Guess some of you need to hear this: Zach Wilson (and his $23 mil 5th yr option) has no Future in NY

[Doggin94it]

16 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

The 5th year option makes no sense unless they think someone else would offer him more than that as a FA following the 2024 season after watching him hold AR’s water for the prior two seasons, which itself followed so many on-field fails.

Like the joke about not having to outrun the bear, and just have to outrun the friend also running from it, they don’t have to offer something competitive with the 5th year option amount; just enough to make their offer more than another team’s offer, if they even want to.

Further, they’d get another full year to evaluate before committing to that decision, instead of locking into such a high amount early. That’s if they even decide they still want him after two more years. Right now there’s no decision, since his contract is fully guaranteed, so all they’re giving up is a roster spot they’re currently comfortable using on Tim Boyle.

Picking up his 5th year option would be insane. The only universe where that happens is one where Rodgers gets injured early in the year and Wilson plays like a high-caliber NFL starting QB over an extended period.

[jgb]

5 minutes ago, Doggin94it said:

Picking up his 5th year option would be insane. The only universe where that happens is one where Rodgers gets injured early in the year and Wilson plays like a high-caliber NFL starting QB over an extended period.

1.75% chance, at best.

[Larz]

So I hope Zach has a good practice today. That would be good for the team I root for. 

[Sperm Edwards]

29 minutes ago, jgb said:

The only way the Jets pick up that option is if Zach demonstrates material and sustainable FQB qualities in live play this season. Based on @Jetsfan80 immense data set (giddity), roughly 1-in-20 highly drafted QB busts become a starting-level player at some point in their careers. Being very generous to Zach let's say he has a 5% chance to develop into that this year (even though such turnarounds, when they occur, tend to occur many years later). Historically 35% of starting QBs miss at least one game due to injury. So multiply the two figures by each other to approximate the odds that Rodgers misses at least a game giving Zach the opportunity to demonstrate to the league (creating possible competition for his services) that he has developed sufficiently and that he indeed has developed sufficiently.

5% x 35% = 1.75% chance that the Jets pick up Zach's 5th year option.

Not even that, imo. Rodgers would have to go on IR and Wilson takes over and balls out a la Foles after Wentz went down. IOW there has to be concern someone else will badly outbid them, in excess of the 5th year option amount but not quite reaching the franchise tag amount (which they’d still have at their disposal), for 2025.

The only other reason to do it is the 5th year option is viewed as a bargain compared to what he’d cost without it (like Herbert, Burrow, etc.). This doesn’t apply to Wilson unless he is literally the SB MVP this season like Foles a few years back.

80s historical evidence is meh for me because I don’t think most are directly analogous. I see scarcely few of those other HOFer or HOF types as embracing a mentor type role for his presumed or possible replacement high draft pick. Mostly you get Favre/Rodgers scenarios if it even works out.

I don’t think it’ll happen with Wilson but it’s just because I don’t think it’ll happen based on his on-field body of work thus far that’d make it a poor bet, plus the contract timing even if he does turn his career around; not because Matt Leinart didn’t take to the job despite veteran helpful nice-guy Kurt Warner being on his roster.

[Sperm Edwards]

15 minutes ago, Warfish said:

I think this touches on two separate, but related, items:

1. The Jets are "stuck" with Zach Wilson in 2023.  There was no scenario where it made financial sense to cut him for this season.  And if we're keeping him, we may as well try and see if he can be anything at this point.  That, and (IMO) JD still believes in the guy HE picked, or at least needs to show Ownership he does as part of earning his contract extension this year.  Rodgers is a well known Iron Man, who rarely misses time, and even a slightly hurt Rodgers is a huge upgrade over Wilson or some other Journeyman backup a la Bridgewater and his ilk.  So the risk is minimal, frankly.

2. Item 1. above does not in any way imply that the Jets or JD see Zach as "the future" here.  Anything beyond the scope of his current rookie contract, sans the 5th year option, or (IMO) anything after JD gets his multi-year contract extension, is purely TBD.  If Wilson shows he is massively better than his 2 years as worst starting QB in the NFL, the Jets may have interest in keeping in, depending on what other options exist for them at that time.  I don't think we can read long-term intent from short-term necessity.

The first moment we'll get a real idea of where JD stands is the start of 2024, and/or when the team has to decide on taking his fifth year option.

You’ve missed my point entirely.

