Jump to content

Zach Wilson - "Different QB the 2nd Half of the Year"


Warfish
 Share

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, Scott Dierking said:

Or is it that you can't take a trash franchise and make it over in a couple of seasons? The world may never know.

Actually, the world does know.  Many franchises have gone from poor to competitive in less than the decade+ we've been trying to do it.

And yes, some have done the turnaround faster than the 3 (soon to be 4) seasons that Joe Douglas has been our General Manager.

Now, we all know Douglas will get his full 6 years, so he's now past halfway through his tenure and heading into the second half of it in 2022.  He is sitting on more than enough assets to field a more than capable, more than competitive team in 2022.

Ultimately, I don't accept a scenario where the rookie QB is faultless because team talent, and the GM responsible for team talent is also faultless.  Responsibility must exist, or we'll forever be a "trash franchise".

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Do we judge General Managers on their predictions?  Or on their results?

Is there a real world scenario where rookie franchise QB Wilson is (mostly) blameless because he "had no talent around him" AND the GM is blameless (mostly) because "he couldn't predict all this"?

And if so, where does the responsibility for a offensively inept, weak, losing and (for the D) historically bad season lay, ultimately? 

Or is there no responsibility, just a freebie, a mulligan, no one to blame, lets all just move on?  It seems many in our fanbase are of this view.  No one is responsible, no one has earned criticism, we must give them all 2022 to lose some more, and maybe in 2023 we'll be competitive.

On their predictions, and I mean that sincerely. Results are only a useful metric for evaluating future performance when they tell you something meaningful about how future decisions are likely to play out

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Do we judge General Managers on their predictions?  Or on their results?

Is there a real world scenario where rookie franchise QB Wilson is (mostly) blameless because he "had no talent around him" AND the GM is blameless (mostly) because "he couldn't predict all this"?

And if so, where does the responsibility for a offensively inept, weak, losing and (for the D) historically bad season lay, ultimately? 

Or is there no responsibility, just a freebie, a mulligan, no one to blame, lets all just move on?  It seems many in our fanbase are of this view.  No one is responsible, no one has earned criticism, we must give them all 2022 to lose some more, and maybe in 2023 we'll be competitive.

I loved the pick of Zach but here's a reality check.   Lance, Fields, Mac Jones, Trevor Lawrence and Davis Mills all finished the year with higher QB ratings than Zach Wilson.  There is little argument that Lawrence and Mills played for similiarly crappy teams and yet at the end of the season were both playing at a higher level than Zach. 

I do believe Zach is blameless.  Before he stepped into the building he was the starter.  While I admit to agreeing to this I wasn't privy to his actual in the building and on the field ability during TC and Training camp.  I got the hype but I'm not an NFL coach who is actually making the call based on tangible evidence.  I'm a fan sucking up the BS until it's clear it's BS. 

I think Zach probably wasn't ready to start and was handled poorly.  Nothing I saw from me says he's ready to lead a quality NFL team to wins.  On the other hand he's arm talent was displayed, he showed NFL toughness and athletisism.  It's not exactly a mulligan but in retrospect, I think he was handled poorly and at the end of the season I'm not sure that matters either way.   He survived, he has an idea what it takes to succeed and he either will or he won't.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Warfish said:

Actually, the world does know.  Many franchises have gone from poor to competitive in less than the decade+ we've been trying to do it.

And yes, some have done the turnaround faster than the 3 (soon to be 4) seasons that Joe Douglas has been our General Manager.

Now, we all know Douglas will get his full 6 years, so he's now past halfway through his tenure and heading into the second half of it in 2022.  He is sitting on more than enough assets to field a more than capable, more than competitive team in 2022.

 

 

The decade+ plus belongs to Woody Johnson and co. JD doesn't own that, he owns the last 3 years. But with caveats. Caveats that have been laid out here.

Zach Wilson doesn't own that decade plus. He owns this year. But with caveats. With caveats that have been laid out here.

I profess to being one of the least knowledgable football fans on this site. There are many knowledgeable football fans here. But, with all of that said, there has not been an argument made that convinces me in one direction or the other, as to what Zach Wilson will be (the topic of this thread).  He is an open book to me.

People have wanted to compare him to this, to that and attach stats to that. To me , stats can be cavorted in many different manners to say what people want them to say. And there is a lot of that here. 

