Lemon might be one of the dumbest WRs I’ve seen interviewed. He did push out Branch somehow. Mostly because Lincoln Riley who I absolutely love as a coach likes bigger slot guys who can take the beating in the middle of the field. That’s definitely an attribute I really like about Lemon is his toughness. My concern with Lemon is his intelligence and the fact Linc schemed him open constantly because that’s his whole offensive system is to scheme that #1 read wide open.
What you consider typical, likely and probable are purely subjective opinions. I might remind you that in the first twenty years of this century the highest probability QB recruit turned out to be the best quarterback only one third of the time. You said it, and I acknowledged we shall agree to disagree. Of course, we'll both be watching to see if the status quo or something perhaps slightly revolutionary will change the fortune of this team.
The surface has never been more clear - the Jets are the best representation of failure in the NFL this century. Rookie contracts are relatively cheap and allow keeping more than one QB at a time without the need to hustle them out the door. I have asked the question before - maybe you'd care to answer now why it was necessary or productive to remove Darnold before seeing how Wilson met the NFL challenge. I will not endorse following the same failed path forever - your mileage apparently varies.
Completely agree. If we kept Darnold to compete with Wilson that would have been so much better for that Salah era. They would have competed their ass off against each other. Instead we dump Darnold and hand Wilson the keys and throw him in the fire.
Luckily the game of football awards you points for scoring touchdowns not for making salient points in an interview There’s a difference between talkers and doers, book smart and football smart, anyway. lemon is clearly “intelligent” on the football field, maybe you prefer “instinctual”, but he operates in the slot like an NFL veteran. There’s no way that’s all scheme
Sure, we will disagree on the approach, but let's not create alternate facts. I never said anything specifically about 1st QB taken. Just that in today's League nearly every successful QB is a high pick, most very high. A high pick is almost always the best asset a team has in its arsenal annually, which could be either used to aid directly or indirectly the QB you just drafted high previous year. You suggest to draft another QB instead (could be straight up or we will need to add more assets to get into the range of top QB prospects that usually go high). That is the fundamental disagreement. You want to be a revolutionary and suggest a team use its best assets every year on a QB (which no matter how you slice it, inevitably takes away ability to surround him with talent), which no successful NFL teams is doing either, that's fine. But I never suggested status quo. Status quo would be surrounding a high QB pick with likes of Perriman, Herndon, semi retired Frankl Gore, not building OL, no proven good offensive coaches, things like we have done time and time and time again and failed. I am not suggesting that at all. Surround a QB with talent, including good protection, give good offensive coaching, and then yes, draft high and give a couple of years in the system. If he still failed, try again. That's not what we have done: we mostly had shit talent around the QB and our best coaches were defensive ones. In some cases no matter what you do, the guy you drafted, just sucks. Then you try again after a couple of years. But surrounding with talent and good offensive coaches is the key part we have not done well in addition to drafting some busts.
So to actually connect all the surrounding variable dots there your logic example is suggesting we shouldn't have given up on Darnold. Who had spent the previous 3 seasons floundering away in an eternally terrible developmental situation. But instead of drafting some potential stud help that can be on the field at the same time with Darnold, in the form of Ja"marr Chase or Penei Sewell, your logic wants to focus in on simply asking the question "why didn't we just draft Zach AND keep Darnold around". So in essence - Having Zach Wilson around to "compete" with Darnold in a terrible terrible developmental situation > having Chase or Sewell on your football team to help Darnold succeed Like i told the other guy digging in on that kind of stance seems a lot more rooted with not wanting to be wrong on this imo then anything else. Even if it actually is probably the closest qualifying answer to his own question he keeps asking here while trying to support this. Your logic *IS* more of the same ol same ol Jets mentality approach of gravitating towards shallow quick fix promise solutions.
