I wonder when we were busting Fitz's ass all those years if there were posters wishing he was playing for our team. With regards to the trade, I'm happy that we are bringing in a QB well versed in the offense we potentially are going to implement and to be adding more competition at the position. However, I'm NOT going to delude myself into believing we now have a "game manager" capable of leading us to the playoffs. I hate the tendency to build up our acquisitions and/or tearing down our former players in an effort to make the new ones look better. There is a reason Fitz was had for practically nothing; it has nothing to do with his COMP%, TD/INT ratio, Wonderlic, game manangement, Alex Smith…etc…etc.
It's funny when people act like stats don't give us any indication as to how well QB's played. Go ahead and look at the top 10 QB's in the main stat categories, then look at the bottom 10 (23-32). they aren't fantasy numbers. they're tallies of what actually fucking happened. obviously they don't tell the whole story but they're usually a very good indicator.
some of those guys in the top 10 aren't really top 10 QBs and are vastly overrated, some of the guys w/ lesser #s are much better than their #s. #s give us an idea, they don't tell all.
Good point. The fact is that stats tell a meaningful story about QBs AND the offensive personnel surrounding them. Maybe a QB has inflated passing numbers because they have great blocking OL and a strong WR corps while they have no running game and can't count on it. Maybe a QB has worse passing numbers but the offense is more balanced. A QB is only as good as the cast surrounding him in virtually all cases.
If you believe the hype, there's an actual competition at the qb position this year. Whoopee...we get the winner of the Geno vs. Fitzpatrick battle.
seriously... thats like pointing out a CEO just bankrupted a company and someone defending him saying "those are just numbers" they arent just numbers, they are facts. and the fact is sanchez loved throwing the ball to the other team while he was here. He is credited for "winning" and he deserves props for being a good post season performer, but the honest truth is both those playoffs teams got their inspite of him, and his play should have and nearly did cost us a spot to begin with. Having alot of touchdowns is good Having alot of interceptions is bad it isnt all that convoluted
I dont know, if you take the top 10 in TD:INT ratio it looks pretty good to me... Rodgers Brady Romo Manning Luck Wilson Brees Big Ben Rivers Eli and if you look at the bottom 10 (worst on top).... Bortles McCown Lindley Locker Hill Cassell mettenberger stanton mallet keenum which one of those guys from the bottom list is better then the guys on the top?
I want to get back to talking about Fitz in light of hte discussion yesterday with JB. I think I should make clear that at most I see Fitz as a serviceable hold the fort guy. The big picture is it takes a great deal of talent just to make it to the NFL, let alone be a starting Qb, which as a collection of skills is arguably the most difficult to put together in sports that i can think of. But as a practical matter here we are talking about a RELATIVE assessment of talent, comparing Qb's to other Qb's, and starting Qb's at that. While the foregoing would suggest, as I think, that someone who can claim to be ranked somewhere from 15 to perhaps even upper 20s from that total is a valuable player, that does not mean he is in the same league as the truly elite Qb's. Players like Tom Brady, Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, sometimes seem to be operating in a different category, with skills enough better to be seen as such, separating them from even mid-pack Qb's to such an extent that some feel you need one to win it all. Clearly Fitzpatrick is not an elite Qb. At most, I think it fair to say, he might deserve mention or consideration as a mid-packer. But I think he can be that, if his last year in Houston is the better guide, and he does not revert to turning the ball over. I also think he probably does not have a higher ceiling of any significance. He would have shown that by now, even taking into account whatever limitations he has had to deal with in terms of the teams he's played on. But despite these caveats I think there is reason for hope that an expected improvement in Qb over that we've seen the last two years will translate into more wins. How many more wins? That remains to be seen, and there are still some issues elsewhere on the roster despite all the FA and trade moves so far. In that connection JB imo was most obtuse in in effect saying that an average NFL Qb will not translate into more wins than an awful one. So despite recognized limitations in Fitz's game, let's be reasonable and acknowledge there is reason to expect a significantly better team's performance in the coming year.
I almost forgot that this dude broke his leg last year, according to a couple of articles he won't be ready to roll till training camp. http://www.nj.com/jets/index.ssf/2015/03/jets_ryan_fitzpatrick_likely_wont_be_ready_to_comp.html geno's getting starting reps through spring. don't expect that to change with a rookie around either.
Only 7 of those top 10 fantasy QB's have won a superbowl and they've combined for 13 superbowls. All in fantasy land. This is quite the conundrum for those who think QB stats are meaningless and we should only look at team stats like wins when looking at QB's. There is a strong correlation that cannot be ignored by reasonable people.
Unlike some teams Fitz won't have to put up 40 pts/gm to make up for his Defense giving up 39. So it's fair to say Fitz won't have to win the games by himself. BUT there comes a point in most games, especially the playoffs, where the outcome of the game is put squarely on the QB's shoulders. It may be the final drive with less than 2 minutes. It may be getting a crucial 1st down to keep Brady off the field late in the game. Whatever. There's critical, stress packed moments all QBs face throughout the season. It's these moments, that go a long way in determining a team's success, that I believe Fitz will fold.
maybe it worked out last year but 5 of those top 10 either didn't make playoffs or didn't win playoff game. what good are #s w/o winning?
I'd rather have Geno to tell you the truth. Fitzpatrick isn't going to get us a anywhere near the playoffs.
You mean turn the ball over like Sanchez and Geno? I do not want a wide receiver, running back or any player that turns the ball over at critical times.
fitz basically has to be able to throw 25-35 times a game while turning it over once or less per game. he does that and we can make the playoffs.
1) 7 of them made the playoffs: Brady, Luck, Manning, Ben, Wilson, Rogers, Romo And its hard for all of them to win a playoff game considering some of them went head to head. 2) how many of those bottom 10 made the playoffs? how many of those bottom 10 won a playoff game? how many of those bottom 10 have won superbowls? that top 10 list includes: -the superbow winning qb -the superbowl MVP -the super bowl runner up -the league MVP -all 4 championship game QBs Sorry but you are 100% completely wrong and look like a fool trying to spin it otherwise. Newsflash, how you perform statistically determines who you are as a QB. throwing a ton of itnerceptions while not throwing many touchdowns makes you a bad player. period. 7 of the 10 guys on that top 10 list have won a superbowl. combined they have won 13 superbowls. how exactly is that not winning?
let's have some clarity here. Not many qb's can consistently lead their teams back from deficits of more than one score. Chad Pennington had many rabid supporters among the Jet fan base, and to some extent for good reason. But I don't think he ever led the team back from a deficit of more than a TD with 20 minutes or less left in the game. As a general observattion your second paragraph is beyond dispute. But not many Qb's consistently meet those tests.
No, I said Fitz wouldn't lead to more wins, not that an average QB in general wouldn't, based on his historical impact on his team's records. Your problem is that you don't like basic statistical analysis, which is why you argued his career shouldn't be looked at in total but just at stats that highlight his greatest success. You tried to compare that to my argument about Geno who doesn't have enough of a sampling size of starts to make a definitive call on, compared to Fitz who has started 88 games with a win percentage of .356. The most elementary understanding of statistics reveals that is enough of a sample size to draw a conclusion on Fitz's ability to win games.
