Why is there this idea from some people that we can’t draft Wilson and improve the team going forward?

[RogerVick1980]

4 minutes ago, peebag said:

'cough, cough' Nick Foles 'cough, cough'

He got hot for two games in the playoffs.

If he starts that whole year they don’t even make the playoffs.

Them winning with him is also an exception to the rule.

If you want to build a team first and get an average QB to try to win SB’s good luck with that 

[derp]

Just now, RogerVick1980 said:

I don’t think anyone is saying take a QB if you don’t love them just to take one.

The push back seemed to be on some of you who seem to think you shouldn’t take a QB until the team is good no matter how good a QB prospect is.Or wait till 10 as if that’s a foolproof plan because Mahomes was drafted there.

If you have a chance to take a QB you think can be a elite QB you take them no questions asked no matter where you are picking or how good your team currently is

The QB position is too important in today’s NFL to pass on a potential top of the league QB.

The elite QB’s in today’s game pretty much guarantee you a title at some point and pretty much gives you a shot to win it going into each year.

I think you’re terribly misreading the pushback and honestly creating a lot of silly hyperbole about the position I’m taking. Obviously, quarterback is important. 

You’re saying if you love a QB, take him.

My response to that is, I don’t think that logic has good result. Do you think the teams that took the multitude of busts at the top of the draft didn’t love the guy they took?

Building a better team and taking a guy later don’t guarantee a guy working out, that’s a ridiculous premise and no one has stated that. It does guarantee a better team, of course. And that you spent less draft capital on the prospect. It also happens to be how the best QB’s in the league right now were developed.

Doesn’t mean it will work out, by any stretch, or that another approach won’t. But it is more pragmatic and has been more effective than teams taking a guy they love at the top of the draft.

[RogerVick1980]

9 minutes ago, derp said:

Which one? Mahomes, Rodgers?

Of course waiting doesn’t guarantee anything. Not waiting doesn’t either. Waiting has just worked better because it’s resulted in better teams.

Eli was drafted seventeen years ago. Absolutely worked out. Lots of QB’s have gone at the top of the draft since then.

Recent Super Bowl winners to go in the first round with the team that drafted them are Mahomes (drafted 10th), Flacco (drafted 18th), Manning (drafted first), Rodgers (drafted 24th), Roethlisberger (drafted 11th), and the other Manning (drafted first). Then obviously Wilson in the third and Brady in the sixth.

I’m not saying it can’t work out. What I’m saying is it’s failed enough that I don’t think it’s a good use of the early draft capital.

So even if it’s a generational talent at Qb you would pass and take another position first high in the draft?

So if you’re the Jags you’d take Sewell instead of Lawrence?

[pdxgreen]

15 minutes ago, Adoni Beast said:

Chris Ballard is a very good GM, and I understand the prudent approach to not be wild in sacrificing the team for a QB, this offseason trading for Wentz was a good and measured move.

My fear about Douglas keeping Darnold and trading down was that if we built a team similar to Indy and Darnold was just average, we’d be the team getting bounced in the wild card round every year.

At some point all of those players will need 2nd contracts and you can’t keep them all....so you’re losing some and still looking for a QB. In Ballard’s case in makes sense. Indy was never in position to draft a QB high post-Luck. But us sitting at 2, with Wilson staring us in the face was a no-brainer in my mind. 

When you have a shot, take the QB. Build the team with and around him.

 

 

Well.  I hope it eventually wins him a championship.  But at some point you have to take a chance.  SF realized that with Jimmy G.  At some point opportunity wanes and being prudent can seem a curse.

[adobolo2]

13 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Matt Rhule is high AF

Also, all HC's think they can "fix" a player with a modicum of talent.  That doesn't mean they're always right.  He's going to find out very quickly what buyer's remorse looks like.  Doesn't mean he isn't a good coach though.  

Not to mention, a 2021 6th and a future 2nd and 4th isn't exactly a ringing endorsement. It's a gamble for a relatively low price when compared to how much it costs to get QB's these days.  Last I heard they're also waffling on whether to hand him the 5th year option by the May 3 deadline, even though it was previously thought to be a virtual certainty that they would do so after trading for him.  This means that they're still hopeful one of the QB's falls to them at # 8 overall, and don't want to commit to Darnold beyond 2021 if that occurs.  