Another QB wouldn’t be brought in to cut Wilson. They’d cut Boyle and relegate Wilson to Boyle’s current QB3 role. 

[Sperm Edwards]

17 minutes ago, Doggin94it said:

Picking up his 5th year option would be insane. The only universe where that happens is one where Rodgers gets injured early in the year and Wilson plays like a high-caliber NFL starting QB over an extended period.

You posted this while I was taking 15 min to write up the screenplay for my too-long sequel including the same point. Totally agree. 

[jgb]

5 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Not even that, imo. Rodgers would have to go on IR and Wilson takes over and balls out a la Foles after Wentz went down. IOW there has to be concern someone else will badly outbid them, in excess of the 5th year option amount but not quite reaching the franchise tag amount (which they’d still have at their disposal), for 2025.

The only other reason to do it is the 5th year option is viewed as a bargain compared to what he’d cost without it (like Herbert, Burrow, etc.). This doesn’t apply to Wilson unless he is literally the SB MVP this season like Foles a few years back.

80s historical evidence is meh for me because I don’t think most are directly analogous. I see scarcely few of those other HOFer or HOF types as embracing a mentor type role for his presumed or possible replacement high draft pick. Mostly you get Favre/Rodgers scenarios if it even works out.

I don’t think it’ll happen with Wilson but it’s just because I don’t think it’ll happen based on his body of work thus far, plus the contract timing even if he does turn his career around; not because Matt Leinart didn’t take to the job despite veteran helpful nice-guy Kurt Warner being on his roster.

You are correct, I purposefully calculated the odds by construing them in the way most favorable to picking up the option to create a supportable max figure.

But you are definitely right while 35% of starting QBs miss "at least" one game due to injury, Rodgers would likely have to miss more than 1 (which lowers the likelihood) to present a true opportunity for Zach to generate any additional interest (beyond whatever baseline exists) from other teams that could influence the Jets decision-making process around the option.

[Warfish]

9 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

You’ve missed my point entirely.

Another QB wouldn’t be brought in to cut Wilson. They’d cut Boyle and relegate Wilson to Boyle’s current QB3 role. 

Why would they want to do that?  I think you've missed the entire point of Boyle and why he was signed and is here.

The team (IMO, gotta keep saying IMO, wouldn't want to be too definitive or say it like it's a fact would I?) values what Boyle brings more than they value trying to overpay some middling journeyman for the small possibility that Rodgers gets hurt for a substantial amount of time.  If they were truly afraid of Rodgers health risk, they would surely have signed a legit #2, or not traded for Rodgers at all.  They're not worried.  Belief in Rodgers is part of their all-in for 2023.  They're not going to immediately start paying big money for big-name backup plans for Rodgers, nor would (IMO) Rodgers have supported that idea himself.  Rodgers likes having no one behind him challnging him, it's one of the things the Packers pissed him off doing.  Zach is no threat to Rodgers, now, or ever, in his mind.  The QB position is all three slots, and the vision of the team (IMO) seems quite clear for each slot. 

[Sperm Edwards]

12 minutes ago, jgb said:

You are correct, I purposefully calculated the odds by construing them in the way most favorable to picking up the option to create a supportable max figure.

But you are definitely right while 35% of starting QBs miss "at least" one game due to injury, Rodgers would likely have to miss more than 1 (which lowers the likelihood) to present a true opportunity for Zach to generate any additional interest (beyond whatever baseline exists) from other teams that could influence the Jets decision-making process around the option.

Would have to generate such interest OR for the team to already view $23MM as a bargain for his services in 2025 (and then use that as a cheap year averaged in with an extension for 4 more at $50MM+ per).

He’d have to look like a serious FQB for half a season specifically in 2023, or through a smaller # of games that included postseason heroics like Foles did.

