Would you rather have Stafford, Darnold or a rookie QB?

[FidelioJet]

12 hours ago, Bronx said:

 

He's 6'3" - there are countless charts showing him at 6'3" - even the one you listed is showing him at 6'3".  I honestly wonder your problem with the kid.  Why is he lying? As opposed to any other QB's listing?

[Bronx]

59 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

He's 6'3" - there are countless charts showing him at 6'3" - even the one you listed is showing him at 6'3".  I honestly wonder your problem with the kid.  Why is he lying? As opposed to any other QB's listing?

Nothing against his skills. The kid has some bad ass skills, cannon arm and accuracy. However, there are other variables that can't be ignored such as little to no pressure, competition and inconsistent history. We will soon find out his small frame which is about 6' 1/2 to 6'2, 200-210. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. 

It's just hard to trust this rookie QB class. I rather have Watson or Stafford, proven QBs.

 

[Biggs]

Captain Morgan starts.  Fields or Wilson takes over after the bye unless Morgan turns out to be the next Tom Brady in which case we package Fields or Wilson for a high No. 1 in 2022.

[jgb]

4 minutes ago, Biggs said:

Captain Morgan starts.  Fields or Wilson takes over after the bye unless Morgan turns out to be the next Tom Brady in which case we package Fields or Wilson for a high No. 1 in 2022.

Not a knock on you but what do you think the odds are that the Jets, after searching for a FQB for 50 years, are going to land 2 at the same time?

[ZachEY]

If Sam Darnold were a Dolphin or a Patriot, every person on this website would be hoping he signed a big extension this offseason.

[jgb]

1 minute ago, TeddEY said:

If Sam Darnold were a Dolphin or a Patriot, every person on this website would be hoping he signed a big extension this offseason.

My objectivity self-test: if the Fins did the same move the Jets just did, would I be laughing or worried?

[Biggs]

10 minutes ago, jgb said:

Not a knock on you but what do you think the odds are that the Jets, after searching for a FQB for 50 years, are going to land 2 at the same time?

The odds of getting one are astronomical.   If we’re going to use statistical models as the basis we should use our draft capital on an in the box safety.  

[FidelioJet]

46 minutes ago, Bronx said:

Nothing against his skills. The kid has some bad ass skills, cannon arm and accuracy. However, there are other variables that can't be ignored such as little to no pressure, competition and inconsistent history. We will soon find out his small frame which is about 6' 1/2 to 6'2, 200-210. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. 

It's just hard to trust this rookie QB class. I rather have Watson or Stafford, proven QBs.

 

We're mostly agreed.

I would much rather Watson. but want nothing to do with Stafford, all the skill in the world just doesn't know how to win.  We don't need another mediocre QB.

For me it's Watson or Wilson at 2 (surely a risk but one worth taking - it's not like next year's QB are going to be sure things)

And yes, we'll find out his real size soon enough.  I tend to think these guys don't lie nearly as much as they used to.  I was certain they were lying about Baker's heights pre-combine - but it turns out he was the height he said he was.  I learned my lesson there.

But, of course you could be right.

[Bronx]

2 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

We're mostly agreed.

I would much rather Watson. but want nothing to do with Stafford, all the skill in the world just doesn't know how to win.  We don't need another mediocre QB.

For me it's Watson or Wilson at 2 (surely a risk but one worth taking - it's not like next year's QB are going to be sure things)

And yes, we'll find out his real size soon enough.  I tend to think these guys don't lie nearly as much as they used to.  I was certain they were lying about Baker's heights pre-combine - but it turns out he was the height he said he was.  I learned my lesson there.

But, of course you could be right.

I won't be upset if it is Wilson, worried about his health? Yes.

[Church01]

Rookie,Sam,Stafford in that order. The only thing going for Sam is Gase is no longer there to hurt him more. If they stick with Sam maybe a new HC and OC can get him playing like he should be. But Saleh doesn't seem too keen on that right now unless he is holding back.

[Jethead]

Watson - First choice, and would pursue aggressively

Stafford - Underrated, would be a good get at a fair price. 3-5 years of high level play left in the tank. We would be playoff contenders.

Keep Sam, try to trade down, probably draft Smith at #2. Keep building....

Put all my money on Red or Black and pray (QB at 2), not recommended

[Warfish]

I think in light of Stafford reaching his first Super Bowl yesterday, a quick look at our takes on Stafford v. Darnold v. Rookie (Wilson, as it turned out) would be fun.

Congrats to Stafford, long time in coming for him, glad to see he at least will get a chance at a title in his career.

