The revisionist history in this thread is out of control. At the time we had to make a decision about Darnold he was LITERALLY the worst starting QB in the entire league. That's not my opinion, it's fact by many metrics. It would have been absurd to keep him onboard with what we knew about him at the time. You cannot look back with the benefit of hindsight and go "See, I told you we should've kept him!". It doesn't work like that because you make decisions with the information available at the time of the decision. There's also the aspect where Darnold played horrendously for 3 full seasons and has now played decently for 3 games - hardly a reason to crown him some kind of great QB and say "I told ya so". This reeks of wanting to take a victory lap when it's nowhere near warranted. If, in 2 years, Darnold is playing well and Wilson sucks then maybe we can have this conversation. Even then it's a bit dumb because again, decisions are made with the information available at the time and that information alone.
Can you put together one of those graphs where you locate the height and weight combo on the grid then color the dot in different shades according to the won/loss record, turn it so the age and years experience are displayed and show who refused to get vaccinated? This is all stuff we need to know, man.
I agree with almost every thing you posted except that the Jets had to make a decision about keeping Darnold. They did not.
Didn't they given the 5th year option needed to be signed months ago? I suppose they could've signed it and drafted Wilson anyway. I think that would've created a host of other issues though.
They could have signed it or not signed the option; they could have negotiated something different for two or three years with Darnold. They could have drafted a different QB of the handful who have yet to distinguish themselves and they could have traded down six or eight spots and still have gotten one of them and a couple of extra picks. They had a lot of options but instead painted themselves into the corner we see them in today. Forget the "host of other issues;" at every level these guys have competed for a spot on a roster; it's what happens in sports. The worst thing that could have happened is that the Jets would have ended up with two viable quarterbacks. What a problem!
Sam wasn't a viable QB though and I'm still not sure he is. Given the information we had at the time, the only logical conclusion was that he was the worst starter in the NFL. That's not a guy you go out of your way to accommodate. Were Bears fans torn up about letting Trubisky go? I doubt it, and he was significantly better than Darnold. Were Cardinals fans upset they didn't keep Rosen? Of course not. We're the only fanbase that acts like our crappy QB was a hell of a lot better than he actually was. Jets fans do this all the time - we overrate a guy initially because we're so desperate for a savior and then we refuse to change our minds even though 99% of the ensuing evidence says they suck.
The upside potential in drafting a QB and keeping Darnold was huge. The upside potential in drafting a QB and trading Darnold for a 2nd and a couple of other picks was there but not at the same level. The downside in trading Darnold and drafting a QB is what we are looking at right now.
Yes, he was a rookie NFL coach last year but had years of experience as a HC at Temple and Baylor. Saleh has zero, zip, nada, NO experience as a HC. Rhule also had the Panthers playing much better than expected last year. No one expected them to win 5 games. I was wrong about Brady not being an OC before, but you're wrong about Brady not developing anyone. He developed Burrow. I don't give a hoot what his title was, Burrow had never played like that before and he credits Brady. Yes, the Panthers situation was better because of McCaffery, their WRs, and a pretty good defense (not a top defense). I had meant to say that. We have been unlucky with injuries, but at some point, one has to wonder maybe if there is something else behind all the injuries. Having to think too much, slows down players, and could make them more vulnerable or more tense, which could contribute to injuries.
They most certainly did! They had to make a decision by some date in May whether or not to pick up the 5th year option. It would have been beyond stupid to keep Darnold and pay him the 5th year option and draft Zach, and it would have been almost as bad to keep Darnold, not pick up the 5th year option and draft Zach only to see Darnold walk at the end of the year, and the Jets get only a late 3rd for him, if that. The only thing that made sense was to trade Darnold and get what they could for him. They didn't want a QB controversy or Sam's crappy habits and play influencing Zach.
Why in the world would they have wanted to sign up for 2-3 years more of Darnold when he was the worst QB in the NFL? That makes zero sense! Your reasoning is an epic fail!
I don't agree with this. Trading Darnold and drafting a QB was the highest ceiling move. It hasn't worked out like that so far but it was definitely the highest ceiling move. The data shows that a good 95% of QB's who start their careers like Darnold did will never be good starters in the league. To keep him would've been banking on the 5% playing out. To keep Darnold with the idea that he'd be a fallback option if the rookie didn't work out flies in the face of the numbers.
