Geno Smith Or Mark Sanchez?

[King P]

Damn u would only give a rookie qb his rookie season to prove himself

Carolina did the same thing. Drafted Jimmy Clausen in the 2nd round. Gave him a year, he stunk, then they drafted Cam Newton next year. Look how it worked out for them. This wouldn't be any different.

If a QB is garbage/isn't working out, there's nothing wrong with admitting it and immediately searching for his replacement

 

[NYC Rebel]

We follow your logic, which is draft another QB anyway. Or, Geno underperforms AND Bridgewater get hurt, then everyone loses.

The scenario I wanna avoid is the Jets picking at #2 and we pass up this savior QB because we wanna see what Geno can do even though we don't know for sure whether he's the guy, or like that time where we picked up a bullshyt OT win at the end of the season during Herm's tenure that cost us a shot at Bush /Vince Young. This team does this too much.

If the Jets wanna bet the house on Geno (which I'm not against), then cool, but I don't wanna hear about this QB competition anymore and just play the guy. We'll still suck, but at least we'll know what's there. What would help us learn more about Geno now is if some of these players like Hill, maybe Bilal, some UDFA or late pick steps up, now and going forward.

Your scenario made no point

 

[tremonthustler1]

Your scenario made no point

If Geno plays and we're still wondering whether he's the QB to build around, I don't want him to be the reason we passed up on a potentially better QB, especially in a scenario where he gets the job once we're out of it only to squeak a bullshyt win or two near the end of the season.

 

[NYC Rebel]

If Geno plays and we're still wondering whether he's the QB to build around, I don't want him to be the reason we passed up on a potentially better QB, especially in a scenario where he gets the job once we're out of it only to squeak a bullshyt win or two near the end of the season.

Wondering if he's the man is a Geno only thing?

Bridgewater is impervious to that same scrutiny?

You're really further pushing a useless point

 

[tremonthustler1]

Wondering if he's the man is a Geno only thing?

Bridgewater is impervious to that same scrutiny?

You're really further pushing a useless point

The difference is that Bridgewater would be surrounded by much better parts offensively, so the scrutiny would be there, but he'd be more likely to succeed.

Well obviously I'm more confident in Bridgewater (or Boyd) than Geno, and Teddy would get more leeway than Geno because he'd be a first round pick that the team would be desperate to justify (just like Fez now).

I'd have a differing opinion on how they should handle this if I thought the team was more equipped to win (like Seattle a year ago), which I don't because of their offense.

 

[NYC Rebel]

The difference is that Bridgewater would be surrounded by much better parts offensively, so the scrutiny would be there, but he'd be more likely to succeed.

Well obviously I'm more confident in Bridgewater (or Boyd) than Geno, and Teddy would get more leeway than Geno because he'd be a first round pick that the team would be desperate to justify (just like Fez now).

I'd have a differing opinion on how they should handle this if I thought the team was more equipped to win (like Seattle a year ago), which I don't because of their offense.

Yet there is no certainty that Bridgewater may even be there for the Jets for you to promote this.

In the draft, you live in the NOW.

It's RIDICULOUS to look ahead at someone who very well may not be there next season for you for a multitudes of reasons. That's just dumb

 

[tremonthustler1]

Yet there is no certainty that Bridgewater may even be there for the Jets for you to promote this.

If Fez is our QB we'll be there.

 

[NYC Rebel]

If Fez is our QB we'll be there.

And will Bridgewater?

There are no certainties.

Your point is based way too much on chance. Passing up Geno for a tomorrow that isn't written?

Stop it

 

[King P]

Even if Bridgewater isnt there, Boyd & Murray should definitely be there, There are a couple 1st round QB's that are better prospects than Geno.

Ya'll gotta remember, Geno was a value pick. If the Jets were really sold on him, they woulda picked him in the 1st round. Franchise QB's don't make it past the 1st in this climate.

Plus, let's not forget there's a possibility that Rex might be gone after this year. And a new coach might want his own QB.

 

[NYC Rebel]

Even if Bridgewater isnt there, Boyd & Murray should definitely be there, There are a couple 1st round QB's that are better prospects than Geno.

Ya'll gotta remember, Geno was a value pick. If the Jets were really sold on him, they woulda picked him in the 1st round. Franchise QB's don't make it past the 1st in this climate.

Plus, let's not forget there's a possibility that Rex might be gone after this year. And a new coach might want his own QB.

My point is, why advocate bypassing the value pick Geno was in 13' preparing for an uncertain tomorrow in 14'? That makes zero sense and is shytty planning

 

[Trip]

http://www.sbnation.com/2013/8/8/4598028/mark-sanchez-jets

The worst QB of all time to ever stick around for four consecutive seasons....its time to move on folks.

 

[Trip]

 

[King Crimson]

Does this factor only the first 4 years?

 

[Trip]

Does this factor only the first 4 years?

The graphic rates QBs who have started 4 years (of over 10 games) based on their whole career. The number next to them is not passer rating, it's a rating that compares their play to the QBs around them each year. Then each number from each season is added together to get an average.]

Basically Sanchez is the worst QB of all time who's gotten 4 years worth of starts.

 

[King Crimson]

Basically Sanchez is the worst QB of all time who's gotten 4 years worth of starts.

Doesn't that kind skew the stats though?Sanchez has only started 4-5 seasons. Peyton has had 15. A lot of those guys have had over 4. Wouldn't that give them a significant advantage? Not caping for Sanchez Just trying to be fair.