--------------------

2021 Stafford:  67.2%, 4,886 Passing Yards, 41 TD, 17 INT, led the Rams to a 12-5 record and Super Bowl berth.

2021 Darnold:  59.9%, 2,527 Passing Yards, 9 TD, 13 INT, benched a few times, 4-7 in his Starts.

2021 Wilson:  55.6%, 2,334 Passing Yards, 9 TD, 11 INT, missed 4 games, 3-10 in his Starts.

[Scott Dierking]

6 minutes ago, Warfish said:

I think in light of Stafford reaching his first Super Bowl yesterday, a quick look at our takes on Stafford v. Darnold v. Rookie (Wilson, as it turned out) would be fun.

Congrats to Stafford, long time in coming for him, glad to see he at least will get a chance at a title in his career.

--------------------

2021 Stafford:  67.2%, 4,886 Passing Yards, 41 TD, 17 INT, led the Rams to a 12-5 record and Super Bowl berth.

2021 Darnold:  59.9%, 2,527 Passing Yards, 9 TD, 13 INT, benched a few times, 4-7 in his Starts.

2021 Wilson:  55.6%, 2,334 Passing Yards, 9 TD, 11 INT, missed 4 games, 3-10 in his Starts.

Check out Stafford's rookie numbers to Wilson. They are not that dissimilar. For those that hug numbers and believe they are the tell all of the future.

[Warfish]

13 minutes ago, Scott Dierking said:

Check out Stafford's rookie numbers to Wilson. They are not that dissimilar. For those that hug numbers and believe they are the tell all of the future.

Cool, so what point are you trying to make?  Are you arguing that Wilson is as good as Stafford?  Or that Wilson will lead his team to a Super Bowl after he leaves the Jets, lol?

Honestly, I'm really interested if @Prodigal Syndicate has had a change of heart on Stafford given this year, he was pretty hardcore against him being a acceptable QB at the time.

[Scott Dierking]

8 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Cool, so what point are you trying to make?  Are you arguing that Wilson is as good as Stafford?  Or that Wilson will lead his team to a Super Bowl after he leaves the Jets, lol?

Honestly, I'm really interested if @Prodigal Syndicate has had a change of heart on Stafford given this year, he was pretty hardcore against him being a acceptable QB at the time.

I am not making any point other than to, as I have been saying on this board umpteen times, that every player and circumstance is different. Others disagree with that and cling to rookie year numbers as the definitive as to what they will ultimately be. 

So, I guess that is kind of a point.

[Warfish]

1 minute ago, Scott Dierking said:

.....every player and circumstance is different.......

Absolutely.  +1

1 minute ago, Scott Dierking said:

Others disagree with that and cling to rookie year numbers as the definitive as to what they will ultimately be. 

So, I guess that is kind of a point.

I don't think many actually do, personally.  I think most use numbers as a reference point to support an overall evaluation, pro or con, of a guy.  But no stress.

[Hal N of Provo]

30 minutes ago, Warfish said:

I think in light of Stafford reaching his first Super Bowl yesterday, a quick look at our takes on Stafford v. Darnold v. Rookie (Wilson, as it turned out) would be fun.

Congrats to Stafford, long time in coming for him, glad to see he at least will get a chance at a title in his career.

--------------------

2021 Stafford:  67.2%, 4,886 Passing Yards, 41 TD, 17 INT, led the Rams to a 12-5 record and Super Bowl berth.

2021 Darnold:  59.9%, 2,527 Passing Yards, 9 TD, 13 INT, benched a few times, 4-7 in his Starts.

2021 Wilson:  55.6%, 2,334 Passing Yards, 9 TD, 11 INT, missed 4 games, 3-10 in his Starts.

Rams send two first-round picks, a third-round pick and Jared Goff to Lions for QB

They say this wasn’t the best offer on the table for the Lions.  Goff was a higher valued commodity than Darnold.   

Zach Wilson, AVT and another 1st this year.  Maybe more.   But they Lions were doing Stafford a solid and sending him to a team he could compete with.    

[Jethead]

Very happy for Stafford. He played well, judtified the investment. Hope he gets his ring.

[slimjasi]

Congrats to Stafford. Happy for him. 

[Sperm Edwards]

On 1/24/2021 at 6:33 PM, Prodigal Syndicate said:

I'm actually rooting for stafford to go to a playoff team just so when he chokes again next season I can see the excuses people come up with for him.

 

Should we pick up this conversation again now, a year later?  

[Hex]

1 hour ago, Warfish said:

I think in light of Stafford reaching his first Super Bowl yesterday, a quick look at our takes on Stafford v. Darnold v. Rookie (Wilson, as it turned out) would be fun.

