The Jets Joint Practice Thread: HOT Take Edition

[Jackie Lee]

 

[PNW_PantherMan]

4 minutes ago, Waldo said:

Hot take: The games would be a lot more fun in person regardless if they let us bring our smokers and grills inside. Hot hot take: There would be something worth eating inside the stadium at that point. 

One BBQ sandwich.  That will be 56 dollars plus tip.

[CRA]

3 hours ago, AceBoogie said:

And you know from all of your years of playing experience? 

I love this logic that gets trotted out over and over. 

sports is sports.  drills are drills.  practice is practice.  Scrimmage is scrimmage.  Games are games. Everything is unique and it's own thing.  My son and I even go over this as he is prepping for his football season.   Controls vary.  You have more and less depending on which we are talking about.   There are controls in scrimmage play.  There are pros to that.  Coaches have it.   Looks can be dictated.  Red jersey always a different environment.  To get and see what you want to see.  But Bryce is trotting out a narrative for a reason. Which is what I addressed. 

We have a tiny QB, that struggles behind massive line play......if you remove him getting hit from the equation....it provides a totally different scenario.  QB play changes.  Line play changes.   

I don't have to play QB in the NFL to understand practice, scrimmage, preseason, and an actual games are all different animals.   Bryce needs to rep in his brand new O, behind in brand new OL, where he faces being hit, and operating the O.   Because it puts him in the fullest version of a real game he can get to and brings his biggest issues actually into play with consequences. 

 

[jayboogieman]

6 minutes ago, Waldo said:

There would be something worth eating inside the stadium at that point. 

And that's why it'll never happen

[Waldo]

7 minutes ago, PNW_PantherMan said:

One BBQ sandwich.  That will be 56 dollars plus tip.

I don't pay those prices when I could do it better myself. I can't remember when I last ordered a steak when dinning out. 

5 minutes ago, jayboogieman said:

And that's why it'll never happen

That and the massive fire hazards. Could you imagine guys smoking already for 8 to 12 hours showing up with their setup? So many lolz

Edited August 15 by Waldo

[Icege]

 

[Icege]

Sucks for Nash after just having his son.

[jayboogieman]

6 minutes ago, Waldo said:

Could you imagine guys smoking already for 8 to 12 hours showing up with their setup? So many lolz

That would be the funny part. And so true about the fire hazards, especially with people drinking their overpriced beer and getting angry about the game.

[PNW_PantherMan]

Just now, jayboogieman said:

That would be the funny part. And so true about the fire hazards, especially with people drinking their overpriced beer and getting angry about the game.

Yea seems like an easy way to get the stadium burned down.

[jayboogieman]

Just now, PNW_PantherMan said:

Yea seems like an easy way to get the stadium burned down.

[MasterAwesome]

1 hour ago, frankw said:

The only team that thinks preseason is useless is also the reigning worst team by a significant margin until proven otherwise.

Also anyone trying to compare us to the Rams at this point in time is about to OD on hopium.

I don't know what you expect here.  You guys argue things like "no successful team/player does ______" and when you're presented with an example of so-and-so successful team/player doing that very thing, then you say "oh are you seriously comparing us to that successful team??".  Yes, that's the point...?

All we have to go off of so far is Week 1 of preseason (we don't know yet what Canales is planning for weeks 2 & 3).  And there were several other teams who rested all/most starters in the first game: Rams, Ravens, Dolphins, Giants, Lions, Eagles, Jets, Buccs, 49ers, Cardinals, Cowboys.  There are some really good teams in there, but I know we're not supposed to ever draw any comparisons no matter how minor to the good teams, so I've bolded the meh teams whose comparisons you will hopefully accept.  The point is that good and bad teams rest their starters in the preseason - that has very little correlation one way or the other. 

Yes I understand and even agree that we might have particular incentive to play starters based off of last season's struggles and having a lot of new additions this year (roster and coaching staff alike), but I'm just pushing back on the notion that resting starters is some unheard of thing that is unique to us (i.e. we're the "only team that thinks preseason is useless").