[doitny]

1 hour ago, Jetsfan80 said:

 

 

NOTE:  Not all of the guys listed on the right are HOFers but they're all at least BORDERLINE HOF guys:

 

• Marc Wilson (pick 1.15/1980/OAK) - Jim Plunkett
• Mark Malone (1.28/1980/PIT) - Terry Bradshaw 
• Oliver Luck (2.44/1982/HOU) - Warren Moon
• Kelly Stouffer (1.6/1987/STL) - Dave Krieg
• Dan McGwire (1.16/1991/SEA) - Dave Krieg
• Tommy Maddox  (1.25/1992/DEN) - John Elway
• Matt Blundin (2.40/1992/KC) - Joe Montana
• Todd Collins (2.45/1995/BUF) - Jim Kelly/Warren Moon/Rich Gannon
• Jim Druckenmiller (1.26/1997/SF) - Steve Young
• Marques Tuiasosopo (2.59/2001/OAK) - Rich Gannon
• Patrick Ramsey (1.32/2002/WSH) - Mark Brunell  @Warfish
• Byron Leftwich (1.7/2003/JAX) - Mark Brunell
• Kyle Boller (1.19/2003/BAL) - Steve McNair
• Jason Campbell (1.25/2005/WSH) - Mark Brunell
• Matt Leinart (1.10/2006/AZ) - Kurt Warner  @T0mShane
• Brian Brohm (2.56/2008/GB) - Aaron Rodgers
• Jimmy Clausen (2.48/2010/CAR) - Cam Newton
• Christian Ponder (1.12/2011/MIN) - Donovan McNabb
• Brandon Weeden (1.22/2012/CLE) - Tony Romo
• Brock Osweiler (2.57/2012/DEN) - Peyton Manning
• DeShone Kizer (2.52/2017/CLE) - Aaron Rodgers
• Josh Rosen (1.10/2018/AZ) - Tom Brady/Matt Ryan

 

 

 

impossible how none of these guys turned out to be good starting QBs under the "tutelage" of such great QBs.

i see Rodgers on that list twice. i guess he didnt like them enough to teach them the "good stuff" but he loves Zach so that wont happen here. lmfao

[jgb]

3 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Would have to generate such interest OR for the team to already view $23MM as a bargain for his services in 2025 (and then use that as a cheap year averaged in with an extension for 4 more at $50MM+ per).

He’d have to look like a serious FQB for half a season, or through a smaller # of games that included postseason heroics like Foles did.

While we can certainly quibble over the exact percentage, I sense that you agree it's in the single-digits.

[Sperm Edwards]

1 hour ago, Warfish said:

Why would they want to do that?  I think you've missed the entire point of Boyle and why he was signed and is here.

The team (IMO, gotta keep saying IMO, wouldn't want to be too definitive or say it like it's a fact would I?) values what Boyle brings more than they value trying to overpay some middling journeyman for the small possibility that Rodgers gets hurt for a substantial amount of time.  If they were truly afraid of Rodgers health risk, they would surely have signed a legit #2, or not traded for Rodgers at all.  They're not worried.  Belief in Rodgers is part of their all-in for 2023.  They're not going to immediately start paying big money for big-name backup plans for Rodgers, nor would (IMO) Rodgers have supported that idea himself.  Rodgers likes having no one behind him challnging him, it's one of the things the Packers pissed him off doing.  Zach is no threat to Rodgers, now, or ever, in his mind.  The QB position is all three slots, and the vision of the team (IMO) seems quite clear for each slot. 

Yeah I get why Boyle was brought in here and said exactly why in my post.

Rodgers likes no one challenging Rodgers, lmao. In what theoretical universe would Teddy Bridgewater at $3MM be seen as challenging Aaron Rodgers (let alone see that as “big money” at a whopping $2MM more than Boyle)?

Are you serious with this stuff or are you just messing with me?

[Warfish]

1 minute ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Yeah I get why Boyle was brought in here and said exactly why in my post.

Rodgers likes one challenging Rodgers, lmao. In what theoretical universe would Teddy Bridgewater at $3MM be seen as challenging Aaron Rodgers (let alone see that as “big money” at a whopping $2MM more than Boyle)?

Are you serious with this stuff or are you just messing with me?

Clearly you don't think I'm serious, so ok.  Whatever. 

Not worth wasting any more keystrokes on today.

[Sperm Edwards]

Just now, Warfish said:

Clearly you don't think I'm serious, so ok.  Whatever. 

Not worth wasting any more keystrokes on today.

Well you keep arguing why Wilson instead of Bridgewater/other to counter my post outlining that the team has stuck with BOYLE instead of Bridgewater/other.

Boyle was brought in to help install Hackett's offense, and most notably was signed while Rodgers negotiations were at a stalemate with each side playing chicken. If that stalemate had gone past the draft, they justifiably wanted a QB on the team to help the rest of the offense run through it. It was quite obvious why they brought in Boyle, and it wasn't because of his prowess in NFL games, let alone after missing the whole prior season to boot.

