means they can use anyone at guard 

Playing guard next to an excellent tackle is easy. Ask pat elflein 

Having two dominant tackles mixed in with an average center and two below average guards will not produce the desired outcome. Not even close.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, bitonti said:

Again I'll name that when you go through every bum that was ever drafted at 2 overall to play qb. Not around 2 overall, exactly at 2

By the way I do regret a deal the Jets made but it's not Adams. It was when the Jets passed on Quenton Nelson and 3 2nd Rd picks for Sam Darnold. They could have just stuck at 6. 

Nelson was such a clean prospect. Team leader. Sewell is Quenton Nelson but at tackle. Instant all pro. It's a chance to rebuild the line. It's a chance to build an identity.

And most importantly it's a very low risk pick compared to the qb 

Put it another way. Do you play poker? Fields or Wilson is going all in on a coin flip. AKs vs pocket queens.

Sewell is like AA over 22... He's got the best pff grade in history the only sophomore Outland trophy winner. it would be hitting the two out card if he doesn't pan out 

Not related to the trade, but I have followed Nelson for a very long time. He grew up a few miles away from me. He went to the same high school as Joe Klecko's son.  A Catholic high school, not the same one my kids go to but the next town over. Nelson made the transition to the next level look as easy as anyone I have ever seen. Kid is going to be a hall of famer.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, bitonti said:

I'm not going to post my resume but I assure you Sperm I'm aware of statistical significance. There's only been like 75 drafts there's not much enough samples in all of football for 99.5 percent significance, whether it be draft picks or anything else. This isn't baseball. 

I'm acting this way because you're acting this way

Why does it have to be back to back seasons or the same position 

Sewell and Becton is nick and brick. Is that a good comparison? It's not perfect but it's close enough. 

Bottom line is that the best lines in the game have 2 or 3 pro bowl or all pro 

1 dude is not enough and I don't understand why you believe it is. Signing thuney for more than a rookie contract Sewell? Why is that so smart? 

I’ve been gaming out some mock drafts via the simulators online. 

There seems to be a reasonable amount of tackles available in the first round and beyond, but a serious drop off at WR by the mid second round. 

Obviously workouts are going to tell us a lot more, but just speaking to the value in this draft specifically - does it seem like there’s more value to go WR with the second pick (or more likely, via trade down) and then target tackle @ 23 this year? 

Obviously Sewell is in a class by himself at his position, but there seems to be a big drop off after Chase, Waddle and Smith are off the board at WR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, greenwichjetfan said:

Don’t sweat him. Dude is so butthurt by being a fan of this team that he can’t even let a statement of fact pass without losing his hair. At least if he were clever or funny, he’d be worth a response.

Rich Gannon’s unprecedented metamorphosis into an Pro Bowl QB in years 13-17 of his career does not justify continued belief in Darnold. Ask yourself: why does every defense of Darnold invoke either his situation/supporting cast/coaching or another player? Where are the arguments based on what makes him innately special? It’s always “well this guy did this extremely unlikely thing over 20 years ago ergo Sam is a secret-FQB-in-hiding.” There is a chasm between the beginning premise and the conclusion that can’t be short-cutted over. If you want to argue that Sam will follow the pathway of the #1 QB turnaround story in NFL history, can you give us anything that leads you to believe Sam is similar in some way, excepting blowing hard for 3 years? Because there’s a lot more guys who sucked early, sucked middle, and sucked late in their careers than there are Rich Gannons. We remember the recent ones but most are lost in the sands of time because they are so very abundant. And indeed if Rich Gannon is the comp — isn’t it an argument to wait 11 more years, the consequence of which being that it’s always too early to give up on a QB because “hey he could be the next Gannon?” How many more years of suck must we endure? Even the Vikings, who “gave up” on Gannon after his first 5 years don’t regret their decision. In the next eight years before Gannon suddenly and miraculously “got good,” they made the playoffs seven times. and lastly, after his time with Minnesota, Gannon rode pine for a chunk of seasons and then played good ball for only four years. Not worth the opportunity cost of a 13 year wait even if it was known ahead of time what he would become — FYI Sanchez would only be going into year 12 if he was still playing. I believe the constant reliance on Rich Gannon as an argument to stick with Sam actually makes the opposite case in so many ways. If anything the Gannon example applied correctly would lead to the conclusion that Darnold needs a change of scenery and to be benched for 4 years — for all we know, those two elements were instrumental in Gannon’s rebirth. You can’t skim the cream without drinking the whole glass.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, jgb said:

