Who is your first choice to come in and QB this team?

[jgb]

28 minutes ago, bitonti said:

On the other hand 3 percent of 33 mil is a million dollars 

Seems pennywise pound foolish don’t think it’s a coincidence that the highest profile unrepresented dude in the NFL is getting worked at the negotiating table 

[jgb]

33 minutes ago, bitonti said:

It always struck me as ridiculous how the Jets went all in on Sam Darnold and meanwhile they and 31 teams all passed on Lamar 

Malik Cunningham is shaping up to be a similar type of scouting report, the late first Rd pick from Louisville thst no one wants 

QB is hardest position to evaluate in sport. Athletic traits are important but the emo-psych-mental is more so after a baseline level of requisite talent.

[IndianaJet]

First choice: Mahomes

[jgb]

1 hour ago, slimjasi said:

old players get injured more frequently than young players. 

Surprisingly (it was to me), the data doesn’t bear that out. Older players appear on injury reports more often (the famous “veteran maintenance days”) but do not miss a statistically-significant greater number of games per season.

Of course, QB and kickers are not included in this data because they get injured far less than other positions and are the two oldest position groups, which would wildly confound the data.

While I don’t have the data to back it up, I’d venture the trend is the same for QB or if anything that older QBs are less likely to be injured since they run/scramble less and slide/give-up-and-go-down much more as a population relative to their younger counterparts.

So while one could certainly argue that age would make a QB more susceptible to injury — despite this trend not existing in other, more physical positions where one would think such a correlation would be most pronounced — it could also be that older QBs are savvier and take less physical risks (a luxury less available to skill positions), which results in either a flat or even negative trend in injury relative to age.

 

[peekskill68]

Interesting to me how many posters are Carr > Rodgers not because Carr is a better QB, but because Rodgers will cost too much.  No one knows what the draft pick(s) will be - could be a conditional 3rd rounder for all we know with that contract.  Second, why worry about Woody's money or JD's track record on draft day?  Why not go all in on the best QB available?  

[Dunnie]

Rogers for two years, retry Zach with rookie behind him in a couple years.

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk

[Stark]

2 hours ago, bitonti said:

Word is Baltimore is going to use the tag on Lamar 

I’m sure. Also why it was 3rd option, have to give up a lot and then the contract 

[sourceworx]

3 hours ago, pointman said:

I'd love to hear your opinions. Learn me, wise ones. No wrong answers except for Mike Glennon, Mike White, and that washed bum from wisconsin. 

 

[slimjasi]

2 hours ago, jgb said:

Surprisingly (it was to me), the data doesn’t bear that out. Older players appear on injury reports more often (the famous “veteran maintenance days”) but do not miss a statistically-significant greater number of games per season.

Of course, QB and kickers are not included in this data because they get injured far less than other positions and are the two oldest position groups, which would wildly confound the data.

While I don’t have the data to back it up, I’d venture the trend is the same for QB or if anything that older QBs are less likely to be injured since they run/scramble less and slide/give-up-and-go-down much more as a population relative to their younger counterparts.

So while one could certainly argue that age would make a QB more susceptible to injury — despite this trend not existing in other, more physical positions where one would think such a correlation would be most pronounced — it could also be that older QBs are savvier and take less physical risks (a luxury less available to skill positions), which results in either a flat or even negative trend in injury relative to age.

 

Interesting post and somewhat surprising, but a lot of players play through injuries, so I would argue that appearing on the injury report is significant and likely affects performance on the field.

 

also, I wonder what the last 8 seasons of data would say. 

[BurntDice]

4 hours ago, section314 said:

He beat Rodgers last year in the playoffs in a snow storm in GB.

