Jump to content

Five Reasons I Believe the Jets are Retaining Sam Darnold


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 90
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

As the title implies these are five quick reasons that I've come to the conclusion the Jets are not going to draft a quarterback (Wilson or Fields) with their top pick. 1. The Jets only have two

1. The Jets are dumb. 2. The Jets do dumb things. 3. Not doing everything to upgrade from Sam Darnold is a dumb thing. 4. ??? 5. ???

Posted Images

Quote

1. The Jets only have two quarterbacks on the roster right now.  Sam Darnold and Captain James Morgan.  If the Jets were to trade Darnold, and draft a quarterback one of the first things they would have done would be to secure a  veteran quarterback that knows the system.  Using the 2021 free agency tracker I notice that both CJ Beathard and Nick Mullens are still on the free agency market.  It would make sense that if the Jets were to trade Darnold, go down to one quarterback, and then draft a rookie, the first thing they would do, even prior to signing Corey Davis or Carl Lawson, would be to sign a QB that would know the probable playbook that the Jets would likely run, and a veteran that they could play if a guy like Zach WIlson gets injured.  The fact that only 7 of a possible 30 QB's have been signed speaks to the fact that they will probably run with Darnold and not look for a backup QB that could support a rookie. https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/free-agents/all/quarterback/

None of this makes sense.

  • Upvote 2
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Douglas sees the 2nd pick as way more valuable than Sam Darnold.   Douglas is a value oriented GM who sees less risk in drafting OL than QB.  He believes in trading valuable assets and having low value assets on the roster.  Sam is a low value asset.    In his head any QB he drafts could bust.  We already have a bust QB why replace him.  I can draft a quality player who's not a QB who's bust potential and conversely contribution potential to a bad roster is higher.  

Douglas is a low risk GM.  Don't expect him to take a risk on a QB unless it's a sure thing starring him in the face where there is complete agreement by the organization.  He's almost the exact opposite of Tannenbaum.  

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, manuvsteal said:

f the Jets were to trade Darnold, and draft a quarterback one of the first things they would have done would be to secure a  veteran quarterback that knows the system.  Using the 2021 free agency tracker I notice that both CJ Beathard and Nick Mullens are still on the free agency market.  It would make sense that if the Jets were to trade Darnold, go down to one quarterback, and then draft a rookie, the first thing they would do, even prior to signing Corey Davis or Carl Lawson, would be to sign a QB that would know the probable playbook that the Jets would likely run, and a veteran that they could play if a guy like Zach WIlson gets injured.  The fact that only 7 of a possible 30 QB's have been signed speaks to the fact that they will probably run with Darnold and not look for a backup QB that could support a rookie. 

I think the decision to keep Sam or go with Wilson or Fields for that matter isnt totally made at this point, Fridays BYU pro day and possibly Tuesdays OSU pro day could be the deciding piece to the puzzle so signing one of the backups mentioned isnt a priority as of today

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Biggs said:

In his head any QB he drafts could bust.  We already have a bust QB why replace him.  I can draft a quality player who's not a QB who's bust potential and conversely contribution potential to a bad roster is higher.  

Because if in his head we already have a bust QB he should replace him with a QB who could work out, not stay away because he could possibly bust.  

QB is much more important to gamble on, with a much bigger payout than any other position.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Jet Nut said:

Because if in his head we already have a bust QB he should replace him with a QB who could work out, not stay away because he could bust.  

QB is much more important to gamble on, with a much bigger payout than any other position.  

He's not a high risk GM.  That's the point.  Look at what he's done so far last year and this year.  Low risk value picks in both FA and the draft.  Contracts that allow the team to move on quickly.  There is nothing that says "no risk it no biscuit".  The philosophy of the current team that holds the SB trophy. 

Aren't you the guy who said "Sam is the greatest prospect since Luck"  Granted he wasn't the top prospect on the board of the two team ahead of us in the draft but that's besides the point.  Why move on from Sam for sloppy seconds again?

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Will the same crowd that rushes to defend every JD move or non-move based on some genius level status they've imputed to him out of the nether defend him if he and Selah thinking sticking with Sam is best for this team? 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Biggs said:

Douglas sees the 2nd pick as way more valuable than Sam Darnold.   Douglas is a value oriented GM who sees less risk in drafting OL than QB.  He believes in trading valuable assets and having low value assets on the roster.  Sam is a low value asset.    In his head any QB he drafts could bust.  We already have a bust QB why replace him.  I can draft a quality player who's not a QB who's bust potential and conversely contribution potential to a bad roster is higher.  

Douglas is a low risk GM.  Don't expect him to take a risk on a QB unless it's a sure thing starring him in the face where there is complete agreement by the organization.  He's almost the exact opposite of Tannenbaum.  

