Why are we being so friggin impatient with Zach?

[FidelioJet]

13 hours ago, jgb said:

Trubisky has been to and won more playoff games than any Jets QB since Sanchez. If Darnold performed at Trubisky level, he'd still be here, and people would be counting Lombardis.

Besides, this whole "you can't win it all with him" argument is tired. Well, I'd like a good team, ok? The all-or-nothing mentality ignores that this is foremost about entertainment. At this point I'll take a competent QB. Look at the fan engagement during Fitz's first year here. The last time it was fun to be a Jets fan. That has value.

I totally get it.  And completely understand now why you and I see this team and our situation so differently.

It really is two diametrically opposed positions. 

1) You're content with winning 7-10 games a year, but always having meaningful games in Dec. - grabbing a wildcard once every 3-4 year and stealing a couple of playoffs wins a decade...but also knowing there's no real chance of a championship.  I totally get that viewpoint.  It's a reasonable position to take and now i have a better understanding of why you've mostly already given up on Wilson.

2) I would rather continue to keep trying to find the guy that will win 12-13 games every year and be a perennial Super Bowl contender...but also understanding you're more than likely in a perpetual rebuild because finding the QB necessary for that is very elusive. 

It's likely why I have more patience and haven't given up on an Uber Talented rookie 6 games into his NFL career...where as you have basically written him off.

Honestly, I get it.  Completely understand your perspective now - it's different than mine, but easier to understand why we see things so differently.

[jgb]

5 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

Many were.  Add in hes played a handful of games, the season in the first half of the season.  

Elways was horrid, dont know if he was worst but was benched.  Manning struggled.  Ben was horrid. I could care about worst titles.  Its too dependent on the rest of the league.  I'm saying bottom third is enough.  Almost all rookie QBs struggle mightily because its an adjustment from college and because they've usually been drafted by crappy teams.  

No matter what the whole outlier thing doesnt quite fit. 

you say many were the worst then list 3 guys who were not the worst.

[heymangold]

I skipped some posts but now the thought is to replace zach with mitch trubisky?  If trubisky was successful he’d still be the qb of the bears.  He stinks, plain and simple.  Zach’s got at least 2 more seasons here. If he fails, it’s back to cleaning house and starting a new GM search.

[jgb]

7 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

I totally get it.  And completely understand now why you and I see this team and our situation so differently.

It really is two diametrically opposed positions. 

1) You're content with winning 7-10 games a year, but always having meaningful games in Dec. - grabbing a wildcard once every 3-4 year and stealing a couple of playoffs wins a decade...but also knowing there's no real chance of a championship.  I totally get that viewpoint.  It's a reasonable position to take and now i have a better understanding of why you've mostly already given up on Wilson.

2) I would rather continue to keep trying to find the guy that will win 12-13 games every year and be a perennial Super Bowl contender...but also understanding you're more than likely in a perpetual rebuild because finding the QB necessary for that is very elusive. 

It's likely why I have more patience and haven't given up on an Uber Talented rookie 6 games into his NFL career...where as you have basically written him off.

Honestly, I get it.  Completely understand your perspective now - it's different than mine, but easier to understand why we see things so differently.

Lol, please refrain from summarizing my position. Way off, amigo.

I'm not "content" with winning 7-10 wins a year. What I'm not content with 10 years of being a bottom barrel team for like 8 of them.

I'd like to see improvement, competence, some competitiveness. Then, my expectations will increase and I will want more. I also think our weaponz aren't getting a fair shot to develop with the league's worst passer throwing them passes -- which we have arguably now had 4 years in a row.

And PS: no one has given up on Zach. No one. I want him to start as many games as possible including next year. But I'd also like a credible Plan B in case he's hurt again or totally bellyflops so we can see what we have in everyone else on offense.

 

 

[JohnnyLV]

1 hour ago, jgb said:

All good brother. I also understand the value of knowing we wouldn’t have won it all anyway to help ease the pain of the last ten years.

Well on that note I think if we had just taken a new against Pittsburgh  we win that game and win the SB. 

[Hal N of Provo]

44 minutes ago, jgb said:

Maybe I’m using the term overbroadly. If you weren’t suggesting people are critical of Zach for his family’s wealth or his looks or some other non-football reason, I apologize.

Yeah buddy.  It’s football talk, jokes, and nothing more.  I know you’d love to see Zach succeed as much as I would.  

[Jet Nut]

18 minutes ago, Barton said:

 

......... The Jets never have a real head coach who knows how to develop a QB. So it doesnt matter who the QB is.

