Buzz: Chad to Start Sunday vs. Titans?
I’m going back to Chaddy, Chaddy, Chaddy
I’m going back to Chaddy. hmm, I don’t think so
I’m going back to Chaddy, Chaddy, Chaddy
I’m going back to Chaddy. I don’t think so
Can this really be true? I mean, yes Chad did have a decent day against the Patriots in some rough wind without his favorite target in the lineup, but are the Jets really going to go back to Chad if Kellen isn’t seriously injured? Why!? I guess I just don’t get this on a number of levels. Please note, I was against the switch from the start of this talk, but now that the team has made the switch it seems foolish to go back to Chad for many reasons.
Mucking Up the Potential Trade — If the Jets do in fact have this elaborate trade in place with Kansas City (which I am highly suspect of) why would they risk injuring a key component of the said trade? Should Pennington play and Clemens is able, this to me is as sharp a debunking of the potential trade as anything.
The Toothpaste is Out of the Tube — Chad has already expressed his interest in starting next year, and has also pretty much said that he isn’t interested in staying with the Jets. I can’t blame him. Mangini has to be smart enough to know that him sitting down Chad was the end of it. If I was Chad, I wouldn’t want to come back if it was in some sort of competition basis with a youngster and the switch had been made once already. Either ride Chad or don’t and let him go.
The Devil You Know — We already know what Chad is fully capable of in this offense, and there were many a fan who weren’t pleased with his performance. If Clemens’ “gave the best chance” to win eight weeks ago, what has changed.
The Kid Needs Time — I’m not thrilled with what I have seen as a whole from Clemens, but it’s ignorant to think that he’s comparable to Pennington right now. He needs to be given time to develop his pocket presence, his location and his progressions. The kid has the arm, has the poise and leadership abilities, but he needs time to mature. I’m not saying he’s the next Joe Montana, I’m just saying you can’t base everything on what the team has seen thus far.
20 Responses to Buzz: Chad to Start Sunday vs. Titans?
-
SackDance99 says:
I agree with seanmac to a point. If KC is injured, playing him would be a huge mistake. If he gets seriously hurt, the Jets would have to make a decision on whether to draft a QB or even pick one up in free agency because there is no guarantee that any player will overcome an injury and be as good as he was before. This fact would be magnified at QB, especially an inexperienced one like KC, who has to work on his craft during the off-season, not rehab an injury.
But, if he’s not that badly hurt, KC should play because he needs the experience. As for Chad, I honestly saw a better Chad this past Sunday than at any other point this season. His accuracy was phenomenal, especially given the conditions and he threw with more zip. Yes, he cannot throw the deep ball well, but when Chad was good, like last season, the throws he can make, he did well. I hate to say it, but if KC doesn’t improve and the Jets are not inclined to draft a QB, then an open competition between Chad and KC next training camp might be the best thing. If KC wins, there will be a team that the Jets could trade Chad to for an ’09 draft pick. If Chad wins, KC stews, learns and maybe does better next time around.
-
If KC is healthy and can go, I think he should play.
Chad was good on Sunday, no doubt, but I saw too much of what plagued this offense earlier in the year. The Pats stacked the box, took away the run game, and were jumping routes on numerous occasions. As I’ve said earlier, we know what we they have with him — I’d really like to see what Clemens has to offer, and the sample thus far hasn’t been enough, nor of any quality behind a sieve of a line (remember, Chad was sacked 5 times this past week) and without a full complement of weapons.
-
i don’t care about chad. but a nice LL Cool J intro like that deserves a ‘hell ya’. well done.
-
If the Jets were picking in the bottom third of the ’08 draft, whether or not KC played, or even played well, would not be much of an issue because the top QB prospects would be gone. But, it appears that wherever the Jets draft, they will have the option to pick any of the best QB prospects in the draft. I’ll admit, as I’ve posted on this board before, I’m a Matt Ryan fan. But, even if you think Brohm, Woodson or a dark horse is the best prospect, the Jets will have the opportunity to pick that player. We know Chad is not the long-term solution at QB, but KC’s less than mediocre play and his injury (the 2nd in 3 years due to a sack) has to give the Jets FO and every Jets fan some pause. With Parcells (apparently) heading to Miami and Buffalo’s improved play, this ’08 pick becomes an incredibly important pick for the future of this franchise. I know that the Jets have many other needs, but QB is, perhaps with the exception of a hockey goalie, the most important position in all of pro sports. QB is the cornerstone by which the rest of the offense has to be built. Right now, can anyone honestly say that we have that cornerstone?
-
subwayfare says:
I could see playing Chad if it could increase his trade value. I don’t follow the theory of saving cap room with wins. I’d rather have the high pick and trade it, exploit the value rather than just give it away. The only upside I see to winning games is to go out on a high note, encourage a winning culture.