 

https://www.catscratchreader.com/2021/4/12/22380108/the-carolina-panthers-have-not-yet-picked-up-sam-darnolds-fifth-year-option

The Panthers have not yet picked up Sam Darnold’s fifth-year option

Although it has been talked about like it was a formality and a given, according to Matt Rhule, that is not something the team has done yet

They have another 3 weeks before his 5th year option needs to be activated so that's a noting story.

At the end of the day sam is gone, you don't rate him and I do, all the crying myself to sleep every night is not going to bring him back, I have to learn to move on.

[RogerVick1980]

4 minutes ago, derp said:

I think you’re terribly misreading the pushback and honestly creating a lot of silly hyperbole about the position I’m taking. Obviously, quarterback is important. 

You’re saying if you love a QB, take him.

My response to that is, I don’t think that logic has good result. Do you think the teams that took the multitude of busts at the top of the draft didn’t love the guy they took?

Building a better team and taking a guy later don’t guarantee a guy working out, that’s a ridiculous premise and no one has stated that. It does guarantee a better team, of course. And that you spent less draft capital on the prospect. It also happens to be how the best QB’s in the league right now were developed.

Doesn’t mean it will work out, by any stretch, or that another approach won’t. But it is more pragmatic and has been more effective than teams taking a guy they love at the top of the draft.

I think the only  extremely clear evidence in today’s NFL is that almost every team that wins now  has  an elite QB so you do whatever it takes to land that elite QB and worry about other holes later on.

In a hard cap league every team has holes even the SB winners but the elite Qb’s hide those flaws 

[Warfish]

43 minutes ago, RogerVick1980 said:

It’s just a habit on message boards..

But since  it bothers you so much I will  continue to do it..lol

Agree with you on JD..

I understand.....

We all have our little foibles.....

It's just interesting.....

.....

[UntouchableCrew]

29 minutes ago, derp said:

Since NFL teams haven’t dramatically changed how they draft quarterbacks at the top of the draft it doesn’t really look good either way. I think the franchise thing is overstated too. Teams like the Eagles and Rams haven’t been poorly run lately. Colts have had some great runs.

I think you’re misreading me too. I’m not saying you don’t take a quarterback in the top five. I’m pushing back on this idea that if you’re there then you should take one, because when are you going to have a chance again? If it’s *the* guy then sure, go for it, but I think that guy is rare to the point that taking guys that high is a questionable practice and should happen less than it does.

I wouldn’t say you never do it, but the idea that it’s a good place to take QB’s isn’t one that resonates with me at all either.

Yeah, we're not that far off -- I said in one of my earlier posts that if you just don't have strong conviction in these guys don't take them. I'm certainly not advocating to take a QB for the sake of it with a pick this high (and I'm not even sold on Wilson personally.) But it seems like some people really are, and I get that.

[jetstream23]

3 hours ago, freestater said:

Well...sure. If you wanna put it the well written, thought out way. 

Ha!  I have my moments.  Now point me to the thread where I can argue that Jachai Polite was simply misunderstood and can still be a Pro Bowler!

[jetstream23]

2 hours ago, Joe W. Namath said:

Completely agree.  Starting in the 4th round, we can take a corner etc.  We have 5 picks in the 1st 3 rounds.  We should come out of that with the following in no particular order:

qb, rb, wr, te, oline

 

I like it.  I might slightly modify your list to QB, 2 x OL, and then 2 out of WR, TE, RB.  But we're on the same page although I almost guarantee one defender is take in the first 5 picks.  Even last year with our heavy need on O we hit OL, WR right out of the gates but then went defense with the next 2 picks. 

[jetstream23]

2 hours ago, Jetsfan80 said:

And especially not "project DT" who was like 26 years old when we took him, no less.

Fire Maccagnan into the Sun.  

A project DT out of Rounds 6 or 7 is fine... but get me a worthwhile project like a Jason Ferguson in Round 7.  Those are the projects I like!