Al Groh, Herm, Rex, Mangini, Bowles, Gase, Saleh. None of these guys ever led a team with a young QB and properly developed him. And none of them lasted in the NFL for very long as head coaches. 

Look at what Belichick and his OC are doing with Mac Jones. They brought him along slowly, kept his throws simple, helped him build his confidence and then once he got his sea legs, they let the offense open up a bit more, asked him to do more etc. Look at Andy Reid with Mahomes. He sat for nearly a year and they coached him up. 

The Jets the last 20 years? Throw the young QB into the fire. Sink or swim. 

All these QBs for the Jets the last 20 years were SET UP TO FAIL by the sink or swim mentality. 

Probably because HCs arent the ones who develop a QB.  

Jets didnt throw Chad in, he sat the usual 3 years that were always the call back in the day.  

KO was brought along by Walton who was considered a top OC, he was surrounded by Walker, Toon, Freeman, Shuler and a top OL.  Played well for a period, no one hindered him.  Coslet was supposed to be a top OC and couldn't develop Nagle, was it his fault?

Regardless fall the particulars two different owners and all different HCs and GMs.  Its most on the QBs.  QBs get all the excuses and none of the blame for sucking on this board.  He sucks?  It has to be the HC because 

[Jet Nut]

27 minutes ago, jgb said:

you say many were the worst then list 3 guys who were not the worst.

 

All of them suck.  Three examples weren't the end of the list.  Its a dumb argument to attempt that more start off doing well than sucking it up.  

All of the rookies this year other than the one on a top team suck.  How many didnt suck as rookies is the better question?  RWilson, Burrow, Herbert, Baker, Marino?  None before Marino and a couple after him

[jgb]

1 hour ago, Jet Nut said:

 

All of them suck.  Three examples weren't the end of the list.  Its a dumb argument to attempt that more start off doing well than sucking it up.  

All of the rookies this year other than the one on a top team suck.  How many didnt suck as rookies is the better question?  RWilson, Burrow, Herbert, Baker, Marino?  None before Marino and a couple after him

Except that's not the argument at all. If you want to chill with strawmen, go back to Oz, Dorothy.

[Jet Nut]

2 hours ago, jgb said:

Except that's not the argument at all. If you want to chill with strawmen, go back to Oz, Dorothy.

If that’s not the point then you’re the one in Oz.  Don’t tell me my argument changed.  It’s so simple anyone could follow it.  The rarity is the QB who starts as a rookie and is successful. If you need help with that, need a long list of names it’s on you quite frankly 

[jgb]

4 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

If that’s not the point then you’re the one in Oz.  Don’t tell me my argument changed.  It’s so simple anyone could follow it.  The rarity is the QB who starts as a rookie and is successful. If you need help with that, need a long list of names it’s on you quite frankly 

It’s a bell curve. The ones who start as terrible are rare. The ones that start great are rare. You’ve stated a truism with no predictive value. The ones that start ok are much more common. But I relish a debate about statistics with you, friendo.

[Jet Nut]

Just now, jgb said:

It’s a bell curve. The ones who start as terrible are rare. The ones that start great are rare. You’ve stated a truism with no predictive value. The ones that start ok are much more common. But I relish a debate about statistics with you, friendo.

I stated a simple fact

You just enjoy arguing and had to claim a simple truism was wrong.  You’re still trying and still are dead wrong.  What I said, few start off successful is a fact.  Now you’re playing straw man and bringing those who start off terribly.  No one said a word about terrible QB.  
But you.

 

[slimjasi]

4 minutes ago, jgb said:

It’s a bell curve. The ones who start as terrible are rare. The ones that start great are rare. You’ve stated a truism with no predictive value. The ones that start ok are much more common. But I relish a debate about statistics with you, friendo.

The problem is, I haven’t seen any good stats on the predictive power of a rookie season. If a guy starts well, how likely is he to turn into a ten year stater? If a guy has a poor or below average rookie season, how likely is it that he ever takes a big jump? how do these probabilities compare? 
 

I’d be curious to see a study on NFL QBs that tries to quantify this to some degree. I haven’t seen anything like this 

[jgb]

3 minutes ago, slimjasi said:

The problem is, I haven’t seen any good stats on the predictive power of a rookie season. If a guy starts well, how likely is he to turn into a ten year stater? If a guy has a poor or below average rookie season, how likely is it that he ever takes a big jump? how do these probabilities compare? 
 

