2023 Off-season Talk

[xrade]

21 minutes ago, Bobby816 said:

So we're pretty much stuck with him for 2 more seasons

You see no hope for him?  I, for one, am not sure if he will ever get it but he does have the physical skills to be very good.

[Greene N White]

9 minutes ago, KingOfNewYork said:

He can't play in this uniform again. The kid was booed for throwing away a screen pass the opposing team blew up. The moment he steps on the field and has an incompletion he'll be booed out the stadium again. They aren't doing that to him or themselves.

Thank you for finally admitting that. I'm surprised it took 136 pages but now I'm glad we got that out of the way and can actually talk about real football and not these hypothetic possibilities that have 0% chance of happening.

[xrade]

7 minutes ago, KingOfNewYork said:

This is why I said we're entering the Colts territory of chasing veterans(Rivers to Wentz to Ryan). This is not the way, it rarely has been

Agreed, but this would be the first vet QB that we would be relying on for more than a year.  Who was the last one?  Testeverde?  We have tried the draft and develop route and apparently this team sucks at it or is cursed.  Maybe its time to get a vet AND draft a rookie that will have the time to sit.

 

12 minutes ago, KingOfNewYork said:

Coaching matters, most of you guys refuse to acknowledge that piece and if you did you'd see the issue we have at play with Hackett leading the charge.

Absolutely coaching matters but not any more so and perhaps even less so that having talented players at the most important positions.  If Payton were coming to this team, Zach would not automatically be the new Brees.  In fact, this team probably would not a whole lot better than they did last year.  Speculation on my part, but it is not without merit.  As for Hackett, I am very disappointed at that hire but I think understand why.  The simple reason is that they wanted an experienced OC not a newbie.  They also wanted someone who has not been away from the game for a bit.  If those were the parameters, Hackett fit the bill.  I do not believe it was to try and lure Rodgers here.  I am pretty certain that if Rodgers comes here, it is because he has a chance to win regardless of the OC. This isn't

 

18 minutes ago, KingOfNewYork said:

Now think about all the holes we still have to fill on the OL, at Safety, Linebacker, Defensive Line. There's a lot that matters not just upgrading QB play but it's all people seem to think this team needs(from fans to media). 

Only because most believe that with even average QB play we are in the playoffs where anything can happen.  I also think most of us, at least on this site, know we need to upgrade the OL as the second most important goal this offseason.  As for the other positions, we have the draft and FA.  Maybe all the holes don't get filled but many will.  In 2021 our pass D was near the bottom of the league.  In 2022, it was near the top with just a couple of changes.  I do not see why that can't happen to the OL.  If you take a look at any mock draft, it is either OL or S.  Except for one *** clown who has us taking Richardson but I think his mommy will make him change that.

[xrade]

23 minutes ago, KingOfNewYork said:

He can't play in this uniform again. The kid was booed for throwing away a screen pass the opposing team blew up. The moment he steps on the field and has an incompletion he'll be booed out the stadium again. They aren't doing that to him or themselves.

Certainly not in 2023 but time heals all wounds.  He was booed because he just isn't any good.  The booing on the specific play in question was not so much directed at that particular play but at Wilson not getting it done again.  We are NY fans.  We have certain expectations.  When those expectations do not get met, we vent.  Hell, Aaron Judge was booed in the playoffs.

Maybe I am too much of a hard ***, but if Zach is that sensitive, then maybe he should just go back to Utah and become a JetBlue executive.  

[jetfuel34]

NBC Sports' Peter King believes the Jets could "seriously consider" trading for Lamar Jackson if they're unable to acquire Aaron Rodgers.

In an appearance on The Rich Eisen Show, King said he believes the Jets' preferred option would be to trade for Rodgers. However, if they're unable to land Rodgers, he believes the next push could be for Jackson, whose future with the Ravens remains uncertain at best. Jackson and the Ravens are reportedly $100 million apart in contract negotiations, which could result in the team franchise tagging him for 2023. King also notes that if the Ravens do tag Jackson, they may opt for the non-exclusive franchise tag, which would allow other teams to negotiate a deal with Jackson in exchange for two first-round draft picks should the Ravens not match the offer.

