How do we feel about this plan...

[joewilly12]

4 minutes ago, jetstream23 said:

Drama, yes.  Winning, no.  Let's shake it up dude.  Make these wussies compete a little bit.  What's the problem with that?  Who says you can't keep the starter (Aaron Rodgers) while you draft a potential 1st round replacement (Jordan Love) or keep Carson Wentz all season while you use a high 2nd round pick on Jalen Hurts?

This isn't Little League.  If a guy gets rattled because someone might be gunning for his job then so be it.  I'd want to find that out pretty quickly.  We drafted Quinnen Williams at #3 after having Leo Williams (a #6) on the roster.

Prefer they sign Nick Mullens and let them battle it out.  

We need a viable backup plan. 

Don't tell me you consider Darnold a viable backup  plan to Wilson. 

[slats]

1 hour ago, Warfish said:

All the usual suspects will down vote you, because they're losers who don't believe in competition.

Just like they didn't want Darnold to have to EARN his #1 job, now they don't want the new golden boy to have to earn HIS #1 job.

Heaven forbid anyone has to actually work hard and prove anything before they get the crown and throne, right?

They love making the same mistakes over and over again, hyped up draft pick, no competition, they bust, rinse repeat.

We're basically Cleveland.  

 

Lol, no. Either they’re giving up on Darnold or they’re not. If they are, get the draft comp back now. Pretty simple. Are you gonna guarantee Darnold $18.8M in 2022 to be “competition?” Or are you just running his contract out and -maybe- being in line for a fourth or fifth round comp pick in 2023? 

[Lith]

1 hour ago, mrcoops said:

If we draft Wilson, Darnold will be gone.

There's no upside to having your former franchise QB looking over the shoulder of your future franchise QB.

If Wilson is the pick, the Jets will have a guy like Alex Smith, Chase Daniel or Nick Mullens backing him up.

This.  Also not enough training camp reps to go around for to develop two QBs.  If Wilson is going to be the guy, then we need to devote all resources to developing him with an experienced guy getting a handful of reps as the back-up.

[Warfish]

8 minutes ago, slats said:

Lol, no. Either they’re giving up on Darnold or they’re not. If they are, get the draft comp back now. Pretty simple. Are you gonna guarantee Darnold $18.8M in 2022 to be “competition?” Or are you just running his contract out and -maybe- being in line for a fourth or fifth round comp pick in 2023? 

This might be news to you, but the next football season is the 2021 season.  Not the 2022 season.

Like I said, terrified of any competition.  Better to just anoint the new Savior the day 1 starter than ever have him earn anything, right?

[slats]

4 minutes ago, Warfish said:

This might be news to you, but the next football season is the 2021 season.  Not the 2022 season.

Like I said, terrified of any competition.  Better to just anoint the new Savior the day 1 starter than ever have him earn anything, right?

Fully aware, Handsome. 
 
My question is what are you doing with Darnold if you’re drafting Wilson #2? Are you guaranteeing his fifth year option -in 2022- for $18.8M? Or are you not picking that option up and either letting him walk for a 2023 4th or 5th round comp pick? Or, if he wins the competition with the QB you just picked #2 overall, would your plan be to franchise him and trade Wilson?  
 
There’s no logic to both drafting Wilson and keeping Darnold. None. They can still get a 2nd or better for him in a trade this year, imho. If you’ve decided to draft Wilson, you take that now to help build around him. He’ll be good or he won’t, who he competed with to get there is not going to be a factor. 

[jetstream23]

17 minutes ago, joewilly12 said:

Prefer they sign Nick Mullens and let them battle it out.  

We need a viable backup plan. 

Don't tell me you consider Darnold a viable backup  plan to Wilson. 

I don't consider Darnold a longterm backup to Wilson, no.  Not trading Sam in the next few weeks doesn't mean that he can't be traded in the Fall though at the trade deadline.  My point is simply that we shouldn't fear any potential fragility in the confidence levels of these guys simply because of a little competition.

If somebody is low-balling Joe during the Draft in trying to trade for Sam then just hold your ground and keep him until October.  Maybe then a market exists for Darnold and results in a better trade.  If not then I don't think the offers would be all that much lower than what they were during the Draft.  In fact, I've long held a theory that right now Draft picks are like gold to GMs.  They want them, they want to keep what they have, and they want even more.  But during the season they want players, then have teams in the heat of battle and they're more likely to trade Draft picks that are 6 months away for a player they can get immediately and suit up next week for Week 7 of the NFL season..... particularly a GM who may think his job is going to be toast come January.