Fans hate saying, " I don't know what so and so will be". It is not the fun part of being a fan. Fans are all geniuses and want to compare. Which is comparing skin and bones and minds that really have no comparison. As each person is unique, each athlete is unique. 

I learned my lessons number of years ago as I was close to athletes in High School and thought that I could make projections of each kid and how they would perform in college. I did that with the benefit of knowing their families, and knowing the kids, and seeing them up close. Something that fans of a professional sport team do not have the advantage of. Even with all that advantage, my predictions were not very good. 

Sure, there are some kids that you just know are going to succeed. They are a rare breed. And even some of those fail out. This is not a science and it is not numbers based. Like most athletes, Zach will get a second year. He is lucky in that aspect. Not every athlete gets that.

What I did learn is that you can get a very good barometer of an athlete and what he will be if he has that chance to return. And have a chance to redeem, or having the chance to prove the previous year was not a fluke. For me, that has always been the measuring stick. After stepping up to the next level, with the ability to reflect and look back, how do they come back?  From my experience as a manager of a company, I always looked at "processing ability".  And some process slower than others. Some of the slow ones became future leaders in the company. We are quick to live off first impressions.

I have said many times here I have no idea what Zach Wilson will be. But I will be interested to see how he comes out next year. For me, that is the thing.

  • Upvote 2
  • Post of the Week 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Biggs said:

There is little argument that Lawrence and Mills played for similiarly crappy teams and yet at the end of the season were both playing at a higher level than Zach. 

Lawrence? I believe Lawrence had 2 total TD passes in the 9 games preceding the final game of the year and the Jags had lost 8 in a row over that timespan. Not sure about Lawrence. Mills - definitely. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Doggin94it said:

On their predictions, and I mean that sincerely. Results are only a useful metric for evaluating future performance when they tell you something meaningful about how future decisions are likely to play out

I'm sure you do.  But I cannot agree. 

Results, in my view, are the only thing that matters.

Poor predictions often lead to poor results, so it may in fact be a distinction without a difference.

But "he couldn't have seen it coming" is not, in my view, a valid excuse for a GM that put together a roster THIS forum regularly describes as "devoid of any talent" and "soft as an egg".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Actually, the world does know.  Many franchises have gone from poor to competitive in less than the decade+ we've been trying to do it.

And yes, some have done the turnaround faster than the 3 (soon to be 4) seasons that Joe Douglas has been our General Manager.

Now, we all know Douglas will get his full 6 years, so he's now past halfway through his tenure and heading into the second half of it in 2022.  He is sitting on more than enough assets to field a more than capable, more than competitive team in 2022.

Ultimately, I don't accept a scenario where the rookie QB is faultless because team talent, and the GM responsible for team talent is also faultless.  Responsibility must exist, or we'll forever be a "trash franchise".

 

 

There is no responsability beccause there are no consequences to ownership for lossing.   The teams aren't competitors they are partners in a business called NFL football.  

Owners only penalty for fielding bad teams is the incredibly small sunk cost of eating contracts of GM's and HC's to placate the fan base of perennial losers.  The New GM has a plan.  The New HC is the next innovator... We are being rewarded with a top draft pick who brings us hope for the future based on nothing but past performance and a handful of metrics.   Met life didn't even have to build the Met Life building Pan Am did.  Now that was a company with great earnings and metrics.  They also were in a business with real competition.  Met Life not so much.  

Every NFL GM and HC will be fired.  Not everyone, Gettleman gets to "retire" but you get the idea.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Scott Dierking said:

I profess to being one of the least knowledgable football fans on this site.

I don't think you give yourself enough credit, Scott.

12 minutes ago, Scott Dierking said:

I have said many times here I have no idea what Zach Wilson will be. But I will be interested to see how he comes out next year. For me, that is the thing.

I think we can all agree, nothing is changing now (this offseason).  JD is our GM.  Wilson is our presumed starting QB.  These are known quantities, immutable in the short term of the next 365 days or so.

These exchanges are not about demanding immediate change, or the like.  We're not there yet.  I think of these exchanges as more conceptual/philosophical.  None of us are in a position to change anything, so all we can really to is contemplate.  We cannot execute.

I agree, knowing that nothing will change, watching next year, how JD does with his pile of assets, and how Zach Wilson does as a 2nd year QB, is key.  I would argue, tho, that if we're here again next year, after Zach's 2nd year and JD's 4th, and we're not materially improved, then an elevated level of fan criticism should be warranted.

