Quarterback competition in camp ... what's the downside?

[ljr]

Quarterback competition in camp ... what's the downside?

---

This is what I've been struggling to understand.

I'm barely, if at all, seeing this talked about (from the talking head "experts" ... or even on this site) as a likely scenario to happen?

The only 2 downsides I see are:

---

1.  the likely value we get back on Sam

All the talk I see going back and forth it seems like trading him before the draft, a 2nd round pick is middle of the road of what we can expect to get back

What do you think a likely return would be that we could get back if we traded him during the year or after this season?  IMO, a middle of the road guess would be a 5th round pick.

To me, that is the first downside ... a 5th round pick vs a 2nd round pick  (we could quibble on the actual #'s, but I think these are fair, middle of the road values)

---

2.  We are not adding a top value prospect for Sam

best case scenario we add a top performing rookie (be it RT, C, WR, Edge, CB ... whatever)

Is that going to turn Sam into the answer?

I don't think so ... he might improve and have a chance to eventually become the answer ... but there is no evidence to suggest a drastic improvement will suddenly happen

Is doubling our odds of the most important player on the field being the answer a better decision than taking a piece to gradually improve our existing QB's performance and hoping he turns into the answer

---

We have a question mark at QB 

The player that teams win or lose by is primarily the QB

Why the F shouldn't we pick a QB at 2, keep Sam for now, let the 2 motherf*ckers battle it out in camp?

We want the person who performs best under pressure ... let's see which of the 2 does.

---

2 chances of having our QB performance move forward instead of 1

Why the F wouldn't we want to do this?

 

[Jetsfan80]

The only reason not to have QB competition this Summer would be if the Jets acquired Deshaun Watson.

In any other scenario, the Week 1 QB1 job should have multiple QB's in the running.  There's no good reason whatsoever for Darnold or a rookie to be the unquestioned Week 1 starter.  Acquiring at least 1 QB of significance this offseason is a must.  

[slimjasi]

There is nothing wrong with a QB competition, and in most plausible QB scenarios, I expect one. 

[JohnnyLV]

Just now, ljr said:

Quarterback competition in camp ... what's the downside?

---

This is what I've been struggling to understand.

I'm barely, if at all, seeing this talked about (from the talking head "experts" ... or even on this site) as a likely scenario to happen?

The only 2 downsides I see are:

---

1.  the likely value we get back on Sam

All the talk I see going back and forth it seems like trading him before the draft, a 2nd round pick is middle of the road of what we can expect to get back

What do you think a likely return would be that we could get back if we traded him during the year or after this season?  IMO, a middle of the road guess would be a 5th round pick.

To me, that is the first downside ... a 5th round pick vs a 2nd round pick  (we could quibble on the actual #'s, but I think these are fair, middle of the road values)

---

2.  We are not adding a top value prospect for Sam

best case scenario we add a top performing rookie (be it RT, C, WR, Edge, CB ... whatever)

Is that going to turn Sam into the answer?

I don't think so ... he might improve and have a chance to eventually become the answer ... but there is no evidence to suggest a drastic improvement will suddenly happen

Is doubling our odds of the most important player on the field being the answer a better decision than taking a piece to gradually improve our existing QB's performance and hoping he turns into the answer

---

We have a question mark at QB 

The player that teams win or lose by is primarily the QB

Why the F shouldn't we pick a QB at 2, keep Sam for now, let the 2 motherf*ckers battle it out in camp?

We want the person who performs best under pressure ... let's see which of the 2 does.

---

2 chances of having our QB performance move forward instead of 1

Why the F wouldn't we want to do this?

 

QB competitions are team killers IMO.  Nothing worse a team can do. 

First, you wind up splitting reps so whomever actually wins is less prepared for the season.

Two it sends a message that you are not really confident in either QB which creates QB factions within your team which destroys unity,

Third they are inherently biased, it is usually obvious who will "win" a QB competition before it even starts but again he loses preparation time and that hurts performance.

If I were an owner it would be one of the few things I would mandate to a head coach. NO QB competitions. And all the rhetoric around it "best pl;ayer should play" etc is just window dressing for failure to make a decision.

A team needs to pick a QB and be 100% behind that person until he proves he cannot handle it then you move to 100% behind the next guy.

If we pick at QB at #2 he starts year one

 

 

[Jetsfan80]

11 minutes ago, johnnysd said:

QB competitions are team killers IMO.  Nothing worse a team can do. 

First, you wind up splitting reps so whomever actually wins is less prepared for the season.

Two it sends a message that you are not really confident in either QB which creates QB factions within your team which destroys unity,

Third they are inherently biased, it is usually obvious who will "win" a QB competition before it even starts but again he loses preparation time and that hurts performance.