I'm not sure I go along with the perception of Douglas as a low-risk GM. He has had one draft, where he took the biggest (literally) boom or bust OL prospect last year in Becton, when Wirfs was considered the safer play. He had a deal to move up with Jacksonville if required. 

I'm curious as to why you believe JD wouldn't want to replace a QB he considers bust or a low value asset? That would suggest he doesn't understand positional value, and I'm not sure that is the case. 

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, TeddEY said:

1. The Jets are dumb.

2. The Jets do dumb things.

3. Not doing everything to upgrade from Sam Darnold is a dumb thing.

4. ???

5. ???

4. They are also stupid.

5. They don’t know their elbow from their a$$hole.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Biggs said:

Douglas sees the 2nd pick as way more valuable than Sam Darnold.   Douglas is a value oriented GM who sees less risk in drafting OL than QB.  He believes in trading valuable assets and having low value assets on the roster.  Sam is a low value asset.    In his head any QB he drafts could bust.  We already have a bust QB why replace him.  I can draft a quality player who's not a QB who's bust potential and conversely contribution potential to a bad roster is higher.  

Douglas is a low risk GM.  Don't expect him to take a risk on a QB unless it's a sure thing starring him in the face where there is complete agreement by the organization.  He's almost the exact opposite of Tannenbaum.  

Are you suggesting JD will never draft a QB to start for this team? 

Because that's the only reasonable way to interpret that point - that I can see anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Biggs said:

He's not a high risk GM.  That's the point.  Look at what he's done so far last year and this year.  Low risk value picks in both FA and the draft.  Contracts that allow the team to move on quickly.  There is nothing that says "no risk it no biscuit".  The philosophy of the current team that holds the SB trophy. 

Aren't you the guy who said "Sam is the greatest prospect since Luck"  Granted he wasn't the top prospect on the board of the two team ahead of us in the draft but that's besides the point.  Why move on from Sam for sloppy seconds again?

Hes done in FA what most want him to do with the draft, drop down from big ticket players for quantity.  

Doesnt mean thats what he will do in the draft.  He went for quantity at the cost of bigger ticket FAs.  Thats not low risk, we dont even know if it were possible to lure a Thuney away from a SB contender. 

Signing young player, all but one player is under 30 and that one is 30 who if they perform can be retained and if not replaced is smart more than safe.  Lets not confuse "no risk it no biscuit" philosophy to a deep passing attack with roster management in TB

I have no idea what Sams ranking after Luck has to do with this, I've been pretty adamant that I want and think Sam should be traded.  You're keeping a scorecard?  I was scared of Sanchez.  I wanted Watson, Mahomes not so much a fail obviously.  I was fine with Allen, was killed for that and that I thought Jackson could work in the right situation.  My son, @Mogglez argued with me against those two for hours on end.  I've been pretty decent there.  Sams the enigma because of everything around him but think he should be moved.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, K_O_Brien said:

I'm not sure I go along with the perception of Douglas as a low-risk GM. He has had one draft, where he took the biggest (literally) boom or bust OL prospect last year in Becton, when Wirfs was considered the safer play. He had a deal to move up with Jacksonville if required. 

I'm curious as to why you believe JD wouldn't want to replace a QB he considers bust or a low value asset? That would suggest he doesn't understand positional value, and I'm not sure that is the case. 

 

This is 100% correct.  I'm not sure where this low risk things comes from....He doesn't spend wildly in FA.  I think we see that but from what I can tell his more high risk in the draft.  A bit of a gambler if you will...

  • The safe pick was Wirfs. By far.  And, btw, Wirfs had the better rookie year.  
  • He took a QB in the 4th - not a safe, conservative play
  • Zuniga was a boom or bust kinda pick - there were plenty of safer, less upside guys there at the time.
  • He traded down in the 2nd - when there were good WR's- rolling the dice on landing a WR he liked later. 

If anything he's more of fiscally conservative, risk taker. 

Look at many of his FA's.  They are mostly highly skilled, former 1st rounders that haven't panned out where they were....so big potential, but in all likelihood they are what they were.

 

  • Upvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

My fresh take is that I don't known, the situation remains in flux and may remain so until the pick is traded, the pick is used to draft Sewell, or used to draft Wilson. Yes they can keep Darnold, yes they can trade down.

The OP arguments are valid but diagnosing the situation based on Douglas's non moves? Douglas moves like molasses, that is the man's super power. 

Why wait so long, why not sign Mullins now? Signing Mullins now suggests they are drafting Wilson. One of many possibilities is that they might have an agreement in place with Mullins that only becomes public when they trade the second or draft Wilson.

The other possibility is teams are simply waiting for Mullins's back-up asking price to fall.

