We all know the particulars of the CHad debate, but I think I have realized the reason that he is so controversial to Jets fans. Often, you hear the statement "Chad gives us the best opprtunity to WIN". That statement has always bothered me and I could not excactly pinpoint it exactly. But recently I realized why that statement bothers me: it's not true. OK, OK, just bear with me. What Chad DOES is give his team the "best opportunity NOT TO LOSE". It is a small distinction but a big one. Chad does not really WIN games for us. He allows defense, special teams, field position and mistakes by the opposition to win the game but not doing anything that costs us the game. It is a good strategy. A team that does not mistakes at QB is tough to beat, and we have great special teams and a stingy defense in terms of points. It is also a .500 give or take strategy. Get a few breaks and you finish 10-6. Get a few bad breaks and you still finish 8-8 or 9-7. The strategy struggles against the best teams, because they also make few mistakes, plus they have the ability to beat you oftentimes physically. That is Chad. He gives us the best opportunity NOT TO LOSE. And by doing so, keeps us in almost all games, and allows us to win more games than we lose which adds up to a playoff berth often. But Chad does not have the ability to WIN games on his skills, and the strategy struggles against better teams. Both of these are reasons to dislike Chad as QB. And because the philosohpy puts an upper bound on what we can achieve. The other side of the debate, does not hate Chad. But what they want to see is "A QB which gives us the best opportunity to WIN" Again, this is not what Chad is, which is explained above. Now a QB that can WIN games also has a much better chance of LOSING the game for you as well. It is a more dynamic position. You might win the Super Bowl with some good breaks but you might finish 6-10 if you get some bad ones. But playing with a QB that can WIN the game for you, has a higher ceiling, and gives us the opportunity to stage late comebacks, which as fans is very exciting. No one knows if Kellen is that guy, but we know Chad isn't and Kellen has the raw tools to WIN games for us. So in the end it comes down to a philisophical divide: Do you want a limited, conservative QB and team that will make the playoffs and have less drastic ups and downs? Do you view football as a cautious game? Let's face it, this type of football has been what the Jets have been about for 7 years so it is ingrained in us. If this is what you prefer, Chad is as good as any... Chad gives us the best opportunity not to lose. OR Are you willing to risk everything for a higher goal? Are you tired of a super conservative defensive approach to games, and not having the ability to consistently WIN against better teams, or beat a team from behind. Well then Kellen is the guy we need to see. Kellen gives us the best opportunity to win. They are not the same thing, and this is the core of the deabte on CHad. It really is more than the debate on a QB, it is a referndum on the type of team we want to field, and the philisophical approach to the way we play football. It is also the reason the two sides of this debate will never agree.
I think the reason the two sides will never agree is that some people see Chad as a star QB worth a 60+ million dollar contract and building the team around while others see him as a talented journeyman who needs a lot of help if he's going to win. The fact that he went 8-5 with the 2004 Jets and 10-6 with the 2006 Jets really should tell us everything we need to know about him. He had all the horses in 2004, or at least the vast majority of them, and could not produce a dominating performance except against the very weak early season schedule. Then he had very few horses last year and again could not produce a dominating performance except against the very weak late season schedule. Chad kind of singlehandedly wills team to beat inferior opponents like a drum. Then he, and his teams, fold to superior teams like clockwork. That doesn't mean they can't beat Drew Brees and the Chargers twice in a season, but name another good team that the Jets have managed to hang with consistently with Chad at the controls?
Well also the big thing is that I think there are antagonistic fans probably on both sides of the fence that really cause these arguments. Some fans refuse to put any blame whatsoever on Chad for any loss, and that causes some fans to get on the defensive, especially when other players they like are being blamed so they lash out at Chad. On the other side of the fence, at times people blame Chad (although I honestly think this is rarer, perhaps I am wrong and will concede I don't read everything) when you really can't lay the blame on him, or put more blame on him than the rest of the team. Again this causes other people who like Chad to be defensive and lash out. I think you are right in your analysis. Chad is a "game manager." Anyone that has ever competed in anything knows about "playing not to lose." Against the top competitors in any field that rarely works, you really need to take the initiative and grab momentum, FORCE a mistake rather than hoping something comes. Chances are these other competitors, if they're really the best, will force it. Maybe they won't, and you can win by luck, but that is not a good way to attempt to do it. I was hoping Chad's problems were the results of various injuries he had and different offensive systems, or hermcuffs even. But I don't know, I don't know if I will ever know since he went and got injured again. I was hoping for a real breakout year this year but, if Clemens is going to be our QB I will get behind Clemens.