He had 131 yards 0 tds and 1 int. Everyone would crucify him for that performance. This just shows why qbs can’t be judged on by w/l. If Carr played in that game would he be able to muster up those sad numbers? It was the D that won that game 

[HighPitch]

Carr is better than average qb thats still young and healthy and wants to play

Rogers is such a gamble

[HighPitch]

3 hours ago, peekskill68 said:

Interesting to me how many posters are Carr > Rodgers not because Carr is a better QB, but because Rodgers will cost too much.  No one knows what the draft pick(s) will be - could be a conditional 3rd rounder for all we know with that contract.  Second, why worry about Woody's money or JD's track record on draft day?  Why not go all in on the best QB available?  

Because even free, the dude is gonna give us 1 year. If he doesnt retire he will be like 41 or 42 in year two.

we need a solid qb and good drafting. Were not a win now team

[56mehl56]

3 hours ago, peekskill68 said:

Interesting to me how many posters are Carr > Rodgers not because Carr is a better QB, but because Rodgers will cost too much.  No one knows what the draft pick(s) will be - could be a conditional 3rd rounder for all we know with that contract.  Second, why worry about Woody's money or JD's track record on draft day?  Why not go all in on the best QB available?  

Because it's simply not Woodys money it's cap money. 

[NYJCAP2]

3 hours ago, IndianaJet said:

First choice: Mahomes

Jets will definitely have a shot at him in 12 years.

[RoadFan]

4 hours ago, peekskill68 said:

Interesting to me how many posters are Carr > Rodgers not because Carr is a better QB, but because Rodgers will cost too much.  No one knows what the draft pick(s) will be - could be a conditional 3rd rounder for all we know with that contract.  Second, why worry about Woody's money or JD's track record on draft day?  Why not go all in on the best QB available?  

I have a different reason. Rodgers will pack it in if things don’t go well.  He is a front-runner.  
 

The Jets’ young players will look to him to lead when the team is having a bad game, and they’ll see the wrong attitude… Rodgers will pout, point fingers, roll his eyes, and otherwise act like an a$$hole…

[fltflo]

It’s my belief that Rogers although intriguing, the price is too high. Everyone saying don’t worry it’s Woody’s money. What those people fail to realize is, it’s going to put us in cap hell. It’s time this franchise builds a team that’s long-term. I’m really sick of all the we have a two year window so let’s get it done. Hell no, I want to team that’s going to be able to compete for the next 10 years and beyond. Not a team that’s going to be in the crapper again two years later, being the laughingstock of the NFL

In that vein, I think David Carr is the right move. His age and cost fit the above scenario. In the interim, we should continue to draft quarterbacks until we find a keeper. This idea of getting Zack on track and improving is never going to work in New York. It’s time for this team to move on and allow Zack to move as well


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

[football guy]

The fact that people would rather Derek Carr over Aaron Rodgers for reasons that involve Zach Wilson is absolutely mindblowing lol. It’s as if people’s bias against the player runs so deep that they would be willing to cut off their noses to spite their faces

[football guy]

32 minutes ago, 56mehl56 said:

Because it's simply not Woodys money it's cap money. 

Rodgers’ cap hits for 2023-24 would be significantly less than Carr’s

[BigRy56]

Has to be Aaron Rodgers. Carr is a good quarterback and a great fallback plan… but if this team is truly going to go for it, it’s got to be AR12. Carr has a ceiling that after a year or two of making the playoffs and winning a game or going one and done may grow old. Aaron Rodgers ceiling is the Superbowl 

[RoadFan]

29 minutes ago, BigRy56 said:

Has to be Aaron Rodgers. Carr is a good quarterback and a great fallback plan… but if this team is truly going to go for it, it’s got to be AR12. Carr has a ceiling that after a year or two of making the playoffs and winning a game or going one and done may grow old. Aaron Rodgers ceiling is the Superbowl 

Aaron Rodgers has been surrounded by good teams in a lousy division for almost 2 decades.  He has one SB and several home playoff game losses.  
 