 

[neckdemon]

4 hours ago, RogerVick1980 said:

Ive heard  from some people here and on social media that the Jets can’t draft a Qb because there are too many holes on the roster  and/or  Wilson would be put in the same situation as Darnold..

First off we aren’t contending this year anyway so if we can’t fill every hole this year it’s not the end of the world.. it’s about how we continue to build..

I don’t get why some people think if we draft Wilson we will have no ability going forward to improve the team at all and he will be stuck with this exact roster for his whole career..

We have enough assets and flexibility wheter through the draft or cap going forward to where if we make the right moves we have more then enough assets to build a talented team around Wilson eventually..

 

 

 

 

it was more that they were saying that the team would get more improvement from trading down for a nice haul and adding a bunch of players to a roster that is low on real talent.....as opposed to using the pick on a qb

[Jetsfan80]

2 hours ago, derp said:

I did read the full post.

Luck is probably the only QB prospect in that stretch who truly deserved to go #1.

The franchise who took him also completely failed him. It resulted in his career ending far too early.

I don’t think that they’d pass on him if they went back. Maybe they’d do other things differently. I also don’t think the pick really worked out for him or the Colts. And I don’t think those ideas are mutually exclusive.

The point is that drafting Luck but failing to build around him still worked out a lot better than their current approach:  Building a great roster, then watching it go to waste surrounding Jacoby Brissett, Phillip Rivers and then Carson Wentz.  

Unless you're the Bucs and fall a$$ backwards into Tom friggin Brady, you really need to go get the QB in the draft whenever you have the ability to do so.  You can't wait until some unknown date in the future and depend on plucking a QB off the QB tree.  Franchises are very rarely that lucky.  

[Jetsfan80]

2 hours ago, CTJetsFan said:

Agree. That's probably why some fans are skeptical that the results under JD will be any different (understandably so).

People just need to see how it plays out over the next year or 2 before saying that JD is just as bad as Tanny, Idzik and Macc

Douglas having the balls and the resume to take control of the org was a big step in the right direction.  It's clear that the org's approach has shifted since his arrival towards taking any football decisions away from the Johnson's.

And from Woody and Chris's perspective, I imagine its a welcome change.  They probably don't want to be constantly hiring new GM's and HC's every few years.  Douglas running things for the forseeable future frees them up not to have to care a whole lot about what's going on.  

[Jetsfan80]

2 hours ago, RogerVick1980 said:

That isn’t something to bank on that’s just luck.

Once again if the Jets think Wilson is great you take him..

Because Mahomes was drafted 10 now all of a sudden waiting till 10 gives you a much greater chance on a great Qb? Lol 

Thats not a reason to always  wait till then to draft a Qb and pass on a guy at the top of the draft you love

And it can't be ignored that the Chiefs traded way up to get Mahomes.  They believed in the kid enough to do that and went after him, aggressively.  Maybe they didn't know he'd be THIS great, but they certainly believed in him enough to do that even after Alex Smith had just put together a career year.  

The Chiefs are an example of aggressively going after a QB in the draft.  Not kicking the can down the road.  

[Jetsfan80]

2 hours ago, derp said:

You think it is just luck that the QB’s who go to the more talented teams that allow them to develop end up having better careers? No chance that the QB going to the better situation is connected with the better career?

It's a 2-way street.  Obviously Mahomes walked into a fantastic situation.  But the Chiefs also specifically hand-picked him to be their guy.  They didn't wait for the board to come to them late in the 1st round.  They also didn't stand pat with Alex Smith, even though Smith was very good for them.  

In this league you have to make your own luck.  The Chiefs evaluated their rookie QB properly and had great infrastructure in place to be able to make their move.  Mahomes took full advantage of a great situation, and then some.  

And this idea that Mahomes wouldn't have success anywhere is laughable.  Mahomes may not have thrown 50 TDs, won an MVP, or a Super Bowl if the Jets had drafted him.  But become an elite QB and win a division title, maybe a playoff win or 2?  Absolutely.  He wasn't fully dependent on his circumstances to succeed.  Those who suggest that just aren't watching him play the game.  