If I were an owner it would be one of the few things I would mandate to a head coach. NO QB competitions. And all the rhetoric around it "best pl;ayer should play" etc is just window dressing for failure to make a decision.

A team needs to pick a QB and be 100% behind that person until he proves he cannot handle it then you move to 100% behind the next guy.

If we pick at QB at #2 he starts year one

 

 

 

Totes.   Having Tyrod Taylor around really hurt Justin Herbert.  

Competition doesn't hurt you at QB.  Having a sh*tty QB does.  

[rangerous]

Unless saleh/lafleur is happy with darnold being QBs they should have a competition. I get the comments of having fewer reps but darnold has been in the league for 3 seasons and shouldn’t have much trouble with a rookie.  On the other hand, if the rookie does outperform darnold then the jets will have found their guy.  And no comments about beating out darnold will be easy.  It won’t. These guys get where they are because can do things fans can only dream about.

[Alka]

39 minutes ago, ljr said:

Quarterback competition in camp ... what's the downside?

---

This is what I've been struggling to understand.

I'm barely, if at all, seeing this talked about (from the talking head "experts" ... or even on this site) as a likely scenario to happen?

The only 2 downsides I see are:

---

1.  the likely value we get back on Sam

All the talk I see going back and forth it seems like trading him before the draft, a 2nd round pick is middle of the road of what we can expect to get back

What do you think a likely return would be that we could get back if we traded him during the year or after this season?  IMO, a middle of the road guess would be a 5th round pick.

To me, that is the first downside ... a 5th round pick vs a 2nd round pick  (we could quibble on the actual #'s, but I think these are fair, middle of the road values)

---

2.  We are not adding a top value prospect for Sam

best case scenario we add a top performing rookie (be it RT, C, WR, Edge, CB ... whatever)

Is that going to turn Sam into the answer?

I don't think so ... he might improve and have a chance to eventually become the answer ... but there is no evidence to suggest a drastic improvement will suddenly happen

Is doubling our odds of the most important player on the field being the answer a better decision than taking a piece to gradually improve our existing QB's performance and hoping he turns into the answer

---

We have a question mark at QB 

The player that teams win or lose by is primarily the QB

Why the F shouldn't we pick a QB at 2, keep Sam for now, let the 2 motherf*ckers battle it out in camp?

We want the person who performs best under pressure ... let's see which of the 2 does.

---

2 chances of having our QB performance move forward instead of 1

Why the F wouldn't we want to do this?

 

I guess the #2 pick in the draft where we can get a dominant tackle, or the best wide receiver in the draft is a waste, if we can only bring in a quarterback at #2 instead who can battle it out with Darnold.

And if Darnold wins the battle, then we can watch the #2 overall pick sit on the sidelines for the entire season.  Let's just forget that we have major holes all over the field that we need to fill.  Let us burn the #2 pick on a QB if the goal is to bring in competition for Darnold.

[flgreen]

I think there might be  a make believe QB competition this summer.   

IMO, like with Adams, Douglas is going to put a price on Darnold.  Most likely a 1st.  If no one pays it, Darnold comes back.  Don't believe that will prevent the Jets from taking Wilson/Fields at #2.

Comes the summer, both Wilson/Fields, IMO could benefit from some competition, and some bench time beginning of the year.  If Darnold plays somewhat improved, for the time being he starts.  Hope is that he will play well enough to draw some attention until the trade deadline, Darnold is traded, rookie takes over.  

Think it's a long shot but possible.

[oatmeal]

37 minutes ago, johnnysd said:

QB competitions are team killers IMO.  Nothing worse a team can do. 

First, you wind up splitting reps so whomever actually wins is less prepared for the season.

Two it sends a message that you are not really confident in either QB which creates QB factions within your team which destroys unity,

Third they are inherently biased, it is usually obvious who will "win" a QB competition before it even starts but again he loses preparation time and that hurts performance.

If I were an owner it would be one of the few things I would mandate to a head coach. NO QB competitions. And all the rhetoric around it "best pl;ayer should play" etc is just window dressing for failure to make a decision.

A team needs to pick a QB and be 100% behind that person until he proves he cannot handle it then you move to 100% behind the next guy.

If we pick at QB at #2 he starts year one

 

 

This, it will do nothing for a rookie head coach / QB and polarizing Darnold but create unneeded headlines.

25 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

 

Totes.   Having Tyrod Taylor around really hurt Justin Herbert.  

Competition doesn't hurt you at QB.  Having a sh*tty QB does.  

I wouldn’t consider a bridge QB / rookie QB situation a true QB competition. 

[Jet Nut]

32 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

 

Totes.   Having Tyrod Taylor around really hurt Justin Herbert.  

Competition doesn't hurt you at QB.  Having a sh*tty QB does.  

Tyrod Taylor was a place holder for the starting spot, was never the long term QB for the Chargers.  