The idea that any former-starter QB2 brought in would be seen by Rodgers as any type of competition for his final 1-3 NFL seasons is just an unserious rationalization and you know it. 

Reason choices (I keep using Bridgewater but swap in another name as you see fit): 

1. Jets didn't bring in Bridgewater for 1 year at ~$3MM because, after trading a 1st & 2nd & more for Aaron Rodgers with his $100MM+ fully guaranteed contract, there was serious concern Rodgers would see Bridgewater as competition for his job.
2. Jets didn't bring in Bridgewater because the team didn't think they needed him as the QB2 (nor QB2 competition), even though he is a significant QB upgrade and an insignificant ($2MM) price upgrade, from their otherwise-rostered QB3 Tim Boyle. 

Once the trade went through for Rodgers, you think reason #1 is the more serious team motivation between those two scenarios? Come on. 

[jgb]

6 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Yeah I get why Boyle was brought in here and said exactly why in my post.

Rodgers likes one challenging Rodgers, lmao. In what theoretical universe would Teddy Bridgewater at $3MM be seen as challenging Aaron Rodgers (let alone see that as “big money” at a whopping $2MM more than Boyle)?

Are you serious with this stuff or are you just messing with me?

I certainly advocated to bring in another vet to at a minimum put some real heat on Wilson to win the job outright and at a maximum to increase the Jets' chances to "steal a win" if Rodgers misses a small number of games in what is likely to be a divisional dog fight. It is a fair and true that if Rodgers misses significant time, none of the available vets were very likely going to save the season and that scenario essentially represents an "uninsurable risk" to not only the Jets but also to most or all other teams considered playoff contenders. I still came down on the side of bringing one of these guys in because they are cheap, I don't believe in Wilson (was that obvious?), and I do believe the Jets have a fair shot to win games with unflashy, mistake-limiting, conservative veteran QB play.

Obviously the Jets feel otherwise, likely for a constellation of reasons:

1. they believe in Zach more than I

2. they believe Rodgers missing time is more unlikely than I

3. they don't see a large enough delta between Zach and hypothetical vet QB play to justify the roster spot/cash

4. some pride of ownership since this regime made Zach "the guy"

5. Rodgers doesn't want it and maybe even made it a condition for agreeing to his sweetheart deal

6. Probably many others I have not considered

[jgb]

1 hour ago, Warfish said:

I think this touches on two separate, but related, items:

1. The Jets are "stuck" with Zach Wilson in 2023.  There was no scenario where it made financial sense to cut him for this season.  And if we're keeping him, we may as well try and see if he can be anything at this point.  That, and (IMO) JD still believes in the guy HE picked, or at least needs to show Ownership he does as part of earning his contract extension this year.  Rodgers is a well known Iron Man, who rarely misses time, and even a slightly hurt Rodgers is a huge upgrade over Wilson or some other Journeyman backup a la Bridgewater and his ilk.  So the risk is minimal, frankly.

2. Item 1. above does not in any way imply that the Jets or JD see Zach as "the future" here.  Anything beyond the scope of his current rookie contract, sans the 5th year option, or (IMO) anything after JD gets his multi-year contract extension, is purely TBD.  If Wilson shows he is massively better than his 2 years as worst starting QB in the NFL, the Jets may have interest in keeping in, depending on what other options exist for them at that time.  I don't think we can read long-term intent from short-term necessity.

The first moment we'll get a real idea of where JD stands is the start of 2024, and/or when the team has to decide on taking his fifth year option.

Agree with all but the last sentence. We already have a pretty good idea of what JD thinks about Zach because he parted with premium draft capital and $75M to replace him with a 40-year-old. But you are right, that could change and we wouldn't have any real way to determine if it does until the next decision point comes around. Talk is cheap and the Jets have every incentive to talk him up whether they want to motivate him to ascend into their future plans or keep his value as high as is possible to move him after the season.

[Sperm Edwards]

1 minute ago, jgb said:

I certainly advocated to bring in another vet to at a minimum put some real heat on Wilson to win the job outright and at a maximum to increase the Jets' chances to "steal a win" if Rodgers misses a small number of games in what is likely to be a divisional dog fight. It is a fair and true that if Rodgers misses significant time, none of the available vets were very likely going to save the season and that scenario essentially represents an "uninsurable risk" to not only the Jets but also to most or all other teams considered playoff contenders. I still came down on the side of bringing one of these guys in because they are cheap, I don't believe in Wilson (was that obvious?), and I do believe the Jets have a fair shot to win games with unflashy, mistake-limiting, conservative veteran QB play.