 

Here is some more info for you guys. Looks like it will be 2 first round picks for Lamar. I'm not a fan of this at all but he would be my third option behind Rodgers and Carr

[xrade]

6 minutes ago, jetfuel34 said:

NBC Sports' Peter King believes the Jets could "seriously consider" trading for Lamar Jackson if they're unable to acquire Aaron Rodgers.

In an appearance on The Rich Eisen Show, King said he believes the Jets' preferred option would be to trade for Rodgers. However, if they're unable to land Rodgers, he believes the next push could be for Jackson, whose future with the Ravens remains uncertain at best. Jackson and the Ravens are reportedly $100 million apart in contract negotiations, which could result in the team franchise tagging him for 2023. King also notes that if the Ravens do tag Jackson, they may opt for the non-exclusive franchise tag, which would allow other teams to negotiate a deal with Jackson in exchange for two first-round draft picks should the Ravens not match the offer.

 

Here is some more info for you guys. Looks like it will be 2 first round picks for Lamar. I'm not a fan of this at all but he would be my third option behind Rodgers and Carr

Peter King is a giant NE Patriot loving *** hat.  No one knows anything.  He is just spouting **** like the rest of us.  No one is giving him or anyone else "inside" info.

[GangGreen420]

Peter King is clueless. I have no idea why he still gets any type of recognition 

[GangGreen420]

Lamar Jackson and Nathaniel Hackett lmao 

[CWood21]

12 hours ago, KimuraGod said:

However it’s very much SB or bust because as others have pointed out it will mess up our cap for the years he’s being paid but likely retired. Is it possible Rodgers could play another 4 years though?! 

Probably not.  But why is everything the focus of 2+ years down the road?  Let's say hypothetically that the Jets pass on Rodgers, and aren't able to "fix" their QB situation in the next 2 years.  Then what?  Your young talent is gonna start getting expensive, and then the wiggle room for the ability to add a franchise QB whether it be via FA or trade is limited.  When you're paying Garrett Wilson elite WR money, when you're paying Breece Hall top RB money, etc.   There's only a finite amount of money to go around.  While your skill position players are cheap, you can spend big money on a QB.  And in the meantime, you develop a young QB who is going to be cheap when your skill players are starting to get expensive.  And that's even assuming that the player you'd pick at #13 is a hit.

[Bobby816]

46 minutes ago, xrade said:

You see no hope for him?  I, for one, am not sure if he will ever get it but he does have the physical skills to be very good.

I give him an extremely small chance of ever being below average.

To elaborate more... No I don't think he has the physical tools. When has he shown it in the NFL? And I'm not talking about 5 plays over the length of 2 seasons. Heck Ryan Leaf, Jamarcus Russell, etc. had flashes. Any starting NCAA D1 QB can have flashes in the NFL. But there's a HUGE gap between flashes and being good.

Physical tools are everything physical not just some things. What footwork have we seen from him that shows he has physical tools? What elite passes does he make at multiple times a game. This is a kid who cant even plant his feet correctly to throw swing passes and quick screens. So not sure what physical traits some see with him besides a good throw 2 years ago with no pads on, with no defense and indoors.

I always wanted Fields over him and mostly got chewed out on here by most for saying that. Now Fields has plenty of work to do himself passing the ball. But he for me was always the safer bet. 

[Bobby816]

59 minutes ago, KingOfNewYork said:

Anyway back to actual discussion and not just agendas. 

Woody has to be honest with himself. Nothing 2024 and forward (capital wise) should be on the table without a long term commitment to this staff. 