  • Upvote 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, slimjasi said:

Lawrence? I believe Lawrence had 2 total TD passes in the 9 games preceding the final game of the year and the Jags had lost 8 in a row over that timespan. Not sure about Lawrence. Mills - definitely. 

Lawrence putting together one complete game in game 17 coupled with Zach brilliant game against the Bills gave him a better QB rating than Zach for the season.  71.9 to Zach's 69.7.   Hard to believe because Lawrence really sucked.  Based on reality Zach really sucked. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Actually, the world does know.  Many franchises have gone from poor to competitive in less than the decade+ we've been trying to do it.

And yes, some have done the turnaround faster than the 3 (soon to be 4) seasons that Joe Douglas has been our General Manager.

Now, we all know Douglas will get his full 6 years, so he's now past halfway through his tenure and heading into the second half of it in 2022.  He is sitting on more than enough assets to field a more than capable, more than competitive team in 2022.

Ultimately, I don't accept a scenario where the rookie QB is faultless because team talent, and the GM responsible for team talent is also faultless.  Responsibility must exist, or we'll forever be a "trash franchise".

 

 

We went from poor to competitive in one off season after firing Kotite and Hiring Parcells and Belicheck. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Jetsfan80 said:

At least the Browns have been willing to "fail quickly" with their QB's. 

Mike Tannenbaum actually handed Mark Sanchez a CONTRACT EXTENSION in 2012.  Geno Smith was ousted as starter in year 3 by Fitzpatrick, but he was still on the roster throughout his rookie deal when we perhaps could have traded him away for a mid-rounder.  Hackenberg was dumped after 2 seasons, but only after Maccagnan had managed to screw the Jets forever by passing on Mahomes/Watson.  And of course Darnold lasted 3 years, and may well have been here for 4 if Douglas hadn't fallen in love with Wilson.  

I just feel like that's more of a result of crappy drafting than 'willing to fail quickly'. The Browns for years have been trying to succeed with high pick QBs, and they fail so badly that they move on. I bet Mayfield will be the same way. So at least they have been willing to 'fail quickly', but that has worked just as well as keeping players.

I sure hope Wilson improves a lot next year, though. I would not like for him to fall in that list with the others. That's not a fine group

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Biggs said:

Lawrence putting together one complete game in game 17 coupled with Zach brilliant game against the Bills gave him a better QB rating than Zach for the season.  71.9 to Zach's 69.7.   Hard to believe because Lawrence really sucked.  Based on reality Zach really sucked. 

Correct, but I don't think the total QBR for the season is a good indication of how each player finished the season, which is what I was referring to. 

Since Wilson returned from injury (i.e. In his last 7 games), he had 5 TDs and 2 INTs. Lawrence had 4 TDs and 8 INTs over that same timeframe (also his last 7 games). 

I also wouldn't use a 2 point difference in QBR to definitively say one QB was better than the other, overall. But that is besides my main point. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Hex said:

I just feel like that's more of a result of crappy drafting than 'willing to fail quickly'. The Browns for years have been trying to succeed with high pick QBs, and they fail so badly that they move on. I bet Mayfield will be the same way. So at least they have been willing to 'fail quickly', but that has worked just as well as keeping players.

I sure hope Wilson improves a lot next year, though. I would not like for him to fall in that list with the others. That's not a fine group

 

It's highly difficult to find competent QB's in the draft, so at times, drafting misses at QB can be forgiven if the process behind trying to find one is sound.  For instance, I liked the Geno Smith pick, and still think it was a worthwhile gamble even in hindsight.  But the Hackenberg pick was a travesty.  Both were 2nd round QB's, but one was a legitimate prospect and the other was a 5th round-caliber prospect at best.

The only thing worse than having a poor process and drafting QB's poorly time and time again is letting them linger too long, and missing out on the opportunity cost of getting new QB(s) onto your roster.

The next test for the Browns will be what they do with Baker.  They gave him the 5th year option, which was the right move.  But if they hand him a contract extension, they're in for a world of hurt.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Paradis said:

Haven't read the thread, so dunno if this has been a contentious/pretentious conversation -- but it seems ludicrous to *attempt* to measure Zach's tangible progress in his first 4 months. He played in the Taco Bell conference with greatest Oline this side of Saturn. He was always going to be dirty laundry in year 1.... 

