I don't know wheether the Jets like Foles, either, but i don't know why they wouldn't. I know you're solidly behind drafting Mariota and keeping him. The argument for doign that no matter what Philly might (reasonably) offer is that Mariota would be perceived as having more upside than Foles. But he also arguably has more downside, meaning no NFL track record, that he would probably take more time geting ready for the Jets' offense than for Philly's, and of course the draft picks that Philly would have to give. I go back and forth in this one.
Nick Foles has played in 28 NFL games. He has 46 TDs and 10 ints with an average QB rating of 94.2. He is also 6'6" 246 and just turned 26. Foles with some weapons gives the Jets a great chance to win now and in the long run. Mariota is a wild card, who could be like Kaperinick or could be like Sanchez.
If the Jets ended up with Foles, 20th pick (lets just say Green-Beckham), an extra 2nd rounder, CJ Spiller and now the addition of Brandon Marshall, I think they are clearly a playoff team. The second round picks could go towards upgrading the Oline.
There's a better chance Tennessee would pass on Winston than they would Mariotta. He ain't falling to us.
Yeah, I don't mind the time it will take to get him pro ready. I'm already looking past 2015 to 2016 through 2026. I just can't get a full read on Foles. I don't know whether his otherwordly year was the real Foles or whether last year when he came back to Earth is the real Foles. If he's the player he was last year before going down, I'm not sure he's a guy that can make us consistent winners year in and year out and win us a SB. _
Most the players in this draft won't play day 1, let alone be the day 1 starters, even as a DT, DE or WR. Wow, no one is comparing White to Moss or Rice, the two best WRs EVER ? You don't say ??? Protip for you, there's a difference between "franchise WR" and "NFL GOAT WR". White had been compared to Julio Jones which says a lot for him. He and Cooper are both seen as "Franchise" WRs. I seriously doubt that Fowler will be the 3rd DE/OLB taken. Yes, he is raw, but there's a huge difference between having a "raw" DE/OLB and a "raw" QB. I think he'll be one of the first 3 defenders taken off the board.
Protip for you. Read the board. Folks are saying we can't take Mariota because he's not Luck or Manning. By that token, the same criteria should go for every other position. None of these guys were on anyone's radar last year and none of them are being thought of as particularly lofty prospects like some of the great (not GOAT) prospects in recent memory. I like all of these players but none of them are "sure things" so the same criteria should go for them as the QB. Saying that player X compares favorably to NFL player Y is fools gold. _
While I am also not certain on Foles, either, I tend to think last year was not the real Foles. But that doesn't mean 13 was,either. Realistically he's probably somewhere in the middle. Which would be a huge improvement over Smith. Losing DeSean Jackson and their OL problems alone explain a good deal of the drop off last year. Add in apparent differences with Kelly wanting a different approach from being a pocket passer, and it goes a long way to explaining the drop off. But I also think opposing DC's had more film on him, so that was no doubt a factor as well.
When people say "like Luck or Manning" in that context, it's in reference to being viewed as a "can't miss" and "NFL ready" prospect, not GOAT at the position. That's why people don't say "Like Brady or Manning". Doesn't matter that some of these guys weren't on most people's radar last year. Fact is they ARE being talked about in reference to some of the best guys at their positions today in the NFL.
Again, it's fools gold who those players are being compared to. An ex-SB winning coach has said Mariota is the next Rodgers. So what. It's all bullshit. If you HAVE to pass on Mariota because he's not the next Luck or Peyton then you HAVE to pass on every one of those other players because they aren't the highest of prospects at those positions in years. Otherwise you're being hypocritical. _
Not being hypocritical at all. To be blunt about it, my view isn't anywhere near as simplistic as your's. What I have said is that IF your team has lots of holes (i.e. they kind of suck), then you don't use a high draft pick on a QB unless he's like Luck or Manning, i.e. a once in a generational talent. If your team is actually pretty good, and it's basically the QB play that is holding you back, then you go ahead and use that high draft pick on a good prospect. The situation is different when looking at other positions, like Oline, Dline, LBs, WRs, etc.
Your view is much much much more simplistic than mine. But you don't value the QB position as much as I do, you being such a huge Tebow fan so I'm pretty sure you wouldn't understand my view in any event. _
J, I value the QB position quite a bit. I also understand that without a very good team around them, a great prospect can easily flame out. It's happened time and time again in the NFL. While I value a good QB, I also value a very good offensive line, a very good defense, and a sound running game. This isn't the College basketball where you can have 1 star player surround by virtual scrubs and still manage to win a Title. Build a very good/dominant Oline. Put together a very good "scoring" defense (as opposed to yards), build a running game based on YPC instead of total yards, THEN get a QB to tie it all together.
Nice plan. It's completely backwards and doesn't take into account reality and timing, but nice plan. _