Obviously the Jets feel otherwise, likely for a constellation of reasons:

1. they believe in Zach more than I

2. they believe Rodgers missing time is more unlikely than I

3. they don't see a large enough delta between Zach and hypothetical vet QB play to justify the roster spot/cash

4. some pride of ownership since this regime made Zach "the guy"

5. Rodgers doesn't want it and maybe even made it a condition for agreeing to his sweetheart deal

6. Probably many others I have not considered

My point was Douglas (and/or Saleh, Hackett, etc.) - for better or worse - felt Wilson is adequate enough as the QB2 to stick with rostering Boyle than an upgrade; not Wilson. Wilson's roster spot was guaranteed, even if only as the QB3 for this season.

There is no argumentative premise (or not by me, anyway) that the team was considering outright cutting Wilson to add a different QB than Boyle, let alone to add a different QB2 and choose Boyle as QB3 over Wilson. 

Boyle's last NFL action was throwing 3 picks against the NFL's #31 pass defense, and then throwing two 2nd-half TDs against said joke pass defense after Detroit was already losing by 31 points. He's been terrible. Wilson's also been terrible, but I'll at least allow he has upside Boyle clearly doesn't. Boyle's theoretical value is a higher floor (purely due to knowing the offense better), and he's not demonstrated in NFL games that his possibly-higher floor is absolutely higher than the low floor Wilson's shown he has in him. But for his shoestring tackle he threw a pick-6 against a 2nd/3rd team defense of roster-bubble players ffs. 

[jgb]

37 minutes ago, doitny said:

impossible how none of these guys turned out to be good starting QBs under the "tutelage" of such great QBs.

i see Rodgers on that list twice. i guess he didnt like them enough to teach them the "good stuff" but he loves Zach so that wont happen here. lmfao

Let's hope if Zach is pressed into action this season that Hackett deems him worthy of calling "teh good plays."

[Sperm Edwards]

5 minutes ago, jgb said:

Agree with all but the last sentence. We already have a pretty good idea of what JD thinks about Zach because he parted with premium draft capital and $75M to replace him with a 40-year-old. But you are right, that could change and we wouldn't have any real way to determine if it does until the next decision point comes around. Talk is cheap and the Jets have every incentive to talk him up whether they want to motivate him to ascend into their future plans or keep his value as high as is possible to move him after the season.

Talk is cheap. 100% agree. They did happy talk with Adams, and every team has done it with other players.

My point was that they did more than talk. They acted, by not acting to sign anyone else to be the QB2.

Were they right to do that? I sure hope so. 

[jgb]

4 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

My point was Douglas (and/or Saleh, Hackett, etc.) - for better or worse - felt Wilson is adequate enough as the QB2 to stick with rostering Boyle than an upgrade; not Wilson. Wilson's roster spot was guaranteed, even if only as the QB3 for this season.

There is no argumentative premise (or not by me, anyway) that the team was considering outright cutting Wilson to add a different QB than Boyle, let alone to add a different QB2 and choose Boyle as QB3 over Wilson. 

Boyle's last NFL action was throwing 3 picks against the NFL's #31 pass defense, and then throwing two 2nd-half TDs against said joke pass defense after Detroit was already losing by 31 points. He's been terrible. Wilson's also been terrible, but I'll at least allow he has upside Boyle clearly doesn't. Boyle's theoretical value is a higher floor (purely due to knowing the offense better), and he's not demonstrated in NFL games that his possibly-higher floor is absolutely higher than the low floor Wilson's shown he has in him. But for his shoestring tackle he threw a pick-6 against a 2nd/3rd team defense of roster-bubble players ffs. 

Zach would have to commit some act to make the team think it would be addition-by-subtraction to absorb the financial ramifications of cutting him and no team was going to trade him absent some Brock Osweiller type deal where the Jets returned significant draft capital in the trade to induce another team to absorb his contract.

For all practical purposes, he was always going to be a member of the 2023 Jets.

[jgb]

9 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Talk is cheap. 100% agree. They did happy talk with Adams, and every team has done it with other players.