[JetFreak89]

While the team may not be built, the team is in much better shape than when Darnold was drafted. 

2018

WR's: Quincy Enunwa (who only started 10 games), 2nd year Robby Anderson (who started 9 games), and Jermaine Kearse followed by Terrell Pryor and Charrone Peake.

TE: Eric Tomlinson and a rookie Chris Herndon.

RB's: Isaiah Crowell, Bilal Powell (for 7 games) and Elijah McGuire

OL: Beachum (serviceable), Carpenter (in decline), Long (really?), Winters (yeah no) and Shell (meh)

2021

WR's: Corey Davis, Denzel Mims, Jamison Crowder, Keelan Cole, and still have Berrios, Vyncent Smith, Cager and a few other projects. 

TE: Chris Herndon - hoping he can regain form post Gase; Tyler Kroft, Griffin and Wesco - definitely can upgrade here

RB's: Tevin Coleman, Ty Johnson, Josh Adams and Le'Michael Perine - serviceable for sure

OL: Becton, Lewis, McGovern, GVR, Fant with hopefully Dan Feeney, Cameron Clark, Chuma Edoga pushing to take over the 2 guard spots. Would love to add a high draft pick here. 

 

All in all our WR's are better overall with much better depth, while we could draft one high, I don't think we NEED to draft one high out of necessity. Our TE's are garbage but still not much worse (if at all) from 2018, so we could definitely use help there. I would take the 2021 RB's over the 2018 with the knowledge that Powell wouldn't last the whole season and again better depth. Similar to the WR's, I don't think we NEED to draft a RB high, especially given the system. The OL I would call it a wash at worst given just how terrible Long was that year. I would say OL is a definite NEED to address with a high draft pick. 

 

[derp]

1 hour ago, RogerVick1980 said:

So even if it’s a generational talent at Qb you would pass and take another position first high in the draft?

So if you’re the Jags you’d take Sewell instead of Lawrence?

Where’d you read that in what I posted? Come on man

Depending on the offer I’d firmly consider trading out. If nothing special I’d likely take Lawrence but I also don’t think he’ll will work out as planned there.

[derp]

1 hour ago, RogerVick1980 said:

I think the only  extremely clear evidence in today’s NFL is that almost every team that wins now  has  an elite QB so you do whatever it takes to land that elite QB and worry about other holes later on.

In a hard cap league every team has holes even the SB winners but the elite Qb’s hide those flaws 

Well I firmly disagree on throwing up your hands and drafting a guy being the best way to acquire an elite QB. And that there’s not clear evidence re early QB bust rates. And I don’t think we’re going to get to the same place on either of those issues.

[derp]

22 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

The point is that drafting Luck but failing to build around him still worked out a lot better than their current approach:  Building a great roster, then watching it go to waste surrounding Jacoby Brissett, Phillip Rivers and then Carson Wentz.  

Unless you're the Bucs and fall a$$ backwards into Tom friggin Brady, you really need to go get the QB in the draft whenever you have the ability to do so.  You can't wait until some unknown date in the future and depend on plucking a QB off the QB tree.  Franchises are very rarely that lucky.  

I think the difference between their current and prior results are less different than you do, they’re now a great situation to develop a young QB, and most importantly Luck was an outlier prospect, one of the few you take that high, and he still didn’t work out long term.

I’m not saying you never do. I’m saying that too many prospects get pushed up to that level and the “take someone while you’re up there” mentality is flawed. The right guy? Sure. But support him. And many many teams think they’re taking the right guy when they take the wrong guy.

[derp]

18 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

It's a 2-way street.  Obviously Mahomes walked into a fantastic situation.  But the Chiefs also specifically hand-picked him to be their guy.  They didn't wait for the board to come to them late in the 1st round.  They also didn't stand pat with Alex Smith, even though Smith was very good for them.  

In this league you have to make your own luck.  The Chiefs evaluated their rookie QB properly and had great infrastructure in place to be able to make their move.  Mahomes took full advantage of a great situation, and then some.  

