Daily Links: Respect

  • Sheldon Richardson earns CBSSports.com’s 2014 DROTY [CBS]
  • Leigh Steinberg on Richard Sherman, concussions and more [SNY.tv]
  • Rex Ryan excited for Jets after year of transition [NY Post]
  • Five things the Jets need to do to reach next year’s Super Bowl [NJ]
  • Rex Ryan: Better the Broncos on our practice field than the Patriots [NY Post]
  • Kate Upton uses Giants and Jets players as props [USA Today]
  • Richard Sherman sorry for ‘attack’ on Crabtree [ESPN]
  • Brady says Broncos were ‘pretty flawless’ [ESPN Boston]



101 comments
harold
harold

@Bent and a57se

I hope you are researching.  Because I am waiting.

frustjetfn
frustjetfn

The Jets need an adequate QB: not someone who may become an adequate QB if he learns X and Y OR if he can do the minimum and let the surrounding cast carry the team OR if we if we ignore lousy performances 75% of the time OR if we ignore reality and rely on hope.

Instead, just bring in talent and see who develops.

Bent
Bent moderator

@jake100 I guess you could say the same thing about Tate.  Or, if the Niners won, Boldin.  Damn those Niners for not winning.

Brendan
Brendan

@jake100 HOME COURT ADVANTAGE, BABY!


If they sign him to an elite WR contract I'll weep. 

Bent
Bent moderator

@harold For me, it's not about "he had no chance of being successful because of what he didn't have" it was more to do with how awful he was with what he did have...and, yes, he got past that and started doing well as the season closed out.


Expecting a better receiving corps to make his life easier and aid his progression is reasonable.  Asserting all his (or Mark's) poor play to the fact that the receivers suck is not.

Pat d
Pat d

Not sure what your definition of adequate is but I don't see too many adequate QBs winning Super Bowls.

Bent
Bent moderator

@jake100 No point putting a number on it, they just need to be more consistent instead of putting up 30 one week and laying an egg the next.

Bent
Bent moderator

@jake100 Of course, this comment from me doesn't consider that those guys would be at the Giants facility...

harold
harold

@Bent:

I never have done that nor will I ever do that.  My facts are solid and not disputable.  I only try to post reasonable argument to stop the over reactions.

I don't generally post where I say Geno will be this or that.  I have always maintained to try and judge him based on this season with the limits of the roster is not possible.

In hinsight we could have made judgments about Sanchez based on how poorly he performed with a great supporting cast around him in his first two years.  I realize the limits of the WR's over the first 8 weeks of season one.

I don't ignore Geno stats 18 total TD's, 25 Int's.

I also don't ignore that in the games where he just had the # 86 WR in yards in the NFL he was 8-4. 

Logic dictates if we can get him a reasonable set of skill players around him he should be able to progress reasonably well.

Brendan
Brendan

@Bent I don't even know if it's the quality of player as much as the constantly changing receiver roster, due to injuries and talent deficiencies. 

Bent
Bent moderator

@jake100 @Ceifus Hornswoggle  "If you go by the last 4 games, he was second only to Peyton in QBR! "

There's no way that's true.  Geno's highest rating in the last four was 91.7.  Brees had a couple of games with ratings in the 120's and the other two about the same as Geno's 3rd and 4th best game.


He was the first one I bothered to look at.  Clearly I don't need to go any further.  Where on earth did you get that stat from?

Brendan
Brendan

@a57se We'll never know, but smart players would look at them that way. The way the team reacted to the "Rex is coming back" announcement is basically a recruitment video. 

Bent
Bent moderator

@a57se @Brendan Absolutely none.  It was jarring reading the "2013 opponents announced" articles for our opponents.  EVERYONE penciled us in as an easy win.

Brendan
Brendan

@Bent Agreed, but a 2-year deal minimizes the pain. He just played at a high level this year, he has good hands, will go over the middle and make tough catches, plus he's a solid blocker. 


I also wonder if him being an absolute beast (in terms of body type) and he's never been a speed receiver will lead to his "falling off" not being so drastic. He's always been about route running, toughness, strength...maybe he's a safer bet than Mason? 


I think it's most likely that he ends up with another team, but I'd be happy if the Jets landed him for a reasonable price. 

Bent
Bent moderator

@Brendan @a57se Devil's advocate for getting Boldin.


