Adam Schefter: Jets Seem "Inclined To Move On" From Darnold

[Greenseed4]

27 minutes ago, pointman said:

Mitch Trubisky is the human example of why taking Mitch Trubisky at 2 is dumb. Nothing more. 

Yet, it’s a great example for why a team should pause before drafting a QB for one year of good production. 

Recall in Trubisky’s final year at UNC he put up numbers similar to Zach Wilson. If you take out his bowl game, MT had a 68.9% comp pct, 3460 yards, 28 TDs, 4 INTs. 

[GreekJet]

9 minutes ago, Greenseed4 said:

Yet, it’s a great example for why a team should pause before drafting a QB for one year of good production. 

Recall in Trubisky’s final year at UNC he put up numbers similar to Zach Wilson. If you take out his bowl game, MT had a 68.9% comp pct, 3460 yards, 28 TDs, 4 INTs. 

What about Joe Burrow? 
 

Also Trubisky only started one season. Wilson started three seasons. 

[Adoni Beast]

9 minutes ago, GreekJet said:

What about Joe Burrow? 
 

Also Trubisky only started one season. Wilson started three seasons. 

And Trubisky never displayed the arm talent that Wilson has.

While far from a perfect prospect...few have shown the zip + touch + accuracy that Zach has. 

[Greenseed4]

15 minutes ago, GreekJet said:

What about Joe Burrow? 

Also Trubisky only started one season. Wilson started three seasons. 

Joe Burrow is an anomaly. He spent 5 years in the FBS and put up 60 TDs to 6 INTs; far cry from Zach Wilson’s resume. 

[Greenseed4]

9 minutes ago, Adoni Beast said:

And Trubisky never displayed the arm talent that Wilson has.

While far from a perfect prospect...few have shown the zip + touch + accuracy that Zach has. 

 

[Adoni Beast]

3 minutes ago, Greenseed4 said:

 

Drew Lock, good arm...not on the same level as Wilson, and not the same level of prospect.

[Greenseed4]

8 minutes ago, Adoni Beast said:

Drew Lock, good arm...not on the same level as Wilson, and not the same level of prospect.

Drew played in the SEC. 

[Adoni Beast]

5 minutes ago, Greenseed4 said:

Drew played in the SEC. 

Doesn’t mean anything about natural ability.

I’m not knocking Lock or idolizing Wilson. But Wilson is pretty much consensus #2 QB (in a draft with Touchdown Jesus) for a reason.

Lock was a consensus 2nd round pick for a reason.

If you don’t see it that’s cool. A lot of this is guess work. But I see the ball fly out of Wilson’s hand in a rare and elite way that I’ve rarely seen.

He’s got his own issues (mechanics, durability, proving he can hit middle of the field, and elevate his play against complex D’s). But all these guys are unproven until they prove it.

 

[bitonti]

6 hours ago, TeddEY said:

I shouldn’t, but sure, let me indulge whatever ridiculous train of logic that had you arrive at this particular conclusion...

Ok, Bit, why is that?

Primarily it's about the team who is bad enough to pick 2 not having the infrastructure to support the pick. It's how we ended up with 23 year old darnold as a bust 

Side note the history of the QBs taken at 2 is putrid. Wentz, trubisky. Mariota, rg3 and leaf. The players who go 1 are legit. Qb at 2 is literally sloppy seconds. 

[Dinamite]

4 minutes ago, bitonti said:

Primarily it's about the team who is bad enough to pick 2 not having the infrastructure to support the pick. It's how we ended up with 23 year old darnold as a bust 

Side note the history of the QBs taken at 2 is putrid. Wentz, trubisky. Mariota, rg3 and leaf. The players who go 1 are legit. Qb at 2 is literally sloppy seconds. 

Trubisky was the first qb taken, just at 2.   Also, McNabb was picked at 2 and way better than #1 that year, Tim Couch.