But I just can’t see going into another season with Chad as the starter after failing to advance beyond the first round with him when healthy, his subsequent injury problems and his benching. Unless the FO is already soured on KC and wants to use Chad as a hold the fort guy as they build around him for a new, yet unnamed QB with a similar skill set.
I personally don’t love that approach, however. The current set of successful teams all have QB’s who can really throw it, Brady, Rothlisberger, Manning, Romo, Favre, etc. I’d rather play KC, even if he’s not the guy, because I think the team should be building for a QB with an arm that can spread the ball around and get it deep.
I also never fully grasped the “he needs more time to develop without playing theory” I’d love to see some hard data on the efficacy of that. (seanmac?) It seems to me that getting few first team reps and virtually no live action wouldn’t further development much. Sitting a year or two to learn NFL systems, pick up pointers from vets, sure. But is there any evidence that sitting for three or four years at the cost of a new contract has that much more upside?
-
Subwayfare, I think Chad led the Jets to the second round twice: in ’02 and ’04. It’s a moot point because KC is hurt and the Jets don’t have another option for this season. Reading between the lines, KC might have a shoulder injury. I’m not sure which shoulder, but if it’s his throwing shoulder, it’s deja vu all over again.
-
Mehl56 says:
I agree Sack- Chad looks like he benefited from the time off to rest-the only problem is we know his ceiling. It’s amazing how bad the O-line is this year. Last off-season we bantered back and forth about the D-line and not upgrading- that was my biggest concern, I didn’t once worry about the O-line, man- the Kendal situation crushed them. Now this is another huge area they have to address! I’m really concerned for next year. D. ferguson does not look like what was advertised- Look at they play of Joe Thomas in Cleveland this year as a rookie- go figure? sometimes we just can’t get a break! We need alot of off season work!
-
SD99- Sorry, I should have said “beyond the second round.” I just think that, as good as his accuracy and game management skills are, his inability to stretch the field is too easy to game plan for. Maybe he’d still thrive behind a massive O-line with a top five RB, three all-pro WR’s in a west coast type system, playing in a dome but I think with all that he’s been through here the team, and he, would both be best served by a fresh start.
-
And I have to add that as well as Chad played in NE – and he was a marked improvement over KC’s recent outings – he took five sacks and was one DB bungle away from a pick-6.
-
Zenlaw says:
There has been a lot of talk in the papers about whether KC can really lead this team or if the Jets need to resume the great QB search. I don’t think KC has been given a fair chance to succeed. On the contrary, I think he has been set up to fail. He has faced, for the most part, very highly ranked defenses and is “protected” by the weakest o-line the Jets have put on the playing field in a decade.
KC has a good arm, decent mobility and for the most part, has made good decisions. His record and completion percentage are atrocious, but all mitigating factors should be taken into consideration.
The release of Clarke punctuates this point. The Jets are incapable of running the ball, which adds a lot of pressure to the QB position. Moreover, the o-line doesn’t give enough protection to allow for slower developing plays. I blame the o-line, the coaching, but not KC.
-
jet4lif says:
I think irrespective of how good a measure we get on KC, using a top 3 pick on the best available QB makes sense. Too much to loose based on cap and corenerstone position. That would allow us to trade Chad and make KC play next yr as well. We still dont know how good KC is. If KC fares well next yr, we’d love to have the “Brees/Phillips QB syndrome” in a couple of yrs. If not then by this time the new QB can start showing something.
We cant keep the QB position hanging in the air.
-
TimNY says:
chad was “fine” sunday. let’s not inflate his performance. the offense was NOT moving up and down the field in any way. some of that was dropped balls and poor line play, but if people are making Chad’s performance over the weekend to be really good, then our standards have dropped considerably. I think he’s the better choice over KC on any nearterm sunday, but unless the FO has already made a negative conclusion on KC’s future, then the kid needs a chance to develop and will only do so playing.
-
I started off by saying KC should play and I think Mangini thinks so, too. But, he’s injured. A frequently injured player is like not having that player at all (like Abraham). KC is not big, has an injured rib and (likely) shoulder, and no matter what the reason is, hasn’t looked all that good as a starter. It’s 2005 all over again, with quarterback being a huge question mark.
-
Doctor K says:
Zenlaw, I know it was wishful thinking, but it was Adrian Jones not Adrian Clarke that was released. AJ was a man without a position eating up a roster spot. Once the new regime took over AJ was as good as gone anyway since journeyman Anthony “The Mauler” Clement took RT.