And this idea that Mahomes wouldn't have success anywhere is laughable.  Mahomes may not have thrown 50 TDs, won an MVP, or a Super Bowl if the Jets had drafted him.  But become an elite QB and win a division title, maybe a playoff win or 2?  Absolutely.  He wasn't fully dependent on his circumstances to succeed.  Those who suggest that just aren't watching him play the game.  

I don’t think you’re really arguing with me here. The Chiefs and Mahomes is pretty much the model. I don’t think the Jets are coming close to that with who they take at two. Pretty much all teams drafting QB’s in the top five don't. A couple have and even those guys haven’t worked out.

And I don’t think we’ll ever know what he would’ve been elsewhere and don’t find it super useful to speculate with authority since that’s all anyone can do on the topic.

[RogerVick1980]

1 hour ago, Warfish said:

I understand.....

We all have our little foibles.....

It's just interesting.....

.....

Now you gave me a complex and I’ve stopped lol.

[slats]

3 hours ago, pdxgreen said:

Chris Ballard must have been close friends with Maccagnan.  I don't think I've ever seen a GM so afraid of giving a huge commitment to a QB.   He's cycled through Brissett, Rivers and now -- whatever is left of Wentz.  He says that it's the one decision he is hesitant to make because his job to attached.  But if you don't land a SB capable quarterback.. a GM doesn't last longer than 5 or so years.  So I would think you take a young QB every chance you get to even the odds.

I love Wentz in Indy. Reunited with Reich? On a win-now roster? That’s career rejuvenating. That team could win a Super Bowl. 

[Jetsfan80]

47 minutes ago, derp said:

I think the difference between their current and prior results are less different than you do, they’re now a great situation to develop a young QB, and most importantly Luck was an outlier prospect, one of the few you take that high, and he still didn’t work out long term.

I’m not saying you never do. I’m saying that too many prospects get pushed up to that level and the “take someone while you’re up there” mentality is flawed. The right guy? Sure. But support him. And many many teams think they’re taking the right guy when they take the wrong guy.

 

But the problem is they aren't even trying to develop a young QB.  They're going after washed up or flawed veterans.  Either they aren't willing to do what it takes to trade up OR they just want to "nice and safe" at QB, which basically never works out.  

[Jetsfan80]

46 minutes ago, derp said:

I don’t think you’re really arguing with me here. The Chiefs and Mahomes is pretty much the model. I don’t think the Jets are coming close to that with who they take at two. Pretty much all teams drafting QB’s in the top five don't. A couple have and even those guys haven’t worked out.

And I don’t think we’ll ever know what he would’ve been elsewhere and don’t find it super useful to speculate with authority since that’s all anyone can do on the topic.

Fair, but there are still quite a few posters here who think that if Sam Darnold and Pat Mahomes switched places, the results between the 2 QB's would be about the same, where Darnold would be elite and Mahomes would be subpar.  It just isn't even remotely operating in reality to suggest that.  I'm not saying you were, only that people are putting entirely too much weight on a QB's circumstances.  

[Jetsfan80]

2 hours ago, peebag said:

'cough, cough' Nick Foles 'cough, cough'

An extremely rare exception does not make it the rule.  

Counting on winning a SB with a "C" level QB is an extremely risky, and dumb, strategy.  

And it certainly doesn't give you a good chance at being a perennial contender.  Just look at the Ravens, and how much they struggled to be a true contender with Flacco after their magical 2012 Super Bowl run.  

Find an "A" or "B+" QB who, if healthy, can make you a contender for a decade or so.  Never, ever settle for a "C" QB.  It's not easy to find, but you have to keep trying in this league.  

[derp]

20 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Fair, but there are still quite a few posters here who think that if Sam Darnold and Pat Mahomes switched places, the results between the 2 QB's would be about the same, where Darnold would be elite and Mahomes would be subpar.  It just isn't even remotely operating in reality to suggest that.  I'm not saying you were, only that people are putting entirely too much weight on a QB's circumstances.  

And that’s probably right, but I also think far too many people have the “if you’re able to take a shot at a QB at the top of the draft you have to do it because you don’t know when you’ll be in a position to be” mentality when in reality the best QB’s have not come at the top of the draft.