Congrats to Stafford, long time in coming for him, glad to see he at least will get a chance at a title in his career.

--------------------

2021 Stafford:  67.2%, 4,886 Passing Yards, 41 TD, 17 INT, led the Rams to a 12-5 record and Super Bowl berth.

2021 Darnold:  59.9%, 2,527 Passing Yards, 9 TD, 13 INT, benched a few times, 4-7 in his Starts.

2021 Wilson:  55.6%, 2,334 Passing Yards, 9 TD, 11 INT, missed 4 games, 3-10 in his Starts.

How would Zach do in LA, with Cooper Kupp and Beckham Jr?

I get your point, but the fact that Stafford never won a playoff game in his first 13 years seems to be more of a Lions problem than a QB problem. At this point they aren't comparable yet.

[JohnnyLV]

I stand by my original ranking of Zach, Sam and nothing to do with Stafford.

Remember the listing is also using the compensation Stafford would have cost.

Zach, AVT and a first this year is still better than losing all 3 and having Stafford. We do not even know yet if over time the Rams will get the better of the deal they made.

[UntouchableCrew]

1 hour ago, Warfish said:

Cool, so what point are you trying to make?  Are you arguing that Wilson is as good as Stafford?  Or that Wilson will lead his team to a Super Bowl after he leaves the Jets, lol?

Honestly, I'm really interested if @Prodigal Syndicate has had a change of heart on Stafford given this year, he was pretty hardcore against him being a acceptable QB at the time.

I would assume the logical point is that one of the primary benefits of a young QB isn't that they'll be better than a 10 year veteran year one but rather that they'll grow into a player that you can have for a long time.

You're posting the Stafford vs. Darnold vs. Wilson comparison as if anyone thought Wilson would be better than Stafford in 2021. I can't imagine anyone thought that.

Doesn't mean Wilson was the right choice but given Stafford is 33 and had no interest in coming here I'm not really sure what the point of this exercise is.

[TuscanyTile2]

On 1/24/2021 at 4:35 PM, Spoot-Face said:

Rookie QB, duh.

After that, and this may shock some, I'd sooner suck with Sam for another year to grab a QB high in 2022, rather than hitch our wagon to a stop-gap like Matthew Stafford. I guess I'm just skeptical that he's an "elite" QB. Convince me otherwise.

I wish I saw this at the time.  We sucked for Sam then we sucked with Sam.

Hilarious!

[Warfish]

27 minutes ago, Hex said:

How would Zach do in LA, with Cooper Kupp and Beckham Jr?

Are you asking me my opinion?  I think he'd be pretty crappy, same as he was here. 

But I don't have the faith in Wilson's future many of you do.  

 

[Spoot-Face]

23 minutes ago, TuscanyTile2 said:

I wish I saw this at the time.  We sucked for Sam then we sucked with Sam.

Hilarious!

now we get shellacked with Zach

[Warfish]

29 minutes ago, UntouchableCrew said:

I would assume the logical point is that one of the primary benefits of a young QB isn't that they'll be better than a 10 year veteran year one but rather that they'll grow into a player that you can have for a long time.

You're posting the Stafford vs. Darnold vs. Wilson comparison as if anyone thought Wilson would be better than Stafford in 2021. I can't imagine anyone thought that.

Doesn't mean Wilson was the right choice but given Stafford is 33 and had no interest in coming here I'm not really sure what the point of this exercise is.

Keep in mind, I wasn't the OP.

And there is (IMO) a legitimate debate that an utterly QB-deficient, moribund franchise (like the Jets were when the OP was written) shouldn't be planning it's entire future around finding the golden draft pick ticket, but would be better off signing a solid average veteran and getting itself to "competent" level BEFORE it tries to win the lottery for the future.

We've been stuck in an interesting cycle for a while now.  Our QB sucks, so we blame all the other players on Offense for him sucking, then a few years later we dump him once it's clear the suck is really him, then we draft another and he sucks, and we blame all the other players around him for his sucking, rinse, repeat.

It might be nice to have a QB we know DOESN'T "suck", to see if the problem truly is "all the other players on offense", or if it fact it was poorly picked rookie deal QB's who were all hype and no hope.

It's a moot point, we're invested in Wilson for the next two years, minimum, so I've been (And will continue to) argue we need to support him with more skill players and O-line as possible, to give him the best chance to succeed.  But I, for one, would have loved to see a Jets season led by a Cousins, or a Stafford, or some other top 10 production QB, just to see how the team and roster could do in a situation where we know it's not the QB that was the problem. 

