There's no question that the kind of football played in high school and college is affecting not only what talent is coming into the league, but how NFL CS's feel they must tailor their games to suit those players. I still think, however, that long term success as an NFL Qb requires the ability to succeed in the pocket. This is for a few reasons, but key among them is that without that ability, you simply take too many risks of getting hit, shortening your career. Even Mike Vick taking a few years off is still seen as more fragile than the older Tom Brady, for example. And Vick to his credit has avoided the really serious injury that could have killed his career. That concededly is an anecdotal example. But the point remains. Coming out of college, compare Griffin with Wilson. Griffin went as a high pick, Wilson fell to the third round, and yet who is better suited for the NFL over even just the medium term? Wilson's elusiveness and risk avoidance was not valued compared to Griffin's game. Now? The fact is that in college you have players who the CS is only concerned about for at most four years, and they are still growing, playing against smaller players than in the NFL. It's a different situation. College systems can afford to stick to the kind of offenses they run now. In the NFL? I dont think you want your franchise Qb running around all the time, not if you want to keep him for more than a couple of years.
Ftr I do not follow the college game, and thus do not have familiarity with Mariota, but what you say about him makes sense. Still what you say suggests he will not be prepared to start his rookie year, not without too many rough edges.
Ftr, I continue to believe Marty is a good OC. The problems with the Jets O this season have been lack of talent (see Smith, Geno) and an inconsistent OL. Sorting out starting wideout has also been an issue. These are attributable imo to the FO, not Marty.
Theories and philosophies don't mean shit if you don't have execution. But you already know that. Still, it remains a consideration that players taken down the draft board tend to be some combination of less talented, in need of development, or carrying issues such as relative fragility, compared to those who go higher. And in particular since the Jets absolutely need to develop a young Qb to take over the starting job in the near future, odds are that role will be best filled with someone who will go as a high pick in the draft. In other words the Jets are not going to find a top Qb prospect with a second day pick, even if they have a number of them.
The part here I can't figure out is whether starting Smith over Vick was something Marty wanted. It has seemed to me it was always Idzik's call.
I think Marty has been a big improvement over what we've had in the past. However, I would point to some very questionable play calls on 3rd downs and a strange reluctance to run the ball in games where we have been able to run well early. You know, the ones where Ivory is standing on the sideline watching a bunch of three and outs and the on-screen graphic shows his 6+ YPC for the game....
You sure are fast to call names and label people. Part of the reason i dismiss most of your posts. as far as vick, he played well enough to win but 7 points off of 4 turnovers is not playing good. heh
You can dismiss all of my posts as far as I am concerned. Vick as the better player to play Qb for the Jets is hardly a case merely based on two games. I also take into account his career. You know, before he got here. Your metric of his allegedly not playing well was limited to choosing two games. The only two games he's had a chance to practice with the first team the week before. When I said he achieved a high Qb rating, in a game the Jets won they were favored to lose, you said you were not impressed. Yet you thought you saw enough in Smith to support keeping him in there as long as they did. Heh. Your point about turnovers ignores that while the Steelers O was making all those mistakes, I thought the Steelers' D played very well other than giving up that play to Graham. Folk missing an easy FG is also not on Vick.
No it's not--it's a bullshit unmeasurable criticism that you are throwing at Mariota because you want Amari Cooper and any additional criticism you can throw at him appears to help your argument. It does not. "Raw" was Mark Sanchez having played only 16 games in college. "Raw" is a kid from a Division 3 school coming out after his sophomore year. "Raw" is a junior that hasn't played any meaningful snaps sitting behind upperclassmen. It'd be like me saying Mariota is "polished" or "refined". Also unmeasurable. Yet the guy has started every game his freshman, sophomore and junior years, has 1000% command of the offense he's been asked to run, has most of the physical fundamentals you want in a college QB other than that he hasn't played in a pro set offense. THAT'S your criticism and if you left at that I'd agree. He is ANYTHING but "raw". You know what? He's probably the most polished QB in college football, but because of a lack of experience (not ability) he MAY not yet be pro ready. But he's not "raw". If he's "raw", then every QB in college football coming into the pros (other than Luck) is "raw". Go with the other criticisms, they hold water. You're "raw" criticism is just silly. And that isn't meant to insult YOU, it's meant to insult your unnecessary unmeasuarble criticism. _
The next step for this franchise is to actually clean the scouting department, starting with that moron Terry Bradway. [How long has this moron free riding? God knows how long.] Unless there is a tangible evidence that says this is a flawed philosophy [multiple SB winning teams all say this is not a flawed philosophy, by the way.] you go fixing the execution part - and that starts from the scouting department. After scouting, position coaches need fixing. [You know how long I've been crying out from the bottom of my lung to cut that sack of shit Sanjay Lal? Go figure.] HC is probably responsible for calling up the new prospects into the lineup, but coaching them up is on the position coaches - and Jets have shitload of donkeys there. With such a huge deficiency in talent acquisition and nurture, it is not hard to see why this team has fallen this far with depleted talent roster. You speak like scouting is an exact science. You see that Harrison dude in DL? Don't just look at Jets roster - there is this guy Tony Romo - and was he drafted in 1st round? No? [Examples abound even in today's NFL.] We already have seen, within the past 10 years, at least 3 QBs that says [You are bullshitting.] - Marc Bulger, Tony Romo and Tom Brady. NO. You don't need to burn high pick to get a starter. It's more about having well rounded scouting department and coaching staff - and nurturing the talent they bring in.
LOL! This discussion has nothing to do with Amari Cooper. Using the players I prefer is not the way I would go about this discussion, but you constantly drumming the Cooper drums shows to me that you are pretty much defeated in this discussion. You mis-guided child. The term "raw" is not limited to just the competition they play or the amount of games they started - it also is a term used to describe a player that has certain skill-sets that are not developed. Again, for the 1000th time let's take a look at those raw skill-sets - Inept pocket passer - Never displayed the ability to take snaps under center - Is not required to go through reads and progressions Mariota is a raw talent that needs to refine his game for the next level, therefore he IS raw. You cannot take Mariota and start him week 1 in a pro-style offense. Why? Because of the 3 reasons I listed above. But keep throwing out those mindless sentences w/out any reason as to why Mariota isn't raw. Good job - you aren't getting anywhere in this discussion.
Never said you second and even third day picks cannot develop into good players. I said as should have been obvious that high picks are more likely to pan out than lower round picks. Since the Jets have an absolute need to find a starting Qb to carry them for five, ten or more years, who would really dispute that need is less likely to be met with a first round pick rather than a second or third day pick? You are talking a general theory when the Jets have a specific need that is MOST LIKELY to be filled or met by using a high pick.
You must have missed the very first post. I remember clearly stating [I am looking at Mannion and Hogan for round 3.] And the next thing in mind was the cleaning of the position coaches - which I didn't mention just yet. [We don't even know how this season will go anyway.] So you are telling me, specific talent for specific round, with specific method of nurturing is a general theory, right? [The next "general" theory came up because a few suggested trading the entire draft, the farm and the kitchen sink to get Mariota, and I just wanted to point out how wrong that approach was from all front. Go back to the first posting - and tell me that is so general that it doesn't have any specific use at all. I dare you.]
Inept pocket passer "Inept pocket passer" really? Are you sure that's the adjective you want to use? I would think "inept pocket passer" would be a description reserved for the likes of Tim Tebow. Never displayed the ability to take snaps under center As you know I believe the "never displayed the ability to take snaps under center" is a non-issue, but if I were being a devil's advocate to my own argument I think something a coach could worry about with regards to Mariota is calling plays in the huddle. I haven't seen anyone else bring this up. As mundane as that activity may sound, it's not easy. One of my favorite NFL Film clips is of Jon Gruden berating young Chris Simms in training camp as he struggles reciting his ridiculously wordy play calls. Simms was sounding like Elmer Fudd with grown men staring at him in the huddle and Gruden breathing down his neck. He, at least, had the benefit of calling plays in the huddle in college; Mariota probably hasn't done that since high school, if at all. There really are no drills for it that you can do on your own like 3, 5, 7 steps drills…etc. Is not required to go through reads and progressions He does have plays that requires reading the defense and going through progressions. The scheme just makes them easier for the QB.
1. I just don't see it enough, I want him to be able to stand in the pocket feel the pressure and get the ball into his receivers, to me he seems to take off and run if no one is available in the initial read. The Ducks offensive line has been sub-par so I think that does play a role. Inept maybe the wrong word choice here - that would much better describe Tebow. 2. I think Mariota is a very intelligent quarterback - The terminology will be foreign to him. It will take some time, but it won't be like Johnny Manziel who prob still doesn't know the playbook. Him not taking snaps under center - I know it's been overblown here (especially by me), I actually think he will be fine as long as he sits down for about 8 games - we would need to be patient with him. That's all I really want at this juncture. 3. Each time I see him play, he reads 1 receiver or maybe 2 at most and takes off. Sometimes being a gifted athlete takes away from the fundamentals like going through progressions. I think he's below-average in this category, but again you sit him down, tailor the offense to his skill-sets, AND allow him to grow as a pro QB - he'll flourish.
IF Mannion and/or Hogan were as likely to succeed as a starting Qb in the NFL as Mariota is, they would go in the first round, not the third. THAT is what I am talking about. The Jets need a starting Qb. The further down they go to get him, the less likely they are to succeed at doing so.
And I told you, you are bullshitting. 1. I picked them out of the pack for a specific reason anyway. [They were not likely to be picked in 1st round if they came out, but had specific strength that, given sufficient support from the organization, could blossom into starting role - I do read scouting reports and performance logs unlike you.] 2. Again, not all starting QBs were drafted in 1st round exclusively and had success. [I also gave you 3 examples within the past 10 years, and I was being very lazy about it too.] 3. If drafting and scouting were an exact science as you have led people to believe, there won't be such things as 'busts' or 'steals.' Get that into your head first.
