Cimini on Status of Sam Darnold

[FidelioJet]

30 minutes ago, Scott Dierking said:

I understand everything you say, but if they went defense with the first 2 picks, and then the team proceeded to go 10-6 in year 1, would you still be "furious"?

Bottom line of this is, there are many different ways to build a team. Just because the people in charge do not see it the same way any one of us individually do, does not mean it is the wrong plan.

Not any more.  Well, at least not a winning way.

Good QB play is pretty much the only thing that matters.

[section314]

7 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Ego.

You don't rise to that level in Sports, as a player or as a coach, without a massive type-A personality, competitive "I'm better than the last guy" attitude and Ego.

 

Absolutely ?

[slats]

37 minutes ago, Warfish said:

I agree with all of this.  You'll note I've removed his "Plan B" at QB, as I have alternate preferences (In my case, I would not trade or sign a Veteran, I would likely prefer to spend a mid-round pick on a player such as Trask, and let Danold, Trask and Morgan all compete in a fair, open competition in camp 2021.  But I hate signing castoff veterans more than most people do, in fairness).

I also much prefer to find my franchise QB in the draft than from someone else's scrap heap, but in this case I would think that a one year rental of someone they're confident could step in and play would be a better situation than throwing in another young guy and hoping for the best should Darnold falter again. 

That said, should they move down from #2, add some picks, and decide to take one of Wilson, Fields, or Lance a little later in the round, I wouldn't be too upset. 

[NYJ1]

I think keeping Sammy and building around him is the best possible scenario moving forward. I love the idea of trading down and still getting Sewell or Smith. Either player provides substantial help going forward.

[Scott Dierking]

29 minutes ago, Warfish said:

I'd be quite happy with the result, but I'd also need to know where our Offense finished up to really judge.

#5 Defense with #31 offense, a single successful year is luck, not a well-built long-term consistent competitor.  

But yeah, I'd love 10-6 at this point.  But I'd like a 10-6 with a top 15 Offense AND top 15 Defense supporting it.

I believe the "build around an elite Defense" is an outdated concept, the same way "build around an elite Running Back and Running Attack" is generally an outdated concept.

And to be very clear:  There are no objective "right or wrongs" in this, there is only subjective beliefs and cold, hard results.

All very fair. But, it all depends how leadership view the draft and view free agency. Maybe they load up on offense in the free agency period, because that is where they feel the talent and value is, while viewing the draft with value at the top on defense. 

I am not saying that is the case, but you get my drift.

We all have ways we feel this team should be built, and that is the fun of the message boards, but knee jerk reactions that incriminate plans based on fans own individual plans, without the basis of seeing how their plans play out are often silly.

Unfortunately for us as Jet fans, we have often been more right than the Jet brass, but that has more to due with their incompetence rather than our brilliance. Your knowledge of the game a segmented exception (along with a good percentage of this board), aside. But there are also those that feel their way is the only way.

 

[Scott Dierking]

11 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

Not any more.  Well, at least not a winning way.

Good QB play is pretty much the only thing that matters.

The cast for winning organizations IS a pretty stable conceptual structure:

-Quality leadership

-Stable leadership.

-A plan.

-The ability to adjust a plan.

-Finding players that fit your plan.

-Developing those players.

-Understanding when it is time to move on from certain players.

What is NOT a consistent withy winning organizations is the manner that they acquire players as it relates to draft slots and free agency spends at position. That is individual for every organization. And, there are many ways to accomplish that task.

 

 

[section314]

20 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Ego.

You don't rise to that level in Sports, as a player or as a coach, without a massive type-A personality, competitive "I'm better than the last guy" attitude and Ego.

 

One other thought.....the special coaches seem to be able to give it a try, but definitely know when to cut bait.

[FidelioJet]

4 minutes ago, Scott Dierking said:

The cast for winning organizations IS a pretty stable conceptual structure:

-Quality leadership

-Stable leadership.

-A plan.

-The ability to adjust a plan.

-Finding players that fit your plan.

-Developing those players.

