Sperm Edwards Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 http://www.nj.com/jets/index.ssf/2009/03/assessing_the_new_york_jets_fr.html One can argue that the Jets are taking a chance by not signing a veteran quarterback, but Ryan insists the organization is ready to go to battle with either Kellen Clemens or Brett Ratliff. The thinking here is that a Jeff Garcia or Byron Leftwich would be only stop-gap measures and the Jets need to find out if one of their current guys is the answer. (FWIW) This line of thinking ("the Jets need to find out if one of their current guys is the answer") would also suggest the Jets may not even draft a QB. That is, assuming those are the thoughts of Ryan & Tannenbaum & not Hutchinson surmising. It is my belief that the desire to go with Clemens or Ratliff is one of the main reasons (if not the chief reason) that Schottenheimer was retained. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gun Of Bavaria Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 http://www.nj.com/jets/index.ssf/2009/03/assessing_the_new_york_jets_fr.html (FWIW) This line of thinking ("the Jets need to find out if one of their current guys is the answer") would also suggest the Jets may not even draft a QB. That is, assuming those are the thoughts of Ryan & Tannenbaum & not Hutchinson surmising. It is my belief that the desire to go with Clemens or Ratliff is one of the main reasons (if not the chief reason) that Schottenheimer was retained. I agree. My guess is that in someone's little mind at Florham Park, it's Clemens 1 and Ratliff 2 heading into camp. I still think that Ratliff might pull it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 It is very interesting watching this team being built. Normal NFL teams operate under the assumption that QB will be your highest paid position on the club. The Jets have the luxury (if you want to call it that) of building out other positions at a premium, at the expense of the QB position. the proof, of course will be in results. Interesting approach though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slats Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 This line of thinking ("the Jets need to find out if one of their current guys is the answer") would also suggest the Jets may not even draft a QB. That is, assuming those are the thoughts of Ryan & Tannenbaum & not Hutchinson surmising. It is my belief that the desire to go with Clemens or Ratliff is one of the main reasons (if not the chief reason) that Schottenheimer was retained. Yup. I think it's the smart move, too. And I agree that drafting a QB doesn't make sense under this scenario. See what you have now, then address it accordingly next year if none of them work out - either with a high (trade up?) pick, or veteran FA or trade. And, of course, this is why the trade for Favre put the franchise back a year. The team should already have this information. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustInFudge Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 It is very interesting watching this team being built. Normal NFL teams operate under the assumption that QB will be your highest paid position on the club. The Jets have the luxury (if you want to call it that) of building out other positions at a premium, at the expense of the QB position. the proof, of course will be in results. Interesting approach though. This is a good point, but eventually we are going to have to shell it ou. Especially, if Kellen Clemens wins the job hitting FA in 2010. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleedin Green Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 Yup. I think it's the smart move, too. And I agree that drafting a QB doesn't make sense under this scenario. See what you have now, then address it accordingly next year if none of them work out - either with a high (trade up?) pick, or veteran FA or trade. And, of course, this is why the trade for Favre put the franchise back a year. The team should already have this information. Sorry, but I call bull**** on that last line. If we didn't trade for Favre last year, the Jets are walking into the 2009 season with Chad Pennington at QB. The acquisition of Favre expedited the process of dumping Chad which is exactly what has allowed the Jets to take this approach of being able to find out about the players they already have at QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECURB Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 Yup. I think it's the smart move, too. And I agree that drafting a QB doesn't make sense under this scenario. See what you have now, then address it accordingly next year if none of them work out - either with a high (trade up?) pick, or veteran FA or trade. And, of course, this is why the trade for Favre put the franchise back a year. The team should already have this information. How are the JETS set back this year? Shotty knows what he has in Clemens and Ratliff... and good changes have happened because of the "win now" attitude the Favre move brought in... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neckdemon Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 Yup. I think it's the smart move, too. And I agree that drafting a QB doesn't make sense under this scenario. See what you have now, then address it accordingly next year if none of them work out - either with a high (trade up?) pick, or veteran FA or trade. And, of course, this is why the trade for Favre put the franchise back a year. The team should already have this information. yeah it's a great idea..... this way when we find out that the qb's we have suck, we don't even have a qb to fall back on that's been in the system for a year. we can just go ahead and wait till next year's draft where, hopefully, we can get a qb. then we can waiti a couple of years till he develops into a franchise qb or we find out he sucks also. stupid approach, if you ask me. if one of the qb's falls to us 17 this yearm it should be a no-brainer to pick him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECURB Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 yeah it's a great idea..... this way when we find out that the qb's we have suck, we don't even have a qb to fall back on that's been in the system for a year. we can just go ahead and wait till next year's draft where, hopefully, we can get a qb. then we can waiti a couple of years till he develops into a franchise qb or we find out he sucks also. stupid approach, if you ask me. if one of the qb's falls to us 17 this yearm it should be a no-brainer to pick him. How so? Just because they are the top QBs in this years draft does not mean they are a top 20 QB in the entire world.... which is what you would expect at the very least from a high 1st round pick... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMJ Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 [url=http://www.nj.com/jets/index.ssf/2009/03/assessing_the_new_york_jets_fr.html]Jets may not bring in a vet QB I never expected them to nor do I want them to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMJ Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 It is my belief that the desire to go with Clemens or Ratliff is one of the main reasons (if not the chief reason) that Schottenheimer was retained. Also, I agree with this 1,000%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crashingjet Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 Either way the Jets are screwed... Too bad Gholston can't play QB, then you'd have a 1st rounder under center Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alk Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 http://www.nj.com/jets/index.ssf/2009/03/assessing_the_new_york_jets_fr.html (FWIW) This line of thinking ("the Jets need to find out if one of their current guys is the answer") would also suggest the Jets may not even draft a QB. That is, assuming those are the thoughts of Ryan & Tannenbaum & not Hutchinson surmising. It is my belief that the desire to go with Clemens or Ratliff is one of the main reasons (if not the chief reason) that Schottenheimer was retained. This seems a little ridiculous to me. They're clearly building for the now and not for the future. So why stop just short with the absolute most important piece to your team? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMJ Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 This seems a little ridiculous to me. They're clearly building for the now and not for the future. So why stop just short with the absolute most important piece to your team? I think there is a "chance" we draft one, but there is zero value to bringing in a retread like Byron Leftwich or Marc Bulger. Unless we're drafting a potential (hopeful) franchise QB, go WR at #17 and see what the young guys can do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECURB Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 This seems a little ridiculous to me. They're clearly building for the now and not for the future. So why stop just short with the absolute most important piece to your team? ASk the Pats... they dumped their young star for their old beat up QB... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthernJet Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 This seems a little ridiculous to me. They're clearly building for the now and not for the future. So why stop just short with the absolute most important piece to your team? If defense is Top 5 in league you dont need great QB play in NFL.. you need game manager.. NFL teams with great defenses have proven this time and again in NFL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 This seems a little ridiculous to me. They're clearly building for the now and not for the future. So why stop just short with the absolute most important piece to your team? Maybe, just maybe, they know alittle bit more about the qbs they currently have on their roster, than you or I. And, maybe they are comfortable with that. heck, teh Pats went with Matt Cassel as their back-up to Tom Brady, how teh heck were they comfortable with that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECURB Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 Maybe, just maybe, they know alittle bit more about the qbs they currently have on their roster, than you or I. And, maybe they are comfortable with that. heck, teh Pats went with Matt Cassel as their back-up to Tom Brady, how teh heck were they comfortable with that? They shouldnt have been... he brought that team from un-defeated to missing the playoffs... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 They shouldnt have been... he brought that team from un-defeated to missing the playoffs... They also just turned him into an early 2nd round pick. Matt Cassel was not the primary reason for the Pats missing the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4HCrew Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 If defense is Top 5 in league you dont need great QB play in NFL.. you need game manager.. NFL teams with great defenses have proven this time and again in NFL Southern while I agree with your point, then wouldn't the Jets have kept Chad and Kellen last year? or did Rex make the Jets drastically change their philosophies? At the same time the Jets do not even know if they have a guy that can efficiently manage the game on their roster. Many reports that came out last year stated that Kellen began to regress if anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GFJET33 Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 If defense is Top 5 in league you dont need great QB play in NFL.. you need game manager.. NFL teams with great defenses have proven this time and again in NFL excellent point. look at some of the super bowl winning QBs in the past decade or so and compare how good they are to how good their defense was: Eli Manning, Roethlisberger, Brad Johnson with the Bucs, Trent Dilfer None of these guys are great QBs IMO, but they are all good game managers who dont turn it over. Thats all we can ask for right now because of how good our defense should and will be. So lets not worry about hoping we can find an all world qb and just hope that of what we have or what we will draft they can put us in a position to win games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gangreenman Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 http://www.nj.com/jets/index.ssf/2009/03/assessing_the_new_york_jets_fr.html (FWIW) This line of thinking ("the Jets need to find out if one of their current guys is the answer") would also suggest the Jets may not even draft a QB. That is, assuming those are the thoughts of Ryan & Tannenbaum & not Hutchinson surmising. It is my belief that the desire to go with Clemens or Ratliff is one of the main reasons (if not the chief reason) that Schottenheimer was retained. FINALLY. Someone that understands stopgaps aren't the answer!!! Im really excited to see what Rex can build over time here. I really am. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECURB Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 They also just turned him into an early 2nd round pick. Matt Cassel was not the primary reason for the Pats missing the playoffs. Crazy what the Pats get for their players... What was the Primary reason? AS far as Im concerned if Tom Brady did not get injured they win the ONE more game needed to win the division... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthernJet Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 Southern while I agree with your point, then wouldn't the Jets have kept Chad and Kellen last year? or did Rex make the Jets drastically change their philosophies? At the same time the Jets do not even know if they have a guy that can efficiently manage the game on their roster. Many reports that came out last year stated that Kellen began to regress if anything. did jets have a top 5 defrense last year? and i assume rex has said we will be greta and dont overpay for a guy i want to control the game.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECURB Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 excellent point. look at some of the super bowl winning QBs in the past decade or so and compare how good they are to how good their defense was: Eli Manning, Roethlisberger, Griese with the Bucs, Trent Dilfer None of these guys are great QBs IMO, but they are all good game managers who dont turn it over. Thats all we can ask for right now because of how good our defense should and will be. So lets not worry about hoping we can find an all world qb and just hope that of what we have or what we will draft they can put us in a position to win games. You mean Brad Johnson right? Still fits. Big Ben had the worst QB rating to win a SB ever... lol I wouldnt call Eli a scrub... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 Crazy what the Pats get for their players... What was the Primary reason? AS far as Im concerned if Tom Brady did not get injured they win the ONE more game needed to win the division... The point was not a comparison of Matt Cassel to Tom Brady. The point was fans (us) not knowing what back up QB's are capable of, and FO's having a much better idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neckdemon Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 If defense is Top 5 in league you dont need great QB play in NFL.. you need game manager.. NFL teams with great defenses have proven this time and again in NFL no team is a consistent winner without a franchise qb. can a team with a great defense and nothing at qb win it all? sure. but they don't consistently make th eplay-offs and get far. i would like to see us build a team that is a consistent superbowl contender. you need a great qb for that. i'm tired of hearing this crap about having a great defense and a crappy qb and it'll be ok. BS. get me a franchise qb and i'll show you a team that can consistently win. besides, it certainly isn't a given that our defense will even be top 10, let alone top 5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthernJet Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 You mean Brad Johnson right? Still fits. Big Ben had the worst QB rating to win a SB ever... lol I wouldnt call Eli a scrub... and rex saw a rook flacco come real close to a super bowl this year.