Idzik's state of the team

I believe that a good GM knows how to use free agency appropriately and builds the team through the draft. I don't agree that there are only two approaches, mortgage the future or build for the long term. I think the right GM can build a roster that can compete for a playoff spot within two years, and be a legitimate championship contender in the third or fourth year. But to do that, you have to have a QB to build the team around, and right now we don't have one.

LIJETFAN wrote:I believe that a good GM knows how to use free agency appropriately and builds the team through the draft.  I don't agree that there are only two approaches, mortgage the future or build for the long term.  I think the right GM can build a roster that can compete for a playoff spot within two years, and be a legitimate championship contender in the third or fourth year.   But to do that, you have to have a QB to build the team around, and right now we don't have one.  

Most GMs only get 1 shot to land their franchise QB...this one will get 2 shots...no bitching if we continue to suck when Idzik is getting more shots than most.

Note he also decided not to move Bradway and extended Rex's contract...again, he'll get a second chance to fix that mistake...most GMs only get 1 chance.

ALL GMs should have more than 2 years...so will he.

Superman55 wrote:

LIJETFAN wrote:I believe that a good GM knows how to use free agency appropriately and builds the team through the draft.  I don't agree that there are only two approaches, mortgage the future or build for the long term.  I think the right GM can build a roster that can compete for a playoff spot within two years, and be a legitimate championship contender in the third or fourth year.   But to do that, you have to have a QB to build the team around, and right now we don't have one.  

Most GMs only get 1 shot to land their franchise QB...this one will get 2 shots...no bitching if we continue to suck when Idzik is getting more shots than most.

Note he also decided not to move Bradway and extended Rex's contract...again, he'll get a second chance to fix that mistake...most GMs only get 1 chance.

ALL GMs should have more than 2 years...so will he.

Not sure how getting to draft another QB after taking a flyer in the 2nd round on player who dropped constitutes getting a second chance.

As far a Bradway I have no clue if we are actually drafting players he is pushing or not.

On Rex we know for a fact Woody forced him on Idzik. Do we know for a fact Woody also was not behind the extension?

We know woody forced him on Idzik year 1...do you knwo Woody forced him on Idzik year 2?

when is throwing away a 2nd rd pick okay? Oh yeah, never. not sure 2nd rd picks are "flyers." Was Stephen Hill or Dorian Boose a flyer or bad pick? Oh yeah, they were bad picks...

Superman55 wrote:when is throwing away a 2nd rd pick okay?  Oh yeah, never.  not sure 2nd rd picks are "flyers."  Was Stephen Hill or Dorian Boose a flyer or bad pick?  Oh yeah, they were bad picks...

It's a flyer when he was a consensus 1st round pick and one of the highest rated QBs that year. It becomes risk vs reward

Superman55 wrote:We know woody forced him on Idzik year 1...do you knwo Woody forced him on Idzik year 2?

No that's my point so why lay the blame on Idzik when we don't know and could honestly go either way

NickSINYC wrote:

Superman55 wrote:when is throwing away a 2nd rd pick okay?  Oh yeah, never.  not sure 2nd rd picks are "flyers."  Was Stephen Hill or Dorian Boose a flyer or bad pick?  Oh yeah, they were bad picks...

It's a flyer when he was a consensus 1st round pick and one of the highest rated QBs that year. It becomes risk vs reward

Sorry, but a bad pick is a bad pick...

Whether the name is Van Dyke, Vlad Ducasse, Dorian Boose, Stephen Hill, or Geno Smith...a bad pick is a bad pick...even if I wanted Geno, if I made the pick and he turned out lousy, I'd call a lousy pick a lousy pick.

I still hope he gets it together, but I dont feel it is ever okay to waste picks in the top 40...QB or any place else. We'll have to agree to disagree.

NickSINYC wrote:

Superman55 wrote:We know woody forced him on Idzik year 1...do you knwo Woody forced him on Idzik year 2?

No that's my point so why lay the blame on Idzik when we don't know and could honestly go either way

Then why blame Ryan for having to coach this shitty roster? Why blame anyone for anything...oh yeah, Idzik's job is personnel...coaches and players...so if the coaches and players aren't performing, and that's his responsibility...

Superman55 wrote:

NickSINYC wrote:

Superman55 wrote:We know woody forced him on Idzik year 1...do you knwo Woody forced him on Idzik year 2?

No that's my point so why lay the blame on Idzik when we don't know and could honestly go either way

Then why blame Ryan for having to coach this shitty roster?  Why blame anyone for anything...oh yeah, Idzik's job is personnel...coaches and players...so if the coaches and players aren't performing, and that's his responsibility...