I am not saying Rodgers isn’t a ginormous upgrade, he is, but we have to look at Rodgers for what he has shown to be.  A regular season superstar, but a finger-pointing underachiever when it comes to January football…

[Alworth]

1 hour ago, fltflo said:

It’s my belief that Rogers although intriguing, the price is too high. Everyone saying don’t worry it’s Woody’s money. What those people fail to realize is, it’s going to put us in cap hell. It’s time this franchise builds a team that’s long-term. I’m really sick of all the we have a two year window so let’s get it done. Hell no, I want to team that’s going to be able to compete for the next 10 years and beyond. Not a team that’s going to be in the crapper again two years later, being the laughingstock of the NFL

In that vein, I think David Carr is the right move. His age and cost fit the above scenario. In the interim, we should continue to draft quarterbacks until we find a keeper. This idea of getting Zack on track and improving is never going to work in New York. It’s time for this team to move on and allow Zack to move as well


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

The above just about nails it.  I'll sing the same melody with different words: (1) I'm skeptical about the assertion that the cap and draft capital cost of Rogers is less than of Carr; (2) I actually like A-Rod's peculiarities and, if healthy he will bring the tangibles of improved team play beyond the QB position but he is a short-timer for sure and has the negative intangible of creating a feeling in  in the  locker room and in the league at large  (read FAs) that the Jets are only enjoying a sugar high and aren't on a road to at least medium term success; (3) in contrast to Rogers, the Carr signing creates a path to such at-least-medium term success and creates an internal and external perception that the Jets are building something; (4) Zach is a distraction that we could eliminate with a post-June 1 trade that turns his departure into at least a bit of a tanagible positive draft capital ('24 draft).

[Reasonable Jets Fan]

48 minutes ago, football guy said:

The fact that people would rather Derek Carr over Aaron Rodgers for reasons that involve Zach Wilson is absolutely mindblowing lol. It’s as if people’s bias against the player runs so deep that they would be willing to cut off their noses to spite their faces

 

47 minutes ago, football guy said:

Rodgers’ cap hits for 2023-24 would be significantly less than Carr’s

It's crazy how so many people don't read or understand the situation yet have strong opinions one way or another... 

Carr is going to be very costly, yet people think he is going to come here for Baker type contract...

Fact is Rodgers unfortunately makes too much sense while they allow Wilson to learn... Whether they like it or not... 

And with packers limiting the tradable teams to afc... It only leaves a few teams like Raiders, tenn and Jets that can withstand his contract and have the supporting players to compete... 

 

[Cbucco19]

1 hour ago, football guy said:

Rodgers’ cap hits for 2023-24 would be significantly less than Carr’s

Please get Rodgers !! Seems it’s really going to be up to Rodgers and packers 

[Beerfish]

5 hours ago, peekskill68 said:

Interesting to me how many posters are Carr > Rodgers not because Carr is a better QB, but because Rodgers will cost too much.  No one knows what the draft pick(s) will be - could be a conditional 3rd rounder for all we know with that contract.  Second, why worry about Woody's money or JD's track record on draft day?  Why not go all in on the best QB available?  

I feel Rodgers is marginally  better than Carr at this time in their careers and will be way more of a pain in the ass player.   It is all about projections.   The people that really want Rodgers see him as one year removed from being league mvp thus he has a good chance to get back to that.  the ones that do not approve feel he will be as good a he was last year which was medium level play.

Not one person is worrying about woodys money people are worrying about cap implications if there are any.

In any case either one of these guys will be a massive upgrade over what we have had in recent years.

 

[Sperm Edwards]

16 hours ago, Warfish said:

As of today, with the caveat that things change and opinions change with it?

1. Rodgers (if cost isn't prohibitive).
2. Carr
3. Mayfield & Minshew + Draft a new developmental QB 
4. er......yeah.  Garrapolo + Draft a QB I suppose.

 

Right there for me, too. Also the same facepalm reluctance if it comes to #3.

But Garoppolo? If the $ expectations are even remotely accurate, why on earth lock the team into a $30MM/year contract for a guy who won't be on the field? 