-Understanding when it is time to move on from certain players.

What is NOT a consistent withy winning organizations is the manner that they acquire players as it relates to draft slots and free agency spends at position. That is individual for every organization. And, there are many ways to accomplish that task.

 

 

Good QB play is #1, #2 and #3. 

Everything a good organization should do is start with - "Does it help our QB""

[k-met57]

 

[rayzor]

8 minutes ago, k-met57 said:

 

How Cimini heard this is a mystery.  Fans might have to get used to the idea of Sam staying put if this is true.  Hopefully it’s a smokescreen.

[Charlie Brown]

31 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

Not any more.  Well, at least not a winning way.

Good QB play is pretty much the only thing that matters.

The post is a little shortsighted for me.........

Think on this:

Watson completed 70.2% of his passes this past season, led the NFL with 4,823 passing yards and tossed 33 touchdowns as opposed to just seven interceptions.

And Houston stinks!!!!

What is your honest opinion then?

[joewilly12]

1 minute ago, rayzor said:

How Cimini heard this is a mystery.  

[Dcat]

2 minutes ago, rayzor said:

How Cimini heard this is a mystery.  

 has this high tech, top-secret device

[k-met57]

4 minutes ago, rayzor said:

How Cimini heard this is a mystery.  Fans might have to get used to the idea of Sam staying put if this is true.  Hopefully it’s a smokescreen.

There has been all the smoke you need to know its true by now...

[flgreen]

4 minutes ago, rayzor said:

How Cimini heard this is a mystery.  

Well just from what we've seen on JN over he last week it seems like the Jets FO is a bunch of blabber mouths.   

[FidelioJet]

11 minutes ago, Charlie Brown said:

The post is a little shortsighted for me.........

Think on this:

Watson completed 70.2% of his passes this past season, led the NFL with 4,823 passing yards and tossed 33 touchdowns as opposed to just seven interceptions.

And Houston stinks!!!!

What is your honest opinion then?

Of course there are exceptions to anything...but the right way to build a team should start and end with your QB...

Rodgers, Brady/Brees, Allen and Mahomes/Mayfield (probably Mahomes) - it's not luck who the final 4 are...

 

[Scott Dierking]

32 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

Good QB play is #1, #2 and #3. 

Everything a good organization should do is start with - "Does it help our QB""

Deshaun Watson says hello. And I know, Hopkins. They broke off the plan.

[Alka]

22 hours ago, Columbia Jet Fan said:

From all accounts - and the most trusted ones to me are @Mogglez and @football guy JD and the rest of his staff are high on Darnold. HOWEVER, if you were going to trade Sam and were totally done with him - they should be leaking the exact same info. 

They will absolutely be scouting the top QBs in the draft, and at the end of the day if they think Wilson or Fields (or even Lance) are THE guy, they're going to take him. A lot still needs to happen. The scouting department needs to get on the same page as the new coaches (once the staff is up to speed), and then they need to do interviews with players, workouts, etc. 

I have no idea if Sam will be our QB next year. But I am extremely confident no decision has been made. There is a lot of optimism on this board about JD and the new staff. If they ultimately elect to keep Sam, I think people on this board should have faith that guys we can trust are making that decision. Even if most of us (myself included) are hoping they move on....

I believe that a decision has been made on Sam Darnold, and they fully intend to keep him.

I don't think that JD would hire a head coach and not have a "meeting of the minds" on Sam's future.

Many fans say Sam Darnold is not a good quarterback.  I say that Sam Darnold had a bad year with a depleted roster and bad coaching.  

You can't build up a roster if you continue to throw valuable draft picks at the QB position without building up the rest of the roster.

Many experts think that the Jets roster is perhaps the worst in the NFL.  You know have the 2nd pick of the draft to improve your roster with a blue-chip player, and you can move down to pick up 2 or 3 starters.  To me, it's common sense.  I have been saying this since before the season ended.  It's beginning to look like I was right.