I'm not sure what is worse, having to wait five weeks for the draft or having to wait four months to training camp.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We will keep Sam for one simple reason:

Joe Douglas struck out in free agency and needs to trade #2 to draft 10 offensive linemen and 8 cornerbacks.

SAR I

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t buy it. We know what Darnold is. If he drafts a QB he gets at least another 3 to 5 years in his job. If he keeps Darnold and he plays the way he always has we will be trying to draft a QB at pick number 12 next year in a weak QB draft. Makes no sense whatsoever.


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

Are you suggesting JD will never draft a QB to start for this team? 

Because that's the only reasonable way to interpret that point - that I can see anyway.

No I don't think he has any QB not named Lawrence rated as his top pick at 2.  He probably has at lest 4 player rated higher than any QB in this draft not named Lawrence.  He might not have any rated higher than Darnold.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

Hes done in FA what most want him to do with the draft, drop down from big ticket players for quantity.  

Doesnt mean thats what he will do in the draft.  He went for quantity at the cost of bigger ticket FAs.  Thats not low risk, we dont even know if it were possible to lure a Thuney away from a SB contender. 

Signing young player, all but one player is under 30 and that one is 30 who if they perform can be retained and if not replaced is smart more than safe.  Lets not confuse "no risk it no biscuit" philosophy to a deep passing attack with roster management in TB

I have no idea what Sams ranking after Luck has to do with this, I've been pretty adamant that I want and think Sam should be traded.  You're keeping a scorecard?  I was scared of Sanchez.  I wanted Watson, Mahomes not so much a fail obviously.  I was fine with Allen, was killed for that and that I thought Jackson could work in the right situation.  My son, @Mogglez argued with me against those two for hours on end.  I've been pretty decent there.  Sams the enigma because of everything around him but think he should be moved.  

No he hasn't done what most people wanted him to do.  Jets fans wanted him to do so much more before FA started.  It's only after the fact through rationalization, something Jets fans including myself are so good at that he has done what we want.  We have no choice.  We are fans, we go along for the most part because if we didn't we would have to rationalize rooting for a crappy team forever. 

Your user name says it all.  You have rationalized he's signings as great because you are locked in.  You have no choice but to be optimistic.  I'm in the same boat.  The difference is at 66 I will root for them anyway.  The past and present are indistinguishable to me.   I'm okay rooting for a crappy team because I remember when they were a great team.  I don't feel the need to delude myself to root for the Jets.   I hope I'm wrong but I'm all in anyway.

  • Upvote 1
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

We will see how all of this plays out internally, but considering the lack of trade interest in Sam I am more convinced than ever that we need to move on. One of the main arguments for Sam is that he has been held back and/or screwed up by Gase; a problem that would not exist for an acquiring team. There has been incredible QB turnover this offseason, and yet we see QB needy teams deciding that players like Andy Dalton and Ryan Fitzpatrick are better bets for the short-term than Sam are striking. Quarterback is the most important position in the league and if teams that need one have decided that a second round pick is not worth it for this player, they are saying he isn't good. If the league doesn't want Sam, why should we be banking our hopes on him?

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Biggs said:

No he hasn't done what most people wanted him to do.  Jets fans wanted him to do so much more before FA started.  It's only after the fact through rationalization, something Jets fans including myself are so good at that he has done what we want.  We have no choice.  We are fans, we go along for the most part because if we didn't we would have to rationalize rooting for a crappy team forever. 

Your user name says it all.  You have rationalized he's signings as great because you are locked in.  You have no choice but to be optimistic.  I'm in the same boat.  The difference is at 66 I will root for them anyway.  The past and present are indistinguishable to me.   I'm okay rooting for a crappy team because I remember when they were a great team.  I don't feel the need to delude myself to root for the Jets.   I hope I'm wrong but I'm all in anyway.

Hes signed 9 players.  People were guessing 10 starters.  Signs Thuney and/or a Galloday at 18 Mil they would have been happier why?  Its a deep draft for OL and WR.  As to going the safe route, we've had one draft so hard to draw conclusions especially when he drafted a Becton who most thought had the bigger bust potential over a Wirfs who was viewed as the safer pick.  

I havent rationalized anything as great, I'm usually dead down the middle, will wait to see things play out because I can see the logic of signing more young players who still can develop to 1 year deals and then lock them up if they develop.  I've been around long enough, wanted to go one way or another and been dead wrong so I dont like absolutes often.

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

Hes signed 9 players.  People were guessing 10 starters.  Signs Thuney and/or a Galloday at 18 Mil they would have been happier why?  Its a deep draft for OL and WR.  As to going the safe route, we've had one draft so hard to draw conclusions especially when he drafted a Becton who most thought had the bigger bust potential over a Wirfs who was viewed as the safer pick.  