Damn, this might just be one of the best and most well thought out threads in a LONG time. Of course, as always, it's going to turn into a shit show and people cursing each other off. I for one (as it is probably well known) can't stand Chad at QB. I am sick of watching him run a boring game and not make any big plays (that is not to say the team doesn't make big plays) but Chad is just so boring to watch. And you are completely right in saying that he tries to keep his team from losing....the old Herm Edwards approach. If you continually want a mediocre team that will beat up on weak teams and get blown out to the good ones, then Chad is your man. If you want to risk it and potentially have a championship team, then he most definately is not. Now I know that we could win with a guy like Chad, just like the Ravens won back in 2000, with a stellar defense, but unfortunately we are far from that situation.
It's near impossible to build that stellar defense/punishing running game when you look at Chad's cap number. You can't have a 'game manager' making what Chad makes if you plan on using the Ravens/Bucs formula.
So what you are saying is that before his arm was ampuated, Chad looked good in 2004, and after he wasn't as effective? hmy:
He was 5-1 when he got hurt, the man played w/ a tornrotator cuff in his throwing shoulder and we still just a kick away from the AFC title Game. All Chad has done since he's been starting is win, moreso than any Jet QB in our history but for many jet fans chad's lack of a Browning nagle type arm is enough reason to want to make a change.
Except in a very few instances, no team will win more games with their back up QB than their starter. Starting QB's in the NFL for the most part are a mediocre lot but 99% are far better than their backup. Since the QB is the most important player, it stands to reason a team that losses its starter is going to be in big trouble. There are only a handful of teams that have a potential franchise QB in waiting that has been specifically drafted to replace the starter because the starter isn't good enough and even in those cases the back up usually isn't starting because they simply aren't mentally ready. When Clemens was drafted the Jets had no idea if Chad would even be able to play again. He was clearly drafted to be the Jets starter at some point. It's natural for a fan to love the players on the team he loves and particularly the leader of that team. We are fortunate that we have a very competent NFL QB leading our team. Many of us simply want to see him have the balls to use his timing and accuracy to attack teams down the field from the first possession rather than waiting for the entire D to be on the LOS before busting a play down the field. This is something Chad simply is uncomfortable doing and I suspect it's his fear of his own arm. He simply has to have the nerve to trust his timing and accuracy and let the chips fall. If he doesn't this team is likely never to take the next step and that's if they build a great team around him or not. What Chad really showed last week, was that when he was pissed and had a little adrenaline flowing, he did let the ball go, got the Offensive tempo picked up and marched the Jets right down the field. I believe it’s one of the few times I have seen Chad really attack a good defense on his terms rather than on their terms. It was actually very enlightening for me, I hope it was just as enlightening for Chad, I think it will make a huge difference in the upside for this team especially if he continues as the starting QB.
Excellent thread! I agree with johnny, but still am a Chad "supporter" . Maybe it's all those years of being awful (and bad QBs), it's nice to have a consistently competitive team, but I do agree with you risk/reward assesment. Winston, do you think his lack of "balls" to attack has stemmed from his injuries? In '02, he seemed much more eager to "attack" in the manner you mention before his shoulder tears. (hopefully it's not worse than we all were led to believe) But he did come out and march down the field, gimpy ankle and all, like he did that year.... possibly the negative reaction to his downfall by all the :drunk: fans proved to be the negative energy he needed as motivation, to say "Phuck it", nothing to lose now, as he knows he's a shortimer.
I can’t see where you can say he gives us the best chance not to lose or to win, however you want to put it when he starts about half the games since officially becoming the starter. Games the (jokes of) backups have lost since Chad has been the starter are on him. for all I care Chad could win every start he makes – still does me no good if he only starts 7 games of a 16 game season.
Yes. One of the biggest drawbacks is Chad plays too much with brains, and not enough with his balls. He just need to adjust the ratio a bit better.