[Patriot Killa]

1 hour ago, Greenseed4 said:

Drew played in the SEC. 

most QB’s coming out of the SEC suck so let’s put that one to rest once & for all. secondly, Drew Lock plays very paranoid in the pocket and didn’t display the same ability to throw into tight windows consistently. That’s at least one of Wilson’s stronger points and it’s something important enough to need on the next level to succeed. 

[Greenseed4]

1 hour ago, Patriot Killa said:

most QB’s coming out of the SEC suck so let’s put that one to rest once & for all. secondly, Drew Lock plays very paranoid in the pocket and didn’t display the same ability to throw into tight windows consistently. That’s at least one of Wilson’s stronger points and it’s something important enough to need on the next level to succeed. 

No. I’m not going there with you.

Except to say that if you put Zach Wilson in the SEC against pass rushers (that don’t play for Arkansas State), you might see stat lines more similar to Drew Lock and Mitchell Trubisky, or even the 2019 Zach Wilson who played four power-5 teams, than the tight window wonderboy you think we’d be drafting. 

[ZachEY]

7 hours ago, Philc1 said:

Because Trubisky was a not great prospect that a team reached for at 2 simply because he was a qb

 

Just like with the 2 clowns now that are being hyped as “must draft qbs” for the jets

 

There's plenty of opinions suggesting that these are both good QB prospects.  Trubisky was pretty much universally panned as a pick, moreso after the trade.  The response to the Jets picking either of these players would not be the same.

The response would be that with the worst QB in the NFL, the Jets made a move to upgrade the position.

1 hour ago, bitonti said:

Primarily it's about the team who is bad enough to pick 2 not having the infrastructure to support the pick. It's how we ended up with 23 year old darnold as a bust 

Side note the history of the QBs taken at 2 is putrid. Wentz, trubisky. Mariota, rg3 and leaf. The players who go 1 are legit. Qb at 2 is literally sloppy seconds. 

If the team's infastructure doesn't support the pick of a QB, how do we reconcile any team, ever, taking a QB early.  Simply unfathomable, as every team who picks #1 overall is very bad.  Should Jacksonville pass on Lawrence, because they're very bad?  And, sure, JN loves a good non-falsafiable argument, but it's it possible... just maybe... that Darnold was never going to be good?  I mean, QBASE did suggest this, in fact.

As for the history of taking QBs at 2.  Ok, so, unless you have the #1 overall pick, where can you take a QB?  What draft slot has a strong record of NFL production for QBs.  I mean, if your argument is that we'd have been better off picking at #1... I agree.  Unfortunately, it didn't work out that way.  And, unfortunately, we have the worst QB in the NFL.  So, QB should be in play with the pick.

[Patriot Killa]

11 hours ago, Greenseed4 said:

No. I’m not going there with you.

Except to say that if you put Zach Wilson in the SEC against pass rushers (that don’t play for Arkansas State), you might see stat lines more similar to Drew Lock and Mitchell Trubisky, or even the 2019 Zach Wilson who played four power-5 teams, than the tight window wonderboy you think we’d be drafting. 

I’m sorry, not going where with me? That’s just the facts of the matter. You want to talk about SEC QB’s or SEC pass rush but you don’t want to talk about how useless that experience has been for guys like idk? Aaron Murray, AJ McCarron, Johnny Manziel, Tua, Zach Mettenberger, Greg McElroy, Drew Lock, Jake Fromm & countless others. You constantly see guys turn into star QB’s who played nobodies. Josh Allen at Wyoming, Pat Mahomes at Texas Tech, Justin Herbert in the  PAC-12, Lamar Jackson at Louisville, Baker & Murray played in a conference where defense is imaginary. OSU sees the playoffs more years than not and still can’t put out a decent QB prospect. When are people going to realize it means nothing?

It doesn’t matter who he played. It matters how talented and moldable he is. How calm and adaptable his demeanor is. What abilities translate to the NFL well.

He has a few. 

If you have your knocks and concerns, that’s 150% fine to have but let’s not make up bad excuses along the way.
 