I’d be curious to see a study on NFL QBs that tries to quantify this to some degree. I haven’t seen anything like this 

Also haven’t seen anyone deep a deep analysis of this. But the model has been extraordinarily predictive when applied.

3 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

I stated a simple fact

You just enjoy arguing and had to claim a simple truism was wrong.  You’re still trying and still are dead wrong.  What I said, few start off successful is a fact.  Now you’re playing straw man and bringing those who start off terribly.  No one said a word about terrible QB.  
But you.

 

Never said it was wrong. I said it has about as much value as saying good QBs with one arm are rare.

[Hael]

So I have to admit, the first half is very much what you want to see from a team trying not to expose a rookie qb too much (eg what the Pats are doing with Mac Jones).  Very patient, simple read, simple throw plays.  They likely scripted the majority of those and allowed Zac to play fast.  It wasn’t perfect by any stretch (a near interception and a missed td), but thats exactly how you want to play.  

It gets the qb a bit of rhythm, and keeps them from stacking the box too much.

Of course once they got behind, they had to open the playbook up into more conventional formations, and it looked more like what we have come to expect.  I think in hindsight, a little more patience with the first type would have been better, as that INT was a back breaker.

[Biggs]

I thought Zach both sucked and showed promise.  I wouldn’t give up on him yet.  The team has lots of problems.  Right now he’s not the solution but he’s not the problem.  This team is not good.  

[Fantasy Island]

5 hours ago, Jet Nut said:

Probably because HCs arent the ones who develop a QB.  

Jets didnt throw Chad in, he sat the usual 3 years that were always the call back in the day.  

KO was brought along by Walton who was considered a top OC, he was surrounded by Walker, Toon, Freeman, Shuler and a top OL.  Played well for a period, no one hindered him.  Coslet was supposed to be a top OC and couldn't develop Nagle, was it his fault?

Regardless fall the particulars two different owners and all different HCs and GMs.  Its most on the QBs.  QBs get all the excuses and none of the blame for sucking on this board.  He sucks?  It has to be the HC because 

Our HC does suck.

[More Cowbell]

I have pretty much given up hope that Zach will fix anything this season. As soon as there is pressure,  his brain just farts all over the place. 

[jgb]

7 minutes ago, Biggs said:

I thought Zach both sucked and showed promise.  I wouldn’t give up on him yet.  The team has lots of problems.  Right now he’s not the solution but he’s not the problem.  This team is not good.  

I'd say he's definitely a big problem with the team. But agree we shouldn't give up.

[Biggs]

1 minute ago, jgb said:

I'd say he's definitely a big problem with the team. But agree we shouldn't give up.

If they put him out there and he’s not ready that’s on the coaches.  

[tdoublee]

I hope Zach one day can be as good as Taylor Heinicke. Take that fwiw.

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

[jgb]

Just now, Biggs said:

If they put him out there and he’s not ready that’s on the coaches.  

Also on JD for leaving the cupboard embarrassing bare behind him. Zach sitting a year behind Minshew could've worked.

[LSJF]

Not blaming Zach for this debacle…. Defense historically bad, refs suck as usual, we can’t find a kicker, ulbrich sucks …

[RutgersJetFan]

1 hour ago, slimjasi said:

The problem is, I haven’t seen any good stats on the predictive power of a rookie season. If a guy starts well, how likely is he to turn into a ten year stater? If a guy has a poor or below average rookie season, how likely is it that he ever takes a big jump? how do these probabilities compare? 
 

I’d be curious to see a study on NFL QBs that tries to quantify this to some degree. I haven’t seen anything like this 

FO did a breakdown of this a long time ago and I'm too lazy to look for it. Yes, normally rookie year is a wash statistically. There are exceptions: Notably, there are boundaries that the rookie should play within to indicate that he won't be a bust or will be better than advertised. A poor rookie year can be fine, and a good rookie year might not be indicative of anything long-term either, as long as they stay within the lines. So long as the guy isn't Jamarcus Russell, it's safe to wait until their sophomore year to judge. All of the Jets QB's drafted since Tannenbaum, I think excepting Geno, have played below that basic threshold. Sanchez, Darnold, and especially Wilson, who looks like the worst of the bunch. An example of the opposite end of that spectrum is Herbert, who looks like an inevitable and perennial MVP candidate going forward. Dak and Russell Wilson also played above the boundaries as well. 

