Since what the "win now attitude" exactly is, is all subjective, we can never really settle this. But I will say that I am hardly alone in thinking the Jets philosophy could be called "win now" even without Favre in the picture. I just searched for old news stories on the FA signings of Faneca, Woody, etc yesterday to learn how long their contracts were before I made my post here yeterday that you replied to, and the articles that sports writers were writing about Jets back in spring were full of declarations that these FA signings signified that Jets had a "win now" attitude. Let me just say that if this team is supposed to be in rebuilding mode, then those FA signings 9 months ago were pretty counterproductive. Those are all 4-5 year deals, and tie up a lot of cap. I think even if Favre's gone there's still only just a couple million in cap space left next year. If you're in rebuilding mode, you usually leave a lot of cap space in the interim so that once you identify/confirm your young draft talent, you can tie them up with long term contracts.
No what you're saying is that he should be declared the starter, and we should not make any attempt to get any other QB that is a prospective starter. Meaning that, once you give this guy his "shot," should he not pan out or be ready yet, you don't have anyone else (except Clemens, Ainge, or a low-salary veteran backup) to put in there, and your 2009 season is essentially over. You may not THINK you are saying that, but that is the natural consequence of what you are saying.
One more thing on Ratliff. People keep bringing up that he played against second and third stringers. Go back and watch the two long touchdown passes to Clowney. Those two passes we deep, accurate throws and hit the receiver totally in stride. And it wasn't like he had all day to throw. If you can find better passes thrown by Favre this year I'd be surprised. I don't care who was playing defense. The point was, they were great throws.
:rofl: You should be a spin master for someone. :wink: As a side note, I'd be all for drafting a potential franchise QB if one were to fall to the team in this year's draft. Even if Ratliff is the real deal, you can never have too many good QBs.
Flacco hasn't set the world on fire but hes has stepped in and has matured through the year. He did not set on the pine for a year or two. He has managed the game well and they let the defense pick up the slack. Sounds like a good recipe to me. The Steelers went a similar route with Ben. If you remember that SB, they won in spite of Bens play, which wasnt the best but the defense and running game picked up the slack. Giants last year was more of the defense also. Give me a QB who is consistent and durable with a top tier defense any day of the week. Offense may be a bit boring but the defense will tear it up.
I explained what I meant in the post you just quoted. If you choose to assign different meaning to my words then you are right. No end to the discussion. I don't think there are only two states for an NFL team. There is more than 'win now' and 'rebuilding'. There is at least one state in the middle that I would not seeing the Jets occupy for a few years. That state is 'win consistently'. In other words, win 8-11 games each year for three years in a row. In my opinion, signing the players the Jets signed between January and May of '08 were leading to the 'win consistently' state. Or at least trying to get there. I do not think there was an attempt to shoot the moon and win it all in one year. I could be wrong about this and would be disappointed if I am wrong.
I think you're agreeing with me with this post. I certainly read it that way. To me, and a number of Ravens fans I talk football with, Flacco was a lucky strike. The Ravens took a chance on the kid in the draft with the belief that he would be a backup to Boller. He then ended up being 'the guy', at least for this year. I'd love to get lucky like that, I'm just not counting on it.
Anyone who believes differently is lying to themselves. Flacco was akin to getting all the numbers in the Powerball.
I respectfully disagree with this thinking for two reasons: 1. The money that was spent in the offseason on acquiring Pace, Woody, Faneca and Favre (particularly Favre since he cost us a lot with no guarantees he would play for more than one year) strongly suggest a "win now" rationale being dicatated by the FO, and 2. If the FO were content with winning 8-11 games per year from the time they signed the above mentioned players, why would they have fired Mangini seeing how we won 9 games and reached the "win consistently" target suggest by your post?
Yeah, just using a few other references to make the point. I would prefer to build a top tier defense first, then we can afford a few mistakes on offense. When we go down the field on offense and don't score its kinda frustrating. But when we cant stop the other team, that REALLY pisses me off. And I would love to watch our defense put some points on the board, not just take away the ball once in a blue moon.
Because we didn't sign Favre in the January to May of '08 timeframe. We signed him after that. We weren't 'win now' until we signed him later. The contracts for Pace, Woody and Faneca are not one or two year contracts so the idea is that they would stick around for a few years. I contend that signing Favre changed the focus of the team.
While I would agree that everyone has a right to be surprised as to how well Flacco has performed this year as a rookie starter and that he essentially won the starting job by default, any college quarterback drafted in the first round is projected by the teams scouts and FO to be an eventual starter. In Flacco's case, I believe he was forecast to be the starter in two or three years time. I seem to recall that he came into camp last Summer projected as the third string QB for the 2008 season but that injuries to Boller and Troy Smith's grounded by sickness led to him assuming the starting position. Certainly every draft pick implies the risk of "taking a chance" but both the hope and expectation of quality and performance are much higher for a first round pick than for an UFA and Flacco would not have been taken by the Ravens with the 18th pick overall if they did not believe he could deliver the goods at some point down the line. Flacco has proven himself worthy of the confidence the Ravens FO placed in him by drafting him where they did and his success this year reflects well on everyone in the organization. That the pick ended up paying dividends sooner rather than later is just a great bonus. Barring injuries or any profound setbacks in his performance/development, Flacco will be the Ravens starter for years to come.
Fair enough. No one can say for sure but I believe the Favre signing, regardless of its timing, was a demonstration of the FO's desire to win now, particularly since the Jets jumped all over it as soon as the opportunity presented itself. Having said that, just because we're in a "win now" mode, I don't believe that mindset automatically expires simply because be failed to win it all this year. Our foundation is greatly improved and I think we have at least another two or three year slot to get ourselves to the next level by which I mean the SB.
Yeah, the problem here is does saying "give Ratliff a shot" amount to saying he should be the starter or he should be able to get a chance to be the starter? The concern was with the poll thread where an unbelievable number said Ratliff should be the starting Qb. Fine, give him a chance to show what he has in camp. But sitting here today and saying someone thinks Ratliff is, right now, the Jets' best option to be the starter in 09 is, well, not making a persuasive argument. In other words, once again, giving him a shot is not the same as saying posters here right now think giving him a shot with the likelihood he starts is the best option. That some would say that based on what little we know about Ratliff does not speak well for the football knowledge and insight of (some) posters on these boards.
Flacco wasnt all that good lets not get crazy. Baltimore has a good DEFENSE. Flacco was alright considering Baltimore has very little talent at the WR position.