Much of the upside in keeping Darnold revolved around not having to throw the rookie into the frying pan while the Jets learned the new offense. The small chance that Darnold would be good in the new offense was there but the cover he afforded any rookie QB was huge. Of course we probably would have screwed it up anyway because a rookie QB is a shiny new toy to the owners and they can't resist playing with it until the shine has worn off.
Agree that Darnold was not a viable QB here for three years, but it's a tough case to make that he's not one now. That change could have happened here as well as in Carolina - it's all about keeping all opportunities open, not limiting them. After all, everyone was sure that Saleh and company were the saviors of the franchise. Darnold was greeted here exactly as Wilson was; the similarity or difference is yet to be decided. The more options open, the larger the possibility of finding the road to success. Some Jets fans do this all the time; those who have been around a while are more prone to not buy into the hype and wait for players and coaches to prove their worth before celebrating. In the last twenty years there have been about 5500 NFL games - how many have been lost due to a "quarterback controversy"?
No. The Jets are and have been an epic fail. It was a perfect time to "think outside the box." Darnold could have been had cheap. You were a fierce proponent of Douglas and Saleh just a month ago now you're on the verge of hoping they lose everything including their jobs. Didn't they have what it takes? It seems Rhule does. Now what is it that makes "zero sense"?
I'm not saying we should have kept Sam, but to say "Sam was the worse QB in the NFL so we HAD to move on...we didn't have the benefit of hindsight"....ignores the fact that at least ONE GM saw the good thru the bad and hired him, plus signed his 5th year. What did the Panthers see that you could not???
Interesting and not an unreasonable take, but I don’t think it’s as black and white as that personally. Yes, the stats are the stats and they showed Sam as the worst (or one of the worst) starting QB in the league. Fact. but…the point that many had then, and I think it was a defensible and valid take as well, is that Sam also had the worst HC and OL and WRs and RBs…literally no support. And that played a big factor in his putrid performance. There were plenty of people who advocated the position that given better surroundings, he would have played much better. And today, he’s showing that to be a valid take, as he IS playing much better now that he has a better HC, better OL, better WR, better RB, etc. On top of that, Wilson is showing that the shitty surroundings of poor coaching to date, bad OL play, bad WR play, etc is making it difficult for him to be even serviceable. I just think those are two sides of the same coin…better surroundings enabling better QB play for Sam, and shitty surroundings leading to shitty QB play for Wilson. I know most (but not all) on here wanted to get rid of Darnold and draft Wilson, and the salary question of resetting the cap is a part of that discussion, but for me, I think it was a valid discussion to have. I agree you can’t make the decision after only three games, because I do think we’ll be a different team by mid season than we are now (at least I hope we will be), and I also don’t think Darnold will become Brady or Peyton or Brees, but I think the whole point is that it’s hard to evaluate a QB when he has ZERO help.
You can do that with any QB, though. He would've just been acting as a body at that point and anyone can be a body. Darnold would've been a more expensive body, though. Both in terms of his contract and the fact that we'd receive less compensation for his trade had it been further down the line. There's also the aspect where if the season is a waste anyway you actually want to do as poorly as possible for the draft pick. Darnold was really bad but a no name backup would likely be even worse.
Keeping Darnold wouldn't have come without downsides though. With another year of poor play under his belt do you think we could've gotten a 2nd rounder for him? I'm shocked we got one as it is. The chances of him improving significantly for us were so minimal that it wouldn't have made sense to keep him given the high likelihood of receiving less compensation for him after another season of bad play. I don't understand this logic at all. Sure, one GM thought he was worth a flier, but many more GM's apparently didn't. If many GM's don't like a guy and one happens to like him why would that make you feel that he's good? You're siding with the side that has less support, it doesn't make sense.
Darnold's also had a couple good games, one against the god awful Texans, another against the Saints who were down like four defensive starters and half their coaching staff to Covid. And us of course. So everyone should pump the breaks on the whole Darnold is a bonafide QB. The real test will be against Dallas without CMC to catch 10 balls for 90 yards every week.