[Irish Jet]

14 minutes ago, RutgersJetFan said:

FO did a breakdown of this a long time ago and I'm too lazy to look for it. Yes, normally rookie year is a wash statistically. There are exceptions: Notably, there are boundaries that the rookie should play within to indicate that he won't be a bust or will be better than advertised. A poor rookie year can be fine, and a good rookie year might not be indicative of anything long-term either, as long as they stay within the lines. So long as the guy isn't Jamarcus Russell, it's safe to wait until their sophomore year to judge. All of the Jets QB's drafted since Tannenbaum, I think excepting Geno, have played below that basic threshold. Sanchez, Darnold, and especially Wilson, who looks like the worst of the bunch. An example of the opposite end of that spectrum is Herbert, who looks like an inevitable and perennial MVP candidate going forward. Dak and Russell Wilson also played above the boundaries as well. 

I'm struggling to think of too many rookie QB's who were really good and didn't go on to be good.

The obvious guy is RGIII but that's probably because his leg fell off. 

[slimjasi]

28 minutes ago, RutgersJetFan said:

FO did a breakdown of this a long time ago and I'm too lazy to look for it. Yes, normally rookie year is a wash statistically. There are exceptions: Notably, there are boundaries that the rookie should play within to indicate that he won't be a bust or will be better than advertised. A poor rookie year can be fine, and a good rookie year might not be indicative of anything long-term either, as long as they stay within the lines. So long as the guy isn't Jamarcus Russell, it's safe to wait until their sophomore year to judge. 

This is what my sense has generally been, but it’s good to see some evidence for it. If you have a link to that or know where I could find it, I would be curious to see it. 

[slimjasi]

11 minutes ago, Irish Jet said:

I'm struggling to think of too many rookie QB's who were really good and didn't go on to be good.

The obvious guy is RGIII but that's probably because his leg fell off. 

Depends what you mean by “really good” but Mayfield is already headed down that path to a degree - the browns are considering not giving him another contract. 

[Joe W. Namath]

Zach played better today.  A big positive for us.  Now lets see him stack an even better performance next week.

[bealeb319]

We were told to "be patient" with Sanchez, Geno and Darnold.   That's not a great indicator that patience in Wilson will result in success.  Sometimes (even most times), what you see is actually what you see.

If you focus solely on Zach and his throws then what you see is a young QB making many terrible mistakes over and over. If you are looking past that you will see a receiving group dropping too many catchable passes (some are not clean but still catchable) and an offensive line that isn't giving our young QB much time to process. Zach definatly needs to be held accountable for some of his mistakes but he is not the only problem we have right now.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using JetNation.com mobile app

[Barry McCockinner]

5 minutes ago, Joe W. Namath said:

Zach played better today.  A big positive for us.  Now lets see him stack an even better performance next week.

Agree - still needs a lot of improvement but there was clear improvement today and it's great to see him and Moore developing a rapport. He was really ripping the ball in to Moore today who was snatching the ball out of the air w/ease.

[Jimmy 2 Times]

He still was plagued by drops.  3 of his first 4 incompletions were off receiver's hands.

I feel better about Zach after this game than I did before.  

He might still bust, but I saw nothing today to make me think he will. 

[Irish Jet]

15 minutes ago, slimjasi said:

Depends what you mean by “really good” but Mayfield is already headed down that path to a degree - the browns are considering not giving him another contract. 

Mayfield is good, just not worth what he'll be wanting.

 

[jgb]

I can't wait for the moment the narrative on Wilson switches from "be patient" to "stop beating a dead horse."

Don't blink or you will miss it.

[Rangers9]

I’ve said this before but I’ll repeat myself after hearing Zach after today’s game. We didn’t lose because of him it was again because of the defense. But 2021 aren’t practice sessions for a rookie Qb. I’ve heard what he’s said before with others like Sam etc. about how they’re learning and improving each week. I don’t want to hear this again. I want to hear about the game and not about his development. I’m not for tanking seasons to draft a Qb or to develop them. There’s a preseason and practice. Regular season games you play people who give you your best chance to win and try to win the game. So don’t tell me about how you’re learning and will get better with more reps etc. Even though I believe Zach and in Zach. 

[LSJF]

14 minutes ago, jgb said:

I can't wait for the moment the narrative on Wilson switches from "be patient" to "stop beating a dead horse."

Don't blink or you will miss it.

This wasn’t on our quarterback, give me a break, did you see defense, The kicker, I guess it’s all Zach’s  fault…. The Jets suck, but haters gonna hate