From among this list of Jets' QBs, who are the ones that you think the Jets failed to develop? I see nothing but shit and mediocrity on this list. Most of them had little talent and were never real prospects. Some players learn and develop more slowly, but in general, I'm not sure that players who don't "step up" and win a job really have what it takes. Jeff Blake and Glenn Foley were probably the two most talented players on that list. Blake played for another team or two, but was never anything special, so if we failed to develop him, then so did that other team or teams. Howard Dyer, 24th round, 1961 Mel Melin, 6th round, 1962 Wilburn Hollis, 13th round, 1962 Bill King, 8th round, 1963 Pete Liske, 15th round, 1963 Ron Vander Kelen, 21st round, 1963 Mike Taliaferro, 28th round, 1963 Dick Shiner, 20th round, 1964 Jerry Rhome, 25th round, 1964 John Huarte, 2nd round, 1965 Bob Schweikert, 4th round, 1965* Archie Roberts, 7th round, 1965* Bob Biletnikoff, 17th round, 1967 Al Woodall, 2nd round, 1969 Dave Buckey,12th round, 1976 Matt Robinson, 9th round, 1977 Pat Ryan, 11th round, 1978 Dab Sanders, 11th round, 1979 Ken Hobart, Supplemental Draft, 1984 Bill Ransdell, 12th round, 1987 Troy Taylor, 4th round, 1990 Browning Nagle, 2nd round, 1991 Jeff Blake, 6th round, 1992 Glenn Foley, 7th round, 1994 Chuck Clements, 6th round, 1997 Brooks Bollinger, 6th round, 2003 Brad Smith, 4th round, 2006 Erik Ainge, 5th round, 2008 Greg McElroy, 7th round, 2011 Geno Smith, 2nd round, 2013 Tajh Boyd, 6th round, 2014
Thanks, and you're welcome. Yeah, the age is a pretty big thing, although 7 years of good, solid QB play would be something the Jets haven't had since Kenny O'Brien. I'd say that being a 4th round pick, spread QB and 25 years old was the kiss of death.
If you want to know why the Jets haven't "discovered" any great QBs since Namath, consider that since him, according to your list they've only drafted a QB in the 1st or 2nd round THREE times! This clearly shows the institutional neglect of offense in general and QB in particular. It's almost like after Joe Namath they decided that "defense wins championships", even though the only one they won was because they had a great QB. And if anything, the QB has become even more important in today's NFL, so their ignorance of this critical position is mind-boggling. If they invested half the time, energy, and money in finding a QB that they have in building their defense, they would several championships to their name. Assuming that Hack isn't their FQB (I'm happy to be proven wrong but I doubt it), if they don't draft a QB #1 next year, I'm done.
Matt Robinson is a good example. Personally, I thought he was better than Richard Todd but thanks to a "Qb competition", Todd won, After that, Robinson became an afterthought. Todd, OTOH went on to get us to the Mud Bowl. He was never the same after that game. Same old story.... Browning Nagle's first game I think he threw for 366yds. The NY media were all over themselves after that but as is typical Jets, Nagle's development crashed and he too, became a afterthought. At least Pat Ryan became a functional backup! Oh yeah, you forgot the immortal Matt Simms. Outside of Namath, Todd, O'Brien and Pennington, the Jets have been a virtual graveyard for young qb's for far longer than some of our posters have been alive. When it comes to Qb development by the NY Jets, history is a hostile witness.
Matt Robinson had one good season. He had only a 46.7% career completion percentage. In his best season with the Jets he threw 13 TDs and 16 interceptions. The Jets were able to cash in on that and get a beneficial trade with the Broncos. If Robinson was that talented, why did he only last in Denver for one season when Craig Morton was 37 years old and their other QB was the immortal Jeff Knapple? He appeared in 14 games that year for Denver completing only 48.1% of his passes, throwing for only 942 yards with 2 TD, 12 interceptions, and took 17 sacks. Denver finished at 9-7, so they weren't that bad a team. After his one year in Denver, he spent two with Buffalo. Joe Ferguson was the long-time starter there, but why didn't Matt latch on with another team? I think he looked better than he was because we've had so many bad QBs, and he had just enough talent to have one decent season with the Jets and a lot of Jets fans overestimated how good he was. Nagle was like Testaverde...a million dollar arm and a ten cent brain. In '92 Nagle threw for 2,280 yards, but completed only 49.6% of his passes for a 5.9 yard average, and threw 7 TDs and 17 interceptions. Personally, I don't think there was much there to develop. He certainly didn't do anything with the Colts or Falcons after he left the Jets and only spent 6 years in the NFL. I say that you probably overestimated his ability as well. But even if you are right about those two, that's only two out of how many? So the problem clearly isn't that the Jets haven't been able to develop them (no one could), it's that they didn't have good leadership and didn't place enough priority on the position and tried to get by with too many schlubs at the position. As for Matt Simms, the Jets didn't draft him. He was a UDFA. The list is only QBs that the Jets drafted. As Colorado pointed out, only drafting 3 QBs in the 1st round in their history is abysmal and tells you all you need to know why the Jets have had so few quality QBs. It wasn't a matter that they didn't develop them. They didn't invest high picks in quality prospects. One would have to go through each draft year-by-year to see which QBs, if any, that they could have taken but passed up. I don't have time for that. Maybe someone else does. That would give a more complete picture. I know that in some years, the Jets were good when there good prospects, and in the years that there were no good prospects, the Jets sucked. Part of that is luck (and I believe that luck is when opportunity meets preparation), and part of it is the sorry ass owners, GMs and CSs we've had.