I blame Rex because I don't think the roster is as bad as you do. I think they were poorly prepared and used. The players don't look all that bad today do they?

NickSINYC wrote:

Superman55 wrote:

NickSINYC wrote:

Superman55 wrote:We know woody forced him on Idzik year 1...do you knwo Woody forced him on Idzik year 2?

No that's my point so why lay the blame on Idzik when we don't know and could honestly go either way

Then why blame Ryan for having to coach this shitty roster?  Why blame anyone for anything...oh yeah, Idzik's job is personnel...coaches and players...so if the coaches and players aren't performing, and that's his responsibility...

I blame Rex because I don't think the roster is as bad as you do. I think they were poorly prepared and used. The players don't look all that bad today do they?

We can't have an offensive drive w/o a penalty, so lets get rid of that crap and see where we stand.

Superman55 wrote:

NickSINYC wrote:

Superman55 wrote:when is throwing away a 2nd rd pick okay?  Oh yeah, never.  not sure 2nd rd picks are "flyers."  Was Stephen Hill or Dorian Boose a flyer or bad pick?  Oh yeah, they were bad picks...

It's a flyer when he was a consensus 1st round pick and one of the highest rated QBs that year. It becomes risk vs reward

Sorry, but a bad pick is a bad pick...

Whether the name is Van Dyke, Vlad Ducasse, Dorian Boose, Stephen Hill, or Geno Smith...a bad pick is a bad pick...even if I wanted Geno, if I made the pick and he turned out lousy, I'd call a lousy pick a lousy pick.

I still hope he gets it together, but I dont feel it is ever okay to waste picks in the top 40...QB or any place else.  We'll have to agree to disagree.

geno is turning out to be a bad pick. no question.

i think the contention with your prior comment is about no GM being allowed to draft 2 franchise QBs. smith was the 39th pick in the draft. he was given a shot to be the starter, but he was never annointed the "franchise QB".

now if it were the case that Idzik used a top 10 pick on a QB and 2 years later needed to use another top 10 pick on a QB, your argument may be stronger. but a failed 2nd round pick, while no question a negative on the record of the GM, is not a franchise QB. it's a 2nd round pick that didn't work out

hobson54 wrote:

Superman55 wrote:

NickSINYC wrote:

Superman55 wrote:when is throwing away a 2nd rd pick okay?  Oh yeah, never.  not sure 2nd rd picks are "flyers."  Was Stephen Hill or Dorian Boose a flyer or bad pick?  Oh yeah, they were bad picks...

It's a flyer when he was a consensus 1st round pick and one of the highest rated QBs that year. It becomes risk vs reward

Sorry, but a bad pick is a bad pick...

Whether the name is Van Dyke, Vlad Ducasse, Dorian Boose, Stephen Hill, or Geno Smith...a bad pick is a bad pick...even if I wanted Geno, if I made the pick and he turned out lousy, I'd call a lousy pick a lousy pick.

I still hope he gets it together, but I dont feel it is ever okay to waste picks in the top 40...QB or any place else.  We'll have to agree to disagree.

geno is turning out to be a bad pick.  no question.

i think the contention with your prior comment is about no GM being allowed to draft 2 franchise QBs.  smith was the 39th pick in the draft.  he was given a shot to be the starter, but he was never annointed the "franchise QB".  

now if it were the case that Idzik used a top 10 pick on a QB and 2 years later needed to use another top 10 pick on a QB, your argument may be stronger.  but a failed 2nd round pick, while no question a negative on the record of the GM, is not a franchise QB.  it's a 2nd round pick that didn't work out

I dont disagree, but I just dont see a big difference between taking Geno #39 vs trading up to late rd 1 like teams do all the time, like the move up for Dalton, Manziel, Flacco, Tebow, Bridgewater, and Geno.

Do you think there is a big difference between Bridgewater going 32 and Geno 39?

Superman55 wrote:

hobson54 wrote:

Superman55 wrote:

NickSINYC wrote:

Superman55 wrote:when is throwing away a 2nd rd pick okay?  Oh yeah, never.  not sure 2nd rd picks are "flyers."  Was Stephen Hill or Dorian Boose a flyer or bad pick?  Oh yeah, they were bad picks...

It's a flyer when he was a consensus 1st round pick and one of the highest rated QBs that year. It becomes risk vs reward

Sorry, but a bad pick is a bad pick...

Whether the name is Van Dyke, Vlad Ducasse, Dorian Boose, Stephen Hill, or Geno Smith...a bad pick is a bad pick...even if I wanted Geno, if I made the pick and he turned out lousy, I'd call a lousy pick a lousy pick.

