Exactly the point (we) the anti Geno crowd are trying to say. I guess we'll see who's right and who's wrong. I'll say this if I was wrong and Geno excels I still win as a Jet fan. If Geno fails (I lose as a Jet fan) but I can stand up yelling at the top of my lungs "you numb nuts picked this yoyo to lead us" (The coaching staff)? As a fan who has been yelling for the last two years I expect the obvious.
What I "heard" from Gailey is that at the pesent time Geno is the number one, meaning he would get the number one reps during mini camps. Fitzpatrick is not healthy enough at this time so it is a no brainer. If Fitzpatrick significantly outplays Geno during the pre-season, it could be a different story.
This has been statistically proven to not be an accurate statement. With a dominant defense for example, statistical analysis of SB champs says you need average QB/offensive play to win. If by quality you mean average, then yes. But if by quality you mean top 10ish then no.
I thought I buried this nonsense debate, but it seems to have taken form in another (blatantly similar) thread. Carry on, whiners of defunct substance.
Are you the guru of the Jet boards? You buried?? Whiners of defunct substance?? When and if U become a moderator than U can bury a thread. Until than either grin and deal with it or ignore it.
Which is weird considering his man love for Sanchez. By his own admission then, Sanchez is not a quality quarterback.
Truth is, if we still had Sanchez on the current roster we'd be looking at 2010 all over again. Sanchez at this point is the precisely average QB we need. But that book is closed... I know we hate Geno, but he is realistically the key for us. Or someone like Fitz. I'm pulling for Geno to get it together, because his arm action is what we need given our offensive weapons. But if it's Fitz, I will not cry.
It occurs to me you add very little here. I would not say you add nothing. But it in truth is a very small contribution. It is not an illegitimate point of view for me or anyone else to assert that viewing someone like Smith, with his very poor record, as a presumed starter, under the current circumstances, is exalting his status beyond what it should be. So your characterization of that point of view in the quoted section adds nothing here. Try to do better next time.
Yes, on all counts. But I still do feel better about Bowles's recognizing a "clarification" was necessary, and of course in terms of what the clarification was.
I hope Geno Smith turns his career around not only because it would be good for my football team but because it will confirm what a complete, hysterical, childish idiot that you are
top 10ish is better than quality, you need a guy who will limit mistakes and make the big play from time to time. you don't need a 40 TD.
maybe historically but certainly not recently with how the game has changed to a more passing oriented game with rules geared toward offense... last several SB winning QBs Brady was top 10 in 2014 Wilson was top 10 in 2013 (6th in QB Rating 26TD/9INT Flacco was NOT top 10 in 2012 Eli was Top 10 in 2011 (6th in QB rating, 5000 yards 29 TD) Rodgers was top 10 in 2010 Brees was top 10 in 2009 only one who was top 10 QB in that group is flacco, who DID play like a elite qb come playoff time. (11 TDs, 0 INT, huge long TD to comeback vs denver late) i dont see the argument that in TODAYS NFL you dont need top 10 QB play to win the superbowl.
Statistics I'm referencing are in fact recent and not historical. This study with the range of data completely refutes your analysis. Although I'm prepared for you to tell me statistical analysis isn't correct. http://www.sportingnews.com/nfl/sto...-defense-wins-championships-49ers-stats-picks
This is fair and I agree with this. I only ask bc "quality" is a very subjective term. So quality = average and I totally agree.
if sanchez was on this team we'd be looking at another season filled with turnovers and missing the playoffs.
The study states that ONE dominant side of the ball is sufficient supported by the average performance of another....It's not just defensive dominance. Which essentially all of your above points lend to.
Well that depends if you think Sanchez could be "average" supported by our defense (essentially 2010). If you don't think he could be average as noted above and would be below average, you would be correct.