[Greenseed4]

33 minutes ago, Patriot Killa said:

I’m sorry, not going where with me? That’s just the facts of the matter. You want to talk about SEC QB’s or SEC pass rush but you don’t want to talk about how useless that experience has been for guys like idk? Aaron Murray, AJ McCarron, Johnny Manziel, Tua, Zach Mettenberger, Greg McElroy, Drew Lock, Jake Fromm & countless others. You constantly see guys turn into star QB’s who played nobodies. Josh Allen at Wyoming, Pat Mahomes at Texas Tech, Justin Herbert in the  PAC-12, Lamar Jackson at Louisville, Baker & Murray played in a conference where defense is imaginary. OSU sees the playoffs more years than not and still can’t put out a decent QB prospect. When are people going to realize it means nothing?

It doesn’t matter who he played. It matters how talented and moldable he is. How calm and adaptable his demeanor is. What abilities translate to the NFL well.

He has a few. 

If you have your knocks and concerns, that’s 150% fine to have but let’s not make up bad excuses along the way.
 

Cool straw man argument. Go back and watch his Coastal Carolina game and tell me how calm and moldable he was after he got punched in the mouth.  He played scared against a mediocre pass rush, and made mistakes reminiscent the Darnold ghost game. 

I can only imagine his “abilities” if he had an SEC pass rush, and didn’t have the luxury of an elite OL playing against Louisiana Tech and Troy. 

[bitonti]

13 hours ago, Dinamite said:

Trubisky was the first qb taken, just at 2.   Also, McNabb was picked at 2 and way better than #1 that year, Tim Couch.

McNabb is the best 2 qb pick for 20 years 

He's primarily known for vomiting in the super bowl and endorsing Campbell chunky soup 

[bitonti]

12 hours ago, TeddEY said:

 

As for the history of taking QBs at 2.  Ok, so, unless you have the #1 overall pick, where can you take a QB?  What draft slot has a strong record of NFL production for QBs.  I mean, if your argument is that we'd have been better off picking at #1... I agree.  Unfortunately, it didn't work out that way.  And, unfortunately, we have the worst QB in the NFL.  So, QB should be in play with the pick.

1 is better than 2 but neither are amazing places to draft a qb. The last truly successful qb 1 pick was Peyton Manning 

To answer your question the Jets need to build a program and take their Mahomes or Watson mid first Rd or beyond. They might already have the guy in Morgan a 4th Rd pick. Drew Brees was a second Rd. Russell Wilson was a 3rd Rd and of course Tom Brady was a 6th

The idea that you have to find a qb at the top of the draft is not backed by draft history. It's not the 60s anymore and they are not going to draft Joe willy to save the franchise. They need to build a program before worrying about the next savior. 

[Biggs]

13 hours ago, bitonti said:

Primarily it's about the team who is bad enough to pick 2 not having the infrastructure to support the pick. It's how we ended up with 23 year old darnold as a bust 

Side note the history of the QBs taken at 2 is putrid. Wentz, trubisky. Mariota, rg3 and leaf. The players who go 1 are legit. Qb at 2 is literally sloppy seconds. 

The infrastructure was so bad that RG3 took his team to the playoffs in year 1.  Wentz was the league MVP in year 2.  Mariota has a winning 3 and 2 record in playoff games including a trip to the AFC finals.  Trubisky has a 29 and 21 record as a starter and took the Bears to the playoffs twice.  He was drafted onto a team that was 3 and 13 the previous year.

[JetFreak89]

12 hours ago, TeddEY said:

There's plenty of opinions suggesting that these are both good QB prospects.  Trubisky was pretty much universally panned as a pick, moreso after the trade.  The response to the Jets picking either of these players would not be the same.

The response would be that with the worst QB in the NFL, the Jets made a move to upgrade the position.

