Just go with Bollinger. The season's over, so you might as well let the kid get some experience.

Another benefit to playing Bollinger is positioning for Leinart in the next draft!

What happened to the first version of this extra points post? The one with the 3110 URL, posted many hours ago. The one with the incorrect link when clicking on the headline?

The Jets are most certainly not taking Matt Leinart, not with the amount of money they just finished giving to Chad (who may well return healthy next year, given a more extended recovery time). The most likely scenario is the team trading for a Matt Schaub type player who won't require an expensive new deal upon signing, or taking a quarterback at the bottom of the first or top of the second round, where the contract will actually be manageable.

I actually was pushing for a rotation from the beginning, as the DVOA suggested Vinny would tire out if he didn't get spelled a bit.

I wouldn't say their season is over. I mean, they're only 1.5 games out of the division lead. I'm not saying I think they'll win it, but in theory they are still very much in it.

I don't think they view bollinger as someone they need to develop. Nobody ever says: "gee, it would be nice if I could get my third string qb out there in a game so he can develop." You gotta figure, next year they're going to have two guys in front of him on the depth chart.

Besides, even if his injury is "career ending," the Jets aren't going to ditch Pennington until they're sure he's out of the picture. That might be 5 games into next season.

James:

I kinda disagree. If you can get a third string QB enough playing time that he becomes a viable second string QB, that's terrific. Hopefully you signed him to a cheap two or three year contract, and now you can ditch your second string QB (who's more expensive) and pick up another third string QB for just as cheap. Voila, you've just reduced your salary cap amount without actually losing any quality.

Interesting topic for FO research: Do quarterbacks actually get better with experience? We all assume so, we can all list examples, but I can think of a few counter-examples as well. Perhaps more interesting, how much experience is "enough", in the sense that any more won't significantly improve skill level (as measured by DVOA).

Pat:

Instead of 3rd String QB, don't you mean AJ Feeley?

fyo:

Donovan McNabb took 2 1/2 years - mid - 1999 to 2001 to grow into a real Quarterback in 2002.

Peyton Manning took one year - 1998 - to do so.

Well, that's the other reason to play a third string quarterback. He then starts to have value, and you can trade him to a stupid NFL franchise for future draft picks.

Possible stupid NFL franchises: Detroit, maybe even Houston or Miami (again!).

How does Detroit make a list of "possible stupid franchises"? If anyone is on the confirmed list, it's gotta be them.

Quarterback development is so dependent on surrounding talent that it becomes difficult to say who needs more experience, and who needs better guys to play with. Culpepper made the Pro Bowl his first year as a starter, then he stunk after his o-line was decimated, and after Robert Smith wasn't taking his hand-offs. Then he became a Pro Bowler again as his 0-line improved. Sure, more experience played a role, but it is pretty hard to quantify.

Remember the old saw that if you have two quarterbacks, you really have none. Or, in Jersey B's case, if you have four qbs, you really have none.

It looks as if the job is still vinny's. Link goes goes roundabout to my blog just to mooch traffic, then to an article :D

As a jets fan, the only thing to keep me interested this season would be to see Bollinger keep playing... he did pretty well against Atlanta's terrible prevent defense...thanks to Herm for ruining that too.

These guys drop the friggin ball three times -- I mean drop it like a wet bar of soap, like the three stooges .... and this guy blames Herm for ruining something ?

good grief.

Re #17

Ugh... I understand my grammar isn't the best there... so pardon the slip-up.

"This guy's" point is this:
If the only storyline that would keep me interested in the Jets this season is Bollinger, Herm has now ruined that for me too.

So yes, I DO blame Herm for ruining the only shred of fun that would be left for me this season... it has nothing to do with fumbles.

If you're 2-5 and your alternative is the dessicated remains of a 43-year old who was on his couch a few weeks ago, why wouldn't you play Bollinger? If you won't play him, why have him on your roster - even as a weekly inactive? With their line in such poor shape, his ability to run is meaningful, and the idea that gee, Vinny can throw the long ball - when? When he gets five seconds to throw? Because they're having such success keeping the defenses honest by running the ball? Ugh. Glad I'm nolt a Jets fan.

Thanks for the sympathy Mike, it really isn't a good year to be a Jets fan. Actually, the last 35 years have been pretty rough.
But I still feel like I have my integrity ... I didn't turn into a Cowboys/Yankees fan, although it really would have been much more rewarding!