My point was that they did more than talk. They acted, by not acting to sign anyone else to be the QB2.

Were they right to do that? I sure hope so. 

They also acted to replace him as starter, for a dear price, so that does cut both ways, more toward the they don't believe in him side.

[Warfish]

9 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

My point was Douglas (and/or Saleh, Hackett, etc.) - for better or worse - felt Wilson is adequate enough as the QB2 to stick with

rostering Boyle than an upgrade; not Wilson. Wilson's roster spot was guaranteed, even if only as the QB3 for this season.

1. The team is stuck (financially) with Zach Wilson in 2023.  He could not be moved.

2. The need for a legit backup is minimal, Rodgers is an iron man who plays hurt and doesn't miss time.  And we're all-in on him.  Both mitigating the need for a "legit" backup.

3. Presumably we want to spend most of our post-AR cap dollars on supporting AR, not signing a backup (in addition to AR and in addition to Wilson) as insurance for AR and insurance in case Wilson sucks still.

4. Boyle brings system knowledge and player-coach type guidance for the offense on the sideline.

5. Zach Wilson is a non-entity in terms of pressure behind Rodgers should Rodgers play badly, get hurt and need to play hurt, or in any other way.  A different backup might create more pressure to go with that backup in certain specific situations than Wilson could.

6. None of the reasons above are evidence that "the teams feels Wilson is an adequate #2", although they MAY in fact feel that way.  I've said all along (to much criticism) that I believe JD still believes in Wilson, or at the least is putting it out there that he does for whatever reason ( I have reasons I believe he is doing so, but it is speculation).

Now, if this isn't clear enough as to my view on the topic, or if you feel this isn't a serious answer, then such is life.  I'm annoyed at myself I even replied with this tbqh.  

[jgb]

2 minutes ago, Warfish said:

1. The team is stuck (financially) with Zach Wilson in 2023.  He could not be moved.

2. The need for a legit backup is minimal, Rodgers is an iron man who plays hurt and doesn't miss time.  And we're all-in on him.  Both mitigating the need for a "legit" backup.

3. Presumably we want to spend most of our post-AR cap dollars on supporting AR, not signing a backup (in addition to AR and in addition to Wilson) as insurance for AR and insurance in case Wilson sucks still.

4. Boyle brings system knowledge and player-coach type guidance for the offense on the sideline.

5. Zach Wilson is a non-entity in terms of pressure behind Rodgers should Rodgers play badly, get hurt and need to play hurt, or in any other way.  A different backup might create more pressure to go with that backup in certain specific situations than Wilson could.

6. None of the reasons above are evidence that "the teams feels Wilson is an adequate #2", although they MAY in fact feel that way.  I've said all along (to much criticism) that I believe JD still believes in Wilson, or at the least is putting it out there that he does for whatever reason ( I have reasons I believe he is doing so, but it is speculation).

Now, if this isn't clear enough as to my view on the topic, or if you feel this isn't a serious answer, then such is life.  I'm annoyed at myself I even replied with this tbqh.  

 

Sorry, I couldn't resist. Carry on.

[Jet Nut]

2 hours ago, jgb said:

Too innumerable to list all the QBs that failed to develop behind HOFers.

That doesn’t change much.  How many had teams willing to try?  How many QBs were even given the chance to stay with that team?  A player highly thought enough to be mocked and picked 2nd overall.  Who was given the starting nod on a team devoid of talent.  Can’t remember any situation similar to this one

[Jetsfan80]

2 hours ago, Dunnie said:

Ah I see ... Yeah ... Good examples to counter the obvious success stories ... Goes to show you ... Can turn out in any number of ways.

That was your takeaway?

[Jetsfan80]

1 hour ago, jgb said:

1.75% chance, at best.

[Jetsfan80]

1 hour ago, Sperm Edwards said:

You posted this while I was taking 15 min to write up the screenplay for my too-long sequel including the same point. Totally agree. 

You : @Doggin94it as Edward Everett : Abraham Lincoln.

 

The day before he wrote this letter, President Abraham Lincoln shared the speakers' platform with Edward Everett, who gave the principal oration at the dedication of the soldiers' cemetery in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. Lincoln was responding to Everett's note which praised him for the "eloquent simplicity & appropriateness" of his remarks. Everett said, "I should be glad, if I could flatter myself that I came as near to the central idea of the occasion, in two hours, as you did in two minutes."