Plus dig a bit deeper into Garoppolo's recent career-best season for efficiency, and realize it was 80% in games against bottom-10 defenses while his own team's D also held 80% of the opponents to 16 pts or less. The two times they didn't? Yep, both were SF losses (including against Atlanta ffs). Then SF threw a late 7th round rookie nobody onto the field after he went on IR, and the offense instantly turned into a 35 ppg juggernaut.

Garoppolo is fool's gold, never mind in the $30MM range. I'd much rather they not throw big money at bad & instead bring in Bridgewater, one of the two slugs you mentioned in #3 above, still draft someone to develop, and use the extra $20MM to further blow out the spending around them.

If we're just looking for a guy to game manage the team for a while before going on IR then I'd rather they go with an obvious "bridge" (pun intended) QB in Teddy instead of trying to get half-pregnant with JG. 

[JETS SB]

Rodgers and if we don’t get him, A-Rod, and if he isn’t available A-A-Ron. 

[playtowinthegame]

Ranking my choices.

1 Aaron Rodgers

2 Derek Carr

3 Lamar Jackson (trade if available)

4 Jimmy Garoppolo

5 Mitch Trubisky (trade if available)

6 Baker Mayfield

7 Ryan Tannehill 

8 BLaKe BoRtLeS

 

[Beerfish]

3 hours ago, football guy said:

The fact that people would rather Derek Carr over Aaron Rodgers for reasons that involve Zach Wilson is absolutely mindblowing lol. It’s as if people’s bias against the player runs so deep that they would be willing to cut off their noses to spite their faces

Eh?  Who is saying this, it should be totally opposite if you ask me, if people want Rodgers that is good for wilson so why would they want carr instead?

[GreenFish]

I’m on board with ARod. We are contenders with him.

ARod for 2 years.

Zach sits and learn. Then competes for the starting gig against our 2024 QB draft pick who will 1 year of sitting and learning as well.

[Maynard13]

9 hours ago, peebag said:

There's no available FA QB that would make this a championship team so why spend the big bucks?

Bingo. Rodgers will cost a fortune and picks. We are not a Rodgers type QB away from going to the SB. To many young players, too many spots to upgrade, a CS that is still learning to manage a team and strategize a game plan. Sorry folks but we got a long way to go. Rodgers would be nothing but a tease. We will not be the 2021 LA Rams with Rodgers. 

[ZachWilsonRightArm]

2 hours ago, GreenFish said:

I’m on board with ARod. We are contenders with him.

ARod for 2 years.

Zach sits and learn. Then competes for the starting gig against our 2024 QB draft pick who will 1 year of sitting and learning as well.

This is where Im at. The Jets are a QB away from making major noise. Lets get it. 

[JetsFanatic]

Rodgers seems like a nice fit.

[talisaynon]

Draft someone

[mrcoops]

For me, it's Rodgers because he's the only QB available who can move the needle for this team.

Yes, he is old, expensive and a bit of an ass.  But he is a genuine superstar at the position, albeit a slightly diminished one.

It's like when we paid a steep price in draft picks to bring in Bill Parcells - which was absolutely worth it. He only stuck around as coach for 3 years, but he moved the needle and changed the way that everyone viewed the team.  Rodgers has the potential to do the same thing.

Do everything you can to get Rodgers, and roll with him with 2 exciting years. It will change the team for the better, in both the short and long term.

If we can't get Rodgers, Carr is a solid backup plan. Not overly keen on Jimmy G, who historically has missed around 50% of his games due to injury. 

Other than that, it's gamble on Mike White staying healthy, Ryan Tannehill having another career resurgence, Baker Mayfield elevating his game, or Gardner Minshew proving himself as a long-term starter. Out of that group, Tannehill probably offers the most as he has played well for the Titans in recent years.

[jgb]

9 hours ago, slimjasi said:

Interesting post and somewhat surprising, but a lot of players play through injuries, so I would argue that appearing on the injury report is significant and likely affects performance on the field.

 

also, I wonder what the last 8 seasons of data would say. 

Don’t know what the last 8 years would say (this is the analysis I found) but I also have no reason to hypothesize that it would show any different.