In an ideal world yes, but this is not an ideal world. Rosen and possibly Mayfield could start day one. I see no way that either Darnold or Allen could start day one and succeed. The most important thing is developing that young QB so that when he does play, he succeeds. Forcing him onto the field prematurely (throwing him to the wolves) will help no one. Your pronouncement that good players can make it from day 1 is BS. Yes, some can, but not all. Better to let the QB sit for a few games, half a season, or even their entire rookie season, and then have him confident, relaxed and ready to play, than force him out before he's mentally ready just because of some arbitrary decision that he "should" be able to play day one if he's any good.
I doubt mayfield could come in and be ready to start day 1. Unless we eliminate all plays from under center
I pretty much agree. Many QBs have success after sitting a few games. Look at Watson this year. Not all great QBs start right off the bat, some even take years, like Alex Smith. It can take time to learn the system and acquire chemistry with the team, plus coaching and other factors are involved in building a team. It's not as cut and dry as all great QBs start right away. IMO that's a bit simple. As far as this year's draft goes, I feel that Rosen is the only QB that can be trusted to start from day 1. I don't trust Darnold. Maybe it's because of our history with Sanchez that got me sour on USC QBs, or because it's a weaker defensive division. I see him being a bust. Mayfield COULD theoretically start right away, but I see him taking a while to get adapted kind of like Watson/Goff. Allen and Jackson I can't really comment on because I haven't watched enough of them to get a feel for them.
Some QBs benefit from not playing right away. However, Watson is a poor example. Sitting back and watching Tom freaking Savage get sacked 8x isn’t going to help Watson in any way. Watson was one of the guys that should of started since day 1 but inept management over there, got in the way of making an obvious decision.
If Rosen, Darnold, and Allen are gone you are OK taking a QB at 6 regardless of who it is? The Jets would be a laughing stock if they took Baker Mayfield at 6.
They are. In fact the only advantage they have over other QB needy teams is cap space which is why I’d advocate handing Cousins a big deal and build around him with 70M in cap space and draft picks.
While I ageee I wouldn’t touch baker at 6, there’ll be better players, qbs are over drafted all the time so if you want one you have to over draft one.
Sometimes it's the right call though. Hindsight is always 20/20. If the Jets took Watson at #6 last year, they'd have been crucified at first, but then it would have seemed brilliant after seeing what he can do.
Last time we picked a QB in round one we got Sanchez. High second rounders were used on Geno Smith, Kellen Clemens, Christian Hackenberg, and Browing Nagle (not our first choice). Maybe those of us who are cautious about which QB to go all in on will end up on the right side of history when we look back in a few years.
The Jets were in shotgun almost 60% of their plays anyway. One of the things most interesting about DeShaun Watson in Houston and very overlooked is that when O'Brien made the switch he trashed his Texans playbook and they were running almost the exact offense Watson ran at Clemson. That's why he was so comfortable running the show. Now would Watson in the Clemson offense have held up successfully for the rest of the season for the Texans beyond the 6 games or whatever he had before he got hurt? Idk, good question. I'm inclined to think probably not but at the same time its a blueprint for teams to follow. You don't have to throw a young QB to the wolves and you also don't have to keep them chained to the sideline. Tailor your offense to their strengths and work them in over time
Wouldn't surprise me if Mayfield was the better than all 3 of them other dudes, so I would be cool with that pick.
I tend to agree if Watson had the opportunity to play last year. That said, if McCown had still broken his hand, then we can assume that Watson would have played, but not necessarily that he would have done well in Morton's offense, with Morton's play calling, or that his arm would have fared well in the Northeast winds.
The Jets have close to $100 million to spend and many needs. Here are the free agents that I think we might have interest in. Doesn't mean we'll sign them. Just mean we should talk to them. QB: Cousins, Bridgewater, McNown, Keenum, McCarron, RB: Bell (not going to happen), Dion Lewis, Jeremy Hill (on a cheap deal), and a few other cheap young guys that could compete WR: Landry, Robinson, not much else I see. Maybe a player or too to compete but wouldn't go crazy with it. TE: Resign Jenkins if not; Trey Burton, Brate restricted though, beyond them stay with who we have hope Legett can play and draft another one OT: If we upgrade tackle I think it'll be through the draft. I think we are committed to Beachum for two more years and Shell was ok when healthy. G: I didn't see much worth signing. I can see them going with Winters and resigning Dozier and releasing Carpenter. C: I can see the Jets signing a c. Maybe Richburg, Sullivan, and Swanson. None of them jump out though. I can see them signing one for not that much and drafting one. DE/OLB since we play a 3-4: Lawerence or Ansah. I think the Jets will pursue one or both very hard. I think one of them will be a Jet. DT: They'll sign someone. Not a big name. Be cheap. ILB: I think they'll try to resign Davis and go with him and Lee. CB: I think they'll try to resign Claiborne and another starting cb. Maybe not a big name but a guy who can come in and play well. Be interesting to see what they do and who they talk to from this group. Some players that could help and fit in being young and prove it contracts.
I didn't know Jeremy Hill was a FA. He's only 25 years old, I would be interested in signing him. He can take on 20+ carries a game.
You won’t be right if the Jets miss on an all in pick if they also fail to land a franchise QB in the later rounds, as we have failed at far more often than an all in pick, because you’d be equally wrong in your advocating of that approach. What about the cautious approach to finding a QB is supported by the history of the NFL?
Do not put words in my mouth. To my mind there is nothing wrong with trading up for the right guy. If Darnold or Rosen is on top of your board and you want to move up for him because he is the guy then by all means go get him. Even if we wait until next year you go get your guy whether it means paying Cousins $30 mil or moving up to # 1. What I am against is the idea that there is some kind of QB bonanza with four or five guys in this draft who will be starting a few years for now. The idea of taking the #3 QB at our pick or even moving up for him because we "need a QB" or because he is "almost as good as the first two guys". That is the fast track to mediocrity or worse.