Rich Gannon’s unprecedented metamorphosis into an Pro Bowl QB in years 13-17 of his career does not justify continued belief in Darnold. Ask yourself: why does every defense of Darnold invoke either his situation/supporting cast/coaching or another player? Where are the arguments based on what makes him innately special? It’s always “well this guy did this extremely unlikely thing over 20 years ago ergo Sam is a secret-FQB-in-hiding.” There is a chasm between the beginning premise and the conclusion that can’t be short-cutted over. If you want to argue that Sam will follow the pathway of the #1 QB turnaround story in NFL history, can you give us anything that leads you to believe Sam is similar in some way, excepting blowing hard for 3 years? Because there’s a lot more guys who sucked early, sucked middle, and sucked late in their careers than there are Rich Gannons. We remember the recent ones but most are lost in the sands of time because they are so very abundant. And indeed if Rich Gannon is the comp — isn’t it an argument to wait 11 more years, the consequence of which being that it’s always too early to give up on a QB because “hey he could be the next Gannon?” How many more years of suck must we endure? Even the Vikings, who “gave up” on Gannon after his first 5 years don’t regret their decision. In the next eight years before Gannon suddenly and miraculously “got good,” they made the playoffs seven times. and lastly, after his time with Minnesota, Gannon rode pine for a chunk of seasons and then played good ball for only four years. Not worth the opportunity cost of a 13 year wait even if it was known ahead of time what he would become — FYI Sanchez would only be going into year 12 if he was still playing. I believe the constant reliance on Rich Gannon as an argument to stick with Sam actually makes the opposite case in so many ways. If anything the Gannon example applied correctly would lead to the conclusion that Darnold needs a change of scenery and to be benched for 4 years — for all we know, those two elements were instrumental in Gannon’s rebirth. You can’t skim the cream without drinking the whole glass.

Let’s start by saying that Sam Darnold is at least as talented as Josh Allen. He doesn’t have the arm that Josh has, but I’ve watched them both play in college and the NFL and talent wise Sam was always considered more talented.

Go look at Josh Allen’s numbers his first 2 years, and Sams...then consider the team and coaching around Josh Allen vs Sam Darnold in their second and third year....and here we are at the result stage. So who is to say that what was done for Allen can’t be done for Darnold by a competent GM and coaching staff.

That is the argument.

 

And the narrative that Sam has somehow just sucked for 3 years and we are defending some horrible QB that falls out of bed when trying to put his shoes on every morning...its a figment of your SOJF imagination. He improved in almost every category in his second year, even though he had to deal with being sick early in the year. And this year was what it was with everything going on, and Sam regressing obviously.

  • Post of the Week 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, k-met57 said:

Let’s start by saying that Sam Darnold is at least as talented as Josh Allen. He doesn’t have the arm that Josh has, but I’ve watched them both play in college and the NFL and talent wise Sam was always considered more talented.

Go look at Josh Allen’s numbers his first 2 years, and Sams...then consider the team and coaching around Josh Allen vs Sam Darnold in their second and third year....and here we are at the result stage. So who is to say that what was done for Allen can’t be done for Darnold by a competent GM and coaching staff.

That is the argument.

Thank you for your thoughts. Totally understand the argument, just don't find it persuasive for three main reasons:

1. There are many more first-round busts than Josh Allens and after 3 years of near-league-worst play, I find the evidence on Sam quite compelling; and

2. The point "who is to say" what was done for Allen couldn't be done by Darnold is not specific to Sam. It could be said of any bad highly-drafted QB on a bad team and most of them just stay bad; and

3. Allen has two elite traits to compensate for weaker areas of his game -- A+ athleticism for the position and cannon arm. Darnold does not. He will need to become at-minimum satisfactory at all elements of his game and even better in some to become a better-than-average QB because he doesn't have any elite traits to fall back on. He needs not a quick fix but a near-complete rebuild. Very difficult (and unlikely).

However, I respect the point of view. Just don't think it's statistically a smart bet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, jgb said:

Thank you for your thoughts. Totally understand the argument, just don't find it persuasive for three main reasons:

1. There are many more first-round busts than Josh Allens and after 3 years of near-league-worst play, I find the evidence on Sam quite compelling; and

2. The point "who is to say" what was done for Allen couldn't be done by Darnold is not specific to Sam. It could be said of any bad highly-drafted QB on a bad team and most of them just stay bad; and

3. Allen has two elite traits to compensate for weaker areas of his game -- A+ athleticism for the position and cannon arm. Darnold does not. He will need to become at-minimum satisfactory at all elements of his game and even better in some to become a better-than-average QB because he doesn't have any elite traits to fall back on. He needs not a quick fix but a near-complete rebuild. Very difficult (and unlikely).

However, I respect the point of view. Just don't think it's statistically a smart bet.

I am a Jets fan my friend. If things came down to brain over heart I’d be gone years ago. Clearly I am betting the underdog at this point (not to say that Darnold was an underdog but the Jets have made him one through sheer incompetence).

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...