IS is partly correct in answering this by noting that as you approach each draft you have to play the hand you are given. RIGHT NOW I don't see any player reasonably available to the Jets who will more likely than not walk in and play better than Clemens or Ratliff. But your quoted point I think as you noted earlier is one that should be viewed in the context of a series of drafts and some other roster and coaching moves. One specific problem, perhaps the largest variable the team is facing, is that Clemens is largely an unknown. Yes he's played enough for those arguing both sides of the question to have things to point to. But the overall truth of the matter is that either Schott and the holdovers on the CS have a firm opinion about whether he will likely be a legtimate starting qb in the league or they don't. If they do, I am not sure why there's a competition in the works with Ratliff. As someone else said you don't have a competition between two starting QB's in camp, except I suppose under circumstances that do not seem to apply here, where you have a virtual nobody in Ratliff - hardly a player you can look at say with confidence that he will be a quality starter. Not to digress, but perhaps they DO think Clemens is that person, but are announcing a competition for some other, perhaps cya, reason. But if they answer is no, then look out - if they really doubt Clemens can be a quality Qb, then this must mean they are confident Ratliff will beat him out?!?!? That makes no sense, as there is no guarantee they will end up with either one not only winning the competition but being deserving of starting in the league. Obviously they could prove equally mediocre, or however bad they think Clemens is, he could still beat out Ratliff. The place I diverge with winston is it's not entirely Tanny's fault the team seems to be at this juncture. I certainly don't feel strongly about Clemens since I've just not seen him play that much, and other than laying the last year on the Favre decision, which I have no disagreement with since it enabled the team to get rid of Chad: Exactly how is it that the team is entering the contract year for Clemens knowing so little about him? That my friends is an overall failure of the team. Some blame goes to the CS, some to the FO. It is too important a position to have such uncertainty about, and to know so little about a second round pick now the highest Qb on the roster. Again, I still hope that we will hear one day that Clemens is doing great, in TC, through the off season, or even that Ratliff is that diamond in the rough that Brady like comes out of a second day pick and becomes a future HOF'er. Or maybe it comes out they knew Clemens had it all along, but they wanted to see whether in the competition Ratliff could show he could be the reliable backup the team will still need even it is happy starting Clemens. But right now, with what we know? What we are led to understand? It doesn't make all that much sense. How that affects their draft day moves will show us something. But imo unless Clemens shows us he's the guy, or htey totally luck out and Ratliff gets it done, the current state of affairs amounts to a black mark on Tanny's reputation.
I feel the same way about not laying the entire QB situation at Tanny's feet, the same way I have a problem with completely absolving him from the things that happened when Bradway was in charge.
I'm not saying he's done a great job with it, that's up for debate, obviously. I just don't think a fair criticism is that he hasn't addressed the position, he certainly has.
I think it's a misnomer to say that he hasn't addressed the issue, the problem is HOW he has addressed it. Terry Bradway 'addressed' the O-line situation by going cheap, letting many veterans go, going after 2nd-tier older players, drafting second-day long shots and had a gift fall into his lap with Pete Kendall, because our line was going to stink on the left side that year if the Cardinals don't cut him late in the offseason of 2004. Bradway 'addressed' the O-line issue, but his approach to it sucked and failed.
Yes. When you have two leaders you have nobody the locker room can coalesce around without a bloody fight beforehand. That's the Todd/Robinson proposition which many of us observed firsthand.
Yep. "addressing" it is not enough. One aspect of the current problem it is hard to correctly apportion blame for, but SOME of it is probably Tanny's responsibility, is that Clemens has seen virtually no regular season action with a decent OL. Isn't that what really makes for all the pro and con debates about him here? Not enough information. For a player who has been here as long as he has. I know, we all know, the reasons that have made that problematic, why he hasn't played more, but I think more effort should have been made to if not get him in there more, try to come up with the best assessment of this guy that you could. The FO and CS also at least get to see as much of him as they want to in camp and practice. I understand that additional info might not be enough to provide virtual certainty about how Clemens can do behind a decent OL. But if these guys, meaning really Schott and Tanny, no matter how much you want to apportion blame to each, has no good idea about Clemens, they both suck. I've posted several times here as have others about Scott's responsibility on this, but to some extent he definitely shares this with Tanny. Arguably, and particularly if they actually go through this entire preseason without making a move at Qb, and the team goes into the regular season with a shaky Clemens, I kind of think right now there should be hell to pay for both those guys. There's really no excuse for it. Which is why the competition does not inspire confidence. The best scenario is Clemens steps up and makes these guys look like geniuses. "Hey I'm sure glad they didn't waste a high pick on a rookie Qb who was not going to play this year, anyway! Glad we got player X instead, who is starting at (fill in the blank)!" Let's hope so.
I am not sure I would say that one was really analogous. Or O'Brien and Ryan, either. Those really were not QB comps in the off season. They were more a matter of some fans, even a large group in Robinson's case, who thought based on the regular season performance of the starter that the backup could do better. This is an off season Qb comp that is in the works. Some people here are ok with that. Even like it. I hope I am wrong, but it signals to me the CS and Tanny are too unsure about the guy this team has as #1 on the roster. I could go on and on. Heh. But imo it does not inspire confidence.
I think it's only fair to give Ratliff a chance after his preseason last year, but I also think it's clearly Clemens' job to lose. Clemens is going to shock the world with his play this year too.
It only makes sense to give these guys a shot. Any young QB you draft has to go through the process of getting used to the NFL, getting reps, establishing himself, getting some game action, etc. Clemens has already gone through all of that, except for the regular season so has Ratliff. The coaches have worked with these guys every day for a few years now, this is the next step. Personally I'm glad there's two of them, it doubles our chances of one of them being good. If it was all on one guy we could easily end up with a Browning Nagle scenario where he can't handle it or a Glenn Foley where he keeps getting hurt and we have to wait for him to hopefully be good one day with no other options.
I just disagree that you need in-game proof that a QB isn't good enough. Clemens has proven in regular season and pre-season that he probably doesn't have what it takes. Add on all the time Shotty has spent with him and they know. On the other hand, I think you do need in-game proof that some one is good enough. Ratliff has thrown a few bombs against scrubs in teh preseason, but that is no predictor of future success against the big boys. If you think about it, when guys emerge either out-of-nowhere or after a long time on the pine, the coaches typically say, "i could see it in practice. he's worked hard and I just knew we had to find a way to get him on the field." However, I have never heard a coach say, "he has shown nothing for three seasons, i figured 'what the hell, let's give him a shot at QB,' and we are all surprised he actually performed well." That just doesn't happen. Just a reminder, after Foley came Vinny.