[Jet Nut]

2 hours ago, Jetsfan80 said:

 

 

NOTE:  Not all of the guys listed on the right are HOFers but they're all at least BORDERLINE HOF guys:

 

• Marc Wilson (pick 1.15/1980/OAK) - Jim Plunkett
• Mark Malone (1.28/1980/PIT) - Terry Bradshaw 
• Oliver Luck (2.44/1982/HOU) - Warren Moon
• Kelly Stouffer (1.6/1987/STL) - Dave Krieg
• Dan McGwire (1.16/1991/SEA) - Dave Krieg
• Tommy Maddox  (1.25/1992/DEN) - John Elway
• Matt Blundin (2.40/1992/KC) - Joe Montana
• Todd Collins (2.45/1995/BUF) - Jim Kelly/Warren Moon/Rich Gannon
• Jim Druckenmiller (1.26/1997/SF) - Steve Young
• Marques Tuiasosopo (2.59/2001/OAK) - Rich Gannon
• Patrick Ramsey (1.32/2002/WSH) - Mark Brunell  @Warfish
• Byron Leftwich (1.7/2003/JAX) - Mark Brunell
• Kyle Boller (1.19/2003/BAL) - Steve McNair
• Jason Campbell (1.25/2005/WSH) - Mark Brunell
• Matt Leinart (1.10/2006/AZ) - Kurt Warner  @T0mShane
• Brian Brohm (2.56/2008/GB) - Aaron Rodgers
• Jimmy Clausen (2.48/2010/CAR) - Cam Newton
• Christian Ponder (1.12/2011/MIN) - Donovan McNabb
• Brandon Weeden (1.22/2012/CLE) - Tony Romo
• Brock Osweiler (2.57/2012/DEN) - Peyton Manning
• DeShone Kizer (2.52/2017/CLE) - Aaron Rodgers
• Josh Rosen (1.10/2018/AZ) - Tom Brady/Matt Ryan

 

 

 

 

2 hours ago, Dunnie said:

How did you miss

Rodger / Favre ?
Or
Young/Montana
Or
Brady/Bledsoe ?

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk
 

You missed the point.  None of these QBs were handed the starting job for 2 years, lost their jobs to a HOF QB, had the FO believing he could be salvaged.  Rodgers sat from day, as did Young and Brady. 

[Jet Nut]

2 hours ago, PFSIKH said:

So after they eff him in the A by getting Rodgers, Zach still trusts the FO?  "Hey Zach, we know trading for A-A-Ron essentially guarantees you will not be QB1 until 2026 at the earliest...would you mind hanging around for three years?  BTW we are not going to pick up the 5th year option, but feel a QB2 contract at half that rate in the 12-15m/year range is fair.  After all, we want to keep A-A-Ron happy with all these weapons. "  You honestly can see that happening?

The major difference with Trevor is the HC of the Jax is a proven coach.  He won the Superbowl and he is known for being a real good offensive innovator.  Maybe, Hackett can push the needle on Zach, but it gets to the economics of the situation.    Zach has value even if it is very little now.  It servers the Jets better to trade Zach next year, draft a QB in the hopes he is ready by 2026 and save cap space for all the people you will eventually need to pay.  Zac is a luxury that the Jets cannot afford.

Yeah, he does trust the team.  And he may or may not have to sit 3 years, no one knows what AR8 will do.  

Pedersons a good HC because he’s good, a good play caller, not from being innovative.  Point was TL went 1.5 years and turned around.  ZW missed time with injuries and was replaced by MW and he’s got a similar amount of experience.  Besides, if you’re blaming the Jets OC and Meyer, if a different coach turned TL around, you’re agreeing

[Maynard13]

On 8/13/2023 at 9:23 PM, Paradis said:

Seriously, some of you need to be walked through this?… Forget his dumpster fire play on the field — Aaron committing to at least 2024 officially (and thankfully) ends any speculation. 

we’re not picking up Zach’s roughly $23+ million dollar 5th year option. 

we’re not gonna double down on him with an extension in 2024 after backing up Arod for 2 yrs

we’re not going to forego drafting a QB in 2025 or signing a veteran because “let’s run it back with Zach”

it’s over. Done. He’ll be cut or traded long before he ever gets named QB1 again here. 

