Is it at all possible that Geno Smith has developed this year to being a real QB this year?
- Thread starter jets82
- Start date
J
JohnnyBaseball1
Guest
I think the Geno supporters know that they're starting out behind in this argument, because their argument rests on a future event that may never happen. I've heard people say he has potential, I've heard people say that we shouldn't give up on him because he has physical talents, that other QBs who turned out to be great started slow ... But what I don't believe I've heard is anyone say that his performance last year was good enough, or that they think that a QB playing at that level can bring us to the Super Bowl. Does anyone believe this is true? Or does everyone agree that improvement on his part is necessary? And we are really arguing over how likely it is that he will improve and how much he needs to improve to bring us to the playoffs/Super Bowl? I understand how the debate shifted to "can Geno be good," because there was no argument to be made on the question of "has Geno been good?" But which is the really relevant question? Your argument is based on something changing, the anti-Geno argument is built on things staying the same. Obviously, the future is yet to be written, and anything can happen. It is certainly possible that Geno will improve, and he will be a leader and a great QB. But just hear in mind in this argument that it is the pro-Geno people arguing that what we will get will be different than what we have gotten. Anti-Geno people are arguing that what we have gotten will be what we continue to get. The pro-Geno argument is speculative. It may certainly turn out to be right, but it is a harder position to argue, IMO.
J
JohnnyBaseball1
Guest
nice to see you make it over here.
good post...my only question is, are you really gonna pinch hit homer simpson for darryl strawberry???
Thanks Hobs .... I would have to say no, BUT do feel it necessary to poin out that that move worked! Homer drove in the winning run! I think Mr Burns thinking is right, he was just looking at the wrong percentages (ie Strawberry's HR/AB of 1.00 might have been a better number to look at)!
Considering Terry Bradshaw's stats during his first two seasons, as evidenced by the data at the link about him posted further up this thread, exactly the same thing could have been said about him after his first two years.
I guess you would have to look at all QBs and the learning curves for each. Clearly some are steeper than others, some flat line, and precious few hit the ground running and never look back. I think most of the 'pro-Geno' crowd feel that he is either going to eventually get it (given experience, better coaching and better surrounding talent) marginally improve or flat-line. The 'anti-Geno' crowd is damn sure that he will never improve. To me, the 2nd position is much more difficult to argue, and the PGers appear much more reasonable. Do yourselves a favor and go look at HOFer Terry Bradshaw's statistics for his 1st 5 years in the league. He wouldn't have lasted one season with this crowd of visionaries.
His 1st 5 years were pretty bad.
Precisely. And that is exactly what gives me pause when so many are ready to dump Geno after just 2 bad years. So many make the argument that you can't compare the 70's to the present. But since Bradshaw's stats were compiled against his contemporaries and Geno's against his, I think the comparison makes sense.
And the one thing that Bradshaw's piss-poor first 5 years point to that distinguishes that era from the present is the lack of patience with QB development today as compared with then. I wonder how many QB's who might have turned out great are selling cars or something today owing to that impatience.
J
JohnnyBaseball1
Guest
The question is, for every Terry Bradshaw, how many Matt Leinarts are there? I don't think it is fair to talk about Bradshaw without talking about Leinart. I understand that the existence of QBs who became great after playing poorly at the beginning of their careers proves that it can happen, the existence of a greater number of QBs who isn't go on to be great puts it in a different context entirely. I don't know the numbers, but I wouldn't be surprised to learn that there were 10 or more failed QBs for every successful one.
There is no way to prove that Geno can't get better, so I understand why the argument shifted in that direction. And you all have shown that there have been examples in the past of QBs improving into hall of famers. That's a much easier argument for you to win. But I can prove that it is possible to win big money playing scratch off lottery tickets, too. Does that make it a sound investment strategy?
I don't see the burden as being on the people who are saying "what we have is what we have," I see it as being on the people saying "what we have is really something better than it appears." All the Terry Bradshaw stats in the world do nothing to explain how or why people think Geno will get better, just that in the past, other QBs have improved. His physical talent and the improved cast around him are good arguments in Geno's favor, but they're still just reasons to hope for better.
If we think of ourselves as scouts, making player evaluations, then it easier to understand the divide. Once a scout decides they don't think a player has it, they probably don't want to devote more resources to that player. If a scout thinks a player has potential, they're willing to live through some growing pains.
Personally, I don't think he has it, either the decision making ability or the attitude/personality to be a great qB. It seems most likely to me that he will continue to play at a less than satisfactory level. If I'm right, it will be a waste of another 1-2 seasons, and then we will finally move on. I don't want to waste seasons waiting for potential I dont believe will materialize. Why would I?