[section314]

The thing to remember , If JD truly doesn't believe that a QB other than Trevor is worth taking at #2, and trades out and gets somebody's#1 next year in addition to picks this year, we have 3 #1's next year, and plenty of ammo to get a QB next draft, even if he rolls with Sam.

[Scott Dierking]

Just now, Alka said:

I believe that a decision has been made on Sam Darnold, and they fully intend to keep him.

I don't think that JD would hire a head coach and not have a "meeting of the minds" on Sam's future.

Many fans say Sam Darnold is not a good quarterback.  I say that Sam Darnold had a bad year with a depleted roster and bad coaching.  

You can't build up a roster if you continue to throw valuable draft picks at the QB position without building up the rest of the roster.

Many experts think that the Jets roster is perhaps the worst in the NFL.  You know have the 2nd pick of the draft to improve your roster with a blue-chip player, and you can move down to pick up 2 or 3 starters.  To me, it's common sense.  I have been saying this since before the season ended.  It's beginning to look like I was right.

I give it greater odds now that SD stays this season, than I did 2 weeks ago. That is based upon the schemes that the LaFleur offense runs.

I have said many times here, that there is an offense that may bring out the best in SD. It is an offense that will have a strong line and threat of a strong running game. It will be heavily dependent on play action passes. It will utilize SD to bootleg and roll out at times to limit his needs to read through progressions and just look at half the field. It will utilize a big tightend target for checkdowns.  It will have WR's that operate on the sidelines.

Whether that is a winning effort for SD, I don't know. 

[heymangold]

so lets get this straight.  everyone is OK with going at it again with Sam Darnold, a guy that'll be learning his 3rd system in 4 years, has terrible career numbers, is injury prone and hasn't proven to have gotten ANY better since he won the Rose Bowl?

and we want to trade down and waste a top 8-10 pick on a LT when we already have a LT?

[QB1]

2 minutes ago, heymangold said:

so lets get this straight.  everyone is OK with going at it again with Sam Darnold, a guy that'll be learning his 3rd system in 4 years, has terrible career numbers, is injury prone and hasn't proven to have gotten ANY better since he won the Rose Bowl?

and we want to trade down and waste a top 8-10 pick on a LT when we already have a LT?

no, If we trade down Sewell will be gone 

Wilson/fields vs. Darnold + 3-4 premium pick players 

[Warfish]

50 minutes ago, Scott Dierking said:

We all have ways we feel this team should be built, and that is the fun of the message boards, but knee jerk reactions that incriminate plans based on fans own individual plans, without the basis of seeing how their plans play out are often silly.

Respectfully, this is the same as the "you can't discuss or evaluate a drafted player till his career is over" type thinking.

We all evaluate things live, in the moment.  

It may be "silly", but I fully expect most of us to continue to post our opinions on events as they happen, and not holding off till long after the item in question is over/long past and the results clear cut.

[Warfish]

6 minutes ago, heymangold said:

so lets get this straight.  everyone........

Apparently you do not "have it strait", because it's certainly not "everyone".

[NamathToCaster]

54 minutes ago, NYJ1 said:

I think keeping Sammy and building around him is the best possible scenario moving forward. I love the idea of trading down and still getting Sewell or Smith. Either player provides substantial help going forward.

I appreciate your loyalty to Sam.  As you watch Jackson, Allen and Mayfield making play after play what is it about Sam that makes you think he is magically going to improve with a new coaching regime.  Don't you feel after 3 years he should be showing more consistency?  Watching and listening to Jet games and announcers saying guys are wide open and he doesn't get the ball to them.  I really don't trust Sam with the heavy load of leading this team.

[joewilly12]

11 minutes ago, heymangold said:

so lets get this straight.  everyone is OK with going at it again with Sam Darnold, a guy that'll be learning his 3rd system in 4 years, has terrible career numbers, is injury prone and hasn't proven to have gotten ANY better since he won the Rose Bowl?

and we want to trade down and waste a top 8-10 pick on a LT when we already have a LT?

Yup seems to be the consensus amongst the know it alls. 