[CanadienJetsFan]

No

[CanadienJetsFan]

Just now, CanadienJetsFan said:

No

Sam will be traded for a low 2nd or 3rd rounder

[slimjasi]

I understand the concept, but it’s not going to happen. 
 

if the jets are planning on drafting a QB at 2, Sam will be traded 

[Mike135]

If I was Sam in this scenario I'd sit out until I was traded.

I mean a team drafts you.  Then proceeds to give you the worst offense for 3 years.  Now they draft a new QB and give him weapons n an oline?   

Psh... screw that.  I might even start booking tons of massages to go the Watson route.

[Bronx]

2 hours ago, Joe W. Namath said:

.The Darnold bobblehead

Make sure to put a condom on that head before it catches mono.

[slimjasi]

32 minutes ago, Mike135 said:

 

I mean a team drafts you.  Then proceeds to give you the worst offense for 3 years.

What if I told you that the QB was a significant part of having the “worst offense?” 

[Mike135]

1 minute ago, slimjasi said:

What if I told you that the QB was a significant part of having the “worst offense?” 

I'd say look at the WRs, TEs and oline.  

Then tell ya to take the red pill n wake up.

[slimjasi]

1 minute ago, Mike135 said:

I'd say look at the WRs, TEs and oline.  

Then tell ya to take the red pill n wake up.

Lol, but if we can look at the WRs, TEs, and OLs, why can’t we ever look at the QB? 

See, the mistake you Sam Bros make is that you completely detach Sam from the performance of his offense over 38 starts. Yes, Sam has been hampered by bad players around him, but those same players also have a right to say that they were playing with a bad QB. Everyone shares in the blame - including the most important player on the field. 

[Mike135]

Just now, slimjasi said:

Lol, but if we can look at the WRs, TEs, and OLs, why can’t we ever look at the QB? 

See, the mistake you Sam Bros make is that you completely detach Sam from the performance of his offense over 38 starts. Yes, Sam has been hampered by bad players around him, but those same players also have a right to say that they were playing with a bad QB. Everyone shares in the blame - including the most important player on the field. 

Because those players were signed off the street in some cases.  And others have moved on to other teams, and still suck.

If ya didn't see it as it was happening, you won't see it now. 

[slimjasi]

Just now, Mike135 said:

Because those players were signed off the street in some cases.  And others have moved on to other teams, and still suck.

If ya didn't see it as it was happening, you won't see it now. 

 Hmmm, didn’t the best WR Sam ever had here just have his best season with another QB?

I really think you guys are seeing what you want to see - you are ignoring the missed open WRs, boneheaded interceptions, remarkably inaccurate deep passes, and generally questionable decision-making. Sam has a lot of physical talent but he also has some major flaws that have nothing to do with any of his teammates. 

[Mike135]

1 minute ago, slimjasi said:

 Hmmm, didn’t the best WR Sam ever had here just have his best season with another QB?

I really think you guys are seeing what you want to see - you are ignoring the missed open WRs, boneheaded interceptions, remarkably inaccurate deep passes, and generally questionable decision-making. Sam has a lot of physical talent but he also has some major flaws that have nothing to do with any of his teammates. 

You refer to the only good player he had.  

Telling.

[slimjasi]

6 minutes ago, Mike135 said:

You refer to the only good player he had.  

Telling.

Eh. Another exaggeration my man. 

[BROOKLYN JET]

***The Official Brooklyn Jet Plan***

Get new QB.

Sacrifice Sam Darnold to the QB ghosts.

[choon328]

3 hours ago, MaybeOneDay said:

Draft Zach Wilson at 2

Keep Darnold

Let them battle it out in Training Camp - Start Darnold unless Wilson proves he's ready (most rookie QB's gain by sitting at the start of their career, get used to the NFL, get used to game days, ect.)

If Darnold lights it up, it's a great problem to have because we are now in a Brees / Rivers situation....Darnold's trade value only increases.

If Darnold stinks, we play Wilson and probably still get a 2nd or 3rd for Darnold from some QB needy team who thinks they can work with him.

Would this be a Win-Win situation for the Jets? 

Or would this turn into a media circus, with constant questions and attention paid to this situation ad nauseum? 

Maybe Both?

No. You can not have a QB controversy to start a new regime. That's a terrible idea. 

[choon328]

3 hours ago, CTJetsFan said:

Here's what I don't get: everyone agrees that if we draft Wilson we would want to have a vet QB around next season. Why can't that be Darnold for 1 year (if there are no FMV offers being made)?

If you say no, who are the options left out there that you want and at what cost?

What is fair market value for the worst starting QB in the nfl, statistically, who is also injury prone and only cheap for 1 more season? 

[choon328]

3 hours ago, mrcoops said:

Chase Daniel, 2 years, $6M.