I still hope he gets it together, but I dont feel it is ever okay to waste picks in the top 40...QB or any place else.  We'll have to agree to disagree.

geno is turning out to be a bad pick.  no question.

i think the contention with your prior comment is about no GM being allowed to draft 2 franchise QBs.  smith was the 39th pick in the draft.  he was given a shot to be the starter, but he was never annointed the "franchise QB".  

now if it were the case that Idzik used a top 10 pick on a QB and 2 years later needed to use another top 10 pick on a QB, your argument may be stronger.  but a failed 2nd round pick, while no question a negative on the record of the GM, is not a franchise QB.  it's a 2nd round pick that didn't work out

I dont disagree, but I just dont see a big difference between taking Geno #39 vs trading up to late rd 1 like teams do all the time, like the move up for Dalton, Manziel, Flacco, Tebow, Bridgewater, and Geno.

Do you think there is a big difference between Bridgewater going 32 and Geno 39?

well i do think there is a difference between trading up for a player and sitting at your draft spot and taking the best player on the board. so i do see a difference between the vikings moving up for bridgewater and the jets taking geno when he was sitting there at 39.

but in any event, my larger point was about labeling the #39 pick in the draft a "franchise QB". now you may HOPE he becomes the franchise QB. but in reality, he was the 3rd player selected by the jets in the 2013 draft, and was a 2nd round pick.

as I stated.....it's not so much that Idzik drafted him......he took a shot (thought it's a pick I vehemently hated).......it's the insistence of jamming him down our throat as if divine intervention will smarten Geno up when it was clear all along he sucks......he sucks....he sucks. IMO he NEVER should've drafted him.

Idzik failed to address QB in the last draft properly after witnessing the debacle of a rookie season. Then in his infinite wisdom on the position of QB, he brought in a turnover/sack machine in Vick to be a safety net. I'm thinking he a bonus clause in his contract if the QBs lead league in turnovers. He brought in a backup who is a clown....errrr...clone in terms of poor ball security.

like other positions......it's Idzik's poor evaluation of the position that ties him to Geno at least in the court of public opinion. He wasn't willing to admit he made mistake soon enough (does he even realize Geno sucks?)........and on the heels of reports he drove the choice to put him back in now - he will draw additional criticism of his ability to judge the most important position on the field.

Fans are afraid to let him 'guess' again...............count me among them.

I don't believe there is a person here that has complete confidence that Idzik can get the job done. Based on the debate, I would say the opposite is true. I would say virtually everyone on the Board has lingering or even significant doubts about whether Idzik can actually evaluate talent and build a roster. And if that's true after two years, that's a serious problem when you look at the state of this team.

I know some do not believe the roster is all that bad. I think the roster forms a 2-10 team. And a 2-10 team is a bad football team. And that falls on everyone, GM, personnel department, coaching and the players.

Before the season started no one said that the Jets were a 2 win team. If anything, most prognosticators, media types and people on this board said between 7-9 to 9-7 with a few outliers at 6-10 to 10-6. So to say now that the roster is a 2 win roster is revisionist history.

LIJETFAN wrote:I don't believe there is a person here that has complete confidence that Idzik can get the job done.  Based on the debate, I would say the opposite is true.  I would say virtually everyone on the Board has lingering or even significant doubts about whether Idzik can actually evaluate talent and build a roster.  And if that's true after two years, that's a serious problem when you look at the state of this team.

I know some do not believe the roster is all that bad.  I think the roster forms a 2-10 team.  And a 2-10 team is a bad football team.  And that falls on everyone, GM, personnel department, coaching and the players.  

Well said like Seaver ... I want to clean house but not sure it will happen.

Old#15 wrote:Before the season started no one said that the Jets were a 2 win team.  If anything, most prognosticators, media types and people on this board said between 7-9 to 9-7 with a few outliers at 6-10 to 10-6.  So to say now that the roster is a 2 win roster is revisionist history.  

I'm not sure I understand your point. To say the roster is a 2 win roster is a fact, not revisionist history. The prognostications were wrong, my predictions included. That's reality. Preseason predictions are long gone. I am sure there were a lot of preseason predictions across the NFL that were completely wrong. We shouldn't be concerned with past predictions, we should be concerned about how this entire franchise moves forward.

soj wrote:

LIJETFAN wrote:I don't believe there is a person here that has complete confidence that Idzik can get the job done.  Based on the debate, I would say the opposite is true.  I would say virtually everyone on the Board has lingering or even significant doubts about whether Idzik can actually evaluate talent and build a roster.  And if that's true after two years, that's a serious problem when you look at the state of this team.

