Sorry, 3rd, I wasn't trying to single out your comments, just the overall tone of the thread. And you were right about both guys, but that's not something you can count on when you bench a QB. Bruce Coslet even said himself when Blake stepped in and did well, you just don't know. He's the same guy who previously started Browning Nagle over Ken O'Brien (and Blake) coming off a playoff season. If Chad were sucking it up and we were 2-6 I'd be right with you guys, but he isn't. He's not Dan Marino, but he's doing a nice job. I'm just not ready to bench him off a bad game when we still have a chance to do something this year--unless you're champ and it's Super Bowl-or-bust. We have a chance to turn the team back from 4-12 into a winning one, which is better for the new coaching staff's credibility and better for the GM as he tries to bring guys in.
Wow... for a minute there I thought I hit the IHOP.com website. I never saw so much waffling over a bad performance in my life. First everyone loves the guy, next thing they are all calling for his head. :rofl: It was clearly a bad performance. It isn't like other players have not had them as well. Every year you go out and attempt to win as many games as possible. Right now, despite the Cleveland loss, Chad continues to be a best hope of winning more than we lose. One or two bad games does not change that. The guy is still playing half staff. There is still no effective running game... the OL is still growing. It takes a team to win a championship, not a player.
Oh, damn! The voices are speaking to me again! :smile: I think everyone just needs to have some patience with this team this year. We all got jacked up on "playoff talk" and we got our hearts broke. I knew there would be a "gimmee" game we would lose. I'm not at all surprised this was it.
Nobody is waffling over ONE bad performance. I for one loved to see Chad back and healthy and playing well. Sadly, it went away fast, and the lowly Browns DL shook him up Pats style. Like I said, I see a trend, and I do not see the same look in his eyes. Go look at some old tape to see what I mean.
JUst so you are completely straight I want to build a team to win us a SB & that means finding out about key players talents on the team. There are NO guaranteed jobs & everybody has to do theres or move along. I would say someday you will far better understand what I & others are saying as Chad hold on your thinking begins to lessen. As for having a winning attitude I would say that Man & Tan already have that rep so need yo go down that road. Now OTH players from other teams may not choose to come to us cause they know that Penny is not the guy to get them to the promised land better then either U & I
I certainly wasn't drinking any playoff Kool-Aid, although I'll admit to sipping some Chad Kool-Aid after the first few weeks. Watching him sulk on the sidelines after the Jets got back in the game yesterday just was it for me. Chad is a tease and I'm about finished with him. He deserves one more shot at the Pats and the Bears but if we see the same "Peyton Manning Face" whenever he tries to throw the ball over a rushing defender or one of his quails gets tipped up in the air I think it's time to say adios.
There was an open competition for QB this camp, with the new guys in charge and no favorites, who won the job? You think they're going to stick with him if he endangers their jobs? You think "Man & Tan's" reps are set in stone after 8 games? How about putting a good season together with the best players we have available? Then we'll evaluate--as the free agent players will--if they are looking to win or just evaluate young players. We already have a ton of young players playing, two rookies on the O-line, a rookie RB, etc, so I don't see your point. QB is a position where you need some experience and brains, Pennington provides that for a team that needs it. If there were a better option he'd be playing. Again, the most valuable thing we can do for our young players is to put them in meaningful games late in the season and see how they respond and learn from it. Sorry, couldn't resist.
Things change after 8 games. If Drew Bledsoe can be replaced, so can Chad. I'm sure Bledsoe beat Romo out in TC, but the move paid off for the Cowboys yesterday night. Instead of defending the ineffective QB, you should be more concerned with what is good for the team. Does your loyalty lie with the Jets or to Chad?
I was a Jet fan for 26 years before they drafted Chad, so I'll let you figure that out. Bledsoe is a stiff who has been replaced by a bunch of teams, I don't see how that is relevant. If we had a better QB on the team he'd be playing.
Bledsoe's career stats are better than Pennington's, that's why I brought him up. His stats before getting replaced this year were I think better than Pennington too, especially after last week's performance. If not, they were certainly comparable. The point is, I think you aren't being objective about this, and you're letting your hope in Chad cloud your judgment. We're going to have to agree to disagree on this, I'd rather see what Clemens has and move on.
And apparently, the people running the NYJ's who have the wealth of job experience disagree with you (for the moment). :grin: Just thought I would point that out.
The only thing is, who do you get to replace him? It's not exactly like the FA market is booming with top talent QBs, you know. Would you guys prefer plopping Kellen Clemens in so he can get crushed like he did last time? Wouldn't it be wiser to let him sit out and learn this year, while the O-Line works out the kinks? The last thing we want is to end up with another Carr. Also, how many QBs out there can actually fulfill your expectations? Many of you seem to want the perfect QB, but there's no such thing. No team out there has a QB that you can completely rely on week-in, week-out. Even Tom Fuckin' Brady puts up stinkers from time to time, and he's possibly the best in the business right now. I'm not saying Chad is a great QB, but he is better than most options. I don't mind people criticizing his play or ranting about how badly he sucked, but if you say he should be gone or benched, please inform us of the near-flawless QB that should replace him.
This is an unfair question. If there was a "near-flawless" QB that should replace him he would already be replaced. I understand where you're coming from but over the last couple weeks I've become concerned about the Jets ability to go anywhere with Pennington at the helm. Other people say "well Pennington is pretty good why take a chance on an unknown". Personally I think taking chances like this is what can elevate a franchise to the next level.
A winning record (which is was 9-7 is) could bring in prized FA's, not to mention we have an extra 2nd to our disposal if we need to use it as a trade chip.
Yes, chances like that can elevate the franchise to the next level, but it can just as likely set the team back another decade. The Jets' ability to go anywhere does not solely rely on Pennington. There's plenty of problems with the team that hinder them from being successful. I believe that if the pieces are in place (competant run game, and a defense that can play 4-quarters of football), Chad can be a Superbowl QB. That's not to say he's a great QB, but rather than I think he's adequate enough. Afterall, history shows SBs can be won with the likes of Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson. If you throw Clemens into the fire now, it's practically a toss up on whether it ruins him or not. I can't understand why you think a risk like that is so worth taking, especially when it's not absolutely necessary. At the very least, I think Chad can hold the fort during this rebuilding season to protect Clemens from being thrown to the wolves.
Could you briefly outline the scenario where playing Clemens in 2 weeks leads to a "setback of a another decade"? I think you're being overly dramatic here. What I can't understand is why people think that QB's have to sit on the bench for a year or two in order to be successful. It's a good thing the Cowboys didn't ruin Aikman by letting him play on that 1-15 team his first year, or the Colts didn't ruin Manning by throwing him to the wolves with a 3-13 team. Players make plays. It's about time we see if Clemens is a player.
The problem is you may not be able to tell if he is or not in his first year. Both of those guys had bad years, their teams didn't know for sure if they were going to be great until atleast the next year.
So yeah, I was going abit overboard with the whole 'decade' bit, but what I'm afraid of is having a situation similar to the Houston Texans, in which their once supposed "franchise" QB gets mentally shellshocked after being tossed into the fray. I think players like Aikman are more of an exception rather than what's common. Besides, I don't think it's necessary to replace something that's not exactly broken. Understandably, Chad is on a short leash due to his history, but all that's happened so far is that he strung together 2 bad games in a row. I think it'd be wise not to make any knee-jerk reactions, especially considering he got off to an impressive start early in the season. If he keeps this up week after week, then yeah, I'd be all for the Clemens' era. But right now, I see no reason to take that risk just yet.
I it would be in the Jets best interest to find out what they Have in Clemens before we go into the 2007 Draft.