I have a feeling that this will be CP's last year with the Jets. KC was drafted to be the future, next year will be year 3, and KC should be more than ready. As a CP fan, I just hope the Jets FO does him right by sending him to a contender. I would love to see him in a Ravens uniform, that would be a prefect fit or as someone mentioned the Vikes, both teams have a stellar defense and very good running backs. Can you say Super Bowl :wink:
All questions will be answered Sunday vs Balt If Clemens goes 8-15 2 int 0 tds then its we have a team problem (were just bad). If he goes 15-22 0 int 2 tds then maybe its time for a QB change. all questions will be answered
I think you are giving excellent points. However, finding a Quarterback that can win games is hard. How many of them are there? Brady? Manning? You don't need a good Quarterback to win Championships. However, you do need a good offense and defense. A good running game usually sets up to a decent passing game. In our case, our O-Line sucks and give no blocks for a running game to develop. And at the same time gives our Quarterback absolutely no time to pass. Chad Pennington threw two touchdowns with no running game and with no time to pass, I think thats decent. I did see him start to throw a little more down field, like 10 yards deep. Anyways, I am excited to see Kellen Clemens start this week. I hope he doesn't start to try a show off his arm since this is why some of you guys like him over Chad Pennington and start to lose accuracy.
jesus christ, you always mention the rotator cuff. maybe the injuries are part of the problem? Pennington is soft, and that's bad for QB's especially. and don't blame it on the OL, or the lack of running game -- David Carr has been sacked an obscene amount of times; how many games did he miss due to injury? Junc, if i told you, you can draft Player X who will be a pretty good player, but he'll get hurt just about every year - except one - for five or six years, would you draft him?
He had a 33 year old runningback. McCariens(who is a 3rd wr at best) and Smurf Moss(one dimensional reciever) and had no tight end. and the most conservative coach on the planet. I mean, you act like he had harrison, wayne and edge with Don Coryall calling the plays.
(I not sure how this argument is debate is different that the one that happens every week around here.) Pennington is a playoff QB, not a Championship QB. There are critical games where the QB needs to play special, put the team on his back and win the game. Pennington limitations (be it injuries, arm strength, lack of mobility) preclude him from doing that. Everyone can make the argument about if he had the Steelers O-line from SBXL, the Ravens D from SBXXXV, and the Rams skill position players from SB XXXIV he could win a title, but, really what is the likelihood of putting those type of units together again. It comes down to fan expectations... If fans are happy being competitive, grabbing a Wild Card and seeing if the Jets can pull an upset Chad is their guy. On the other hand, if fans want to be more than competitive, see 12/13 win seasons and an expectation that the Jets will be in the conference championship game, then it's time to say thank you to Chad and ask him to be on his way.
In 02 everything was new the guy was fresh and everything was working. It might be the injuries or it could just be an accumulation of the reality of how much getting clobbered actually hurts. I think there are several aspects to being a great athlete besides raw athletic ability. Obviously brians and vision are two very key elements but the real seperator is being mentally tough enough and have belief that you can beat your opponent on every single play anywhere on the field.
I think it all goes back to recent draft strategy. The front office seemed convinced the way to build a winner was through dominant lines, and drafted accordingly. When it was not known if Chad would play in 2006, they passed on leinart and went oline. The organization must feel chad is good enough to win now if the rest of the team performed up to expectations. Mangini helped game plan against chad, twice a year, for a number of years. Surely that perspective gave him some kind of insight into chad's ability to play to win vs. not to lose. Why would they pass on some top QB prospects, especially with chad's health being uncertain, if they were not convinced the OB position required at least a good NFL player, given a superior rest of the team. In other words, they drafted as if the QB they had was GOOD ENOUGH and improvement was required in other areas. I guess I'm saying the rest of the team plays a bigger role in winning than just a separation of QB from good enough to win vs. good enough not to lose. Marino gave Miami the best chance to win but the rest oft he team did not. Elway did not win until the rest of the team became good enough. Football is truly a team game. I imagine the fans of every NFL team that plays well enough to get into the playoffs but never good enough to win have these same kind of discussions. Johnny- my compliments on your stating your point of view in a thought provoking and excellent manner.
A wise man once said "Watch what you wish for". A wise man once said "The grass is always greener." A dumbass once said "Hey Mo, see if you can crush Bledsoe's chest in"