On the topic at hand, I truly believe KC is hurt more sriously than initially thought, to have Chad running the offense again. Is it just me or does any one else think with Pennington being able to start one more time for the NYJ in front of his hometown crowd that it will propel us to a ‘W’? (a la opening game ’06?) -
seanmac says:
subway- Other teams need to want your draft pick for it to have value, and increasingly in recent years, those top picks are a detriment, not an asset. People don’t want them. You’re much better off picking 6th or 7th than 2nd or 3rd unless there is a specific player at a specific (and difficult to address) position that is going to go up top. But this isn’t one of those years. The quarterbacks aren’t particularly good and in any event, the team isn’t taking one, McFadden is a luxury pick, the top OL may have to play right tackle while getting paid like a left tackle, and there is no elite pass rush threat. Chris Long is going to be there at 5, so why pay him at 2? And if he’s not there, there are top corner prospects, Michael Oher, etc, etc.
But the notion that Clemens needs to play so he can develop is misguided. Guys who get plugged in in the middle of the season generally play worse than guys who sit and come in after a full training camp of reps and with an offense optimized for them. Plus, they generally don’t develop all that much in the following season. Whatever reps Clemens gets in the last two weeks won’t make one iota of difference when it comes to how he plays next year.
-
seanmac-
I appreciate your well researched take on QB’s not showing much improvement entering in the middle of a season but doesn’t every down played help? If not right away than in the aggregate?
I would just play KC if he’s healthy even if there were not much to gain for him. I think going back to Chad after benching him has more downside than upside for the team in the long run, draft position notwithstanding. I’m also not in favor of drafting a QB high in ’08. I’d like to see KC get as much of an opportunity as possible while the team improves in other areas before pulling the plug or going backwards. IMHO.
But that brings up the main question that I thought you’d probably be best qualified to answer. What is the most effective amount of time to bring a young QB along, playing 2nd team before starting him? I can understand the value of having a full training camp and have seen that your data backs that up but what does the data say about QB’s who sit for one year, two, three, more? Is there an optimum amount of time to “groom” a quarterback? Do first team reps and live games accelerate the process? Do they set the player back if they come too soon? Are QB’s like Brady and Rothlisberger just flukes? Would they have played even better with more time to learn on the bench?
I’m curious because I often hear people say, “He needs to stay on the bench a couple of more years and learn, ” about one QB or another but wonder what the numbers say. I sometimes think great NFL QB’s are just rare and that years of grooming doesn’t really make much difference. (though I’m sure Bill Walsh would have disagreed) I’d love to learn what the numbers reflect.
-
It’s hard to say, seeing as not many high profile quarterbacks end up sitting for one or more years before seeing the field. It’s a small list, but Chad Pennington sat for 2+ years and was the best quarterback in the league when he got in the game, Carson Palmer sat for a full season and played reasonably well in his first season (although the newest post suggests that he started slow), and Philip Rivers was a top ten quarterback after sitting for his first two seasons.
Brady wasn’t a rookie when he came in, btw, as he was in Chad’s draft class. Second-year player.
-
Right, Brady was a second year player but started after being the backup in training camp and won immediately. And incessantly.
-
sjfalcon2001 says:
I don’t see a problem with this if KC is hurt. After the shot he took, it looked to me like he has at the very least a rib injury on the left side. If it’s broken ribs or a shoulder injury, I don’t blame KC or Mangini for going with Chad. I know what it is like to have broken ribs. There’s nothing you can really do for it and it is painful even to breathe. Depending on which rib is broken, he may not even be able to lift his arm. I broke the top 2 ribs on the left side playing backyard football once and I couldn’t even lift my arm halfway. If that kind of injury is the case, I’d rather shut KC down for the year and let him heal than risk further injury in a season that is worthless anyway.
That being said, if he’s not injured, KC is a better choice at this point.
Look at it this way- each win could save the team millions and millions of dollars in cap room come draft day. The difference between the sixth pick and the second pick is often incidental in terms of talent, but it’s huge in terms of contract.
Besides, at this point, there is no upside to playing Clemens. He may well be hurt, so playing him could result in more serious injury. At the very least, playing two more games isn’t going to do anything one way or another to prepare him to play next season (neither has playing any of these other games, most likely, but that’s a different story). Chad, on the other hand, can substantially increase his trade value if he plays well these last two weeks.
Lastly-and it shouldn’t be underestimated-playing Chad gives the coaching staff and front office one last chance to reconsider. Chad’s still got several years of quality play left in him, and there is ample historical evidence that he can be a winning quarterback with the proper pieces around him. But those pieces would look different than the pieces Clemens needs to be successful, so what the team does this offseason will in part be governed by what Mangini decides to do here.
Anyway, I think there is actually more upside to playing Chad these last two games than playing Clemens. But we shall see.