It’s not hypocritical for me to find the argument that Clemens is a bust after half a season’s worth of play to be dubious, and to find the notion that because he failed to step up when competing against a high school rival the proper course of action is to drop $30 million on a sketchy quarterback with an identical statistical profile to border on the nonsensical.

Clemens did not play well, and I found it necessary to point that out to people who insisted that he was playing well because a) he wasn’t Chad and/or b) because he won a few games. But I didn’t expect Clemens to play well when dropped into the same environment that Chad was already not playing well in. Clemens did have some intermittent success, and he certainly showed an NFL-caliber arm and good mobility. And while his performance was bad, it wasn’t all that out of character with the performances of other young players who were forced into midseason duty, players who subsequently became good players. In short, there was nothing that happened last season to sway me one way or the other on Clemens’ long-term viability.

We have two fundamental disagreements- you think Chad Pennington is done and I don’t, and you think (or hope) that Matt Ryan is another Ben Roethlisberger and I certainly don’t. That is what causes the strident disagreement. You don’t think we can afford to leave Clemens without competition based on last year’s performance, and I would agree with you- I just happen to think that there is already competition on the roster in the form of Pennington. You are also of the belief that the team shouldn’t be so committed to Clemens that they pass over a truly elite quarterback prospect, and I would agree with that as well- the problem is that I think an elite quarterback should have played like an elite quarterback throughout his college career and have the statistical background to justify the selection and you think an elite quarterback should be able to reach the top shelf in the cupboard.

As for Cutler, I’ll say this about him- he projected to be a reasonably good quarterback, good for about 4.51 DPAR per game. He did not project to be an elite quarterback along the lines of Rivers (7.59 DPAR), Roethlisberger (6.32 DPAR), Manning (6.34 DPAR) or Pennington (6.30 DPAR). He did not project to be as good as Matt Leinart (6.24). The projection system is not a simple pass/fail- it tries to peg players into tiers according to how they are likely to perform. Cutler did not have a strong enough projection to warrant going at the top of the draft, not like the other mentioned players, but he represented good value in the middle of the round. Matt Ryan would be decent value for a team drafting from about 17 onward. But with his second round FO-profile, with his atrocious TD-INT ratio and subpar YPA, he represents an unacceptable risk at the top of the draft, for us or for anyone else.

It’s not a simple “Clemens bad/Clemens good/Ryan bad/Ryan good” argument. It’s about assessing risk and reward in the salary cap era.

As for “whose INT was worse.” Cutler’s was terrible from every conceivable standpoint. First, it came in the Senior Bowl, so he should’ve known that every poor decision would be held against him. Second, it was unnecessary. He wasn’t scrambling at the end of the game trying to make something happen in the rain with his team ranked no. 2. Third, his WR was clearly covered. And, most importantly his ball placement was just horrible. It was behind and thrown with such pace that there was no way his WR could have caught it without slowing down, allowing the safety to just cut in front of the WR. And, as for telegraphing, Cutler locked on to the WR from the snap, and he was right in front of him. The difference is, you will do anything to defend an FO darling like Cutler, but won’t cut any break to Ryan, even though his protection broke down, he moved up in the huddle, and threw a bad pick on the run that was the result by a great play by the DB. Cutler, on the other hand, could have knitted a sweater back there and had more than enough time to properly lead his WR. But, you are right, KC would not have thrown that pick because he would’ve run right into the DL after being flushed out of the pocket.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4dIokx90R8

http://youtube.com/watch?v=fflMJ6K2yrs

It’s become such a staple of the Jets offense and we need to make sure we can continue to enjoy it after Chad is gone. :-)

The jury is still out – as it should be. All bets are off after last year. You’re right, there should be a competition.

Sack, I wasn’t suggesting Chad needed to be great, just good enough for the Jets to win some games, which he was in 2006, so I don’t see why he couldn’t be again.