Average catches per season over the last three years: 69

Average catches per season over the last three years for Derrick Mason when we got him: 72


Or go back four years and the discrepancy is even bigger (79-68).


When receivers fall off, they do so fast.  


Boldin was fantastic this year, but the Jets have had terrible success with signing free agent wide receivers.   

Brendan
Brendan

@a57se I know what you're saying, but an 8-8 team on the rise is a fairly attractive squad, though. And not every good team has cap space for him or a need at WR. 

Brendan
Brendan

@Bytor I've been a huge fan of Boldin since his days at FSU. The guy is one of the toughest dudes in the NFL, he would teach the Jets' young receivers A LOT. 

Bytor
Bytor

@Brendan @Bent @Bytor @jake100 @brendan It makes even more sense if/when Holmes hits the streets. I'd rather go with rookie/Kerley/Boldin than rookie/Kerley/Hill or rookie/Kerley/Tate etc.

Bent
Bent moderator

@Bytor @Bent @jake100 @brendan He's less than a year older than Welker, who just got 2 years and 12m last year, so I'd be looking at something within spitting distance of that.

Bytor
Bytor

@Bent @jake100 @brendan I have a funzies bet with 57 that we'll sign Boldin. Probably wishful thinking on my part but I see an awesome fit for us and Geno. How much do you think he'll command in the open market? 

Bent
Bent moderator

@a57se @Bent I thought late rounders don't count.  :o)

Bent
Bent moderator

@a57se @Bent Hopefully Campbell will be another one we can look back on as a good pick in the future.

Bent
Bent moderator

@a57se Well, whatever, just don't make the same mistake again with the next guy.

Bent
Bent moderator

@a57se Well, they just drafted two good players, while we drafted Hill, White, McKnight and only hit on Kerley.


Morale of the story is that if they draft a WR high, they better get a good one.

Bent
Bent moderator

@a57se @Bent Exactly, you'd be stuck with the overpaid veteran and having to re-sign the guy whose contract was up and perhaps overpaying him so as not to lose out on chemistry.

Bent
Bent moderator

@a57se @Bent Well, they drafted well.  What if the Thomas and Decker picks had not panned out?

Bent
Bent moderator

@a57se @Bent No, but if you recall, they reshaped their receiving corps around that time, trading Brandon Lloyd away during the season and using the likes of Royal and Decker full time while they increased the playing time for Thomas.


When Royal's contract was up, they opted to stick with Decker, who they'd groomed as a replacement.

djf1
djf1

@a57se I think a more reasonable response would be, you're right, looks like OTC is a more accurate source.

Bent
Bent moderator

@jake100 @Bent @a57se @brendan Well, Moore has Brees and Royal has Rivers (not too much of a drop-off).


I'd say he's definitely a notch above those guys.  Denver basically kept him over Royal for one thing.

harold
harold

@Bent

As you said he will get between 8-12 million.  Depending on the market.  But thinking we will get him for 5-7 million which I would pay is unrealistic.

Bent
Bent moderator

@a57se @Bent Either that or Spotrac stumbled upon a stunning exclusive

Bent
Bent moderator

@jake100 @Bent @a57se @brendan 


4-5m in terms of APY makes his veteran peer group Eddie Royal, Nate Washington, Lance Moore.  He's a notch above that group IMO.

Bent
Bent moderator

@a57se No, OTC is better.  Spotrac gets their data from OTC.

Bent
Bent moderator

@jake100 @Bent @brendan Yes, like I said that's 2013 salary, but if you're paying a guy 6-7m in salary, you probably also paid him a bonus upfront that has to be factored in.


Maybe Decker does get a five year deal with an annual salary of $5m ... but he'd also get a 10m signing bonus and therefore the average per year would actually be 7m.


That's for illustrative purposes.  I think he'll get more than 7m a year.

Bent
Bent moderator

@a57se @Bent @jake100 @brendan  There aren't that many to look at but Deion Branch is the obvious one.  The rest - Moss for example - were already over the hill so you could attribute any down turn to that.


That's the reservation everyone should have with Decker.  While some will play the "he produced with Tebow" card, I don't buy that because that was a run heavy offense so when they did throw it was to exploit single coverage or someone biting on playaction.


Clearly Woodhead has exceeded expectations with the Chargers.

Bent
Bent moderator

@jake100 @brendan In a market where Mike Wallace got $10m and was outproduced by Decker, I think you are dreaming if you expect him to earn that kind of money.


