The 2 Choices, and the 2 Teams to Watch

That’s a silly strategy IMO especially if you’re a bad team & most teams picking that high are not very good. Why is day 1 important for a team that’s rebuilding?

 

Good point

 

Yeah that's BS. Especially when you have a piecemeal offensive line. You just don't want them taking QB at 2 and you're latching onto any argument that will support that.

 

I'm a Wilson supporter and I don't think that. In fact, I've also defended Darnold, against many here. I don't think keeping Darnold and drafting a QB they think can be better are mutually exclusive, and in fact, that's what I'm hoping for.

 

Of course this can only happen if the teams ahead of the Patsies drop the ball and pass on a QB "with some risk", only to then kiss BB ass for the next 20 years for the wisdom of the pick.

 

If I could "Not Like" this post, I would. I couldn't possibly disagree with this more. Of course you're entitled to your opinion, but I followed the Jets rather than the Giants or any other NFL team because I loved the aerial circuses the AFL often had. This was the genesis of the Jets name in fact, and then after the merger and the departure of Namath, the "air" left the franchise. Add to this the fact that today's NFL is more like the old AFL, and centered on offense. Trying to build and "impregnable" defense with the rules and how they're employed by the refs is a fool's errand.

 

I dont totally understand the strategy here. I understand not wanting Wilson because you think he's a bad player, thats an opinion, we all have those. If Douglas trades dislikes both Wilson and Fields, he should trade down. But QB is still probably the biggest need on the team and needs to be addressed.

The idea that sticking with Sam is the right call makes very little sense to me. Is there any historical evidence of a QB that has been as bad as he is turning it around after year three? I cant imagine there are many similar situations. Even if he does improve his play, the Jets are then forced to pony up and pay big money for one year of production.

I'm a big fan of Darnold, but it just makes too much sense to reset the clock and move on.

 

Uh, where is the "proof"? What famous QB "guru" made that statement? Because they missed the boat on how Aaron Rodgers succeeded, not to mention a whole boatload of great - not good, but great - QBs succeeded. Steve Young sat behind Montana for almost 5 years. This claim is completely false. In fact, the opposite is more true: NOT sitting a QB is almost guaranteed to make him a bust.

 

For the less astute of is, who is that avitar?

 

Justin Fields.

 

The only name that come in mind that struggled early on and managed to overcome it was Drew Brees. Coincidently, he managed to steer his career back on track after the Chargers drafted QB Philip Rivers 4th overall

The chargers sat down Rivers for 2 years, keeping Brees as starter, he rebounded quite significantly from his early career struggle before the Chargers decided to let Brees go to free agency and move on with Rivers.

Also back then 4th overall contract was quite more significant and impactful to the cap space than now which impacted massively on the decision to keep Rivers instead of Brees.

 

Who doesn't rate him that high? You? Some posters here who have no known expertise? Now, if Douglas comes out and says "I don't think much of Wilson", I'll accept that. Of if he decides to pass on him or all the other QBs and trade back, I'll take that as fact that he doesn't think much of Wilson, but other than that, I'll go with guys who have actually played the position at a high level and have studied it for years.

 

Thanks!

Now I'm going to have to figure out how to reconcile my firm belief that Wilson is the guy with my also firm belief that legler is the most reliable evaluator of QBs on TGG!

 

Sit vs play debate aside: what is the point of taking Wilson if the plan is to sit him? The very appeal of him as a prospect is refined skilll & the ability to play early. If it was possible to hate The idea of drafting Wilson more..it’d be taking him & then immediately sitting him

 

I think if we’re all honest that we’re probably not winning the Super Bowl next year, the move would be to give Sam one last shot IF you don’t like Wilson or Fields enough.

You would essentially be building the team, establishing the culture, and kicking the QB can down the road another year.

If it doesn’t work out, you will have a high pick most likely, an extra 1st rounder (maybe more from trade downs this season), cap space, etc to make a move on a new QB next offseason

I understand QB is a big need barring a Sam turnaround, but it’s better to not force the issue if you don’t believe in the rookies at 2 overall.

 

Of course, if Douglas doesn't think any of the QBs this year are worth he sure isn't going to force it, regardless of what anyone on TGG says.

But I really have a hard time believing that NONE of these 2021 QBs are worth the #2 pick. Of course I'm no expert, but any of the top 5 this year have great attributes and potential - more than I've seen in a lot of other years - so passing on all of them is really hard to understand.

Moreover, not taking a QB this year when there is no need to trade up, would be a massive mistake, compounded by the need to burn that capital the next year or in 2023 just to even get a chance to get a QB - and that's assuming that A) there will be a better QB available then, and B) that some team who holds the 1st or 2nd pick would be willing to trade it to us. That's just incredibly long odds.

Again, if JD doesn't think any of these guys this year are wroth it, he's not going to take one just because. But I will sure be disheartened if that's the case.

 

LOL go back and watch the last game played back in February.

 

Oh, now I understand! In addition to building a great defense, you also have to figure out a way to cause key parts of the other team's offense to not play! Great formula!