And so as to not quote you twice - I agree the Colts should be drafting a QB and have made errors in not doing so. I also think they didn’t need to be at the top of the draft to do that which plays into that prior belief.

[GreenReaper]

4 hours ago, jetstream23 said:

Ha!  I have my moments.  Now point me to the thread where I can argue that Jachai Polite was simply misunderstood and can still be a Pro Bowler!

He can...like this...

Download video

 

[UnknownJetFan]

7 hours ago, Wit said:

Simply because time and time again, bad franchises draft QBs high and ruin them. Hopefully that narrative is changing with kyler Murray and Baker Mayfield for instance, but the Jets have to prove they won’t ruin him.

Bad coaches are what ruins these QBs and the QBs also don't do themselves any favors or were not very good due to bad decision making or lack of exp. in college itself. Top 5 picks on our team of Sanchez (only had 1 year starting college exp. and showed poor decision making in the NFL) and Darnold (had a lot of turnovers in college due to bad decision making and this carried over into the NFL) basically both couldn't process information fast enough in the NFL and then would make bad or hasty decisions resulting in too many turnovers costing us most of the games we lost during those timeframes. We'll just go by recently, but how many open WRs did Darnold either not throw to or just flat out miss due to inaccuracy much of the time. Heck, we all know Gase is bad, but he certainly is covering for Darnold on all of those cases I just mentioned since he could go public and say that to try and salvage some part of his career and at least see if he could get an OC job in the NFL or college. Gase just looks real bad since Tannehill came back looking real good, but with a Superman RB on his team that could make most QBs that are average look good, and everyone in the NFL, Media, etc. is giving Darnold a pass and throwing Gase under the bus. A lot of the plays and aspects of the game plans could have turned out much better if Darnold showed any semblance of consistency via better judgement/decisions. Heck, if the coaches and game plans were the only problem how did this team win back to back games this past season against playoff teams that each won a playoff game?. You'll hear "Any given Sunday", "Law of averages". No, those only apply if spaced out like maybe a win in week 4 and another win in week 13, not 2 games in a row. Lets see how Darnold does long term, but if he does the same things for the Panthers he did here it won't matter if he has better weapons there, he will struggle. They may have downgraded at QB since Bridgewater overall for the course of his career has shown to be a better more consistent QB than Darnold.     

[Jetsfan80]

2 hours ago, derp said:

And that’s probably right, but I also think far too many people have the “if you’re able to take a shot at a QB at the top of the draft you have to do it because you don’t know when you’ll be in a position to be” mentality when in reality the best QB’s have not come at the top of the draft.

And so as to not quote you twice - I agree the Colts should be drafting a QB and have made errors in not doing so. I also think they didn’t need to be at the top of the draft to do that which plays into that prior belief.

It may be true that QB's historically don't always come from the top of the draft.  But lately, teams have gotten better at evaluating QB prospects from the looks of things, and some of the best QB prospects have indeed been getting taken early. 

Joe Burrow and Justin Herbert look like hits from the last draft class.  Both picked in the top 6 and QB's # 1 and 3 off the board, respectively.  Kyler Murray is clearly the best QB from the 2019 class, taken # 1 overall.  A QB like Murray might not have been taken that early in previous years.  Yes, Lamar Jackson was picked late in the 1st in 2018.  But Baker Mayfield and Josh Allen were not.  

And even in the Mahomes example, the Chiefs aggressively traded up as high as they could go from their late 1st to get Mahomes at 10 overall.  Sitting and waiting was not an option for them.

This year, it looks like QB's are going to go 1-2-3, with 2 others potentially coming off the board before getting to pick 8 or 9.  

Relying on QB's to fall in any given year is a risky and unwise proposition.  Either you're in position to take one (like we are), OR you likely will have to hand over a lot of draft capital to move up.  "Sticking and picking" in the back end of the 1st probably isn't going to land you a franchise QB.

[Big_Slick]

9 hours ago, RogerVick1980 said:

I don’t get why some people think if we draft Wilson we will have no ability going forward to improve the team at all and he will be stuck with this exact roster for his whole career..

