I hope so. I agree with everything in JV’s post. They’re definitely still in the mix. They have to win out, and it works out better for Vandy if the three one-loss teams do also. Their losses don’t bump Vandy up, but their wins help knock some teams out - Texas and Oklahoma, particularly. You should be rooting hard for each of them to pick up a third loss. That’s doable. There’s either going to be four or five SEC teams in the playoff. Right now, it looks like seven teams battling for five slots. We don’t want that to become four. A two-loss team will get in, but if it gets to be too much of a schmozz, the CFP Committee has a bias in favor of blue bloods, strong finishes and whatever fan base will criticize them least (because someone’s always going to be pissed). My opinion - Vandy is better off if the SEC top-four finish strong and if they become the best, two-loss team, alone in the fifth slot. Texas A&M, 8-0 Alabama, 7-1 Georgia, 7-1 Ole Miss, 8-1 Texas, 7-2 Oklahoma, 7-2 Vandy, 7-2 Oklahoma’s toughest game is at Alabama next week. Texas is at UGA in two weeks and at home against TAM to close out the season. They have the talent to win either one, but will be underdogs in both. Also wouldn’t hurt if Vandy’s strength of schedule could bump up a notch or two. So, if VA Tech could finish strong against Miami and Virginia, or if South Carolina can pull off an unexpected win at TAM, Vandy’s SoS technically improves. Although, since you also want TAM to beat Texas, that one might be a wash.
It’s also going to be a battle with the Big Ten teams to see which 3 loss squads get in. We’re basically looking at the below getting in factoring in the remaining schedules. A&M Alabama Georgia Ole Miss Indiana Ohio State Big 12 bid ACC bid G5 bid Notre Dame That leaves two spots for the below Texas Tech or BYU (whoever doesn’t get the top billed Big 12 spot) Georgia Tech or Virginia (whoever doesn’t get the top billed ACC spot) Iowa Michigan Oregon USC Vanderbilt Oklahoma Texas Miami? Louisville? I think the committee is going to want Texas Tech whether they win the Big 12 or not. That might be settled next week when they play BYU. Oregon/Iowa probably settles the debate between those two next week as well. USC/Iowa still play. Virginia is a waste of a spot regardless of what they do from here on out. They’ll get boat raced by anyone of these other teams and have played no one. I assume Miami loses another game they shouldn’t and aren’t deserving anyways but they do have that Notre Dame win. It’s a mess and some good teams are going to get left out. The super conferences have made this terrible too.
Yeah I just totally disagree with this framing. The best QBs of all time have been, with rare exception, this exact "process and distribute" archetype. Even the best mobile QBs are generally guys who are just mobile enough to evade some pressure like Mahomes and Rodgers, not the all out runner types. The problem is that it's very hard to determine if a guy is Kirk Cousins or Peyton Manning, whereas it's very easy to determine who is the better athlete between any two QBs. That doesn't change the fact that the ideal QB is the process and distribute type though. Athleticism in a QB, more often than not, is used as a crutch for not being able to pass. It's a bad thing disguised as a good thing.
Seriously. Even though many of the all time great QBs were not physical freaks of nature, it seems that being one is STILL considered the gold standard metric in finding a star QB. Hell, if you look at most sports, especially team sports, most of the all time greats were great because of their IQ for their sport more than just raw talent.
Great post. I’m SEC biased but wasn’t ignoring the rest of college football. I assume five teams today, but I don’t deny that’s my bias burning through. The ACC is making things easier, the Big12 is making things tougher, and ND is fucking things up for everyone, as always. Calling five SEC teams - today - actually breaks one of the unstated CFP rules I mentioned, because ND probably wins out and it really sucks ass that they get to compete as an independent without any penalty. Plus, if Texas Tech and BYU split, brace for the whining. Part of me wishes for that, but it’s really unhelpful.