I havent rationalized anything as great, I'm usually dead down the middle, will wait to see things play out because I can see the logic of signing more young players who still can develop to 1 year deals and then lock them up if they develop.  I've been around long enough, wanted to go one way or another and been dead wrong so I dont like absolutes often.

 

The answer to that is both Golladay and Thuney would be day 1 starters and huge upgrades.  In Golladay's case he's young at 27.  He has an injury history but he also has 2 years producing as a true No. 1 WR.  If you look at his deal it's a 3 year deal with an out in year 4.  In year 3 he can be cut with a 10 million dollar cap hit.  In reality we have the room for a front loaded deal so in my case I would have done my due diligence with the medical and if he checked out I like the deal.  It will be cheap for a true No. 1 WR going forward.  He's in his prime for at least 4 years and the cap is likely to go up by a huge number during that time period which will make his deal look great. 

If any of our FA's actually perform they are likely to get sick money in a couple of years.  We clearly signed guys as stop gaps.

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

This is 100% correct.  I'm not sure where this low risk things comes from....He doesn't spend wildly in FA.  I think we see that but from what I can tell his more high risk in the draft.  A bit of a gambler if you will...

  • The safe pick was Wirfs. By far.  And, btw, Wirfs had the better rookie year.  
  • He took a QB in the 4th - not a safe, conservative play
  • Zuniga was a boom or bust kinda pick - there were plenty of safer, less upside guys there at the time.
  • He traded down in the 2nd - when there were good WR's- rolling the dice on landing a WR he liked later. 

If anything he's more of fiscally conservative, risk taker. 

Look at many of his FA's.  They are mostly highly skilled, former 1st rounders that haven't panned out where they were....so big potential, but in all likelihood they are what they were.

 

All that's begs the question what is the safe play in this equation?

I'd argue that picking Wilson would be the safe play by the GM, he gets 3 years minimum with a young qb and an excited fan base. It's what has been done by GMs with bad teams and high draft picks since the dawn of time (few exceptions of course)

Giving Sam one more year is dangerous, you have automatically alienated half the fans, but the rewards of extra draft picks in this an future years could be more rewarding.

Will joe have balls to live dangerous or does play it safe and pick the next "franchise QB" like so many GMs in the nfl before him.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Biggs said:

The answer to that is both Golladay and Thuney would be day 1 starters and huge upgrades.  In Golladay's case he's young at 27.  He has an injury history but he also has 2 years producing as a true No. 1 WR.  If you look at his deal it's a 3 year deal with an out in year 4.  In year 3 he can be cut with a 10 million dollar cap hit.  In reality we have the room for a front loaded deal so in my case I would have done my due diligence with the medical and if he checked out I like the deal.  It will be cheap for a true No. 1 WR going forward.  He's in his prime for at least 4 years and the cap is likely to go up by a huge number during that time period which will make his deal look great. 

If any of our FA's actually perform they are likely to get sick money in a couple of years.  We clearly signed guys as stop gaps.

Golladay has just one season with over 10 touchdowns (2019 with 11). Only one season with 70 catches (2018). The rest of his career is 5 or less touchdowns. Only two years over 1,000 yards (2018 & 2019 albeit barely). He isn't terrible. I just don't see the obsession with this guy. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sonny Werblin said:

If Saleh is of the ilk that he wanted to ride with Sam one more season, that is interesting. He prepared to play against Darnold this past season and apparently did not come away with the thought, "That guy stinks".  In fact Darnold had an OK (no huge gaffs) game going 21/32 for 179 with 1 TD and no interceptions throwing to frightening trio of Perriman, Hogan and Berrios.  So, I could see Saleh thinking that if he makes Sam a game manager, he might be able to make it work.

So what you're saying is that even Darnold and Gase can do well against Saleh's defense. Great.

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Alentador31 said:

Golladay has just one season with over 10 touchdowns (2019 with 11). Only one season with 70 catches (2018). The rest of his career is 5 or less touchdowns. Only two years over 1,000 yards (2018 & 2019 albeit barely). He isn't terrible. I just don't see the obsession with this guy. 

He's been in the league for 4 years.  He was a 3rd round pick who started 5 games as a rookie.  In year 2 as a full time starter he was a 1000 yard receiver with 15.2 yards per catch and 5TD's.  In year 3 he was a 1000 yard receiver with 18.3 YPC and 11 TD's.  In year 4 he got hurt and started 5 games and got hurt.  He was on pace for another 1000 yard year and he was averaging 16.9 Yards per. 

He's an outright beast when healthy.  He's a big rangy receiver with speed with a huge catch radius.  He's numbers when healthy were terrific.  He's in his absolute prime.  I'm just saying there's a health issue.  You do the due diligence and he passes, he's worth the contract and we have the money.

Link to post
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...