Do we believe the Jets could be a superball winner with Chad at the helm? As much as I respect Chad I am convinced he is not going to be our long term answer. I think most of us will agree with that. The key question for us then is not why to change QBs but when to change QBs. If you put Kellen in there now, you must accept the fact that he needs a few games to grow and he will make mistakes in the process. So if you were hoping for a long shot playoff birth you might be better with Chad...although I would say that is a marginal advantage unless Chad regains his poise. The real benefit of playing Kellen now depends on a few factors 1) Do the coaches think he is ready, or would he be better served to wait till he gets the system down pat? 2) If the answer to 1 is yes, then I would suggest is better to find out this year if he's got the intangibles or not because that might set the draft/free agency priorities for next year 3) If he does have what it takes then playing in real games will give him the experience and confidence he needs NOW to be the winning leader next year from the get go. The Jets have decisions to make....when is the best time to play Kellen Clemmens? What is best for the Jets? What is best for the players? Do we accept this year as a work in process and take more chances, or do we play with the more experienced QB? Meantime Chad can really help himself and the team if he would perhaps try not to think so much, and go more with gut reflexes and instict. We know he knows the playbook, the question is can he make the tough play under pressure? That is execution, poise and self confidence. He needs to inspire the team and make believers out of the players again. The question in my mind is not who is the better QB, but who is the one that will win consistently when the chips are down? I think both Chad and Kellen would benefit greatly from that attitude adjustment.
I think its funny how people simply by-pass right by Patrick Ramsey .The chances of the coaches skipping the back up and going straight to the 3rd stringer are nil. But one thing is for sure if Chad starts throwing picks and is unable to generate any offense against this team he will be yanked in this game in favor of Patrick Ramsey. If they do go to Clemens then I would severely question the coaching staff and why this paper weight has a roster spot. Change is always good. Under the right circumstances!
the chances of skipping the backup and going to the number three are very good...If he benches chad that means its future time...why the hell would you play Ramsey...youre completely wrong
Just like my post read “against this team” (Houston). You don’t go to the rookie with no experience when the season is not lost; not while you still have a shot at the play-off's. You go with a Quarter back on the roster with a better arm and some NFL starts, Regardless of how he did in the preseason he’s still better then Clemens at this point. Let’s all hope Chad steps up and there’s no need to think about these types of scenarios.
I agree. The only reason he would play ramsey is if penny was hurt in the middle of a playoff run...with the playoffs looking as bleak as ever with us losing and KC, Jack, NE, and Cin winning...I wouldnt go with Ramsey for a second. I am hoping Chad can rebound starting Sunday, but this 6 game stretch of his isnt making me a believer in him.
Actually, the chances are quite high. It's amazing how many teams have a 2nd stringer that they have to have for coming in mid-game, but start the 3rd stringer, if they are making a move... It's happened before, and it'll happen again.
Happens all the time. See Jason Campbell and the Skins. It has to do with prep. The Vet 2nd stringer (in our case Ramsey, in Wash case Collins) can come in without getting alot of reps in practise and be OK just by experience. The rookies or kids with little or no experience would struggle without a week of practise.
If Chad is benched Ramsey will not come in because we are playing for the future and that Future is Clemens. The season will be over after the next loss.
The Jets are very likely going to replace Chad before we have a real shot at a super bowl. Whether they do that this year or not is largely irrelevant because the Jets don't have a realistic shot at the super bowl one way or the other in 2006. As to whether or not you make the change this year it really comes down to whether or not Kellen Clemens could stand up to the pressure of being a starting rookie quarterback in the NFL. Looking at historical references doesn't really help here because it's generally not the talent of the QB that's being tested if they get thrown in to the mix in their first year; it's the wisdom of their coaches that is the primary factor. Rookie QB's that do well tend to play for people like Bill Cowher and Don Shula, coaches with a proven track record of understanding talent and getting the most out of what they have. Every now and then a QB has so much talent, like Peyton Manning did, that throwing them in as a rookie is going to pay some kind of dividends regardless of how they get pushed around in year 1. As I've been considering the Chad issue over the last week I've come to the conclusion that short of an injury he is likely to remain the starter for the rest of the season. He could fall apart and force Mangini to make a change, but I think that is unlikely. Mangini is smart enough to know that Kellen Clemens is an unknown quantity right now and he's unlikely to throw him out there without some certainty that he'll succeed. Look for Clemens to emerge as the starter in next year's camp. Both Parcells and Belichik are very careful about who they put out there at QB and both generally will stand pat unless an injury or a seasoned alternative forces their hand.
What's Chad's base for next year? Might be worth converting some of that to bonus now in order that he's more attractive as a trade option for teams looking for experience (possibly Tampa Bay, with Hackett in situe).
