They're playing the odds. Chances are, the undrafted rookie who was almost cut from the practice squad two years ago will not be a starting QB, so they get to be jerks and have a high probability of being right. If you want to knock his play, THEN KNOCK HIS PLAY: He gets no depth on his drops. His arm isn't as strong as everyone makes it out to be and while he has great accuracy on deep throws and touch passes, he throws behind receivers on short bullets (Like Raymond's there. That ball was behind him). He does, however, have excellent pocket presence. He feels pressure well and moves around in the pocket. He has a decent arm and is great with his touch passes and deep throws. However, he has no experience. Like any inexperienced QB, he could get throttled if he is put in at starter and defenses go at him. Thus, putting him in would be a gamble.
The "random walk" theory of building a football team, lol. Just start throwing whatever shit you have laying around at it & see what sticks! Right after I get MY chance, lol. After all, you have no proof that I won't be a success either, so you can't put down that idea either! To be clear, we're not putting down Brett Ratliff. Not at all, he may turn out to good. We're just putting down clueless voters who want to declare him the presumptive starter for next year (and that presumably means not trying to find anyone else) before they have any friggin' idea if he is not only good enough, but has had enough time to adjust to the pro level of speed. Also, the former requires the latter. So we're laughing that people who think he might have potential are actually voting to do him & his potential harm, but wanting him as the starter before he may be ready to succeed, or even survive. p.s. and oh yeah by the way, there are those little details I posted the other day in the poll thread about how he played at Utah ... very inconsistent. But I guess maybe he will somehow find pro ball easier to play than lower division 1A?
Your argument is ambiguous. Every quarterback in the NFL who has ever played starts off as that guy with no experience against a starting NFL defense. The only difference between most is who gets a shot and who doesn't. Tom Brady was the #2 quarterback at Michigan... where is he now, and where is Drew Henson? Matt Cassel didn't start a game of football since high school... where is he now? Players who are great in college do not always translate well to the NFL. On the flip side of that coin, players who are OK in college translate very well to the NFL because they have the right work ethic and attitude to be an NFL football player. The only way you find out what you have is to go out there and test him. It may be a gamble to not play Ratliff, but in my opinion it is a bigger gamble to draft a rookie (who is as much a gamble to play as Ratliff) or trade for an underachieving QB, or sign a washout QB... and waste a potential shot at a great QB... potential is the key... but we have it right here on this team in Brett Ratliff... Ratliff NEEDS TO PLAY!
the best case for not starting him I've read all year... good job. but, it can change with experience.
Those were some damn good deep balls Ratliff threw in that video. Who on this board can really say he doesn't at least deserve a chance to compete for the starting job? And why hasn't Clowney been playing more? I almost forgot how good he played in preseason. With speed like that he could be the deep threat this team needs. Maybe we have the recievers we need on the team already with him Clowney and Stuckey.
Elitist? Spare me, dude. I've seen those stupid-ass youtube clips posted before 100 times on this board as reasons for Ratliff to get the job. I'm not against him getting a shot at the job, but the guy has done jack shit to get the type of love he's gotten on this board. If you want to tell me he's the lesser of two evils between him and Clemens, based on what they have seen of Clemens behind a horrible O-line, I think you're in for a rude awakening with this guy. Some of the people exclaiming that he has a greater pocket presence and better mechanics and better defensive reads etc., after seeing him play against 3rd string defenses, without a real pass rush, I don't get it. It's impossible to know how this guy will be during a live game, with an elite pass rush in his face. We could probably dig up some polls from 2007 and see a number of the same people who today are screaming for Ratliff, bashing Pennington and wanting Clemens to come in and save the day, praising him for what they saw in the Baltimore game and the Washington game. And those were real games, not a mix-and-match roster of guys who are wearing street clothes right now. Don't give me that elitist bullshit, I've seen enough paper-savior QBs with this team to know that a walk-on who has been running the show team all season has a snowball's chance of taking us to the promised land.