Trying to "read the Wilson tea leaves" in his rookie year is akin to watching Doctor Phil for marriage advice. A year from now?... OK, we can start burning books.

You may be right, but I'm not of the opinion we should be considering Wilson's rookie year a complete wash.  I think there are still enough datapoints to pick through and look at to see if we should have more hope than concern.  

Even if you're right and it really is a wash, then we might as well not talk about him at all until training camp rolls around, and that's no fun, nor is it a realistic expectation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Scott Dierking said:

Or is it that you can't take a trash franchise and make it over in a couple of seasons? The world may never know.

The Rams did it.  They went 4-12 in 2016, and were coming off 6 straight seasons where they finished no higher than 3rd in the NFC West.  For the 10-season period of 2007-2016, there was no weaker franchise in the NFL than the Rams.  They had zero winning seasons in that span, and in half of those seasons, they won 4 games or less.

In 2017, they went 11-5 and reached the playoffs.  In 2018, they went to the Super Bowl.  With Jared friggin Goff as their QB. 

And yeah, it required one of the worst referee calls in NFL history to get them into that SB, but you get the point.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Snell41 said:

 


Listen, Zach was garbage all season. If you wanna play the “he was better in the second half of the season” card that’s fine I agree. Had he played as well as he did in the 2nd half of the season for the entire season it still would’ve been an absolutely terrible performance. You wanna hang your hat on the idea that because he went from downright embarrassing as hell to just embarrassing as hell as some kind of victory then you do you. That boy is terrible at playing QB in the NFL. At the end of his career you’ll look back and realize that Geno Smith had a better career. That’s how bad he is.


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

 

I guess the proof will be next season, if he excels then I guess we will all be happy, if he fails we will be calling for his head in unison

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

The Rams did it.  They went 4-12 in 2016, and were coming off 6 straight seasons where they finished no higher than 3rd in the NFC West.  For the 10-season period of 2007-2016, there was no weaker franchise in the NFL than the Rams.  They had zero winning seasons in that span, and in half of those seasons, they won 4 games or less.

In 2017, they went 11-5 and reached the playoffs.  In 2018, they went to the Super Bowl.  With Jared friggin Goff as their QB. 

And yeah, it required one of the worst referee calls in NFL history to get them into that SB, but you get the point.  

The 2016 Rams  also had Tood Gurley, Kenny Britt, Tyler Higbee, AAron Donald, Trunaine Johnson, among many other serviceable pieces. to build from. 

Are you are arguing that Macc left JD a similar war chest?

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Scott Dierking said:

The 2016 Rams  also had Tood Gurley, Kenny Britt, Tyler Higbee, AAron Donald, Trunaine Johnson, among many other serviceable pieces. to build from. 

Are you are arguing that Macc left JD a similar war chest?

Are you seriously listing off Kenny Britt, Tyler Higbee and Trumaine Johnson here?  That isn't a "war chest".  

Every team has "servicable" pieces.  Even the terrible ones.  Obviously Donald is in another class of his own.  But why did the Rams go 4-12 despite all those pieces the year before?  Aaron Donald had been on the team since 2014 and they couldn't win for 3 years in spite of his presence.

Macc was undeniably the worst GM in NFL history.  But you asked whether a team is capable of going from a joke to contender in 2 years, and the Rams did it.  In fact they did it in ONE year.  And I'm asking for Douglas/Saleh to do it in their 3rd year, not their 1st. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Warfish said:

Do we judge General Managers on their predictions?  Or on their results?

Is there a real world scenario where rookie franchise QB Wilson is (mostly) blameless because he "had no talent around him" AND the GM is blameless (mostly) because "he couldn't predict all this"?

And if so, where does the responsibility for a offensively inept, weak, losing and (for the D) historically bad season lay, ultimately? 

Or is there no responsibility, just a freebie, a mulligan, no one to blame, lets all just move on?  It seems many in our fanbase are of this view.  No one is responsible, no one has earned criticism, we must give them all 2022 to lose some more, and maybe in 2023 we'll be competitive.

Quite a leap you're making here. I say "mixed review," after outlining specific reasons why he bears blame for some moves and non-moves, and not (or a shoulder-shrug from me) for others. Then you misrepresent that as saying he bears "no responsibility"?