And in other news the price of eggs has gone down!

[Sperm Edwards]

31 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

You : @Doggin94it as Edward Everett : Abraham Lincoln.

 

The day before he wrote this letter, President Abraham Lincoln shared the speakers' platform with Edward Everett, who gave the principal oration at the dedication of the soldiers' cemetery in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. Lincoln was responding to Everett's note which praised him for the "eloquent simplicity & appropriateness" of his remarks. Everett said, "I should be glad, if I could flatter myself that I came as near to the central idea of the occasion, in two hours, as you did in two minutes."

2 minute oration : 6 minute abs

[Jet Nut]

3 hours ago, Jetsfan80 said:

 

 

NOTE:  Not all of the guys listed on the right are HOFers but they're all at least BORDERLINE HOF guys:

 

• Marc Wilson (pick 1.15/1980/OAK) - Jim Plunkett
• Mark Malone (1.28/1980/PIT) - Terry Bradshaw 
• Oliver Luck (2.44/1982/HOU) - Warren Moon
• Kelly Stouffer (1.6/1987/STL) - Dave Krieg
• Dan McGwire (1.16/1991/SEA) - Dave Krieg
• Tommy Maddox  (1.25/1992/DEN) - John Elway
• Matt Blundin (2.40/1992/KC) - Joe Montana
• Todd Collins (2.45/1995/BUF) - Jim Kelly/Warren Moon/Rich Gannon
• Jim Druckenmiller (1.26/1997/SF) - Steve Young
• Marques Tuiasosopo (2.59/2001/OAK) - Rich Gannon
• Patrick Ramsey (1.32/2002/WSH) - Mark Brunell  @Warfish
• Byron Leftwich (1.7/2003/JAX) - Mark Brunell
• Kyle Boller (1.19/2003/BAL) - Steve McNair
• Jason Campbell (1.25/2005/WSH) - Mark Brunell
• Matt Leinart (1.10/2006/AZ) - Kurt Warner  @T0mShane
• Brian Brohm (2.56/2008/GB) - Aaron Rodgers
• Jimmy Clausen (2.48/2010/CAR) - Cam Newton
• Christian Ponder (1.12/2011/MIN) - Donovan McNabb
• Brandon Weeden (1.22/2012/CLE) - Tony Romo
• Brock Osweiler (2.57/2012/DEN) - Peyton Manning
• DeShone Kizer (2.52/2017/CLE) - Aaron Rodgers
• Josh Rosen (1.10/2018/AZ) - Tom Brady/Matt Ryan

 

 

 

This list is meant to say what?  Guys like Osweiller didn’t get benched, kept as the backup to be groomed.  He was gone after 2 seasons.  Pretty much the opposite of what I asked.

Leinart started, was benched, backed up and was dumped for Anthony Wright, McNair wasn’t a HOF QB who was brought in at the end of his career to win and mentor Boller.  

Druckenmiller made 1 start in year one, was benched and never started in year 2 then was dumped

I gave up there

 

 

[jgb]

Just now, Jet Nut said:

That doesn’t change much.  How many had teams willing to try?  How many QBs were even given the chance to stay with that team?  A player highly thought enough to be mocked and picked 2nd overall.  Who was given the starting nod on a team devoid of talent.  Can’t remember any situation similar to this one

So the best that you can put forth is that there is none -- as in zero -- precedent for what you advocate. Let's put aside that lack of exact precedent doesn't foreclose the use of situations containing parallels to approximate likelihoods, and allow me to ask this question: why are you so virulent against the opinion that a turnaround is unlikely when you concede that there is no precedent for it to happen?

[Jetsfan80]

6 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

2 minute oration : 6 minute abs

So a 2-hour oration : 360 minute abs?

That doesn't sound fun.

[Maynard13]

Zach has shown NOTHING in the 2 preseason games he's played in. He's as inept as ever. Rodgers has a very good track record with his injury history, pretty stable like Brady.  Zach will never see a 5th year in Green and White.  Who they choose to bring in after Rodgers is an interesting venture.  They could draft someone in a year or two, trade or sign another FA or do a combo of those things. But there looks to be no way Zach is kept going into his 5th year and maybe not even next year if he plays this year and gets booed off the field.  In fact, Rodgers has even hinted he play 3-4 years more and definitely is playing at least the next two. When Zach leaves NY, he will be sending Rodgers texts: