geno "ball kicker" makes no sense. how is that a denotation of somebody that defends him? wouldn't that define somebody who dislikes him more? and, uh I don't think the medias harsh on him at all, in fact I think I've seen a few articles in his favor. Even though I don't think he's done developing and that he's capable of being a legitimately good QB, he's currently a poor QB that hasn't improved enough to warrant handing him the starting job thats lucky he's on a cheap rookie deal in a year with no sure starting alternatives at his position… yeah thats all I got to say on this matter.
1. Geno played fewer games than Carr and the latter threw the ball more, thereby explaining Geno's lower overall passing yards. 2. Carr's regularly threw for more YPA than Carr, which helps explain Carr's similar completion percentage. QBs who attempt shorter passes tend to have higher average completion percentages. Carr threw a multitude of screens and dump offs. 3. Geno basically did not have Decker or Harvin in the starting line up or healthy until later in the season. Obstensibly then Geno played with worse players that Carr for most of the season. At any given time Carr has a plethora of 6'3 jump ball receivers whereas Geno has none. 4. Carr never had a run like Geno did in the final length of the season so their two QB's respective QB averages are misleading. Some of Geno's QB averages come from games where he barely threw. Carr has never even had 2 games where he registers 80+ QB rating.
Wait, Geno, a second year starter on a more talented team played FEWER games than a rookie on a shittier team? Why is that? Because he was so much better. Got it. _
No, repeating what others have said without clarifying is objectionable, not objective. This was all in reply to your broad brush tarring of the New York media and even your few citations go nowhere near proving your claim that the local media are trying to bring down the Jets players. So, reading through the articles, your whining is more than obvious. When a player screws up, it's going to get reported and possibly more colorfully than it might elsewhere. It's not the job of the media to pat a player on the back, massage his ego or polish his image. Just call a spade a spade; such is life in the big city. People need to quit using negative media attention as an excuse for players not performing on the field. I haven't seen any media report here that is unfair or untrue.
This is essentially the strategy that lead to Foles' record setting 2nd year season and Sanchez's revival. As such it doesn't sound like a bad plan at all. Dallas also surrounds Romo with talent and an incredible o-line. He is playing his best football ever.
The bolded part is where you agree with my point entirely, then go off on a tangent. Next time you want to make a point unrelated to mine, leave me out of it.
It's not 31 vs 32, I don't know where he is pulling that from, but if you go by the official QB Rating for 2014, Geno is in late 20s, not 31, which is obviously not great or anything, but it is an improvement from his rookie year. Wow, you might want to calm down a little, all the "LOLOL"s are making you sound like a teenage girl and you keep mixing up k's and l's in your anxiety. Now on to your actual silly arguments: 1) You cannot say that Carr had shittier talent around him the entire year. As I already pointed out, Geno had Winters in the O-Line for the first 6 games or so, who was one of the worst linemen in the league and regularly allowed pressure up the middle, which is just a killer for any pocket QB. He was gone by the first NE game. Similarly, we only got Harvin by the first Buffalo game. And Decker was injured with hamstring problems earlier in the season, causing him to miss time. Cumberland was played significantly more than Amaro. So that's your argument, that Winters and a receiving core that was at time Kerley + Nelson + Salas + Cumerland is better than what Carr had? Come on, now. Once Aboushi replaced Winters, we got Harvin, and Decker was mostly healthy (starting from the first NE game or so), Geno's numbers were significantly better, especially if you discount the first Miami game, where it was more on playcalling. 2) The point is not that Geno's QB Rating is a little better than Carr's, as opposed to a lot. The point is that in your irrational hatred of Geno and love of Carr, you keep making it sound like Geno is horrible while Carr is the 2nd coming, when in reality, Geno has had a better season, by however small a margin. 3) Your nitpicking of the details is flawed. You have to understand that the QB Rating already takes those things into account, so if Geno's was higher, that means there is a reason for that. For example, Carr's more yards are irrelevant, because he played more games than Geno AND in an offense where they passed a lot, whereas Geno played in one where they ran a lot more. If you look at yards per completion, which is a much better indicator, you'll see why Geno was rated higher (aside from higher completion percentage and other stuff). Carr had a ridiculously low 5.46 yards per completion, which wasn't only the worst in the league by far, but is barely above a running play. What's shocking is how he could throw such short passes on average and still have a worse completion percentage than Geno. Next.
How about this? 1. We cut Geno's ass. 2. We all agree that it was unfair of us to do so. 3. We give Geno a trophy for his "improvement" from his rookie year and make sure the door does not hit his ass on his way out of the building. 4. We get a journeyman this year. 5. Next year we get a real QB and win the Superbowl
geno smith is sanchez except a stupider unfan friendly one. he has already killed one gm and coaching staff and is getting the chance for two regimes. He is a turnover machine. i love when people defend him about having a perfect b rating against the fins but forget the perfect ) he threw against the Bills, ot the way he cursed at a fan. he actually had more turn over then sanchez in less starts that alone is cause to go. He saw the butt fumble and upped by one by passing the ball behind his back and fumbling it there by eliminating the need for a olinemen. We don't need anymore geno ever
You're a Jet fan looking at ONLY the Jets. The Raiders had absolutely shittier talent around Carr. Worse receivers, worse running backs, a horrible line, and a worse defense. Why do you think the Raiders ended up WORSE than us? We BEAT the Raiders and Geno torched them (with a fumble and INT). You only look at the Jets in your Geno ball licking, Carr had much much less talent around him and he hardly played in preseason because of injury. Carr, as a rookie had more TDs , fewer INTs, more yards, and basically the same completion percentage on a shittier team than Geno had in his second FULL year. Carr is already a better QB. It's not Carr's fault Geno couldn't stay on the field. That was GENO'S fault. Next. _
Yes but if he had stayed in the game he might have completed another pass and had a 3.4 QB rating. That's what some Geno ball licker is actually arguing. That maybe Rex should have left him in there to complete a pass so he didn't have a 0.0. Oh and that Aaron Rogers had a bad game against the Bills so Geno=Rogers. Too funny. _
this is my point if you wanted sanchez gone why are giving smith another chance? they are the same except geno is the new improved edition of the turn over machine
And possibly dumber and less like able. It's time to get a real QB with a high football IQ in here to build around. Enough with surrounding flawed players with MORE talent and a further dumbed down playbook. It's a recipe for losing. Don't prop up losers. _