I would prefer Alex Smith, but I don't think he'll sign for cheap.

Darnold staying with Wilson is a bad idea.

The mentor will be Mullens. Guaranteed. 

[choon328]

29 minutes ago, Mike135 said:

Because those players were signed off the street in some cases.  And others have moved on to other teams, and still suck.

If ya didn't see it as it was happening, you won't see it now. 

What is your explanation for Flacco playing much better than Darnold with the same terrible supportng cast? I'll wait for the deflection.

[Mike135]

2 minutes ago, choon328 said:

What is your explanation for Flacco playing much better than Darnold with the same terrible supportng cast? I'll wait for the deflection.

Plenty of obvious reasons.  But no sense.

As mentioned before, if folks didn't see the Jets destroying Sam the past 3 years, they won't see it now regardless of what's said.

Gotta let the Wilson hype die down for a few days before really discussing how the Jets will move forward. 

[choon328]

4 minutes ago, Mike135 said:

Plenty of obvious reasons.  But no sense.

As mentioned before, if folks didn't see the Jets destroying Sam the past 3 years, they won't see it now regardless of what's said.

Gotta let the Wilson hype die down for a few days before really discussing how the Jets will move forward. 

And there's the deflection. The only reason Flacco played better than Darnold is bc Flacco can read a defense pre and post snap and get the ball to open WR's. That was the only difference in the offense. Stop ignoring the obvious. Darnolds issues have nothing to do with Wilson and everything to do with his football IQ and decision making. If Flacco could succeed, statistically, with the same offensive line and skill position players there is no excuse for Darnold.  Stop inventing them.

[Mike135]

Just now, choon328 said:

And there's the deflection. The only reason Flacco played better than Darnold is bc Flacco can read a defense pre and post snap and get the ball to orb WR's. That was the only difference in the offense. Stop ignoring the obvious. Darnolds issues have nothing to do with Wilson and everything to do with his football IQ and decision making. If Flacco could succeed, statistically, with the same player there is no excuse for Darnold.  Stop inventing them.

Wait for the sugar high to wear off.

[choon328]

Just now, Mike135 said:

Wait for the sugar high to wear off.

Still no answer. Have you even watched a Jets football game?

[Mike135]

1 minute ago, choon328 said:

Still no answer. Have you even watched a Jets football game?

Shoosh.

[CTJetsFan]

30 minutes ago, choon328 said:

What is fair market value for the worst starting QB in the nfl, statistically, who is also injury prone and only cheap for 1 more season? 

24 year old former top 5 picks with 3 years of starting experience who played under one of the worst head coaches in recent memory still have some perceived value by other teams.

[RedBeardedSavage]

1 hour ago, slimjasi said:

What if I told you that the QB was a significant part of having the “worst offense?” 

When you attack the boogie boarder, you deserve:

[choon328]

20 minutes ago, CTJetsFan said:

24 year old former top 5 picks with 3 years of starting experience who played under one of the worst head coaches in recent memory still have some perceived value by other teams.

A 3rd, maybe. I think Darnold supporters are going to sh*t a brick when they see what's he's traded for. 

[CTJetsFan]

5 minutes ago, choon328 said:

A 3rd, maybe. I think Darnold supporters are going to sh*t a brick when they see what's he's traded for. 

We may not net a pick in a Darnold trade.

He could be a chip that gets our pick in the early second into the low/mid first round.

[choon328]

25 minutes ago, CTJetsFan said:

We may not net a pick in a Darnold trade.

He could be a chip that gets our pick in the early second into the low/mid first round.

With the report that the Jets are willing to accept less than a 1st round pick for Darnold my reading into that is they aren't requiring a 1st round pick in a trade up with Darnold being involved. Meaning they'll just move him for a pick alone. Plus moving from 23 to 9 would take a late 1st round pick to get done. Nobody is valuing Darnold that way. 

[Jetsfan80]

4 hours ago, CTJetsFan said:

Here's what I don't get: everyone agrees that if we draft Wilson we would want to have a vet QB around next season. Why can't that be Darnold for 1 year (if there are no FMV offers being made)?

If you say no, who are the options left out there that you want and at what cost?

Because supposedly we can get a late 2nd rounder/3rd for Darnold. Are you willing to sacrifice that to have 1 year of Darnold as a vet backup?

Sign Nick Mullens as the QB2 or roll with Morgan, and call it a day.

[CTJetsFan]

41 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Because supposedly we can get a late 2nd rounder/3rd for Darnold. Are you willing to sacrifice that to have 1 year of Darnold as a vet backup?

Sign Nick Mullens as the QB2 or roll with Morgan, and call it a day.

Fair enough