[Waldo]

24 minutes ago, PNW_PantherMan said:

Yea seems like an easy way to get the stadium burned down.

But with BBQ and beer so it couldn't be all that bad

[frankw]

19 minutes ago, MasterAwesome said:

I don't know what you expect here.  You guys argue things like "no successful team/player does ______" and when you're presented with an example of so-and-so successful team/player doing that very thing, then you say "oh are you seriously comparing us to that successful team??".  Yes, that's the point...?

All we have to go off of so far is Week 1 of preseason (we don't know yet what Canales is planning for weeks 2 & 3).  And there were several other teams who rested all/most starters in the first game: Rams, Ravens, Dolphins, Giants, Lions, Eagles, Jets, Buccs, 49ers, Cardinals, Cowboys.  There are some really good teams in there, but I know we're not supposed to ever draw any comparisons no matter how minor to the good teams, so I've bolded the meh teams whose comparisons you will hopefully accept.  The point is that good and bad teams rest their starters in the preseason - that has very little correlation one way or the other. 

Yes I understand and even agree that we might have particular incentive to play starters based off of last season's struggles and having a lot of new additions this year (roster and coaching staff alike), but I'm just pushing back on the notion that resting starters is some unheard of thing that is unique to us (i.e. we're the "only team that thinks preseason is useless").

The Carolina Panthers have been the worst team in the NFL for at least 3 years.

No resting starters isn't some unique thing that just started happening recently. I dont think anyone myself included are arguing that.

But the teams you mentioned along with the Rams have earned some level to a high level of the benefit of the doubt as they have each been competitive. I mean you have multiple Super Bowl contenders in that list with consistent sustained success. The Panthers have earned absolutely not even a sliver of the benefit of the doubt to make bold moves and declarations about anything. We're on our 3rd head coach in 3 seasons lol. Do I hope they are right on this? Hell yes. Do I automatically expect it will turn out fantastic for us? Bluntly no I do not. We'll see how it goes.

Edited August 15 by frankw

[ForJimmy]

14 minutes ago, MasterAwesome said:

I don't know what you expect here.  You guys argue things like "no successful team/player does ______" and when you're presented with an example of so-and-so successful team/player doing that very thing, then you say "oh are you seriously comparing us to that successful team??".  Yes, that's the point...?

All we have to go off of so far is Week 1 of preseason (we don't know yet what Canales is planning for weeks 2 & 3).  And there were several other teams who rested all/most starters in the first game: Rams, Ravens, Dolphins, Giants, Lions, Eagles, Jets, Buccs, 49ers, Cardinals, Cowboys.  There are some really good teams in there, but I know we're not supposed to ever draw any comparisons no matter how minor to the good teams, so I've bolded the meh teams whose comparisons you will hopefully accept.  The point is that good and bad teams rest their starters in the preseason - that has very little correlation one way or the other. 

Yes I understand and even agree that we might have particular incentive to play starters based off of last season's struggles and having a lot of new additions this year (roster and coaching staff alike), but I'm just pushing back on the notion that resting starters is some unheard of thing that is unique to us (i.e. we're the "only team that thinks preseason is useless").

This is kind of where I am at.

Will it help to play our starters in the preseason?  Sure it will help to a degree.  Definitely not to the degree that some people are acting on here.  Starters usually play limited snaps so maybe it affects our first drive or two of week 1 and that's a maybe.  So there is a risk vs reward...  I mean does anyone think if we played our starters more last year we would have some how had a better record?

We are also one of the worst rosters when it comes to depth.  This mean two things regarding preseason.  The first is a major injury can greatly decrease play on the field for the regular season.  The second is we really need to evaluate our depth for young promising players, and other teams castoffs.  The best way to do this is to play the players fighting for spots to get an in game look at them.