Instead of asking questions (since you'll just reword and reframe the answers provided) why not just flatly stipulate that you feel a certain way and are disinterested in any sentiments to the contrary, instead of this charade that you're looking at any of these things objectively and impartially because of a statistically insignificant posting of teh maths without regard for the variables or reasons why, like accepting a lost season (which they clearly did, in intentionally starting this many rookies).

He's had two offseasons with a spring preseason (which is when GMs do 90% of their season's work). The first was pretty bleh (and will be cemented as fully disastrous if Becton doesn't become a player). The second is much more promising, with the elephant in the room being what Wilson becomes when he's not a raw rookie. I've said more than a couple times myself recently I'd like to see them sign a more realistic multi-month starter at QB2 because Wilson shouldn't get nearly as many mulligan starts in year 2 but will get just that if the QB2 is just Flacco. I think the team's going in the Flacco direction, so I don't agree with everything they do by a long shot & this is just one example. 

Over the long term things are fairer to judge, because one-year individual letdowns are expected to become less significant over time; especially when so much of the team were youngsters being coached-up by coaches in the first season in this capacity, and few drafted players are expected to reach their NFL primes as rookies.

Over a short term, you'd have to provide a list of people who predicted this many missed games from Becton, C.Lawson, Joyner, Maye, and Curry; then who doubly also predicted major regressions on the field from prior years from C.Davis (who missed half the season to injury himself), Mims, S.Lawson, J.Davis, Rankins, Fatukasi, and more. That's almost half their expected starters, and the majority of veteran starters, on a team that planned to start several rookies as it was. It sucked, but I don't know how predictable it all was.

He certainly doesn't get an A+ or close to it, but everyone knew they were starting a lot of rookies, and it's clear Douglas stayed clear of signing too many costly FAs because they were entering the first of two offseasons where they're more or less doubled-up in draft picks/capital, and didn't want to rule out any prospects because they signed an expensive veteran instead. He further got the blessing from the owner to do just this long-term approach, even if it meant bleh in the short term, so (as much as I hate this expression) it is what it is. I don't agree with all of it myself, but I can't recall agreeing with all the things any GM/HC does in any season without the benefit of hindsight.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Jetsfan80 said:

Are you seriously listing off Kenny Britt, Tyler Higbee and Trumaine Johnson here?  That isn't a "war chest".  

Every team has "servicable" pieces.  Obviously Donald is in another class of his own.  But why did the Rams go 4-12 despite all those pieces the year before?

Kenny Britt 2016 stats: 68 catches, 1002 yards, 5TD

Tyler Higbee has had a very serviceable career. He was a rookie in 2016

Now, you tell me all the serviceable players that JD inherited. I could start with Robbie Anderson, but even he gives me doubts. Leonard Williams ok. Now you go.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Scott Dierking said:

Kenny Britt 2016 stats: 68 catches, 1002 yards, 5TD

Tyler Higbee has had a very serviceable career. He was a rookie in 2016

Now, you tell me all the serviceable players that JD inherited. I could start with Robbie Anderson, but even he gives me doubts. Leonard Williams ok. Now you go.

You're arguing with one of the biggest Joe Douglas defenders here.  You do realize that, don't you?

C.J. Mosley, Rookie Quinnen Williams, Jamal Adams (ugh, you made me do it), Macus Maye, Kelvin Beachum and Jamison Crowder all qualify, no?

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

You're arguing with one of the biggest Joe Douglas defenders here.  You do realize that, don't you?

C.J. Mosley, Rookie Quinnen Williams, Jamal Adams (ugh, you made me do it), Macus Maye and Jamison Crowder all qualify, no?

If that is the hill you are going to die on, ok. What are you arguing again?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Scott Dierking said:

If that is the hill you are going to die on, ok. What are you arguing again?

lol you forgot already?  You noted its basically impossible for a team to go from a joke to a contender in 2 years.  Patently false statement.  The Rams went from 4-12 to 11-5 to the Super Bowl.  You didn't qualify your statement by mentioning what regimes inherited.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Quite a leap you're making here. I say "mixed review," after outlining specific reasons why he bears blame for some moves and non-moves, and not (or a shoulder-shrug from me) for others. Then you misrepresent that as saying he bears "no responsibility"?

While it was a reply to you, the reply was intended to be more broad/generic, not specific to you.