Given that since Namath they've never had a "sure thing" at QB, why would they EVER pass up a chance to draft one that might be better than what they've got? It's not like they were SB contenders year after year. Even when they were "good" how much better would they have been with an ACTUALLY good (not RELATIVELY good) QB? The last part of your statement nails it. (Tired record alert!) This is why I advocated for them to draft Mahomes or Watson this year. Sure, maybe they wouldn't worked out, but the odds are they would've been better than the three they currently have, and a pretty good chance that they would've struck paydirt. Yes, Adams seems like a great pick, but even if he is, and he stays healthy, will the best Safety transform this team? And from the reports Maye is damn near as good as Adams, so Safety would've been vastly improved with the 2nd pick anyway. I know it's a moot issue at this point, but I just wish they would learn their lesson, ONCE!
For a minute there I was in shock...an actual decent, common sense article by Gary Myers, but then he reverted to his typical dumbass, douchebag form in the last half. He is right that Hack should be the starter and getting most of the reps. At least he got that much right.
The only exception to making Hack the #1 guy is if he really doesn't progress enough. Supposedly he's improved - but he's being measured against a really low bar - but let's see how he does in actual games. Will he revert to his PSU shellshocked self? That would be a disaster, but not a surprise really. I hope he can step up and at least show whether he can be the FQB or not. Playing McCown won't answer that.
I can almost guarantee that Watson wouldn't have worked out or been no better than Hack or Petty. Mahomes has the raw talent to be better, but there's no way any GM would have taken him as high as the Jets took Adams. He was way too risky, and you know how much I love his arm and his potential. I'm still in shock that the Chiefts took him at #10. There's no way I would have done that.
We'll have to see how Watson and Mahomes do, but I can almost guarantee that either would've been better than what we have. But there almost never a "sure thing" when drafting a QB because the nature of the position, and the complexities involved make it a crap shoot. Unlike any other position where "What you see is what you get" usually. So if an organization is risk-averse, like the Jets, they're not going to roll the dice on a QB, which is their problem IMO. Personally, I WOULD have taken Mahomes at #5, but I can understand that most wouldn't have. But I SURE would've traded down and then taken him! I think the Chiefs made the right move.
It would be a disaster but at least then we would know and at this stage we need to know one way or the other, if he is really terrible he can go back to school for another season learning whatever it is he can't do, he is 22yo still a relative baby, this I think is what has done for Petty, fuck the guy is 28yo, he is a man and if he was an RB he would already be peaking or maybe even starting the downslope, whereas he hasn't even got a foot on the ladder at QB, at 25yo he needed to come in ready to rock from the off.
This is what I read off the report: 1. Maybe the 3rd-string status is doing something to the pass selection for Petty. Did he throw as many risky passes while at Baylor? [I don't think so.] Maybe if he can get some peace of mind of a sort, then just maybe, he will settle in. As of now - he's stuck in a rut, and the team lets him know it too. 2. That said, he'd still give a shot to every receiver on the pitch. More than McClown or Hack would, that is. I don't know about you guys, but I see a leader there. Sucks to be him - if he had been drafted by a team that knows how to groom a QB, he'd be set for the next 10+ years.
The only exception is injury. Hack must play. If he didn't progress enough, he will bring high pick next draft. A huge question is whether Bowles will play him. If it's "best chance to win" all over again, then he doesn't understand or cares about long term need of the team.
For one, Sanchez was completely mismanaged in his time here with the Jets. They traded away/let go of his top three targets in one offseason. We went from Cotch/Santonio/Braylon/Brad Smith to Santonio/Plax/Derrick Mason/Kerley in one year right as it looked like he started to figure it out in 2010. That's no way to develop a quarterback. We focused more on building a super secondary and defense than to build around what looked to be a young promising quarterback that we traded up for to get at #6 overall.
"History is a hostile witness." I never heard that one before. Good one. I like it. Do you mind if I toss it around tomorrow at work? It might make me sound sage and wise.