By the way Jackson gets $11m a year or $10m a year (depending whether you mean Vincent or DeSean)


White gets 8.5m a year.


Williams and Rice both get $8m a year


Boldin got over 8m a year


You're just looking at salary, not factoring in bonuses.


I agree that Peyton drives his price up, but the same is true of NE skill position players and they still get paid pretty well.



Brendan
Brendan

@jake100 That's not it at all, I promise. I was just curious what you think the cutoff for him should be. 


I'd be willing to part with $7ish million a year, fwiw. 

Brendan
Brendan

@jake100 Well, who do you feel are his peers? Maybe if we establish that, we can gauge a fair market value for him. (this is what I do at work, btw, drag the horse to water by asking questions)

Brendan
Brendan

@jake100 Just curious, what's your cutoff for "elite" money. Would a $7-$8 million average be acceptable?

harold
harold

@Bent

Understood, I know you have to be impartial and give both sides.  No harshness intended.  Hard to sound reason and strong sometimes. 

Bent
Bent moderator

@harold No you haven't.  That wasn't really aimed at you, that was aimed at the people who take your reasoned comments too far.


Aside: Imagine if the Jets benched Geno permanently after week 13, which easily could have happened.  We'd know they'd be drafting a QB and would all be assuming Geno's Jets career was all but over.  Hopefully they got lucky there.

Brendan
Brendan

@SackDance99 This. 


We all know the Jets' have had QB issues forever. Acting like they're Geno's fault, or Rex's fault, or Marty's fault, or Idzik's fault is just unfair. 


Yes, the Jets have had QB issues and they're frustrating and longstanding. No, that doesn't mean you can pull a "we've been waiting decades!" act every time Geno throws a pick. Every rookie QB struggles, Geno has Y2 to show improvement, or he's yanked. And so goes the process until they find someone worth keeping. But it's not like Idzik has made every QB pick for the past 3 decades, or the QB's been the same. 

SackDance99
SackDance99

@a57se@SackDance99Rex, however, admitted that after the bye (and starting with the Saints game) he made a mistake of reining in the passing game.  After the Miami game, Rex decided to leave MM and Geno alone and the results were encouraging.  So, maybe with the full playbook (and, more importantly, the right non-QB players to fully implement MM's system), Geno will be better?  Because, when MM's system was used more, Geno had some of his best games.

SackDance99
SackDance99

@haroldFans every right to be impatient with the QB position, but impatience with a rookie QB , who objectively had very little offensive talent around him, isn't fair to him or the franchise.  Geno being successful, at his cap #, would be a home run for the Jets.  It would allow them to build out the offense with veteran performers (like Graham or Decker) without having to worry about paying the QB.  That is a huge advantage.  I'll be the first to jump off the Geno bandwagon if he's still staring down receivers, getting too many INTs or holding the ball too long and taking unnecessary sacks.  I just think he has the potential to be much better next season.

SackDance99
SackDance99

@a57se@Bent@haroldHis improvement was reading defenses better and taking off and running decisively when it was better than attempting a risky pass.  When he trusts himself and his receivers better, then he should attempt more challenging throws, but if the defense just vacates the middle of the field or leaves the edge wide open with no contain, why not run?  Eventually, running success and the threat of the run help open up the passing game.  Fact is, Geno did get better in the pocket and did improve on staring down WRs (probably his biggest rookie mistake).  Let's hope with a full complement of weapons around him in Cortland and another year of camp tutelage with MM (and this time with the bulk of QB1 reps), he'll improved markedly.


IMO, 2nd year starting (if there hasn't been 1st year success), is the big year.  I expect more TDs than INTs and 60% or better completions.  Anything short of that and the Jets won't have a QB that's better than replacement level for the 6th straight year...and that's unacceptable.

harold
harold

@Sackdance99

Great post.  It continues to add context to the debate.  Many posters here are hurt by the failed Sanchez experiment.

It blinds them to the true fundamental differences between the two players.

Hopefully they read what you wrote and continue to add more diversity to their thoughts so they can see maybe we have something here.

harold
harold

@a57se

Those are the statistical rankings.  It is a point of reference for all you guys who don't realize what Geno was up against.  The worse Qb's have more consistent threats. 

These rankings are meant to add context to the debate.