33 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Instead of asking questions (since you'll just reword and reframe the answers provided) why not just flatly stipulate that you feel a certain way

I think how I feel has been quite clear.

It's how you all feel, not just you but you all. 

33 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

and are disinterested in any sentiments to the contrary, instead of this charade that you're looking at any of these things objectively and impartially because of a statistically insignificant posting of teh maths without regard for the variables or reasons why, like accepting a lost season (which they clearly did, in intentionally starting this many rookies).

You're entitled to your beliefs on this, I don't see anything here worthy of a reply.  

33 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

He's had two offseasons with a spring preseason (which is when GMs do 90% of their season's work). The first was pretty bleh (and will be cemented as fully disastrous if Becton doesn't become a player). The second is much more promising, with the elephant in the room being what Wilson becomes when he's not a raw rookie.

Two offseasons and a spring preseason is enough time to build a roster than a goodly portion of our fanbase would not describe as "talentless" or "least talented" or "devoid of talent" or pick you preferred JN poster quote.  That is my point.

33 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I've said more than a couple times myself recently I'd like to see them sign a more realistic multi-month starter at QB2 because Wilson shouldn't get nearly as many mulligan starts in year 2 but will get just that if the QB2 is just Flacco. I think the team's going in the Flacco direction, so I don't agree with everything they do by a long shot & this is just one example. 

Nor do I presume you "agree with everything they do".  I tend to agree with you, on both counts, that we need a better QB2, and that we will likely go the Flacco route with no plan to sit Wilson at all, regardless of performance level.

33 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Over the long term things are fairer to judge, because one-year individual letdowns are expected to become less significant over time; especially when so much of the team were youngsters being coached-up by coaches in the first season in this capacity, and few drafted players are expected to reach their NFL primes as rookies.

I'll reiterate:  JD has had enough time to build a team that our fanbase does not regularly describe as talentless.

33 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Over a short term, you'd have to provide a list of people who predicted this many missed games from Becton, C.Lawson, Joyner, Maye, and Curry; then who doubly also predicted major regressions on the field from prior years from C.Davis (who missed half the season to injury himself), Mims, S.Lawson, J.Davis, Rankins, Fatukasi, and more. That's almost half their expected starters, and the majority of veteran starters, on a team that planned to start several rookies as it was. It sucked, but I don't know how predictable it all was.

I'll repeat here as well.  I don't judge a GM by their predictions, I judge them by their results. 

If he drafted soft players, or signed soft players, that's still on him ultimately. 

It's his job to field a talented comparative team, not a talentless soft team.  Even while "rebuilding".

33 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

He certainly doesn't get an A+ or close to it, but everyone knew they were starting a lot of rookies, and it's clear Douglas stayed clear of signing too many costly FAs because they were entering the first of two offseasons where they're more or less doubled-up in draft picks/capital, and didn't want to rule out any prospects because they signed an expensive veteran instead. He further got the blessing from the owner to do just this long-term approach, even if it meant bleh in the short term, so (as much as I hate this expression) it is what it is. I don't agree with all of it myself, but I can't recall agreeing with all the things any GM/HC does in any season without the benefit of hindsight.

No disagreement, this is their "plan" conceptually.  But the results, so far, speak for themselves.

And I hold JD accountable for it.  Just because it's a plan, does not excuse losing, nor does it excuse results which lead to our fanbase describing our team as talentless on the regular basis.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

You may be right, but I'm not of the opinion we should be considering Wilson's rookie year a complete wash.  I think there are still enough datapoints to pick through and look at to see if we should have more hope than concern.  

Even if you're right and it really is a wash, then we might as well not talk about him at all until training camp rolls around, and that's no fun, nor is it a realistic expectation.

Not a wash, but making meaning correlations might be wishful thinking 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Warfish said:

 

And I hold JD accountable for it.  Just because it's a plan, does not excuse losing, nor does it excuse results which lead to our fanbase describing our team as talentless on the regular basis.  

 

It'd be a big favor to us all if you kept reminding us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

It'd be a big favor to us all if you kept reminding us.

Unless you're planning on banning me, which I presume you're not, I will continue to post my thoughts, like everyone else.

That includes pointing out the cognitive dissonance here in re: Wilson, JD and the teams talent level.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Unless you're planning on banning me, which I presume you're not, I will continue to post my thoughts, like everyone else.