I agree with this, too. They've already put a couple of years into developing him, what do we have to lose if Favre retires? Why let him go somewhere else and take advantage of all the resources the Jets put in? Without Favre, it's not like we're displacing a top prospect. Between Ratliff and Clemens we hope one can do the job.
Yes. But can we just, you know, see him play in the first half of an exhibition game before we declare him the week 1 starter & decide we don't need to have a plan B? Please?
What we have to lose is the $140m FA investment we made last season in order to go into "win now" mode.
I don't think anyone is doing that. Just put him in the mix and consider him an option, what is so wrong with that? Again, assuming Favre retires, what else should we do?
Ok, so assuming no Favre, what do we do? Handing the keys to Clemens is equally as risky so what do we do? Hope a bonafide QB falls off a tree? We draft #17, so that's probably not the answer. You're telling me Ratliff is not the answer, so who is? How do you know he isn't?
Clueless voters? Most people posting here have been watching football long enough to be able to tell the difference between a real football player and an athlete who can't get it done in the NFL. The few times I saw Ratliff play I saw a guy who could and should be an NFL starting QB. Did you ever wonder why so many people are on that bandwagon? It isn't because of a 40 time. It isn't because he has a rocket arm, or because he has the "perfect" size for a quarterback. It's because they saw the same things that I did, even in limited time. Because we make our opinions known, we get to deal with dopes like you who are so clouded by their own opinions on what is good and what it isn't, you forget to watch the damn game itself. Clearly, Ratliff isn't tested. Clearly, he wasn't a hot prospect. But I would like to add that clearly, this guy needs to be put into the fire and needs to be given a shot to show what he can do, because the potential is there.
You're missing the point again. We DON'T know how he'll handle against a real pass rush and a real NFL defense... but because of WHAT he has shown, we need to find out. The only way to find out is by putting him to the fire. So my suggestion, put him and Clemens in competition next year. We have plenty of other needs to focus on in the draft other than QB, so spend the offseason addressing those issues. 2009 should be a chance for Clemens, Ratliff... and even Ainge... to show what they have. We shouldn't piss away what we don't know out of fear of potential failure. We fail with proven entities like Brett Favre.
I am completely advocating Ratliff plays a first half of an exhibition game. Hell, I'm advocating he play two. What I'm strongly against is wasting draft picks trading for someone like Derek Anderson or drafting someone who doesn't have Peyton Manning written all over them. I'm also against bringing in a FA retread who is going to come here and do what they've done their whole career, which is be average. I don't have any faith in the available FA QB's to be the second coming of Vinny Testaverde.
I honestly don't think Favre should be coming back, but if you think it's an intelligent idea to go into the season with just Ratliff and Clemens and Ainge in competition, then you're more of a Jets fan than I am, meaning you enjoy the suffering more. We need a veteran in the competition. Plus, we need a frigging HC who can put one of them to use, an OC who can call the right plays, and a system that makes sense for one or more of them. Hell, this could all be academic. Some pocket rocket HC could come in and cut both of them and we'd be sitting here twiddling out thumbs wondering what the hell just happened.
Yeah, more or less. You're not wrong on the points above. My thing is that when it comes to football I trust my eyes over numbers and scouting reports when I watch these players. When I watch Ratliff I see the real deal... and I want to at least see this kid get a shot rather than waste more time on another PSL selling douchebag who is going to turn the ball and the season over again. Playing Ratliff would be a change of pace for the Jets, and it is a change of pace that is long overdue. Business as usual + Jets = major suckage.
Restating what you're saying, we should go into camp next year with just Ratliff, Clemens, and Ainge. Wow. Just wow. I'm guessing you like to play russian roulette too? Heck your odds (5 out of 6) are probably a lot better winning there! :rofl2:
What I don't get more is why a fanbase that has tossed out 1 QB after 7-8 career starts is so up in arms about some UDFA. It was 4 quarters divided over 4 games against third or second stringers at best. Obviously if he kept on improving his game then yea that'd kick ass. What fan doesn't want to see their franchise pump out talent like that. But the likeliness of this happening is fuckin... I'd rather see Clemens get a fair shot.