Brendan
Brendan

@a57se Limiting his improvement to just running the ball? 


Great, good thing you're not biased or anything. 

Pat d
Pat d

Geno is more like a roller coaster

SackDance99
SackDance99

@Bent@haroldI've said this before and I'll keep on saying it.  Geno and Sanchez both had incompetent seasons (for Mark, his regression started in 2011 and became the slipperiest slope imaginable in 2012), but they were incompetent in different ways.  Sanchez had foundational issues in his ability to throw the football that Geno doesn't have.  Sanchez was awful at screens, terrible at short and intermediate outs and lost his deep ball accuracy (to such a point that I thought he had an injured shoulder).  Geno's flaw in throwing is tied to his footwork when rolling out and setting.  He has a tendency to back foot throw and sail his throws.

Other than that, Geno has the ability to make every NFL throw, with his main need being experience and chemistry with his receivers.  As Kerley was the only WR that he threw to in camp and for the majority of the season and Geno's record with Kerley in the line up was good, it bodes well for the argument that getting Geno a corps of receivers (TE, WR, RB) with him in camp could pay great dividends.


The difference between Geno and Mark as QB prospects, however, is like night and day.  Geno has a better arm, is an exponentially better runner and is even a little taller.  Geno improved over the course of the season and bounced back after his only losing streak and benchings.  His overall numbers were better than an average Sanchez season in many respects, with control over INTs being Geno's biggest problem.  In the turnover category, I don't believe that Geno fumbled after the Titans game and he only threw 2 picks in his last 4 games, after throwing 19 in his first 12 games.

Geno shouldn't be given a free pass and should have camp competition, but Jets fans have a sound basis to be optimistic about Geno's prospects with better weapons around him.  IMO, and the reason all of us argued with joey so much, is that getting Sanchez better weapons couldn't have cured his foundational throwing issues that manifested themselves in his rookie season and were steadily exposed over the course of 4 seasons.  With Geno we saw what having chemistry with just 1 WR showed.

bradysucks
bradysucks

QB's are judged by their BODY OF WORK over an entire NFL season. You can't just cherry pick the games at the end of the 2013 season and conclude that Geno is our guy at QB. The fact is he was one of the most turnover prone QB's in the NFL in 2013. He was a rookie. We expected some growing pains. In 2014 we expect a QB who protects the football and throws more TD's than he has turnovers.

This is not unreasonable nor is it unfair to Geno!

He has not come close to proving to me that he should be the Jets QB. The only thing I know about Geno is I like him more than Sanchez.....who was a BUST.

harold
harold

@Bent

IMO and this is with hinsight.  The team Sanchez had he should never have been that bad to begin with.

I admit that is with hindsight.  But with the #1 defense, running game and a 3 top 85 receiving threats he should have been better to begin with.

Bent
Bent moderator

@a57se @Bent @harold He was very "all or nothing" all season.  What I like about those last four games was that he smoothed out a bit and there weren't wild swings from week to week.

Bent
Bent moderator

@harold Sanchez did the same thing at the end of 2009 (and 2010) if you include postseason.


Sometimes the momentum carries over, sometimes it does not.

harold
harold

@bradysucks

He already showed that over the last 14 Quarters of the season 1 Turnover.

He is understanding so to act as though the last 4 games did not happen is just as silly as me acting as though the first 12 games did not occur.

I maintained one thing all season.  I judge rookies on the positive moments much more so than their low ones.

I take note of the low moments to see how they respond.

bradysucks
bradysucks

These guys just ignore turnovers....how convenient. A QB who turns over the football is not a good QB. A QB who turns over the football and doesn't throw TD's is just BAD.

Geno was a rookie. No more excuses. If he keeps turning over the football he needs to go. The talent is there. It takes more than talent though. He needs to show he can play smart football and that starts with reducing turnovers

Pat d
Pat d

Geno's M O is what goes up must come down

Bent
Bent moderator

@harold It's harder to perform competently, sure, but for a stretch this year Geno could sniff 50% or 10 completions in a game and at the end of last year, Sanchez was similarly incompetent.  That's a step below how badly most veterans would struggle in the same situation.


We don't ban good posters here.

Brendan
Brendan

@SackDance99 QBR is a fake stat created to give Trent Dilfer something to argue about when talking about "Tim Tebow...starting QB." No one should ever reference it (sorry, Joseph). 

