NO QB in RD1- Bollinger not Leinart/Cutler!!

Discussion in 'New York Jets' started by johnnysd, Apr 17, 2006.

  1. johnnysd

    johnnysd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2006
    Messages:
    1,387
    Likes Received:
    158
    I think that us picking a QB is ridiculous. Even if we assume that Penny cannot come back, and Ramsey will still suck, I think Bollinger could be a very good starting QB. He improved every game last year and made us competitive in the last games. Had a fantastic game against Miami. In addition, the Jets had to have had one of the worst OLines ever last year. Morever, he was crippled by Herms insistance on running on first and second down and only allowing him to throw in clear throwing situations. Even worse he would not really try passes in the red zone other than the corner timing play, rather than going play-action or mixing it up. It was criminal.

    Despite all that, Bollinger actually did pretty well. He showed a LOT of grit and heart. He was mobile and made plays on the move. His touch get better and better each game. He has a very good arm and made very good long passes.

    None of this changes the fact that most Jet fans seem to vilify him and cast him down as the root of all our problems. That is not true and we have a fourth round pick to prove it :) Was he an elite QB last year? No. Did he have to perform in one of the worst situations possible yes. And i think he distinguished himself.

    For the sake of argument, let's consider him a rookie QB, which he essentially was. Since we have a NY team and the best AFC QB is Peyton let's compare his first year results to the Mannings. Ny Giant fans on the other hand are convinced that Eli will turn out to be a franchise QB. Here are the numbers:

    Peton Manning
    YEAR TEAM G CMP ATT PCT YDS AVG TD LNG INT RAT
    1998 IND 16 326 575 56.7 3739 6.5 26 78 28 71.2

    Eli Manning
    YEAR TEAM G CMP ATT PCT YDS AVG TD LNG INT RAT
    2004 NYG 9 95 197 48.2 1043 5.3 6 52 9 55.4

    Brooks Bollinger
    YEAR TEAM G CMP ATT PCT YDS AVG TD LNG INT RAT
    2005 NYJ 11 150 266 56.4 1558 5.9 7 60 6 72.9


    To me they are very similar. Peyton obviously had more TDs, but as mentioned before the Jets scheme was a big factor there, and Peyton did have better offensive weapons than Brooks. Brooks QB rating FWIW was much MUCH higher than Eli's and for that matter higher than Peytons. Bollinger splits the difference in Yards per attempt but again is ahead of Eli. Brooks had a positive TD/interception ration while the other two did not.

    Now, I am not saying Brooks will be Peyton. Nor I am saying that Eli will be a bust. What I am saying is that Brooks had solid objective performance numbers in his first season as a starting NFL QB. Comparable to the best, and one of the most highly touted prospects in the league. How can one look at that, and watch the games and not think that Brooks has a chance to be a good or excellent starting QB?

    If we get OL line help and some offensive play makers Brooks is almost guaranteed to be much better. And QBs can make huge leaps when they get a playmaker. Look at Brees rookie year and after Gates arrived:

    Drew Brees
    YEAR TEAM G CMP ATT PCT YDS AVG TD LNG INT RAT
    2002 SDG 16 320 526 60.8 3284 6.2 17 52 16 76.9
    with Antonio Gates
    2004 SDG 15 262 400 65.5 3159 7.9 27 79 7 104.8 (pro bowl)
    2005 SDG 16 323 500 64.6 3576 7.2 24 54 15 89.2

    He is now a ProBowl QB. Notice again how similar first year numbers are. Brees may have actually been the best of all.

    Look at it another way. Say we draft Leinart. His numbers will probably be at best in line with what Brooks did. And most people here would defend him to the end saying "he was a rookie QB".

    Well Brooks was too.

    Because of this I say it is much too early to select another QB in RD 1. We may have the future one already on the team. Now factor in Chad coming back and Ramsey's potential and it seems obvious to me that we are pretty set at QB. We certainly do not need to spend $30M on someone who would quite possibly not even put up the numbers Brooks did. I say stay where we are QB wise, and let Brooks honestly compete for the starting job. Get OLhelp and a playmaker (Davis would be the ultimate) in the draft and we may be all saying in a year how wonderful it is we gave Brooks a chance.

    NO QB in Round 1 !!

    Disclosure: I am in favor of taking Croyle day 1 in RD2 or RD3
     
  2. BrowningNagle

    BrowningNagle Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2003
    Messages:
    28,476
    Likes Received:
    29,723
    welcome to the board Mr. Bollinger, nice to have ya around!
     
  3. Jetfanmack

    Jetfanmack haz chilens?

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    21,496
    Likes Received:
    314
    George Jetson! We missed you!
     
  4. GangGreen04

    GangGreen04 Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2004
    Messages:
    2,406
    Likes Received:
    7
    i am actually frightened by your obsession with bollinger. I have never felt like this after reading anything let alone a post on the internet
     
  5. Jtuds

    Jtuds Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2004
    Messages:
    6,641
    Likes Received:
    1
    I didnt read the whole post cuz it was too long but I hope you are not suggesting that Brooks is gonna be our starting QB because he is not one of the best 32 in the league, nor will he be better than Chad or Ramsey. I like the guy alot cuz he is a gamer and did decent this season considering what he had to work with but he is not the total package. That said, I am also against drafting a QB in the first round, maybe round 3. Anyways, I think Ramsey is the best QB on the team right now unless Chad can come back fully recovered.
     
