You are currently viewing the old forums. We have upgraded to a new NFL Forum.
This old forum is being left as a read-only archive.
Please update your bookmarks to our new forum at forums.footballsfuture.com.


 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Jay Cutler resurfaced
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 14, 15, 16
 
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> New York Jets
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Kyu


Joined: 26 Feb 2014
Posts: 391
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 4:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bobby816 wrote:
jetskid007 wrote:
Kyu wrote:
Bobby816 wrote:
ekill08x wrote:
GangGreen420 wrote:
Kyu wrote:
Bobby816 wrote:
I don't think we should touch a QB in the draft this year. Reason being is we have so many other needs that it'd be a wasted pick, bc we seem to want to bench every QB we draft for 2 years when we can develop a player at a different position ASAP and actually start them. No sense of drafting a QB until we see what Hack can do. That's why I want him to start at least 6-8 games this year regardless who we bring in. I don't want us to bring in a guy like Kaep or Cutler bc they block the potential of starting Hack at all this year. I'm not against bringing in a cheap vet like Keenum or Foles, but for me they really are a waste of money and just blocking Hack. I think we need to quit babying Hack and play him. If nothing else it clears up that we need a QB big time in the draft next year and make it next year we finally move up and get one. The better alternative is Hack is the answer and we already have our franchise guy. The best thing we can do right now is surround Hack with players. Get an upgrade at LT and C and make the defense better so he doesn't have to score 30 points a game to win. We seem to be one of the only franchises that big time babies our QBs and look where its gotten us. Geno should've started the last 2 years and Hack should this next year. Instead we got Fitz 2 years in a row and who knows in 2017. Opportunity is all these guys need most the time. Confidence is 2nd and that comes with opportunity and play.


If Hack played this year, he'd be done. Game action has two effects on confidence. Either they come in and succeed and their confidence grows, or you have a Osweiler situation where they're playing when they're not ready and struggle mightily, hear about it every second of every day, and become a shell of themselves.


Im pretty convinced Hackenberg was just a waste of a draft pick for us. We are drafting a QB either this year or next which means he's not in the long term plans. He needed to go somewhere where he could sit behind a guy for a couple years, that wasn't the case here.


He may very well have been. I hated the pick but i do see the upside. We cant take a QB at 6 this year. It would be a nightmare.

I disagree. I think the main problem is people want Hack and go 11-5. Everyone should know that won't happen. Go look at virtually every qbs 1st year starting, they weren't good. Let's just look to last year... Wentz looked good early and struggled big time as the year went on. Never once did philly say bench him. Bc it's part of the process. God was in a different situation and only started like 1/3 of the year and struggled yet LA will stay with the process, bc you have to be patient. We've became a franchise that has no patience and that freaks out when we aren't good. Yes sometimes a QB just isn't good, but I don't think anyone can say Hack doesn't have all the tools to succeed in the NFL. Play him this year and let him get the bumps and bruises. This will set up for the future. Maybe this season and even next season are rough, but Hack will still only be 24 and we could have our guy for 10-15 years.


No offense, but it's kind of foolish to think the only way to develop a QB is to throw them to the wolves. I agree, patience is very important, but more importantly, they have to be ready to play. Hack has the physical tools to play QB, but he doesn't know how to use them. His mechanics were awful and his feet were worse than that. I don't know how far he's come, but no, he could not have survived a trial by fire this year.

I am in no way saying Hack can be Rodgers, but they both had similar issues coming into the league. Look at how Aaron throws the ball now and compare it to when he was at Cal. Everything is different. It takes time to fix mechanics. Yes, Rodgers had a HoF in front of him and we had Fitz, but the time that Rodgers had to sit, learn, work on his craft must have helped him immensely. Again, I am in no way, shape, or form saying Hack is Rodgers. I'm just saying that time on the bench isn't bad if they're developing behind the scenes.

Eventually, yes, there will come a time when Hack will have to show us the fruit of his labor, but you can't expect him to do that without the necessary coaching and fundamentals.



Truth: you won't truly know how good a QB is until they get a season-plus of starting experience.
Fallacy: knowing that you have a potential long-term starter doesn't have to require early career starts.


The Jets will know by year 2-3 whether they have "something" or "nothing" in Hackenberg without him stepping on the field in a game. That's not to say "something" means he'll be a great QB, rather, it means he has shown enough development for the team to be optimistic of his potential to be a long-term starter. Potential is the key word.

Using the Aaron Rodgers example is appropriate because while the team internally felt very good about his potential when it was his turn to start, they still took Brian Brohm in the 2nd round to hedge their bets in case that potential amounted to nothing in live action. He went on to become one of the best QBs that ever lived.

The Broncos felt good enough about Osweiler to offer him upwards of $65 million last offseason. Whether or not they admit it, they surely didn't expect him to play the way he did this year or else they wouldn't have made the offer.


No one is saying that time will lead to Hackenberg becoming some great QB, but the organization can evaluate him without forcing him into the lineup. It's kind of like Garoppolo - we've been hearing Bill's love for him before any of his starts. How did he know? Because he has seen his progression in practice. Time will tell; no need to rush hack into the lineup - it'll only be a disservice to him and the team.