If the team's infastructure doesn't support the pick of a QB, how do we reconcile any team, ever, taking a QB early.  Simply unfathomable, as every team who picks #1 overall is very bad.  Should Jacksonville pass on Lawrence, because they're very bad?  And, sure, JN loves a good non-falsafiable argument, but it's it possible... just maybe... that Darnold was never going to be good?  I mean, QBASE did suggest this, in fact.

As for the history of taking QBs at 2.  Ok, so, unless you have the #1 overall pick, where can you take a QB?  What draft slot has a strong record of NFL production for QBs.  I mean, if your argument is that we'd have been better off picking at #1... I agree.  Unfortunately, it didn't work out that way.  And, unfortunately, we have the worst QB in the NFL.  So, QB should be in play with the pick.

Why is it so hard for some to comprehend that the vast majority of QB's drafted into the NFL bust? Sure, you have a higher success rate in round 1 than any other but it doesn't change the fact that it is more likely that whichever QB you draft won't work out than it will.

There doesn't have to be a reason behind why Sam has sucked other than he joins the vast majority of other QB's who were drafted in the top of Round 1 that didn't turn into franchise QB's. 

[ZachEY]

16 minutes ago, bitonti said:

1 is better than 2 but neither are amazing places to draft a qb. The last truly successful qb 1 pick was Peyton Manning 

To answer your question the Jets need to build a program and take their Mahomes or Watson mid first Rd or beyond. They might already have the guy in Morgan a 4th Rd pick. Drew Brees was a second Rd. Russell Wilson was a 3rd Rd and of course Tom Brady was a 6th

The idea that you have to find a qb at the top of the draft is not backed by draft history. It's not the 60s anymore and they are not going to draft Joe willy to save the franchise. They need to build a program before worrying about the next savior. 

There is no "amazing place" to draft a QB.  That's what we know.  There are busts at every pick, because, more often than not, QBs bust.

I certainly agree that we need to build a quality roster, but, you also can't pass on Mahomes or Watson when Sam Darnold is your QB.  If you believe that either Fields or Wilson are potentially top QBs, you can't wait around for the better team.  If you don't, different story, but you still need to address QB this year.

We've given a great team to a bad QB in 2009 and 2010, and couldn't get it done.  We've built a team, passing on QB, because we needed to "see what we had in Hackenberg" and that was a disaster.  We've never done what everyone is afraid of, had a good QB and lost because the team wasn't good enough.  Again, look at the PFF stats, Sam Darnold is the 2nd worst QB with time to throw.  The Jets could have gotten more pieces in place for him, yes, but one of the reasons we've struggled to do so is we used 4 high picks on a bust.  Had we drafted Mahomes or Watson, we'd have also had another 1 and 3 twos to support him.  This year we can get a QB for just one pick.  And, still have 3 firsts and at least this year, a high 2nd, to build around him.  That's a lot.

I'm not a believer in the savior, and I don't think either of these guys are it.  However, I am a believer that good QBs elevate the team.  And while I don't think this team would have been a playoff contender under any circumstance last year, a QB who understood what's going on, didn't bail on the pocket before necessary, was accurate, and made smart decisions with the football, would have made everyone look a lot better, and probably would have had us in that 6-10 to 9-7 range.

[rayzor]

14 hours ago, bitonti said:

Primarily it's about the team who is bad enough to pick 2 not having the infrastructure to support the pick. It's how we ended up with 23 year old darnold as a bust 

Side note the history of the QBs taken at 2 is putrid. Wentz, trubisky. Mariota, rg3 and leaf. The players who go 1 are legit. Qb at 2 is literally sloppy seconds. 

What's crazy is that Wentz, Trubisky, Mariota and RGIII were all Pro Bowlers.  What made them drop off is the question. 

 

[Marshmello]

 

[Patriot Killa]

45 minutes ago, Greenseed4 said:

Cool straw man argument. Go back and watch his Coastal Carolina game and tell me how calm and moldable he was after he got punched in the mouth.  He played scared against a mediocre pass rush, and made mistakes reminiscent the Darnold ghost game. 