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 You mean Brad Johnson right? Still fits. Big Ben had the worst QB rating to win a SB ever... lol I wouldnt call Eli a scrub... But, Roethlesberger has the uncanny ability to come up big when the game is on the line. Numbers don't measure that, other than wins. He has them, and has them in spots where he came up big when needed to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GFJET33 Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 You mean Brad Johnson right? Still fits. Big Ben had the worst QB rating to win a SB ever... lol I wouldnt call Eli a scrub... yeah hes not a scrub but it was the giants running game and defense that has carried them while hes been QB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthernJet Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 no team is a consistent winner without a franchise qb. can a team with a great defense and nothing at qb win it all? sure. but they don't consistently make th eplay-offs and get far. i would like to see us build a team that is a consistent superbowl contender. you need a great qb for that. i'm tired of hearing this crap about having a great defense and a crappy qb and it'll be ok. BS. get me a franchise qb and i'll show you a team that can consistently win. besides, it certainly isn't a given that our defense will even be top 10, let alone top 5. dont agree.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECURB Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 The point was not a comparison of Matt Cassel to Tom Brady. The point was fans (us) not knowing what back up QB's are capable of, and FO's having a much better idea. Agreed and Shotty is a QB guy first so he should know... and now he has a HC who seems to trust in him... Mangini did not... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slats Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 Sorry, but I call bull**** on that last line. If we didn't trade for Favre last year, the Jets are walking into the 2009 season with Chad Pennington at QB. The acquisition of Favre expedited the process of dumping Chad which is exactly what has allowed the Jets to take this approach of being able to find out about the players they already have at QB. Everyone knows the Jets wanted Clemens to win that "competition," and that even if he didn't - Pennington would've been on a very short leash. We'd have the Clemens info right now, at least. Dumping Chad was an extremely stupid sidebar to the Favre trade. Their love affair with the legend resulted in them getting absolutely nothing in return for Penny, and having him land at a division rival where he can potentially give us fits for years. How are the JETS set back this year? Shotty knows what he has in Clemens and Ratliff... and good changes have happened because of the "win now" attitude the Favre move brought in... No one knows what they have in Clemens or Ratliff at this point. Favre took thirteen million more things from the Jets than he brought to the team. yeah it's a great idea..... this way when we find out that the qb's we have suck, we don't even have a qb to fall back on that's been in the system for a year. we can just go ahead and wait till next year's draft where, hopefully, we can get a qb. then we can waiti a couple of years till he develops into a franchise qb or we find out he sucks also. stupid approach, if you ask me. if one of the qb's falls to us 17 this yearm it should be a no-brainer to pick him. Who's gonna drop? Sanchez? If they suspect they have a starter between Clemens and Ratliff, then they should shore up the roster around them to give them the best chance to succeed. Getting another young QB question mark doesn't help them. It would be just another big contract sitting on the bench. If defense is Top 5 in league you dont need great QB play in NFL.. you need game manager.. NFL teams with great defenses have proven this time and again in NFL No better example of that than Ryan's old team. I'm sure this is his thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECURB Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 But, Roethlesberger has the uncanny ability to come up big when the game is on the line. Numbers don't measure that, other than wins. He has them, and has them in spots where he came up big when needed to. The Steelers D allows him to **** up all game long and need just that one big play... lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleedin Green Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 excellent point. look at some of the super bowl winning QBs in the past decade or so and compare how good they are to how good their defense was: Eli Manning, Roethlisberger, Brad Johnson with the Bucs, Trent Dilfer None of these guys are great QBs IMO, but they are all good game managers who dont turn it over. Thats all we can ask for right now because of how good our defense should and will be. So lets not worry about hoping we can find an all world qb and just hope that of what we have or what we will draft they can put us in a position to win games. Dilfer was definitely a bum, but I'd hardly call Manning, Big Ben or even Johnson in 2002 simply game managers. In 02 Johnson had a damn good season and I believe made the Pro Bowl. Eli really stepped up his game big time in the playoffs that year and Ben was a big part of that offenses success both years, even if he was a disaster in his first Super Bowl appearance. The point being, while you may not need Tom Brady or Peyton Manning to do Super Bowls, most of the time you still need a guy who can actually make some plays and not just stay out of the way. There are a few exceptions (like Dilfer), but its definitely not the norm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.