I’m with @BrowningNagle on this. Maybe for different reasons - I won’t speak for him - but I think we land in the same place. Before even getting to Mendoza, one point on where I’d start. I watch a ton of college football, and I know he does too, so I don’t give a flying fuck who Mel Kiper or whatever “draft expert” is telling me who they have “valued” at QB1. Unless that kid is clear QB1 in my own eyes, I’m more concerned about saddling the Jets with the wrong guy for a five-year, first round, top-5 contract than I am with overdrafting a mid-tier college QB with the hope that he or she blossoms into a franchise savior. Because the colossal QB mistakes in Round 1 outnumber the surprise franchise QBs by MILES. For that reason, if picking a first round QB were up to me - before size, arm strength and all measurables - I’d want to see two seasons of success as a college starter against good competition. Call it the Trubisky-Mahomes Rule. There could be exceptions, but they’d have to true unicorns or have a good reason to argue. The two problems with that rule: (1) it may need to be tweaked slightly with how the college game has evolved and (2) it’s only useful to say who qualifies for a first round pick, not order of priority. This only solves the Trubisky-Mahomes question, but it still leaves the Allen-Rosen dilemma on order of priority. All this rule does is narrow the field slightly, accepting the rare missed opportunity when the next Mitch Trubisky lights the NFL on fire, because he or she will be the first. Plugging in a couple examples to show the bar would work and how low it really is: Mendoza qualifies for Round 1, Simpson and Manning don’t, and if Sayin were eligible, he wouldn’t. Simpson sitting for three years at Alabama and showing strong success when it’s his turn MAY fall under the “good reason” exception, but I’d be cautious there. One of the benefits of playing QB for a team stocked with 5-star recruits is that throwing to the most talented players in college football makes a good QB look great. Ask Carson Beck. Drop-off years aren’t uncommon, though, so those would be considered based on the circumstances. Like if you’re injured and throwing in a wind tunnel, or maybe have nasty coke habit. Call that the Allen-Marino Caveat. No better reason for a test of sustained success than this college season. Look at the list of draftable QB rankings from preseason to now. Wildly different, and changes almost from week to week. On September 1st, the consensus first QB off the board was Arch Manning. With almost no track record. A month later, John Mateer was the flavor of the month. And then Dante Moore. Then Ty Simpson. Today, everyone’s Golden Boy is Julian Sayin, but he’s not draft eligible. That said, Fernando Mendoza has been pretty consistently somewhere in everyone’s top-10. And, now that everyone else has spit the bit, does that make him worthy of a top-5 pick? Not in my mind. I hadn’t seen a lot of him before this season, but I’ve watched a ton of Mendoza since, both this season and last. Because I’m convinced he’s the guy the Jets will take. And I don’t hate the kid, but I definitely see limitations. I’m more willing to limp along with a free agent pickup than I am with giving up top-5 value for a guy who doesn’t give me hope of a better future. I also don’t accept the “nobody wants to come here” line. Horseshit. Players chase money and the market is an attraction. Brett Favre and Aaron Rodgers - Exhibits A and B.
Yeah I don't really have strong thoughts on Mendoza or any of the other QB prospects yet. Was more speaking generally about why it scares me when a QB's main selling points are athleticism-based. Every GM over-indexes on athleticism because it's easy to spot and comes with a bit of job security if the guy busts. You can defend taking the better athlete with a high ceiling. It's tougher to defend taking the "low ceiling" "processor" when he ends up not being able to process in the NFL because it looks like you just botched the entire assessment. I was also pushing back on the notion that talent or potential are only or mostly physical. I completely reject that. Mental talent is absolutely a thing, it's just harder to recognize because it's far less quantifiable than height, weight, 40 time, etc. For me, a processor-type QB either has to have just enough mobility to escape pressure (Rodgers, Mahomes), or be tall enough and have good enough pocket presence to evade pressure that way (Brady). The height matters there because if you're going to stay in the pocket you have to be able to see over all of the gigantic linemen around you. The conventional wisdom views athletic QBs as being higher ceiling than pure passers. I completely reject that as well (barring unicorns like Allen). I actually think athletic QBs usually have higher floors than pure passers but lower ceilings because the very athletic QBs always use athleticism as a crutch to a degree. Everyone falls back on the thing they do especially well when under duress. For athletes, that means ditching the pocket and taking off running. This is a problem because you need your QB to pass well to maximize what he does for your team.
The thing is, nobody can ever truly predict how a top QB prospect is actually going to pan out. Even with supposed "can't miss" generational prospects, sometimes you get John Elway or Payton Manning, and other times you get Trevor Lawrence, or a total bust like Ryan Leaf. But this team has to stop playing it safe. The Jets are all about playing not to lose both on the field and in the front office. It's trickled into the fanbase. Nobody wants to draft anybody, because we're worried about the person busting. Limping along with journeymen QBs, hoping that we just tank year in and year out until the perfect prospect comes along is not a recipe for winning a Super Bowl.