I can only imagine his “abilities” if he had an SEC pass rush, and didn’t have the luxury of an elite OL playing against Louisiana Tech and Troy. 

I’d imagine he’d have the same caliber of OL recruitment that other SEC team’s would have for their pass rush. Sounds like a moot point to me. If the CC game is all you nay sayers can bring up then we probably are having an empty debate right now. He got punched in the mouth and nearly led them on a miracle comeback drive where his teammates didn’t seem very ready to step up & answer the call at all. You act like he just sh*t the bed. He didn’t. People here enjoy using lots of exaggeration to get their points across much stronger than they actually are. Must be a NY thing.

[ZachEY]

9 minutes ago, JetFreak89 said:

Why is it so hard for some to comprehend that the vast majority of QB's drafted into the NFL bust? Sure, you have a higher success rate in round 1 than any other but it doesn't change the fact that it is more likely that whichever QB you draft won't work out than it will.

There doesn't have to be a reason behind why Sam has sucked other than he joins the vast majority of other QB's who were drafted in the top of Round 1 that didn't turn into franchise QB's. 

The answer to that is actually fairly simple.

Most of us have not been alive to see the Jets have a good QB.  And, we know a QB is a must.  We're desperate.  So, we convince ourselves that coaching is the problem.  Because, that's a simple administrative change, and there's always a hot new name.  It's an easy fix.  Admitting that Darnold, who we invested so much in, is a complete failure, means we're as far from a franchise QB as we've ever been.  There's no Robert Saleh fix for that.  There's two guys with a lot of question marks.

[FidelioJet]

15 hours ago, GreekJet said:

What about Joe Burrow? 
 

Also Trubisky only started one season. Wilson started three seasons. 

Of course.

Anyone can find examples of virtually any scenario to justify their own opinions.  Trubisky's failure or Burrow's success have NOTHING to do with Zach Wilson.

[rayzor]

2 minutes ago, Marshmello said:

 

This will improve his trade value at least.  But i can't see the Jet's or any other team paying the $18.7M option.  Even if he shows some improvement next season, he should be cheaper than that.

[FidelioJet]

7 minutes ago, Marshmello said:

 

As if Darnold's 3 years of failure doesn't mean anything.

Moreover, there are plenty of things you see in Wilson that are superior to Sam's....Like Arm strength for one.

[rayzor]

4 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

As if Darnold's 3 years of failure doesn't mean anything.

Moreover, there are plenty of things you see in Wilson that are superior to Sam's....Like Arm strength for one.

I'm not sure if arm strength is the issue for Sam.  It's more his inability to see deep plays and accuracy.

[chirorob]

14 hours ago, Dinamite said:

Trubisky was the first qb taken, just at 2.   Also, McNabb was picked at 2 and way better than #1 that year, Tim Couch.

One had Andy Reid, one went to an expansion franchise.

No one could have succeeded on that Browns team.

[FidelioJet]

Just now, rayzor said:

I'm not sure if arm strength is the issue for Sam.  It's more his inability to see deep plays and accuracy.

Not a function of issue or not - All I was pointing out was the Orlovsky stated every trait Wilson has so does Sam.

It's just not true.  There are a number of things "Trait" wise - Wilson's arm is far superior to Sam's.  

They are simply very different players - Tying to compare them the way Orlovsksy did is just lazy.

[NamathToCaster]

What is it about Sam Darnold that the experts say we are making a mistake if we let him go.  How is he going to magically do a 180 this upcoming season based on what you have seen from him the last 3 years.  You know his habits and tendencies.  Even if we had burner WR's, I don't recall his long ball accuracy being that great.  He also, and this is important, seems to be easily frazzled and almost falls apart instead of going into attack mode.

[jetstream23]

13 hours ago, TeddEY said:

There's plenty of opinions suggesting that these are both good QB prospects.  Trubisky was pretty much universally panned as a pick, moreso after the trade.  The response to the Jets picking either of these players would not be the same.