[prime21]

I will leave it up to JD, Saleh and Lefleur to make what they feel is the best direction to go in. Personally I would like to grab a a Qb but I’m getting older and can’t keep aggravating myself for decisions I have no say in.


Sent from my iPad using JetNation.com mobile app

[Scott Dierking]

7 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Respectfully, this is the same as the "you can't discuss or evaluate a drafted player till his career is over" type thinking.

We all evaluate things live, in the moment.  

It may be "silly", but I fully expect most of us to continue to post our opinions on events as they happen, and not holding off till long after the item in question is over/long past and the results clear cut.

No, The new staff will be evaluated immediately after season 1. As it should be.

And, as I said, opinions are great and what makes this site great. But say that "I will be furious" if they don't do "xxx", is an overreach, in my opinion. That is all. 

You are a great poster and I enjoy the opinions you offer.

[SomebodytoAnybody47]

52 minutes ago, k-met57 said:

 

I would kill to see them watching and examining Gases offense. 

[Lith]

56 minutes ago, Charlie Brown said:

The post is a little shortsighted for me.........

Think on this:

Watson completed 70.2% of his passes this past season, led the NFL with 4,823 passing yards and tossed 33 touchdowns as opposed to just seven interceptions.

And Houston stinks!!!!

What is your honest opinion then?

He is the exception.  Of the top 7 QBs by passer rating, 6 of them are in the playoffs.  And the Texans sucked this year, but were in the playoffs the last two seasons.

Personally, I think GM-Coach-QB are all equally important to building sustained success in the NFL.  Hopefully we have the first two solved for, but time will tell. 

[Charlie Brown]

2 minutes ago, Lith said:

He is the exception.  Of the top 7 QBs by passer rating, 6 of them are in the playoffs.  And the Texans sucked this year, but were in the playoffs the last two seasons.

Personally, I think GM-Coach-QB are all equally important to building sustained success in the NFL.  Hopefully we have the first two solved for, but time will tell. 

Of course you are correct!

I was actually pushing back in saying you don't have to worry about anything else!

[bitonti]

1 hour ago, slats said:

 

That said, should they move down from #2, add some picks, and decide to take one of Wilson, Fields, or Lance a little later in the round, I wouldn't be too upset. 

Everybody in the draft wants to move down. Trade downs from 1,2 overall are rare because of the price. Any team outside of the top 10 requires multiple 1st to get there. Even a team at 8 or 9 needs to pay at least another first 

So the list of trade down partners is small and the players they would be trading for are nebulous 

The question is why would another team move up and 

If it's for a player on offense, why don't they just take the player on offense? 

[bitonti]

1 hour ago, FidelioJet said:

Good QB play is #1, #2 and #3. 

Everything a good organization should do is start with - "Does it help our QB""

Drafting the best offensive lineman in pff history helps the qb, whoever he may be 

[Gibby]

23 hours ago, flgreen said:

This is depressing

It really shouldn’t be. First. If the Jags do go with Fields? That opens Lawrence back up. They would definitely take him. I don’t think it’s that crazy of a possibility. 
 

From what we’re hearing Fields wouldn’t fit this offense anyway. Taking Wilson is a bit of a gamble. Just because Sam is back next year doesn’t necessarily mean he’s here forever. If he shows improvement in the new offense ( and finally plays 16 games) That’s when they will address his extension. My guess is they either have him play as a lame duck or give a very responsible team friendly bridge deal. 
 

This team is not a “ win now team” anyway. Regardless of who is under center ( including TL) we are likely ( base cast scenario) looking at a step in the right direction 6-7 win season in 21.

[Bugg]

Whether Douglas, Lafleur and Saleh are totally 100% sold on Darnold or want to move on from him, right now there's no point to badmouthing the guy either way. If you want to trade him, you don't want to hurt his value. Remember when Parcells signed Curtis Martin and for a time kept Johnnie Johnson around and pretended he was going to have a 2 back attack,  until he got the deal he liked; same thing. This is how it's done. This is alien to a franchise that's being doing dumb stuff for a decade plus.