Letting Douglas and Saleh give a guy like Carr a deal with 3 years of guaranteed money but the team fails to make the playoffs(likely scenario) and you fire them. Now you're stuck with a QB who can't get it done taking up 2 years of cap at the most important position on offense. What prospective coach will come in and take that job? Likely not the top candidate.

Trading 2024 and beyond picks for Rodgers carries the same risk but this is taking away draft capital for the prospective GM. Imagine we trade a conditional 2024 pick that becomes a 1 and it meets the conditions, say 11 wins or a post season berth. We lose in the WC round and Rodgers retires. Now we're out our 2023 pick(s) we gave up, our 2024 1st and still need a QB...again. That is unless we do the work with guy in house(we won't). 

This is why I said we're entering the Colts territory of chasing veterans(Rivers to Wentz to Ryan). This is not the way, it rarely has been though most will point to Brady and Stafford as success stories but McVay and Arians aren't walking through that door and you seen what the Bucs looked like when Bowles took over. We look more familiar to that than a Super Bowl contender. Coaching matters, most of you guys refuse to acknowledge that piece and if you did you'd see the issue we have at play with Hackett leading the charge. 

Now think about all the holes we still have to fill on the OL, at Safety, Linebacker, Defensive Line. There's a lot that matters not just upgrading QB play but it's all people seem to think this team needs(from fans to media). 

 

A team just won a SB with holes all over their roster bc they had an elite QB. You have an elite QB and not having a great LB and S and it costs you 4 points more doesn't matter if you're averaging 12 points more a game. Or how about that just because you have a QB that can actually move the chains that that alone makes up for those 4 points. Never mind the obvious scoring that would come with it as well. 

[GangGreen420]

People need to keep in mind this is a league of parity. Good teams are bad the next year and bad teams make a jump in a year (except the Jets. This is literally the worst franchise in sports) Just inserting QB X, Y, or Z doesn’t guarantee anything.

[CWood21]

10 hours ago, Bobby816 said:

I’m pro going for Rodgers.

But I can totally understand the stance of people who don’t want him.

I think on here I’ve only heard one or 2 people say they think he’s lost it after a down year last year. I think that’s BS. He had a new OC, new WRs and a broken finger. It’s not like last time he was good was 5 years ago. This is a guy that had mvp seasons in 2020 and 2021. So he still has it. So I don’t agree with anyone with the stance of him not being elite.

The part it do get in not wanting him is draft capital and paying for a guy that likely for sure we’d be paying a huge sum to, for 2 years after he retires. And I get not wanting to give up a ton of draft capital for likely a 2 year window.

Reports are now that likely we’d have to part with our 13th pick. That’s huge. The idea of trading future 1sts wasn’t all that bad assuming those picks for sure would be in the 20s (hopefully late 20s or even 30s). And I’m sure we’d have to give up even more if LV is offering their 7th overall pick. So I get this stance.

 

For me as a team that needs to win and make the playoffs and make a SB run… I’d still do the 13th pick and a tad more (maybe like 2024 3rd that goes to a 2nd if he plays in 2024). And that’s it. Anything more than that and I switch over to going all in on Carr.

I'd be lying if I said I didn't understand where Jets' fans are coming from.  Generally speaking, trading a potential long-term asset for a short-term fix generally isn't a healthy decision for any franchise, but it's more fluid than just Rodgers vs. 13th pick.  Even if you go down the QB spectrum, how much is your franchise impacted.

Lamar Jackson - We're probably talking about a Deshaun Watson-like package (3 FRPs+) plus handing out a mega contract (again think Deshaun Watson).  From a purely on-the-field perspective, Lamar Jackson is the best QB available.  He does things the only QB that probably can claim to have done in the last 20 years is Michael Vick.  But the reality is that he's likely going to have a yearly cap hit of at least $40M/year and he's averaged 12 GP over the last 2 seasons because of various injuries.  If you're giving up 3 FRPs+ for Lamar Jackson, you're expecting him to stay relatively healthy and not miss almost a quarter of the season.  Lamar is easily the highest upside QB available, but he also provides the biggest amount of risk involved given the draft capital needed to acquire him and the subsequent mega-deal you're going to have to sign him to.