There is no way to prove that Geno can't get better, so I understand why the argument shifted in that direction. And you all have shown that there have been examples in the past of QBs improving into hall of famers. That's a much easier argument for you to win. But I can prove that it is possible to win big money playing scratch off lottery tickets, too. Does that make it a sound investment strategy?
I don't see the burden as being on the people who are saying "what we have is what we have," I see it as being on the people saying "what we have is really something better than it appears." All the Terry Bradshaw stats in the world do nothing to explain how or why people think Geno will get better, just that in the past, other QBs have improved. His physical talent and the improved cast around him are good arguments in Geno's favor, but they're still just reasons to hope for better.
If we think of ourselves as scouts, making player evaluations, then it easier to understand the divide. Once a scout decides they don't think a player has it, they probably don't want to devote more resources to that player. If a scout thinks a player has potential, they're willing to live through some growing pains.
Personally, I don't think he has it, either the decision making ability or the attitude/personality to be a great qB. It seems most likely to me that he will continue to play at a less than satisfactory level. If I'm right, it will be a waste of another 1-2 seasons, and then we will finally move on. I don't want to waste seasons waiting for potential I dont believe will materialize. Why would I?
Well that is certainly a fair point. But all I am arguing for is patience. Let's give Geno at least one more season to see if he can turn it around, especially in view of the strengthened offense and new coaching staff. We have no other way to know if he is one of the rare turn-around type of guys.
My thinking exactly.
I think the majority of the 'pro-Geno' crowd feels the same. I don't believe that any are locked in to the QB, but would like to see if he can develop given the physical skills. Further, most are saying that if he can't cut it, he should go and that the Jets have adequate alternatives.
L
Lakerfan80
Guest
He will get an entire season if he does well.. This season isn't going to be about developing a QB or seeing if Geno is the guy for the future...all the stats and past means nothing moving forward...Geno will either keep the job or he won't...and don't forget he is a 2nd round pick of another regime.
This is not a guess, this is completely on point Hobson. By default Geno is our starter at this moment in time due to his experience of playing time over Matt Simms as Fitz is injured.
This isn't "Geno's job to lose". Geno many may say might have a leg up by August, but Fitz actually played meaningful games under Chan Gailey's system, therefore when all the cards are even, Fitz IMHO will have the leg up.
Again, Geno, for the 2nd year in a row will have every opportunity to seize the moment. If he can't be the starter for opening day then he's not qualified to have earned a roster spot on this 2015 team. Yet, if he is the starter then he proved he beat out legit competition. Though that's not where the journey ends. He must sustain his role and not have a roller coaster year.
IMHO, more than likely, all this back & forth on FItz & Geno may all be nothing by the end of the draft. The organization may draft a QB, in which as many outlets have reported that we're sending six of our own front office men to have a private workout with Marcus Mariota. Meaning Geno's days are numbered and would showcase what this new regime honestly thinks of Geno & would make the Fitz signing more understandable as he'd be the vet to groom the 1st rounder, knowing the system.
Or, we may trade the pick for a bonafide starter,then have Geno & Fitz battle it out to be his back up.
This QB situation is far from being settled. No one has been named the week one starter and won't be for a while.
I've said it before and will say it again, this new regime holds no loyalty to Geno or any QB really. He is a second rounder true which would be no real heart break if he flopped and they moved on. I've said also if they draft Winston or Mariota then Geno is done here as QB regardless. Winston would be the starter day one or after the draft really. Mariota would probably need a year but would beat Geno or Fitz out his second year.
If they draft either, their obviously doing it in the first round so they not doing it for Geno to have any chance of remaining a starting QB here. Now them drafting any other QBs and IMOO, Geno still has a shot. Not drafting Winston or Mariota to me means they may actually want to see if Geno can be their QB of the future but will only give him this year to prove it. Drafting Winston or Mariota means they have no faith in Geno and ready to move on.
L
Lakerfan80
Guest
S
sg3
Guest
Geno Smith was discussed four weeks into the season on "Inside the NFL".. Interesting take from Simms, Boomer, Namath and now Geno's teammate, Brandon Marshall.
My real hope is that Fitzpatrick's thinking rubs off on Geno. I think Geno has the physical skills Fitzpatrick never did, and Fitzpatrick has the QB mind Geno never did.
But I would also spend a pick, even if it's not a first rounder, on a QB.
But I would also spend a pick, even if it's not a first rounder, on a QB.