The response would be that with the worst QB in the NFL, the Jets made a move to upgrade the position.

If the team's infastructure doesn't support the pick of a QB, how do we reconcile any team, ever, taking a QB early.  Simply unfathomable, as every team who picks #1 overall is very bad.  Should Jacksonville pass on Lawrence, because they're very bad?  And, sure, JN loves a good non-falsafiable argument, but it's it possible... just maybe... that Darnold was never going to be good?  I mean, QBASE did suggest this, in fact.

As for the history of taking QBs at 2.  Ok, so, unless you have the #1 overall pick, where can you take a QB?  What draft slot has a strong record of NFL production for QBs.  I mean, if your argument is that we'd have been better off picking at #1... I agree.  Unfortunately, it didn't work out that way.  And, unfortunately, we have the worst QB in the NFL.  So, QB should be in play with the pick.

My opinion is that the best way to reduce/mitigate the risk that you setup your rookie QB for failure is to forego spending resources (Draft picks, FA money) on Defense for a year or two.  Do the minimum on D to field a below average but not horrible Defense and pour resources into supporting the QB the year you're going to Draft him.  Start with the OLine, build a respectable rushing attack, get the QB at least one or two reliable "hands" pass catchers, maybe at TE or in the slot. Build that cocoon for the rookie QB of pass protection and safety valve pass catchers so that you can develop him.  If that means you don't target a high-end CB in FA or Draft a LB in Round 2, so be it.

On a team that had just drafted Sam Darnold in 2018, Maccagnan spent the next 12+ months throwing money at CJ Mosley and using his first two Draft picks of 2019 on Quinnen Williams and Jachai Polite, finally hitting offense at #93 with OT Chuma Edoga.  That's how you neglect building infrastructure for a 21 year old rookie QB.

[joewilly12]

This morning Mike Greenberg show GET UP ESPN 

Matt Miller and Mike Tannenbaum give their reasons why Zach Wilson will be the second QB taken in the draft.

Said he will be selected by the NY Jets. 

[jetstream23]

23 minutes ago, rayzor said:

This will improve his trade value at least.  But i can't see the Jet's or any other team paying the $18.7M option.  Even if he shows some improvement next season, he should be cheaper than that.

But the average of that deal, IF you think Sam Darnold can be your starter for two years, is a very reasonable $14.25M.  Again, it hinges on whether the Jets themselves or a team trading for him think he has a legit shot to succeed in a new system (maybe one more like what he played in during 2018 as a rookie) and with a better supporting cast (ex. not doing play action to 61-year old Frank Gore and then trying to hit Braxton Berrios).

It seems somewhat binary that depending on how Darnold performs in 2021, that $18.7M (IF exercised) will seem like either way too much or a bargain.  Either Darnold continues to show he's a bottom 10 QB or the lightbulb goes on in a new system and the $18.7M looks cheap.

[rayzor]

8 minutes ago, jetstream23 said:

But the average of that deal, IF you think Sam Darnold can be your starter for two years, is a very reasonable $14.25M.  Again, it hinges on whether the Jets themselves or a team trading for him think he has a legit shot to succeed in a new system (maybe one more like what he played in during 2018 as a rookie) and with a better supporting cast (ex. not doing play action to 61-year old Frank Gore and then trying to hit Braxton Berrios).

It seems somewhat binary that depending on how Darnold performs in 2021, that $18.7M (IF exercised) will seem like either way too much or a bargain.  Either Darnold continues to show he's a bottom 10 QB or the lightbulb goes on in a new system and the $18.7M looks cheap.

A good comparison is what happened to Trubisky.  The Bears declined his 5th year option which was about $24M.  He played much better than Darnold.  Ranked 21st i believe but improved greatly in the second half.  If they choose to re-sign him, it would be significantly less than the $24M.  Which is not the cap adjusted amount.  I know the average is low but should be even lower if you don't exercise.