Derek Carr - Derek Carr is probably the highest upside of all of the FA QBs, but his track record has been inconsistent at best.  You're still probably paying him really good QB money ($35M+/year), but you're not having to give up draft capital to do so.  In terms of minimizing your risk, he's probably the guy who is most likely to cost the least, but going to need the most out of his supporting cast to succeed.  But again, that's assuming that Carr wants to sign with the Jets, but let's assume that he does.  What has Derek Carr done that makes you believe that he's going to succeed when he wasn't able to do it with the Raiders?

Jimmy Garoppolo - This probably the highest floor of the QBs, but also the lowest ceiling of QBs rumored to be available.  He's probably going to be the cheapest to sign (~$25M/year) and he's not probably going to get a lot in terms of GTD money and he doesn't cost draft capital.  But he's only played in 12+ games twice in his 6 seasons with San Francisco, and the 49ers were a Super Bowl-caliber franchise.  And that team actively traded 2 future FRPs to move up to get a QB to replace him.  To me, that speaks volumes about Jimmy G.  What makes you think that the Jets can do something that the 49ers weren't able to do?

Aaron Rodgers - Might be the Packer fan in me here, but Rodgers is the best value in terms of upside and investment.  If the 2+ FRPs are true, I would agree that's too hefty of a price to pay for someone who might retire next offseason unless that second FRP was conditional.  But if it's a FRP plus some change, that's hard to beat.  We all like to assume that the picks our teams make won't bust, but the reality is the success rate of FRPs is around 50%.

And part of the issue I'm seeing with these discussions here and in the Raiders' forum is the concept that future picks hold the same value as present picks when the reality is that isn't the case.  Any team acquiring Rodgers isn't doing it with the idea that they're going to be bad, they're doing it because they think they're going to be good.  Do you think the Broncos would have traded their pick this year for Russell Wilson if they knew they'd be picking top 5?  No.  But the concept is that you either pay more in the future or pay less in the present.  And you're not going to trade your "extra" picks to get the guy that makes you a legitimate Super Bowl contender.  It's easy to forget that the Jets only finished 2 games out of a playoff spot despite 6 straight games to end the season and dealing with the QB carousel.  The Jets were on pace to win 11 games this year.  The concept that the Jets are a fringe playoff team is comical.

[Bobby816]

2 minutes ago, GangGreen420 said:

People need to keep in mind this is a league of parity. Good teams are bad the next year and bad teams make a jump in a year (except the Jets. This is literally the worst franchise in sports) Just inserting QB X, Y, or Z doesn’t guarantee anything.

Of course nothing is guaranteed.

So nothing is absolutes. But this whole angle of some that us adding Rodgers doesn't equal playoffs and possible SB run. Is just a hater for reasons they're not saying.

If someone just saw us almost make the playoffs with the worst QB play in the league and don't think that we are at minimum a playoff team with Carr. They're being a hater for reasons they're not saying.

Neither are guaranteed but you take our healthy roster that has younger guys that should only be better getting a QB. To think that doesn't equal a better team is crazy.

[KingOfNewYork]

47 minutes ago, xrade said:

Certainly not in 2023 but time heals all wounds.  He was booed because he just isn't any good.  The booing on the specific play in question was not so much directed at that particular play but at Wilson not getting it done again.  We are NY fans.  We have certain expectations.  When those expectations do not get met, we vent.  Hell, Aaron Judge was booed in the playoffs.

Maybe I am too much of a hard ***, but if Zach is that sensitive, then maybe he should just go back to Utah and become a JetBlue executive.  

Booing him for playing bad is one thing. Booing him for making the right decision is another. The play was blown up, if he forces that throw it’s a pick. All I’m saying is the fan base removes all rationale when it comes to analyzing him. No one has done any actual analysis of his play or any of these Quarterbacks for that matter.