  6. ScotlandJet

    ScotlandJet New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2004
    Messages:
    1,226
    Likes Received:
    0
    Johnny, thats a good post and info is spot on and informative. Brooks didn't get a proper shake last year and has something to add to this team.
     
  7. Buttle

    Buttle New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2004
    Messages:
    728
    Likes Received:
    0
    I like Bollinger and I think he has a lot of heart and good intangibles but I trust the opinion of lastyears CS as they didn't see Bollinger as a long term answer or even a good back-up. This years CS and FO seems to share the same view.

    But I will agree with you that its not fair to judge a QB on his 1st 10 games. If Bollinger was a high draft pick he would be given much more of a chance and would be given a lot more leeway by fans and the FO and the CS. We certainly do judge Bollinger different than a highly touted rookie but thats because a rookie like Manning or whomever is deemed to have a lot more upside. It may not be fair to Bollinger to produce or go back to the bench but thats the way it is when you don't have the physical tools or pedigree of other young QB's.
     
  8. johnnysd

    johnnysd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2006
    Messages:
    1,387
    Likes Received:
    158

    But isn't that part of the problem? People seem to be judging Bollinger on the fact he was a mid draft pick and a #3 QB, rather than an objective look at his performance. If what we hear is true about Mangini, then he will probably watch every snap Bollinger has ever taken. If he decides that Bollinger is never more than a 3rd QB or needs to be cut then I guess I have to defer to that opinion. However, by objective measures his performance was not bad, and nothing close to the horrible performance many here seem to think he had. I think in this case, Bollinger IS getting pre-judged because he does not have "pedigree" or a perceived upside. I think he deserves a chance. If I am correct in that, then we have plenty of ammunition at QB and do not have to take QB at 4.

    One more thing: after last year, I do not value ANY opinion of the coaching staff, specifically Herm the Politician and Dumberdinger. They gave up. They were focused purely on winning now, and since Bollinger had to develop like all rookie QBs do, they were unwilling to go through the process to let him develop, and ruined any chances he really had. So, those two were not really saying we can not win with Brooks, they were saying we cannot win with him now. Big difference. What those two did last year with the entire team was criminal in its lameness.
     
    #8 johnnysd, Apr 17, 2006
    Last edited: Apr 17, 2006
  9. Dinobot 2

    Dinobot 2 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2003
    Messages:
    19,335
    Likes Received:
    1
    Pennington.
    Ramsey.
    Bollinger.

    I'm set.
     
    #9 Dinobot 2, Apr 17, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 20, 2005
  10. King Koopa

    King Koopa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2003
    Messages:
    4,425
    Likes Received:
    3,054
    if we dont take a qb in the 1st rd brooks should get every chance to start at qb....he looked pretty damn good as the season progressed considering the circumstances of our team....he's still young so maybe he can be a brees or something, either way he's he a good backup to have
     
  11. AlbanyJet

    AlbanyJet New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2002
    Messages:
    178
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree. Brooks was put into an impossible situation, and managed to inspire some exciting moments. Even with the rediculous limits Edwards imposed, and a desimated team, Bolly's passion for the game always came through. Give the guy some players, and a fighting chance, and I certainly wouldn't bet against him.
     
  12. Twombles

    Twombles Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2005
    Messages:
    4,652
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thankyou ive seen so many other dumb posts about getting qbs. Also i have some pictures of brooks getting changed if you are interested. I took them from a house over the road....

    No seriously i dont
     
  13. kinghenry89

    kinghenry89 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2005
    Messages:
    5,052
    Likes Received:
    0
    If you actually watched every game last year and you believe that Brooks Bollinger is an NFL starting QB, you are a sad sould.
     
  14. The Lord

    The Lord Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2005
    Messages:
    1,572
    Likes Received:
    0
    Exactly...Bollinger is a good backup...but he is not a starter. You bring up interesting points about him and Eli and Brees and Peyton, and I have to agree that what Herm did was insane...but I would rather draft a QB RD 1...by the name of Jay Cutler.
     
  15. JetsIn2004

    JetsIn2004 Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2004
    Messages:
    11,912
    Likes Received:
    0
    "Bollinger could be a very good starting QB"

    All credibility lost, and I stopped reading.

     
  16. Kentucky Jet

    Kentucky Jet Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2002
    Messages:
    5,612
    Likes Received:
    15
    EXELLENT OBSERVATION and I agree!
     
  17. GeshJet

    GeshJet Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2003
    Messages:
    693
    Likes Received:
    84
    Please, Bollinger sucks. No better than thrid string - emergency.
     
  18. hoobash

    hoobash Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    4,179
    Likes Received:
    48
    Brooks is not a starter. Sure he can be a backup or a #3. He will most likely not be a jet next year. We will draft a QB and we arent cutting pennington or ramesy.
     
  19. jetsaholic1094

    jetsaholic1094 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2003
    Messages:
    6,551
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sorry, but I stopped right there. He showed moxy, i'll give him that, but he's a career backup. I'd be surprised if he even turns out to be a moderately competent starting QB.
     
  20. 3rdAnd15Draw

    3rdAnd15Draw Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2004
    Messages:
    15,484
    Likes Received:
    123
    This is probably the most ridiculous thread title I've seen in the Jets forum this offseason, and that's saying alot.
     

Share This Page