 

JD's picks at #23 and the three day two picks will determine the ability of the Jets to move forward. He needs to hit on three of the four picks otherwise it'll hinder Wilson's progress and set the Jets back to square one.

If JD does hit on the 2021 draft the Jets will certainly be improved and will be headed in the right direction.

[derp]

6 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

It may be true that QB's historically don't always come from the top of the draft.  But lately, teams have gotten better at evaluating QB prospects from the looks of things, and some of the best QB prospects have indeed been getting taken early. 

Joe Burrow and Justin Herbert look like hits from the last draft class.  Both picked in the top 6 and QB's # 1 and 3 off the board, respectively.  Kyler Murray is clearly the best QB from the 2019 class, taken # 1 overall.  A QB like Murray might not have been taken that early in previous years.  Yes, Lamar Jackson was picked late in the 1st in 2018.  But Baker Mayfield and Josh Allen were not.  

And even in the Mahomes example, the Chiefs aggressively traded up as high as they could go from their late 1st to get Mahomes at 10 overall.  Sitting and waiting was not an option for them.

This year, it looks like QB's are going to go 1-2-3, with 2 others potentially coming off the board before getting to pick 8 or 9.  

Relying on QB's to fall in any given year is a risky and unwise proposition.  Either you're in position to take one (like we are), OR you likely will have to hand over a lot of draft capital to move up.  "Sticking and picking" in the back end of the 1st probably isn't going to land you a franchise QB.

I think it’s too early to tell for a lot of those guys. Murray really struggled when banged up and less of a run threat last year and the Bengals got Burrow hurt. Lots of guys have started well and flamed out.

I don’t know how you got to sticking and picking late first round. Jets aren’t going to be drafting there next year and often teams end up in the middle of the draft. It’s expensive to get into the top two picks but not super cost prohibitive to get into Allen/Mahomes/Herbert territory. The Jets could’ve taken two of those guys without trading up and were very much in range to get the third if they tried. And as for the NFL getting better at drafting those are the best guys in their classes so far and went third, second, and third.

Again I’m not railing on first round or even top half of the first round guys. It’s the idea you need to take one if you’re in the top three or you don’t know when you’ll have a chance again. Top three bust rate is super high and there are guys who play great ball available outside the top five...fairly regularly.

[Jetsfan80]

15 minutes ago, derp said:

I think it’s too early to tell for a lot of those guys. Murray really struggled when banged up and less of a run threat last year and the Bengals got Burrow hurt. Lots of guys have started well and flamed out.

I don’t know how you got to sticking and picking late first round. Jets aren’t going to be drafting there next year and often teams end up in the middle of the draft. It’s expensive to get into the top two picks but not super cost prohibitive to get into Allen/Mahomes/Herbert territory. The Jets could’ve taken two of those guys without trading up and were very much in range to get the third if they tried. And as for the NFL getting better at drafting those are the best guys in their classes so far and went third, second, and third.

Again I’m not railing on first round or even top half of the first round guys. It’s the idea you need to take one if you’re in the top three or you don’t know when you’ll have a chance again. Top three bust rate is super high and there are guys who play great ball available outside the top five...fairly regularly.

 

Fair.  But even if Murray takes a severe downturn, he's still the best QB in the class of '19, and its not close.  He just went to the Pro Bowl in his 2nd season.  His competition is Daniel Jones, Dwayne Haskins, Drew Lock and a bunch of backups.  Burrow is obviously a question mark with his injury, but he looked great, and lots of guys have come back from ACLs these days.  

No, you're right that the Jets weren't going to stick and pick in the back of the 1st.  But earlier I was talking about the Colts, supposedly the paragon for all that is right in team building among teams without a QB, and their struggles to find a QB.  Clearly their strategy at QB has been questionable.  We'll see if they finally get it right with Wentz and reuniting him with Reich.

And yes, you're absolutely right that picking in the top 3 doesn't guarantee anything when it comes to QB's.  The best QB of this class may well be Trey Lance, who is likely to go after Lawrence, Wilson and Fields are off the board.  But I also don't think you can count on finding one outside of, say, the top 10 picks as much as teams used to be able to.