yes, that's fine if the intention is to have him be the backup but people here are saying sign him to be our starter and don't draft another qb. passing on the potential starting qbs in this draft is a horrible decision.
If they feel that Cutler is their long-term QB, they have to go back to him, rusty or not. If he's ready, you don't keep your impending FA franchise QB on the bench in the middle of a playoff push. Keeping him on the bench, fuels the flames of the "Keep McCown, why pay Cutler" talk, and may make it that much more difficult to lock him up long term.
As someone who is firmly in the camp of signing a quality vet Qb, I would want to look at McCown. In that connection I see Chicago's putting Cutler back in the starting role as evidence they may well be inclined to keep him after all. sigh. Oh well. But the age difference here is significant. I liked the Cutler concept precisely because his age would hit a sweet spot for the Jets. Give a couple of years minimum of him at the top of his performance arc, maybe more than that, to correspond to the Jets core players' age. Meanwhile perhaps Smith uses the time to improve, or someone else steps in and develops watching Cutler. But McCown's age makes me think the Jets would not get much play out of him, which would pressure the team to make a move elsewhere. That in turn would either mean going high in the draft to get a Qb, which i don't like for all the reasons dicsussed in the Vet Qb thread. Or depending on Smith. Which i also don't like. In short McCown's age seems a particularly bad fit for the Jets. If Cutler stays in Chicago I would prefer someone like Kyle Orton.
Big Blocker has a disgusting man-crush on Kyle Orton. A QB with a loser mentality that lost his job to Tebow. I would rather draft plenty of weapons in the draft / acquire a Maclin & Tate. Then go out and draft Carr or Fales along with Shaun Hill in the FA. Shaun Hill would be much cheaper and brings more to the table then Orton who is again a known loser. You go into TC with Geno Smith / Shaun Hill / Carr or Fales. Smith will prob be on the back-burner eventually because I doubt he beats Shaun Hill in a competition. I wouldn't mind letting Carr or Fales sit for half the season at least
IMO if you have both Smith and Hill on the roster, either Carr or Fales would sit a lot longer than half a season. They'd be likely to never see the field for the Jets and would be traded.
If Fales is drafted, he would be acquired in the 3rd round or so, there would be no rush to start him right away - he can sit on the sidelines and learn what not to do and what to do. If the season is lost for the Jets, Fales would come at that point and be the starter. At that juncture, the Jets would know Geno isn't the man, Hill was merely a stop-gap. If Carr is drafted in the first round, Geno Smith is done as a Jet and would be 3rd on the depth chart. At that point, you would let Shaun Hill start the season. If Hill struggles, you put Carr in. Regardless of each scenario, Geno Smith would have an opportunity to show improvement. If by some miracle he becomes the guy, Carr or Fales would be traded and would have value.
Sorry to hear that you're so down on our future franchise QB. It's not gonna take anything near a miracle for Geno to remain "the guy." With an off season to focus on fundamentals, get stronger and study film, he will be a much-improved player next year. Book on it. If Rex is gone (as he should be) and we have a real HC in place who has an offensive background, then Geno will be even better.
I assume you are talking to me. I outlined the reasons why I don't think the Jets should have as their primary strategy the approach of going high pick in the draft to get a better Qb in the Vet Qb thread. So for those reasons, yes in answer to your question. Go to post 94, here: http://forums.theganggreen.com//showthread.php?t=79769&page=5 To be clear Orton would not be as serviceable as Cutler. But the flip side of the you get what you pay for observation is he would no doubt cost less. I like Orton partly for the same reason I like Cutler. He's the right age, compared to Hill or McCown.
You again reveal complete ignorance about what happened in Denver. I have tried to warn you, but go ahead sounding ignorant. it is amusing.
Here's the thing about Smith. Assuming the picture does not become much more clear than it is now after the next three games are played, which is what I expect, the problem with him is he's not been bad enough to give up on, or good enough to count on for next season. But since he's not bad enough to give up on, and they just spent a second round pick on him, I think that is another factor that tends to argue against going high pick in the draft this off season. And that is on top of the politics involved. Meanwhile a vet Qb coming to hte club would not preclude keeping Smith and seeing if he can't develop. But drafting a guy a year younger than him would certianly do that.
:rofl: Me ignorant? Your response in both threads is "you don't know what happened in Denver" - seems to me that you cannot correctly describe what actually happened in Denver because this is your only response (2nd time in a row btw). Maybe you should look in the mirror and admit, "I really don't know what happened in Denver." Why the lack of details? Where is the reasoning? Usually if you have an opinion, you should have details to back up that opinion. Besides, I already responded to that post from before - it was pretty obvious what happened in Denver. Orton = loser QB that stat-padded late in games and against bad teams. Please enlighten us on what happened in Denver, Big Blocker. I am awaiting your response.
See, this is actually reasonable. You know I'm on the Manziel bandwagon but I would be cool with your scenario. He's been historically terrible and has garbage mechanics. How that is not bad enough is beyond reason. Vet signing or not, passing up on drafting a QB this upcoming class would be a huge mistake.
You are the one who brought up Denver. Back up your shyte or stfu. I went over this many times last year with the Tebots. No reason to do it again if you can't back it up. Which you can't. You are really flailing here lately. I mean really. Getting personal, whining, not making sense. You have a problem, bud.
The more I think about Manziel, the more I wouldn't mind him here as our QB. His attitude is infectious and could really help our franchise and our offense step their game up. We need a fiery guy out there. As long as we get weapons around him, he could thrive here. The size thing doesn't bother me as much with Wilson doing his thing.
I backed my shit up yesterday moron - you didn't reply back to it -that's not my problem. The fact that you can't support your argument TO ME (not Tebow followers) with any details doesn't make you correct in any sense of the word. It makes you look like a complete idiot - no one gives a fuck about your opinions if you can't back them up. I don't have a problem, you need to look in the mirror and learn how to debate. If you believed I was wrong, you should quoted my post (that was supported with details) and rebuked it. If you can't support your opinion with any details then GTFO of the forum - because you don't belong here.
It's very tough for me to defend Smith, since I think I share your concerns about him. But we should also take into account that he was ill prepared to start the season, and Rex compounded his difficulties by leaving him in there to fester and die in several games, shooting his confidence. He was locking in on receivers, his fundamentals were getting worse, and of course he turned the ball over. But some of those issues with fundamentals can be fixed, hopefully in the coming off season. He's also got all the throws. It is field awareness and decisionmaking that have been a problem. Add in the reality that Idzik will not give up on him, and I virtually guarantee you he will be in the mix this coming off season. Ftr I do not rule out getting a Qb in teh draft, even with a high pick. I just think for the reasons I mention that such is not the best strategy. But if they get a good vet in FA, can address some of the other major needs, which include more than one OL position, wideout and safety, then I would say yes, if BPA indicates a Qb should be chosen, they can do that, too. (I just wish we had a better idea what Simms could do, but I guess that's not going to happen, unless he goes to another team.)
Heh. WHere did you back up your "story" about what happened in Denver? I must have missed that. And your characterization of my intelligence and ability as a poster mean nothing to me. I am far more intelligent than you, and will not respond to your personal attacks, since they mean nothing. I would think a mod might have issue with you, but that's up to them.
ok I follow you. I am just much higher on drafting another qb because I thought smith would be bad and he has been. my view of him is as a backup not a franchise guy. So my confidence that he will improve to starter level is very low, I don't want to be banking on that as part of the plan going forward.
