In the Jets case probably 3-4 years instead of 2-3. Big part of that reason is the Jets cap in 2013 and possibly still an issue in 2014, depending on what they do this off season. The Jets can easily get under cap, but at the cost of losing two of their starting LB's, both starting Safeties, One starting DE one starting DT, one starting TE, one backup TE, the starting Running back, two starting guards and i believe their starting Tackle. And with all of that the jets are about 10 million under cap at that point, but at the cost of 11 starting players.
Read back through the thread, I have debunked most of those games Junc's provided. Including the game against the Browns, and how the game never should have gotten to overtime. But tell you what, this weekend when I have more than 30 minutes I'll go and disect each and every game, play by play. Box scores can be misleading, the play by play tells the story.
As a fan, I would think we would want a 6 win team to lose 11 starters. Also, losing 11 starters is a bit misleading as there are players in house that we've been grooming for staring roles (i.e., Kendrick Ellis, Vladimir Ducasse, Demorio Davis, Quinton Coples, Antonio Allen, Jeff Cumberland...etc.). You trade Cro you get another 8.25 million I think as well as extra picks. Then there are restructuring options (Harris, Holmes, Brick...etc.). So it would only take 3-4 years if you have no clue what you are doing.
I think anyone whose "standards" (I'm being awfully generous here) define Sanchez as a good, or even average, NFL quarterback is a very silly person. I disagree with most of this, however, for brevity's sake, I will stick to addressing the bolded: The modern NFL is governed by upper-echelon quarterbacks. Quite frankly, the NFL is a passing league proliferated with teams that are able to score points quickly, and in bunches. The last 10 Superbowl winning quarterbacks are 1) Eli Manning, 2) Aaron Rodgers, 3) Drew Brees, 4) Big Ben, 5) Eli Manning, 6) Peyton Manning, 7) Big Ben, 8) Tom Brady, 9) Tom Brady, and 10) Brad Johnson. Other than Brad Johnson (who was on a team with a borderline historically dominant defense), each of these quarterbacks is an elite player, and several of them are all-time greats and future hall of famers. While having a future HOF QB is not a definitive prerequisite, it is beyond obvious that this is the direction the league has gone. From Sanchez's first 4 years alone, it is extremely unlikely that he will be anywhere near as good as 9 of the 10 players on this list. I could expand on this in much greater detail if you want, but the bottom line is that I vehemently disagree with the notion that it is a "loser trap" to "chase" a great ("franshise", if you like) quarterback. In point of fact, I consider it one of the most quintessential goals of every front office in the league. Quarterback is the single most important, decisive position in all of team sports, and with passing rules skewed the way they are, and in full accordance with the number of great skill position players who proliferate the pro and college ranks, it is an utter necessity to have a competent player under center. Mark Sanchez simply doesn't cut it.
Two years isn't much, unless you've been waiting 44. We've been fucking rebuilding since 1969. That's how long I've been a Jets fan and that's how long I've been waiting. We were supposed to have it with Chad Pennington. Then we draft El Guapo. 4 more years gone and now another 2-years (at the very least) to fucking rebuild again? Come on Man.
This is a great point and something that a team's front office should always consider before making wholesale changes. Having said that, Sanchez has always been the weakness of this team. He's never performed at a high level for any consistent period of time, and in point of fact, he's mostly been decidedly below average. We've had anywhere from a mediocre to outright poor passing game since he's been here . . . and this year, Sanchez was downright disastrous. It is certainly fair and reasonable (and in no way suggests innate instability within the organization) to want to replace a mediocre quarterback (and perceived weakness of the team) after 4 years.
Well yes and no, Vlad is still a very big question mark, his run blocking is fine but his pass protection even this year has been very much lacking. Kendrick Ellis has shown flashes, but he's also been hurt alot, not a good sign for a DT, and this is from someone who think Ellis can be a real stud at DT. Cumberland, unless I'm mistaken, is a free agent so he's not even on the roster currently. Antonio Allen, another player I love the potential of, is hard to say he's been groomed since he spent most of the season on the practice squad. I love his potential, but he's still a big question mark. Coples is an almost certain stud at DE, but you still need to have depth and this is especially true on a team like the Jets that while they are a base 3-4 defense they play many different fronts, often with two DE's and 2 DT's. Demario Davis is a again a guy I think has a big upside, but we've yet to see him enough of the field to get a feel for what he really is and whether he is going to get close to his potential. Trading Cromartie, while it sounds good, if you are doing a 2 year rebuilding then you HAVE to get Revis resigned. However, that's not going to be easy. Revis is going to want 12-14 million per year and he's made it clear that he will not renegotiate before the end of the 2013 season, he needs the leverage to negotiate. restructuring deals is part of what got the team in to this mess. Consider this, in 2014 the Jets have 96 million already committed to 26 players, and that's with Revis only being a 6 million cap value in 2014 (the contract amount is still listed as Revis can not opt out till after 2013.) Yes Scott's 8M cap value will be gone, he'll be cut this year but that would be more than offset with Revis's new contract, assuming he would resign at all. You can resturcture, but in doing so you always have to guarentee more money which means larger cap hits if you later cut that player or trade that player, and there are several big contracts you probably don't want to guarentee more money to, Sanchez, Holmes, Harris, Pouha., etc. Remember, you have to give the players something in order to get them to restructure, and that ALWAYS includes more money in guarentees. Now that's not to say you can't clear a ton of cap space, you can..in theory if they did the trades right they could get open up about 30 million in cap space for 2013, and about 80 million open in 2014...of course that means moving almost every starter over the age of 26 or so.