Careful man, you might get called a troll repeatedly and decide you need a self-imposed break from JN.  @jgb

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Unless you're planning on banning me, which I presume you're not, I will continue to post my thoughts, like everyone else.

That includes pointing out the cognitive dissonance here in re: Wilson, JD and the teams talent level.

Cognitive Dissonance isn't the right term...

It's accepting two truths at the same time - without being inconsistent ...

1) The team has been bad under JD

2) JD hasn't necessarily done a bad job

It seems you're saying the only thing matters is results so therefor the job the GM has done is terrible.

While others, recognize the situation- the Jets are accepting short term failure for long-term, sustainable success.

Now, we don't know if this "plan" will work, but it doesn't change the fact of what has been their goal.   In other words, they haven't failed at their desired outcome.  

You can argue with the plan - but should also recognize the plan exist and they are mostly executing as originally laid out.  

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

Cognitive Dissonance isn't the right term...

It's accepting two truths at the same time - without being inconsistent ...

1) The team has been bad under JD

2) JD hasn't necessarily done a bad job

It seems you're saying the only thing matters is results so therefor the job the GM has done is terrible.

You've changed my argument.

I'll restate my thesis here:

1) The team under JD is described by many fans as "talentless" around Zach Wilson.  And that is in part why his year was so spotty.

2) JD is responsible for the talent level of this Organization.

This isn't a two-things-can-be-true-at-once argument.  This is an either-or.

EITHER the team is in fact talentless, and that is in fact a justification as to why Wilson underperformed.  If true, this indicts JD's job.

OR the team is more talented than is being claimed, which defends JD's job managing talent, but diminishes the "talentless" rationale for Wilson's performance level.

It's hard to argue that we're both talentless and talented at the same time, depending on who you want to defend in that moment.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Warfish said:

I'm sure you do.  But I cannot agree. 

Results, in my view, are the only thing that matters.

Poor predictions often lead to poor results, so it may in fact be a distinction without a difference.

But "he couldn't have seen it coming" is not, in my view, a valid excuse for a GM that put together a roster THIS forum regularly describes as "devoid of any talent" and "soft as an egg".

I'm just going to go out on a limb and say this forum isn't necessarily the best evaluators of football skill. 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or, to put it another way, the team is no longer talentless. It's actually pretty deep through the middle and bottom of the roster, probably more so than most of the league. 

What it is missing are the top of the roster guys who unlock the rest by dictating opponents' schemes and play calling. They don't have that guy on the roster on offense, and the one who could have been that on defense was Lawson. 

And that was all exacerbated by the rash of injuries. The plan on defense was to run with young cornerbacks and linebackers while pressuring off the edge and using the front four, with veteran safeties on the back end to help the young kids grow. Then we lost both Maye and Joiner for the season after losing Lawson. On offense we had what looked like impressive depth at the wide receiver position, until our top 4 wide receivers missed significant time and the second-year player we were counting on washed out. The offensive line had depth and competition and then Alex Lewis retired and Cam Clark suffered a severe injury. And they were able to pull it together anyway even with the loss of Becton. 

Yes, TE, LB, and K were black holes. But anyone looking at this roster and saying that it is talentless doesn't know what they're talking about

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jetsfan80 said:

You're arguing with one of the biggest Joe Douglas defenders here.  You do realize that, don't you?

C.J. Mosley, Rookie Quinnen Williams, Jamal Adams (ugh, you made me do it), Macus Maye, Kelvin Beachum and Jamison Crowder all qualify, no?

The Grinch Smile GIF

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Are you seriously listing off Kenny Britt, Tyler Higbee and Trumaine Johnson here?  That isn't a "war chest".  

Every team has "servicable" pieces.  Even the terrible ones.  Obviously Donald is in another class of his own.  But why did the Rams go 4-12 despite all those pieces the year before?  Aaron Donald had been on the team since 2014 and they couldn't win for 3 years in spite of his presence.

Macc was undeniably the worst GM in NFL history.  But you asked whether a team is capable of going from a joke to contender in 2 years, and the Rams did it.  In fact they did it in ONE year.  And I'm asking for Douglas/Saleh to do it in their 3rd year, not their 1st. 

Trumaine Johnson was good enough to get a $70+M contract from some stupid team after that year...

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
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.   Restore formatting

  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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...