[slimjasi]

1 hour ago, UntouchableCrew said:

I would assume the logical point is that one of the primary benefits of a young QB isn't that they'll be better than a 10 year veteran year one but rather that they'll grow into a player that you can have for a long time.

You're posting the Stafford vs. Darnold vs. Wilson comparison as if anyone thought Wilson would be better than Stafford in 2021. I can't imagine anyone thought that.

Doesn't mean Wilson was the right choice but given Stafford is 33 and had no interest in coming here I'm not really sure what the point of this exercise is.

Basically this. 

[Snell41]

I'm actually rooting for stafford to go to a playoff team just so when he chokes again next season I can see the excuses people come up with for him.
 

This aged real well ???


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

[Snell41]

We're mostly agreed.
I would much rather Watson. but want nothing to do with Stafford, all the skill in the world just doesn't know how to win.  We don't need another mediocre QB.
For me it's Watson or Wilson at 2 (surely a risk but one worth taking - it's not like next year's QB are going to be sure things)
And yes, we'll find out his real size soon enough.  I tend to think these guys don't lie nearly as much as they used to.  I was certain they were lying about Baker's heights pre-combine - but it turns out he was the height he said he was.  I learned my lesson there.
But, of course you could be right.

This explains a lot. Didn’t want Stafford over Zach Wilson……. Alrighty then….Oh, Wilson isn’t 6-3 either. ???


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

[Smashmouth]

1 hour ago, Warfish said:

Keep in mind, I wasn't the OP.

And there is (IMO) a legitimate debate that an utterly QB-deficient, moribund franchise (like the Jets were when the OP was written) shouldn't be planning it's entire future around finding the golden draft pick ticket, but would be better off signing a solid average veteran and getting itself to "competent" level BEFORE it tries to win the lottery for the future.

We've been stuck in an interesting cycle for a while now.  Our QB sucks, so we blame all the other players on Offense for him sucking, then a few years later we dump him once it's clear the suck is really him, then we draft another and he sucks, and we blame all the other players around him for his sucking, rinse, repeat.

It might be nice to have a QB we know DOESN'T "suck", to see if the problem truly is "all the other players on offense", or if it fact it was poorly picked rookie deal QB's who were all hype and no hope.

It's a moot point, we're invested in Wilson for the next two years, minimum, so I've been (And will continue to) argue we need to support him with more skill players and O-line as possible, to give him the best chance to succeed.  But I, for one, would have loved to see a Jets season led by a Cousins, or a Stafford, or some other top 10 production QB, just to see how the team and roster could do in a situation where we know it's not the QB that was the problem. 

Only one point to make that you forgot here ... The current QB that sucks could not move the offense consistently in any game this season. Even games where people feel he did okay or even played good there was entire quarters of inconsistency. With that being said, there are 3 other QB's on this roster that did move the team and the offense over all looked faster, more in sync and much more consistent.

[The Crusher]

On 1/24/2021 at 3:43 PM, Irish Jet said:

Obviously the rookie.

Stafford would obviously be better than Simple Sam, but he's not worth the investment as we're not set up to win now.

Literally nailed it on this third post. Boom! Well done.

[varjet]

1 hour ago, Snell41 said:

 

This explains a lot. Didn’t want Stafford over Zach Wilson……. Alrighty then….Oh, Wilson isn’t 6-3 either. ???


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

 

According to the Official Combine Results, ZW is 6-21/8 and weighed (you can manipulate that) 214 pounds.  

I actually thought facially he looked older at the end of the season.   Burrow does not look that old either.  

[jamesr]

4 hours ago, Warfish said:

Absolutely.  +1

I don't think many actually do, personally.  I think most use numbers as a reference point to support an overall evaluation, pro or con, of a guy.  But no stress.

I think it's more used to say "don't rule player X out, here's player Y who started out similarly and did well".

These can often be the exception rather than the rule, but it does mean "You're telling me there's a chance?".  

[Warfish]

12 minutes ago, jamesr said:

I think it's more used to say "don't rule player X out, here's player Y who started out similarly and did well".

These can often be the exception rather than the rule, but it does mean "You're telling me there's a chance?".  

I get it, I just hate that line of reasoning.

Lets all agree, there is always a "chance".  Always.  There is, right now, a chance that Sam Darnold turns his career around and becomes a HOF'er.  It's a VERY small chance, but there IS a chance.  Same way there is a chance I win the lottery this evening, lol.

If we're grasping at chances, it says alot about the guy we're discussing tbqh.  Good players don;t have fans discussing things like "well, player X sucked, so our guy could rebound too".