That quintessential goal should be winning. Getting a "franchise" QB should never take priority over that. If it does, then you can rationalize tanking seasons for the purpose of putting yourself in the best position to get your "franchise" QB; hence the "chase". The Jets tried to get their "franchise" QB in 2009. Depending on who you are, you either believe they poorly evaluated or poorly managed their "franchise" QB or both. Either way that doesn't mean we stop trying to win games and switch our focus to getting the next franchise QB.
Well, of course the quintessential goal is WINNING. It's what (I presume) we are all interested in. But, the point is . . . Getting a franchise quarterback is the most quintessential aspect of building a winning, contending team, year in and year out. Unless we are truly going to field a historically dominant defense, it's something I firmly believe we need.
We'll get one, don't worry. I'm only 20 and I have only been a fan since 2010 (I should have known whaat I was getting into But, I truly think we are going to get the pieces to win a Superbowl within 5 years. Cutting the deadweight that is Saint Chez will go a LONG way towards that goal.
You dont' need a "Franchise QB", but you do need an above average QB. Unless you have a massive defense you dont' get the playoffs with average or below average QB play. There is a reason the league is QB driven in todays salary cap league, it's easier to stay competitive year to year if you have an above average QB that doesn't need a massive defense to win. To keep a massive defense you have to keep 10-11 guys on top of their game year in and year out, that gets expensive over time. But if you have an above average QB, or "Franchise" QB you can win with a lesser defense and a less expensive recieving corp. With a below average QB you have to have an elite defense, above average receivers and an above average running game. All of those parts are difficult to keep in place year to year in a salary cap league. If you look at most of the successful teams that are in the playoffs year in and year out they are all QB driven teams, the exception you might be able to argue is the 49ers the last two years and the Ravens the years before Flacco's arrival. But in the end you still need to have an overall good team, but with a top half QB you can get by with a few holes on the team, if you have a below average QB those holes become glaring.
The problem I have with what you have bolded is that some fans act as if there is a simple science to obtaining a "franchise" quarterback that the Jets organization intentionally or unintentionally fails to exercise. Excuse my French, but no sh*t having a franchise QB greatly improves you ability to compete every year. However, in the absence of one, you can still attempt to field a competitive team. I've mentioned this analogy many times before, I equate those who continually harp on the whole franchise QB mantra to fans of bad NBA fans who profoundly proclaim that all their team needs is a guy who can demand a double team. Uh yeah that would great, but what should we do until that happens?
I totally agree with most of this. It's hard and isn't anything close to a science. But the NBA/NFL fans clamoring for a star player and franchise qb, respectively, are still correct. No one is saying it's a sure thing or that there is any obvious way to go about doing it. The answer to your question (bolded) is, sadly, this: we have to get lucky. There is no magic set of rules to follow. We have to draft a young QB and hope he works out. We have to TRY. It starts with making the admission that Sanchez isn't the guy, and at some point, going in another direction.
Came over here to see if junc was the same here as on FH. Its literally the exact same right down to the whole "you don't really know the game" spiel. He once said that he watches the game like a coach and pretty much everyone else is just a casual know nothing fan.
If the team makes the playoffs he will probably be broght back if hes atleast mediocre....anything short of that him and Rex will probably both take the fall andbe out after next season..... Woody will need another fall guy or two and sanchez and rex would be perfect for that. Than he would sell the fan base that were letting Idzik build this roster. And this is exactly what I expect the case to be after this season.
you are gonna use stats to prove your point? why is it when someone else shows you stats they dont mean anything? try again though junc, you have been proved wrong countless times. our run game and defense won us most games in both of nacho's so called good years. what was the score of those games? a penalty on an opposing team is one of your highlights? what about all those turnovers? 3-outs? oh yeah and his critical fumble that gave pittsburgh the winning margin that your offensive passing game couldnt make up the difference? spin master, thats all you are. use your eye test some more, you are so convincing! convincing to yourself and others who do not know what they are watching.
