Why does Simms deserve a shot to get on the field? He was a complete and total failure as a college QB for all 4 years. He did nothing last year after his college career ended. Here are his career college stats: Year Team G Cmp Att Comp % Yds Yd/A TDs Int Sacked Yds 2008 Lou 1 4 10 40.0 39 3.9 0 1 1 5 2010 Tenn 11 113 195 57.9 1460 7.5 8 5 25 171 2011 Tenn 7 27 62 43.5 319 5.1 0 3 4 27 Career 19 144 267 53.9 1818 6.8 8 9 30 203 8 TDs in 19 games with 54% completion percentage. If Simms couldn't play against the Vanderbilts and Mississippis of the world, what makes you think he can play against NE and Cincy and NO? One good game in the preseason playing with a bunch of scrubs against a bunch of scrubs? Is Brett Ratliff available? Maybe we should give him a shot too. Let's audition 7-8 QBs this year. That's a sure formula for building a winning team and developing QBs. This is one the dumbest threads in TGG history. A bunch of internet posters claiming to know how the career of a rookie QB will turn out after 6 games.
You are not allowed to criticize Geno in the official Geno Smith Era! thread. Didn't you get the memo? _
I suggest that you read the story behind SIMMS in college. The stats tell you nothing. The guy never really got a chance to produce because his headcoaches kept quitting and he was not the guy the new new HCs wanted. BUT when he did get in he did pretty well. It would not hurt to give the guy some snaps in a real game. Then we can see what we have and make a decision.
Agreed! To not consider all options when you know you'll be lucky to have a 500 season is a trait that will get you fired. Then Rex is going to be gone anyways so what does he have to lose? They if he pulled the trigger and the skies parted and the sun came out it might just save his job.
welcome back did not saw a post of you right after Atlanta game.Glad you will be away more next time means Geno performance might get consistent xd.
Fair points, but you're ignoring the biggest difference between the two players. Geno's INTs typically amount to being early down punts. He's taking shots down field at inopportune times. Sanchez's INTs have always been of a different variety, killer INTs either returned for TDs or giving a short field because they were just from tipped passes or DBs constantly jumping his routes. That is a HUGE difference that needs to be taken into account. And yes, Geno has more consistently turned it over, but he's also being asked to do a lot more than Sanchez was in his first (and second) years. And I don't think you can honestly say you thought Mark was winning any of those games early in his rookie year. He was just not losing them. With Mark, it was always either he blows the game by himself or he allows his team to lead the way and he didn't get in the way. (Note that I'm not talking about playoffs at all where he did look good.) Geno, conversely, has been asked to do a lot more and has at times succeeded. It's way too early to tell if he's going to be legitimate, but he moves the offense and makes our offense interesting. He has shown that he's capable of it while also making rookie mistakes. It's much better than what we've seen for 4 years whether you want to blame Sanchez or the OCs or anyone else, but I guess I'm just glad to finally see both a QB and an OC that doesn't consistently lead us to 3 and outs or pick 6's. Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk now Free
We might have low expectations as fans, but you're asking a team to turn to a different QB at 3-3 and in the thick of the early playoff hunt. Your and my expectations don't matter, but in the words of Herm Edwards, you play to win the game. If the coaching staff thinks Geno gives them the best chance to win, I'll take their word for it and hope there's no agenda behind that. But I bet Jacksonville even thought they could win some games for a few weeks and be competitive. Additionally, all indications are that the team as a whole respects Geno as their QB, so I don't think it would send the right message. If the season starts looking bleak and Geno's apologies start falling on deaf ears, then sure. Give Simms a shot. But for now, I'd trust the offense to the guy who made a name for himself in college and has played decently for a rookie over a guy who sucked in college and strung together a couple nice preseason games. It's not fear, it's just I think it sends the wrong message at this point in the season. Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk now Free
There should only be a change if Geno continues to play the way he did yesterday for about 4 to 5 more weeks at best. We are still contending for a playoff spot. If you bench Geno, some will believe you are giving up on the season.
Yup, and I mean it. It felt like I was watching Matt Schaub every game. Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk now Free
ah, the opportunist makes an appearance! "Oh man, after that Atlanta game I sure hope that smith guy has another bad game, that way I can bitch about him without looking like an idiot! Oh boy two picks, nows my chance!" alright "jetsfan" while Geno is by no means absolved of his bad performances (that first pick last sunday was atrocious right?) I want you to give him credit for doing well on the road last week. If you're a true fan of the team and have any sense of objectivism that shouldn't be a problem, just as anybody that likes him should admit that he's played poorly as well. and really everybody, enough of the simms s#it, I'm fine with the guy as a project and backup but Smith is nowhere near thin enough ice to be replaced. the chance that Simms may be the next best thing to sliced thread because of one preseason game isn't enough to abandon ship for another rookie, especially since he's gonna have to go through his own curve too.
I don't mean to get in the way of some good hyperbole while you're rolling, but I don't know many teams that punt inside the redzone not once but twice when trying to get back in a close game like against Pitt. _
Fair enough. But I'd call the Steelers game the anomaly here. It kept points off the board, but didn't directly result in the opposing team's points either. Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk now Free
So how does your hyperbole square with the Titan game? Every INT led to points, not one was akin to a punt. First throw of the game? Short pass at mid field to Holmes? Another anomaly? What I'm saying is, you're revising history to promote an agenda, I get it. Geno is going to be fine, no need to make stuff up about him. _
I know preseason games do not count but I am starting to think that some of you guys were at the beach and missed the whole preseason. Anyone who watched those games knows that Matt Simms ran circles around Mark Sanchez and Geno Smith. Every time he was on the field we moved the ball, scored points, and did not turn the ball over (not even once). Sure he might not have been playing against the best competition but it is not like Geno Smith showed us anything good in those same games against the same defenses. After the Falcons game I thought hitting rock bottom against the Titans finally got Geno thinking about protecting the football. Now I am not sure he is ever going to get it. Last year most of us were screaming for the coaching staff to bench Sanchez and see what else we have on the roster. When is enough going to be enough? How many times does Geno have to turn the ball over before there are any consequences?
2 things... 1) Geno was battling an ankle injury that clearly affected his footwork vs the Giants and helped attribute to a lousy game 2) Simms worked with 2nd and 3rd stringers on offense AND against a 2nd and 3rd string, mediocre Giants defense. I like Simms...he did what he was suppose to but lets not take the preseason into account as to which signal caller is better please. Geno is a rookie....Sanchez was in year 4. There's the difference.
there's a difference he played bad but he didn't play horrible to the point where -he's the next Sanchez -we should put in Simms -we should draft a new QB I've been critical of Smith but I can do so without being a dickhead like some of you