GB had Favre, NE had Brady so those examples don't equate for a situation like ours. The Denver one is the most similar to ours and even there situation wasn't similar to ours. We have NO ONE at QB. Therefor why not start Hack? At this point I think starting Petty is kinda pointless. I'd still rather start Petty than a guy like Cutler though. I don't think any QB over 26yrs old should start a game for us next season. We are clearly in a rebuild and wasting cap space and time isn't what we should be doing. Not playing a young QB is wasting time when you're rebuilding. Hack isn't coming in and starting right away, he sat a year. He also isn't a QB with no experience, he started every game for 3 years at a big university against good competition and succeeded under a good offense at 18 years old. Yes he had some flaws when we drafted him, but that's why he sat last year. And of course at 22 he isn't a finished product, but I'm all for putting him in there and letting him grow along with the team. We shouldn't baby him.


You see it as babying him, I see it as putting him in a situation to succeed. Like you said, he won't be a finished product, not close. That's both a good and bad thing. What is the damn rush? How many QBs have come in and played on bad teams, got crushed behind an inexperienced line, threw to inexperienced receivers, learned a new system, and survived? Worked awesome for Geno, if I remember correctly.

He's going to play, but why rush him into and impossible situation? He's not Cam or Luck. There's and reason people questioned the pick, even some on this board already consider it a lost pick. We're developing a QB not a hunter gatherer.

It's better to be prepared than just wish on a shooting star and hope for the best.
_________________
J.e.t.s.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rdelaney89


Joined: 22 Jan 2009
Posts: 3842
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 5:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think the point Jetskid is getting at is that even with a high draft pick QB waiting in the wings both those franchises still took a QB to hedge their bets in the event Rodgers/Jimmy G didn't pan out. We would be in the exact same situation, I'd absolutely take a QB in the first next year unless Hack comes in this year and blows the doors off the competition. The worst case scenario is what NE is in, they have a QB they could swap for a 1st round pick or they can hold onto him and be the successor to Brady.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kyu


Joined: 26 Feb 2014
Posts: 391
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 6:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

rdelaney89 wrote:
I think the point Jetskid is getting at is that even with a high draft pick QB waiting in the wings both those franchises still took a QB to hedge their bets in the event Rodgers/Jimmy G didn't pan out. We would be in the exact same situation, I'd absolutely take a QB in the first next year unless Hack comes in this year and blows the doors off the competition. The worst case scenario is what NE is in, they have a QB they could swap for a 1st round pick or they can hold onto him and be the successor to Brady.


Absolutely.
_________________
J.e.t.s.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JetsFan15


Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 788
Location: Dutchess County, NY
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 7:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Curious as to thoughts on our options for adding a QB to the roster that folks have:

Cutler
RGIII
Kap
Osweiler
Siemian
Foles

I think the Jets/Mac want Siemian. Not sure we are going to get him. I think Mac will slow play his hand on this and that will be wise. If Romo lands in Houston then I believe no way Den trades him.

I am going out on a limb and say they end up with ...... Osweiler
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
rdelaney89


Joined: 22 Jan 2009
Posts: 3842
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 10:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

JetsFan15 wrote:
Curious as to thoughts on our options for adding a QB to the roster that folks have:

Cutler
RGIII
Kap
Osweiler
Siemian
Foles

I think the Jets/Mac want Siemian. Not sure we are going to get him. I think Mac will slow play his hand on this and that will be wise. If Romo lands in Houston then I believe no way Den trades him.

I am going out on a limb and say they end up with ...... Osweiler


Since Osweiler would likely cost us the vet minimum I wouldn't be upset. I'd take him over Geno or RG3 at the moment. My top 2 I'd like to get are still McCarron/Siemian but that will depend on asking price. I do think we wait it out, may not have an answer until after/during the draft. There is no reason for us to rush into any decision.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jetsfandan423


Moderator
Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Posts: 18186
Location: Greensboro, NC
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 11:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Agreed, if Osweiler is who we end up with I won't be mad. He will come cheap, and he will probably be cut so we won't have to use a draft pick to get him.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
JetsFan15


Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 788
Location: Dutchess County, NY
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 11:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

rdelaney89 wrote:
JetsFan15 wrote:
Curious as to thoughts on our options for adding a QB to the roster that folks have:

Cutler
RGIII
Kap
Osweiler
Siemian
Foles

I think the Jets/Mac want Siemian. Not sure we are going to get him. I think Mac will slow play his hand on this and that will be wise. If Romo lands in Houston then I believe no way Den trades him.

I am going out on a limb and say they end up with ...... Osweiler


Since Osweiler would likely cost us the vet minimum I wouldn't be upset. I'd take him over Geno or RG3 at the moment. My top 2 I'd like to get are still McCarron/Siemian but that will depend on asking price. I do think we wait it out, may not have an answer until after/during the draft. There is no reason for us to rush into any decision.


Personally I would like Siemian too. I just don't see Den trading him as I believe that Romo is going to Houston. I am not sold on McCarron but would take him over Cutler or RGIII
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Display posts from previous:   

This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> New York Jets All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 14, 15, 16
Page 16 of 16

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group