All that matters is that he is playing like the best qb on the team. It doesn't matter where that ranks against the league at this point in time. what to do at the end of the year is irrelevant to what happens this season.
That's the horserace part of it, which no doubt is a story. Given the limited options (really Petty is not one, so it is really between Smith and Fitz), someone still has to be the starting Qb by Opening Day. But I think it's alreadly clear that of the two, neither one is showing that they are quality starter material. Whoever wins the horserace.
I agree - but I mean aren't we getting the reports you are talking about? all I see is reports that he's having a great camp. its impossible to tell of course what that means in comparison to the league. so far.
what are you basing that last sentence off of though? their past or how they look in 2015..? seems like a strong statement either way but especially since I'm not really seeing anything to suggest that anywhere else
I am sorry, but do you mean whoever wins the horserace? If so my point is that whoever wins the horserace doesn't mean so much if both SMith and Fitz are mediocre.
I'll answer for him- "If he doesn't make the jump from Geno Smith in 2014 to a future HOFer like Aaron Rodgers by 2015! he's a waste of time. "
For Geno to be the guy he needs to have a top 10 performance this year, which based on the last couple of years would be a 63% completion percentage with a 2 to 1 TD to Int ratio and his team winning two thirds of his starts. If he has an up year that looks like Andy Dalton we're still screwed at QB.
not the horserace. I'm referring to the statement - "But I think it's alreadly clear that of the two, neither one is showing that they are quality starter material." are you basing that statement off their pasts or off of what we are seeing in camp? just curious. I personally think thats a really strong statement either way but it has to be based on their past in order to be an even reasonable take at this point IMO
That's not the case at all. What is true is that if his third year is just acceptable the odds on him being what we need to win a Super Bowl are low. That wouldn't stop the Jets from going with him for another year but that would be a wasted year. Terry Bradshaw never becomes Terry Bradshaw in a capped era. The ability to stockpile hall of famers just doesn't exist any more. The Steel Curtain defense would have been broken up by the free agency process and the cap. Same thing for the great players on the offensive side of the ball. That's why QB has become so important in the NFL. It's the only position where if you pay the guy and keep him around you can reconfigure the team around him multiple times and still win a Super Bowl. The Steelers won a Super Bowl in 2005 with Ben Roethlisberger at QB. 3 years later in 2008 they won again. There were 6 new starters on offense including a completely new offensive line and that was just 3 years later. 2 years later they went to the Super Bowl again. 6 new starters AGAIN on offense including 3 on the offensive line. Why did the Steelers go to 3 Super Bowls in 6 years? The QB was good enough to keep things together through wholesale change, mostly driven by economics, on the offensive side of the ball. The Packers have been to the playoffs 6 years in a row now including a Super Bowl win. How many starters remain on offense since 2009? ONE. Aaron Rodgers. They've had total turnover on that side of the ball since 2009 except for the only guy that really matters in terms of making the playoffs year after year. Geno Smith has to be one of the best QB's in football for the Jets to ever get to the level of a consistent playoff contender, let along win a Super Bowl or two. The economics of the game say that his position is the only position that is absolutely indispensable in terms of high level competition. The QB can't be "not the problem." He has to be the answer.
How many qb's become the answer in year 3? i think you are asking too much of any prospective qb not named manning or luck .
I disagree. not to the point that the QB is enormously important. but that you need to stockpile HOFs to win if your QB is just capable. or that the team can't consistently win with a QB thats "not the problem" as you eloquently said. Dallas could've won the thing last year easily had they not gotten screwed by the refs for example last year. They aren't stockpiled with HOFers. They had a good OL and some impact players on each side of the ball. "Not the problem" is a perfect description of Tony Romo. Same thing with Detroit. They could've won the thing last year. They got a lot of weaknesses but some impact players on each side of the ball and a QB that was "not the problem" Giants, Ravens, Bengals, Chargers, Panthers.. these are all teams that have consistently been going to the playoffs in recent years. theres a couple SBs and SB appearances in there and lots of division titles. I'd say they consistently contend. They've all had QBs that have been described as "not the problem." have they been stockpiled with HOFers? not really..
Tony Romo is not the problem in Dallas. Matthew Stafford is not a top 10 QB or really even close to that.
Tom Brady, Ben Roethlisberger, Russell Wilson, Carson Palmer, Chad Pennington, Donovan McNabb, Philip Rivers, etc, just from the post 2000 era. I'm leaving people like Cam Newton, Joe Flacco and Matt Ryan and Colin Kaepernick off the list for various reasons but you could put them on the list also as being the answer instead of not the problem.
No, the point was that if Smith was going to make a real jump this off season, a real significant improvement over the off season, we would have seen it by now. Sure he might develop more as camp and pre-season go on. But that's not likely. Everyone is trying to use this time to improve. How many do to a greater extent than average? You just don't see someone suddenly turn it on when they have not before during camp, after starting out slowly. Gradual development is the most you can realistically hope for. The problem for Smith is that he has so much ground to cover, to make up for, to move from awful to even be mediocre. What is his ceiling at this point? Even though he's only entering his third year, it's not very high.
This is the problem. Geno has so far to go to become a really good QB that the odds on it happening incrementally and in a timely fashion given the Jets current roster makeup are low. This is why with this roster you'd really rather go with Ryan Fitzpatrick. His ceiling isn't as high as Geno's but his proven performance is much higher. That Geno has a lot more potential value from the perspective of 2017 doesn't really matter because the current roster is likely to be in tatters by 2017. That's just the way the NFL works when most of your talent is concentrated at a few positions and many of the players are going post-prime at the same time. Obviously if Geno suddenly turns it on and looks really good, like ready to be a top 10 QB right now, then you go with him but nobody thinks that's the case. The Jets have a huge investment in the 2015 roster. They've spent heavily on post-prime CB's. They've brought in two prime and post-prime free agent WR's over the last couple of seasons. The offensive line has 3 guys who are going post-prime. The question is do you use that investment to look hard at Geno Smith or do you match that investment with the best QB you can put on the field? Geno wasn't even the best option at the quarter point of the season last year. The Jets were a younger team in a rebuilding phase and he wasn't helping them get over the hump. He was being the hump at times.
I disagree. That obviously would be your requirements for Geno to be the guy, but I'm not sure that Bowles would expect Geno to be a top 10 QB. That's asking A LOT. I think the completion percentage requirement is not only fair, but a realistic expectation. With regards to Andy Dalton, I think it depends upon the numbers to which you're referring. With the exception of his rookie season in 2011 his completion percentage has been above 60%, and his average yards per completion numbers are pretty good. Dalton's TD to Interception ratio was not good last year (19 to 17), but in every other year, they've been at least acceptable if not pretty good (20 to 13 in 2011, 27 to 16 in 2012, and 33 to 20 in 2013). Of course we want better than that, and a 2 to 1 ratio is desirable, but I don't think is an absolute must. He doesn't seem to take a lot of sacks. The Bengals were third best in the number of sacks surrendered last season. The number of sacks that he took in 2012 was awful, but that seems to have been an aberration that was perhaps due to injuries or poor play by his OL. If Geno has a 63% completion percentage, throws for 3,400 yards, has a TD to Interception of 25 to 15, makes better and quicker decisions, plays at a more consistently high level, avoids sacks and fumbles, rushes for a couple of hundred yards and scores around 5-10 TDs that will be plenty good. We don't need for him to become Tom Brady overnight, we just need to see greater consistency and significant reduction in the mental errors and forced throws.
I don't think that's fair at all. Considering how Geno has looked to this point, expecting that big of a jump is a lot to ask.