Unlike Sams situation

[DetroitRed]

Thank you OP.  It’s dumb to write off any of our options.  Rookie , Darnold or a trade for a Qb.  Ignore the people who rule out any of those. And I’m happy the brain trust seems to be considering all options 

[Biggs]

Just for clarification what are the rules and do they get to choose weapons.  

[Jet Nut]

6 minutes ago, flgreen said:

I think there might be  a make believe QB competition this summer.   

IMO, like with Adams, Douglas is going to put a price on Darnold.  Most likely a 1st.  If no one pays it, Darnold comes back.  Don't believe that will prevent the Jets from taking Wilson/Fields at #2.

Comes the summer, both Wilson/Fields, IMO could benefit from some competition, and some bench time beginning of the year.  If Darnold plays somewhat improved, for the time being he starts.  Hope is that he will play well enough to draw some attention until the trade deadline, Darnold is traded, rookie takes over.  

Think it's a long shot but possible.

Only problem could be what do you do with Darnolds contract situation?  The 5th year option takes him near $30 mil over the next 2 seasons.  Dont give it to him and who would trade anything of value for him in a walk season?

 

[DetroitRed]

If a QB competition is a killer, don’t call it a competition.  It didn’t kill Mahomes/ Smith or Herbert/ Taylor.  It won’t kill us 

[Jetsfan80]

9 minutes ago, oatmeal said:

This, it will do nothing for a rookie head coach / QB and polarizing Darnold but create unneeded headlines.

I wouldn’t consider a bridge QB / rookie QB situation a true QB competition. 

Well that's exactly what I'm advocating for.  Rookie QB + Bridge QB + trade Darnold.  

If the alternative route is Darnold + veteran/rookie competition, then who cares about Darnold's feelings, or the team's feelings about Darnold?  He's sucked for 3 years.  He can't just be handed the job in year 4, especially with this being the last year on his deal.

[ljr]

1 hour ago, johnnysd said:

QB competitions are team killers IMO.  Nothing worse a team can do. 

couldn't disagree more

poor QB performance is worse that a QB competition

---

"Two it sends a message that you are not really confident in either QB which creates QB factions within your team which destroys unity,"

we are not confident in Darnold being the man, all he has given us is reason to doubt him

a rookie should not come in with the title that he already is the man ... let him prove it

we hope for one or the other or both of these things to happen, but as of now they are both just that ... hope

players are not dumb (except for Cromartie ... but he has a super-weiner exemption card) ... players prefer the best chance to win over a vote of undeserved confidence

---

"Third they are inherently biased, it is usually obvious who will "win"

agree that the incumbent should have the bias ... if he is outperformed then that makes the decision easy ... if he outperforms then over the next year or two there is still plenty of value in having the young QB in waiting on the team

---

"If I were an owner it would be one of the few things I would mandate to a head coach. NO QB competitions"

sounds like Woody Johnson ... thankfully it appears that he is not the person making this decision at this time

---

"A team needs to pick a QB and be 100% behind that person until he proves he cannot handle it"

again, couldn't disagree with you more.

no handouts ... let the person prove he should have have the job

... this is not the National Third Grade Give Everyone A Participate Award League"

The NFL is for professionals

 

[Matt39]

Camp has been drastically reduced. The amount of live reps in camp these days practically makes it impossible to have a competition. Also throw in preseason probably going away.

[JohnnyLV]

1 hour ago, Jetsfan80 said:

 

Totes.   Having Tyrod Taylor around really hurt Justin Herbert.  

Competition doesn't hurt you at QB.  Having a sh*tty QB does.  

There was no competition. Tyrod was installed as a bridge QB for Herbert to start mid year. Completely different situation than a "competition"

[Jetsfan80]

4 minutes ago, johnnysd said:

There was no competition. Tyrod was installed as a bridge QB for Herbert to start mid year. Completely different situation than a "competition"

If Watson doesn't end up with the Jets, most are advocating for the Jets to draft a QB who might not start until midyear.  So what's the problem here then?  Darnold's hurt feelings matter that much?

[bitonti]

 

#morgantruther

 

[JoJoTownsell1]

If you select A QB at 2, there is no QB competition. That's the reality. 

[Morrissey]

Downside is the only time there is a QB competition is when you don't have a freaking QB....

If we draft a QB at 2.. he's the QB. You may have him sit to start the season like the Chargers and Dolphins did, but there isn't a competition.

[HighPitch]

if you have competition that means there will be a winner and a loser.

The loser's feelings will certainly be hurt.

Thats why

[Jetsfan80]

20 minutes ago, HighPitch said:

if you have competition that means there will be a winner and a loser.

The loser's feelings will certainly be hurt.

Thats why

Poor, sweet Sammy.