I know some do not believe the roster is all that bad.  I think the roster forms a 2-10 team.  And a 2-10 team is a bad football team.  And that falls on everyone, GM, personnel department, coaching and the players.  

Well said like Seaver ... I want to clean house but not sure it will happen.  

Agreed

The problem many see in getting rid of Idzik is Woody would have to admit he was dead wrong on the GM choice. I have a hard time believing he would accept responsibility.

If not already done, somebody will be in his ear to tell him he can't fire a GM 2 years into job and expect to hire a credible replacement. Not sure that is a sound argument if Woody takes the heat for a bad choice.......and that again seems unlikely to me.

Chances are Idzik stays and some reorganization will take place.....a golden parachute for Bradway at minimum. He will then need a strong personnel guy brought in and maybe given the title of Asst GM. Idzik handles the contracts and dabbles in free agency......new guy reshapes the draft approach. All this has to mesh with the choice of next HC.

This to me is more in Woody's nature than a complete flush. I say that because I view Bradway as Woody's tutor/translator. That was his advisor on football matters after Parcells left. Tannenbaum was flushed w/o remorse as he still had his security blanket in Bradway around. Now that this regime has quickly come under fire, the blame is climbing higher than the GM office.......so Woody may have to do what he may be uncomfortable with - let go of his security blanket. Now in doing this he won't let himself be caught naked looking to replace the entire front office....so Idzik may survive because he has no one left with more of a clue about football matters. Well, I guess I forgot about the Team President...but he's about as invisible as ever. We're in trouble if he is the last man standing.

LIJETFAN wrote:I don't believe there is a person here that has complete confidence that Idzik can get the job done.  Based on the debate, I would say the opposite is true.  I would say virtually everyone on the Board has lingering or even significant doubts about whether Idzik can actually evaluate talent and build a roster.  And if that's true after two years, that's a serious problem when you look at the state of this team.

I know some do not believe the roster is all that bad.  I think the roster forms a 2-10 team.  And a 2-10 team is a bad football team.  And that falls on everyone, GM, personnel department, coaching and the players.  

So, we lost yesterday because of our roster? I though we lost because our coaching staff took a nap at halftime instead of making adjustments. We kept running the ball with nine guys in the box. Decker was in single coverage against a cb signed off the street four days ago. I'm sorry, but we've lost 3-4 games because of Rex and his staff this year. This roster is a lot closer to 5-7 then it is 2-10.

A. Roster
B. Coaching
C. GM
D. Scouting
E. All of the above

I'll go with E. 

We need a ton of turnover: Through draft or FA at minimum:
2 QBs
3 CBs
3 LBs
3 OL 
1 Punter
1-2 TE's
2 Wr
I feel good about our RBs and DL....I'm even pretty comfortable with the safeties.

The Wicker Man wrote:A. Roster
B. Coaching
C. GM
D. Scouting
E. All of the above

I'll go with E. 

We need a ton of turnover: Through draft or FA at minimum:
2 QBs
3 CBs
3 LBs
3 OL 
1 Punter
1-2 TE's
2 Wr
I feel good about our RBs and DL....I'm even pretty comfortable with the safeties.

A. Roster
B. Coaching
C. GM
D. Scouting
E. All of the above

I'll go with E. Agreed

We need a ton of turnover: Through draft or FA at minimum:
2 QBs
2 CBs Milliner will be a #1 or #2
2 LBs Harris and Davis are fine, with Harris coming out on passing downs.
2 OL Still think Aboushi is fine, as are mangold and Brick
1 Punter
1-2 TE's Maybe, but Amaro, Sudfeld, and Pantale may be fine also
2 Wr I like Decker, Harvin, and Kerley with a new coaching staff, maybe push Evans and Salas with some more kids

I feel good about our RBs and DL....I'm even pretty comfortable with the safeties.

I'd add a safety to replace Landry and back up Pryor and Jarrett

55, I should've been clearer, I'm talking depth, too not just starters. 
I figured Pace and Babin gone-bring in 2 to replace them
I figured Wilson, Walls, (maybe Adams) are gone-bring in 2/3 to replace them
OL-We need to bring in a bunch to push/replace some of these guys. 
TEs-Cumbersome needs to go-hopefully, we get to see Pantale play the rest of the year and he'll 
show us something. 
WR-Harvin will need to restructure, if not, then he's gone.
Safety-AA, Landry , Pryor, Jarrett...I'm good, we can always bring in another, maybe a feisty vet like Rolle(on the cheap).