When your a crummy team trying to rebuild you don't pursue picks that have a high percentage of becoming a sunk cost. Its simply a question of acquiring resources and then spending those resources correctly to strengthen your team. The obsession with QBs around here is crazy. We have a crummy roster and have had a crummy roster for 5 straight years. A massive reason for that is using the 3rd pick plus three 2nds on a QB, then using a pick that could have returned multiple 1sts and seconds, and gotten the number 1 WR everyone is suddenly so desperate for, on a QB. If you do the math we've burned four 1sts and five 2nds on two QBs in 4 years. That's nine high picks on two players with high sunk cost potential. Upgrading our crummy QBs has taken priority over upgrading our crummy team. This is exasperated by bringing these QBs onto crummy teams, dropping their potential to properly develop down to about 20%. We've turned into the 00s Browns and people cant even recognize it.
Every QB has a high chance of becoming a sunk cost though, it's just a very hard position to play well. You can't consistently compete without one though so taking one often is just the game you have to play. We have had a crappy record largely because we've had terrible QB play, not because we take QB's too often. You can be a consistent 8 win team without a good QB but you're not going to make consistent playoff runs without one.
Maybe we should build the 8 win team first. Its the game for an 8 win team. Not a 2-14 team. This is where we fail.
Your post is a classic example of the "pot calling the kettle black". It's YOU who have stuck to a one note song ever since last draft. If my continued support for what I believe - and what most knowledgeable people believe - was a good pick makes me a "homer" I'm proud to wear the tag. At least I root FOR the Jets instead for my own agenda. And your assertion that the Jets would've built a "truly competitive team" is empty - there's no way to prove this, and in fact, given their drafting history of which you berate even Douglas for, the odds were better than they would've missed on at least one or two of these "can't miss" picks you wanted them to take instead of taking a potential FQB. And if you didn't want them to stick with Sam, who would you have had them use as their QB?
Being a consistent 8 win team means nailing all of your non-QB picks in the draft though, it's not a guaranteed outcome just by virtue of avoiding taking QB's. It's a hard outcome in and of itself, I just meant it's the best you can hope for without a good QB. A good QB stays with the team that drafted them for 10+ years. That's a large window in which to build around him enough to where you can compete. It's very hard to keep a good core of non-QB players for such a long duration while you wait to find the QB that takes you to the next level.
That’s why the best way to build long term success is to develop a FQB. The Saints and Chargers had a bunch of down years with Brees and Rivers. But they also had SB windows when they picked their spots and hit on some draft picks to fill the roster out. Steelers and Seahawks as well, but they found their way into the playoffs more often than Brees & Rivers. But there were a bunch of appearances where they likely weren’t going back to a SB.
I'm not arguing with any of that, dean. I feel the same way. It was a brief golden age. But debates are better if we don't get lazy about facts.
The problem wasn't trading up using 3 2nds for a QB, the problem was a GM that DID NOT use his #6 pick the year before on a future HOF QB that fell into his lap, and the fact that the same GM didn't know how to evaluate QBs. If we had a competent GM in 2017 we would've had our FQB for 4 years already. And again, using the #2 pick on a highly rated - some experts rated him THE highest - QB to obtain the most valuable and hard to fill position in sports was the right thing to do. There are no sure things in drafting, whether it's for a QB or ANY position. Claiming that your way was guaranteed to work is simply false. Maybe it might have, but there's also a good chance that it wouldn't have, but even if it did you'd be left with a team with at best a mediocre QB that you'd be paying millions for and tying that up for several seasons. And if you don't have an above average QB in today's NFL you're not going to the SB let alone win one.
Teams that made the playoffs AFC Bills- Drafted QB Patriots- Drafted QB Chiefs- Drafted QB Bengals- Drafted QB Raiders- Drafted Qb Titans- FA 1-6- not drafted by current team NFC Rams - FA Bucs- FA 49ers- FA Eagles - Drafted QB Cowboys- Drafted QB Cardinals - Drafted QB 3 of 6 not drafted by current team. Make of it what you will
Disagreeing with you means I root against the Jets. Zach was the lowest rated QB in the league last year. But stick by that pick as the best use of capital. You're a visionary.
I think @ouchy wanted us to follow the Chiefs model when Reid took over. They acquired Smith, who wasn't getting them over the top, but brought stability and competency to the position while the rest of the team was built up. By the time Mahomes was starting, Hill, Kelce, and Hunt were established weapons for him. A similar path for us would've been signing Beathard to hold the fort, then drafting Chase/Smith, Freiermuth, and Carter. Let them develop, so the 2023 or 2024 drafted QB comes to a ready made team. This can work if the CS and FO identifies a QB in a future class they really want as I'm sure KC did with Mahomes.
A side note to this. Only two of those teams drafted their QB when they were in the bottom 5 in the league - the Bengals and Cardinals. Both used a #1 pick to get them, and both were considered true #1 picks. None of the rest used a top 5 pick on a QB.
The understated X-factor in that equation is that Reid is one of the best offensive coaches of all time. Every offensive player he touches turns to gold and he transforms most offensive lineman into good players (something that’s really undervalued when talking about him). It’s never talked about because of all the numbers his offenses produce, but he was an offensive line coach for a decade before turning into the offensive guru he is today. We still could’ve taken this approach if they put the damn kid on the bench in year one.
I don't post to get people to agree with me. We will get perhaps 1 win in the division (MIA). That's all. Browns - loss Rd Packers - loss Rd MIA - loss Rd Vikings - loss Rd PATS - LOSS Rd Bills - loss hm MIA - Win hm PATS - loss hm Ravens - loss hm Bengals - loss hm Lions - win hm Steelers - loss rd Bills -loss rd DEN - loss rd JAX - win hm SEA - loss rd Only the Lions, Jax are in the same class as the Jets are presently. Every other team on that schedule is better. You sound like the Jets were 13-4. They weren't. Brutal.
As a football fan, I say Thank God. With that staff’s inability to develop talent, Mahomes might actually be working in a footlocker right now instead of pretending in a commercial. He wasn’t can’t miss. He had talent that needed to be developed. Andy Reid was the perfect fit for him.
Next year we play 7 teams who went to the playoffs the previous year. This year we played 6 teams who went to the playoffs the previous year. I am not passing judgement on the cutoff for “brutal”, but our schedule doesn’t seem that much harder next year.
Rams, 49ers, and Titans traded for their QBs. Super Bowl Caliber QBs don’t make it to FA unless you’re in the league 20 years.