Part of the problem though is trying to figure out what college QB’s have the process and distribute skillset that’s going to transfer to the NFL. And if the ones that do have it, have enough physical skill to make it effective in the league. College QBing has evolved so much that there are dozens of guys who look like elite processors nowadays. They all have helmet communications now which is new as of last year. Western Kentucky QB’s are a good example. Throw a dart at their D1 history and you’ll hit a guy that threw for a million yards in a fast processing offense. I’m not sure if Indiana throttling everyone helps or hurts my analysis of Mendoza. They did this same thing last year with a very similar roster. They’re doing it to a bit of a greater extreme this year but they beat all the lower tier Big Ten teams mostly by 3-4 scores and Kurtis Rourke looked great doing it. https://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/schools/indiana/2024-schedule.html
We need something similar to the Cleveland Browns/Jacksonville Jaguars Day 1 morning trade 4/24. Browns moved down three spots from 2 to 5. They also picked up a 2nd rounder (#36), 4th rounder (No. 126) and a 2026 first-round pick from the Jaguars, who received the No. 2 pick, a fourth-round choice (No. 104) and a sixth-round selection (No. 200), sources told ESPN's Adam Schefter. With the No. 5 selection, the Browns selected Michigan defensive tackle Mason Graham. Things change a lot between now & April, ---- but I'd be willing to go down further to select Ty Simpson QB Alabama because I think Dante Moore & Mendoza would be first 2 QBs off the board.
Thanks Jack for the insight. I now know what to root for on Saturdays. Hopefully we make it to the playoffs. Fingers crossed.
There needs to be a compelling player that a team wants to move up and get though. And I’m not sure that player exists. Maybe Reuben Bain Jr.? Caleb Downs? I can’t see anyone moving up for a safety even though Downs is the real deal. I think Bain is probably the best player in the draft but there are 3-4 edge players that could go in the top 10-15. It seems like a stretch that someone would move up to get him when they can stay put and get a good edge. I don’t see much of a difference between any of the QB’s on the “top tier” and the tier below so I hope we can move down. We need to stack good players and we can probably get a QB in the latter half of the first or second rounds.
The game just changed to utilizing mobile QB’s in the last 6 or so years, so obviously all the great ones before that were not mobile. The NFL didn’t really prioritize or emphasize that type of skill set. There’s only 1 QB that is elite and can’t move and he’s injured every single year (Burrow). He’s a sitting duck back there. All the rest of them (Allen, Mahomes, Jackson, etc) are dual threat. With what defenses and players are able to do, you’re not gonna be a Super Bowl threat just standing back there like a statute. That will only take you so far.
I didn't advocate for drafting statues, I just said that athleticism beyond a certain minimum threshold is highly overrated. Mahomes isn't a dual threat QB. He's in the Rodgers mold where he's athletic enough to buy time but he's always doing everything he can to pass before finally deciding to run. The top QBs this year in some order are: Darnold Stafford Love Allen Mahomes Maye Goff Herbert Mayfield How many of those guys would you consider true dual threat QBs? One?
The compelling player for that team might be Moore or Mendoza. My wild unrealistic fantasy is trading down to about 7 to take Kendrick Faulk DE-Auburn & then get Ty Simpson top of 2nd round. I'd even be willing to trade our 2nd rounder along w/the extra 2nd rounder we pick up in a trade to move back into 1 late & grab Simpson. Just like NYG did w/Jaxson Dart.
Not disagreeing but who is moving up to get him? Cleveland maybe but they haven’t even put Shedeur on the field yet. I’d bet they roll one more year with the Gabriel/Shedeur experiment. The Raiders maybe? The Rams with the Falcons pick to find a Stafford replacement? Arizona moves on from Kyler? I hope you’re right though. I think we’re getting a similar quarterback to Mendoza or Moore in the late first or second. I also tend to think Moore goes back to school and so does Sellers.
It sounds like Mendoza and Simpson are kind of separating themselves as top 2 QBs in this draft (whether top 5 worthy or not). Is that accurate or there could be someone else in the mix there?
I disagree and think the opposite of your take actually. I think athleticism is often used as a way to incorrectly pigeonhole a guy. "oh he's just a runner." Look at Lamar Jackson. Jalen Hurts. Those two guys were seen as runners, fell because of it, and hell they talked about Jackson switching positions even. Now he's the best thrower of the football in the whole game. I also think athleticism in some of the traditional QBs is getting overlooked in your take. Pat Mahomes is very athletic. Josh Allen of course. Trevor Lawrence is another example, he is a very underrated athlete. Mendoza, good processor, nice height, but he's not even close to their athletic ability. so Number 1 overall potentially on a guy who's a bit of a statue? idk... that's scary shit to me. Its not 1998 anymore...
Is he a complete statue? I haven't seen him play, only highlights, but stats say 220 yards rushing and 4TDs, so I thought he could move a little bit.