SackDance99
SackDance99

@Bent@jake100@Ceifus HornswoggleI read the same stat, but it was based upon ESPN's QBR and, fwiw, Geno's average over the last 4 games was higher than Brees'.  So, it's possible that using ESPN's bespoke QBR, that Geno was second only to Peyton over the last 4 games of the season.

harold
harold

I disagree very strongly with your argument.  It is not well reasoned when it comes to missing WR's.

Every QB will miss open WR's.  Rookies throw picks vets throw it away.

that is the main difference.  But if you look at the history of the NFL I cannot find one QB who has been successful without either a top ten defense, top 15 RB or top 85 Wr.

If you can find me one I will gladly agree to be banned from the site for a month.

harold
harold

Bent:

Every QB misses reads. 

I disagree very strongly with your argument.  It is not well reasoned when it comes to missing WR's.

Every QB will miss open WR's.  Rookies throw picks vets throw it away.

that is the main difference.  But if you look at the history of the NFL I cannot find one QB who has been successful without either a top ten defense, top 15 RB or top 85 Wr.

If you can find me one I will gladly agree to be banned for the site for a month. 

Bent
Bent moderator

@harold That's obviously true, but ...


(a) That was mainly due to injuries, so those people criticizing the front office for not doing enough to put together a solid receiving corps are off-base IMO.


(b) When Smith and Sanchez were doing really badly, there were journeymen QBs around the league doing more with less, so you can't attribute everything to the receiving corps, that's an oversimplification ...  and ...


(c) There were loads of examples of open receivers that were missed or not even seen by both Sanchez and Smith, where the blame goes solely on them.


Upgrading the pass catchers is a need, but it isn't going to suddenly make the QB better at reading defenses or more accurate and in those regards Smith, like Sanchez before him, has a lot of work to do, so hopefully he continues on from the progress he made to end the year.

harold
harold

Bent

Can you at least let the other bloggers know to get rid of the argument of pieces.

Sanchez had solid pieces and an exceleent team around him.

Can you help the others understand that when your leading WR is # 86 in the NFL in yeards you are in trouble.

juunit
juunit

@jake100@juunit@Bent@Ceifus Hornswoggle 

He played better once we were eliminated from the playoffs and the games became meaningless.

I don't really consider that encouraging. All I consider that to be is not disappointing. It's better than him finishing with a bunch of games where he completed less than 10 passes. That's about it. 

And I really have no interest in a QB who needs a perfect situation to succeed. I don't want an Andy Dalton on our team. 

harold
harold

@Bent

The QBR is about winning football and when you take rushing and receiving into account, Geno was very good. 

Last 14 Quarters 1 INT.  He played excellent football.  For the last 4 games I don't know many QB's you would have rather had (not reputation, based on results).  He led Peyton-esque drives w/4 -79 yards plus scoring drives against the Browns.  That is big-time football. 

No matter the how you slice it he played not well but very well.

Bent
Bent moderator

He was 16th, 27th, 10th and 18th in traditional QBR.


If we're going to consider a completely subjective metric then let's also see where PFF who grade every throw ranked him over the last four (passing grade only, because they also grade runs):


18th, 22nd, 8th, 10th.



Bent
Bent moderator

@harold If that's the case, then it just goes to show how laughable that completely subjective stat is, but at least he was impressing someone.

harold
harold

@Bent

Jake100 is talking about ESPN QBR, not the traditional ranking.  I believe this was accurate at least for the AFC.

Ceifus Hornswoggle
Ceifus Hornswoggle

@Bent 

So, our coach likes to make foot fetish videos.  Our QB likes to do Brett Favre impressions with his phone.  And our starting tight end gets high and plays with himself in public parking lots.  Miami may have a culture of bullying, but that seems better than our culture of deviance. 

Ceifus Hornswoggle
Ceifus Hornswoggle

@Bent 

He would've been had his receivers been able to catch the ball.  It was like their hands were coated in Vaseline or something. 

Bent
Bent moderator

@jake100 @Bent @Ceifus Hornswoggle 


"Would you agree Geno improved the last few games?"


Absolutely...but he wasn't the 2nd best QB in the league.

Bent
Bent moderator

@a57se @Bent @jake100 @Ceifus Hornswoggle 


I'm legitimately interested to know where he got that stat from because I read it and was like "there's no way that's true" then did 10 seconds of research and proved my hypothesis correct.