Freedom Investing Report
  • Sports
  • Politics
  • Stocks
  • Business
  • Sports
  • Politics
  • Stocks
  • Business

Freedom Investing Report

Sports

Geno Smith trade grades: Who won QB deal between Jets, Raiders?

by March 11, 2026
March 11, 2026
Geno Smith trade grades: Who won QB deal between Jets, Raiders?

The New York Jets spiced up their outlook at football’s most prominent position by returning to a familiar figure.

The Jets on Tuesday agreed to acquire quarterback Geno Smith from the Las Vegas Raiders as part of a late-round pick swap, according to multiple reports. The Raiders will pay the bulk of Smith’s restructured contract, per reports, while the Jets will pay the passer just over the veteran minimum.

Smith heads back to the team that drafted him in 2013 and for whom he started for two years, until a punch by a teammate sidelined him and eventually cost him his QB1 status.

For the Jets, the swap provides much needed clarity in the form of a viable starter for what could be an extremely challenging season. The Raiders, meanwhile, continue to set the table for expected No. 1 overall pick Fernando Mendoza.

But who won the trade? Here are our marks:

Jets trade grade: B+

So it’s come to this.

After the Justin Fields experiment went awry, the Jets figured to have perhaps the league’s most daunting quarterback setup for 2026. Entering the offseason, Gang Green was linked to the likes of Carson Wentz and Andy Dalton. It was enough to make any fan want to fast forward to next spring – or at least the fall, when they could watch plenty of Arch Manning and the other 2027 draft-eligible quarterbacks.

Going with the Smith 2.0 era will produce plenty of jokes, but this was likely New York’s best option.

Many of Smith’s worst traits bubbled to the surface during his disastrous one-year run in Las Vegas, including a devil-may-care mentality that led him to toss a league-high 17 interceptions in 15 games. At least with the Jets’ solid collection of talent up front, however, he’ll be afforded higher quality protection than he received from the Raiders, who gave up an NFL-worst 64 sacks in total.

That of course still won’t matter if he can’t speed up his decision-making and become an effective distributor, as Fields proved untenable behind center due to the number of sacks he invited. But Smith at least gives the rest of the offense a chance at achieving mere functionality, which is a necessity for evaluating the other parts of the operation heading into a critical 2027 offseason. The price is hardly exorbitant, so … why not give this another shot?

Raiders trade grade: B

Maybe this is generous for a team washing its hands of the quarterback for whom it surrendered a third-round pick just a year earlier. But the Silver and Black were backed into a corner here, and getting any kind of relief for a player who otherwise was headed for a cut is a win. Move on to Mendoza and leave this in the past.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY
previous post
New York Jets’ Super Bowl 3 hero dies at age 84
next post
Mexico goalkeeper stretchered off with possible Achilles injury

Related Posts

Former Packers president Bob Harlan dies at 89

March 6, 2026

Ranking top 10 coaches in college basketball ahead...

March 10, 2026

Coco Gauff forced to retire, 18-year-old phenom moves...

March 9, 2026

Chiefs headed back to Super Bowl? What Kelce,...

March 10, 2026

How India defeated New Zealand in T20 Cricket...

March 8, 2026

Key information, how to watch NASCAR race at...

March 8, 2026

    Get free access to all of the retirement secrets and income strategies from our experts! or Join The Exclusive Subscription Today And Get the Premium Articles Acess for Free

    By opting in you agree to receive emails from us and our affiliates. Your information is secure and your privacy is protected.

    Categories

    • Business (1)
    • Sports (274)
    • About Us
    • Contacts
    • Terms & Conditions
    • Privacy Policy
    • Email Whitelisting

    Disclaimer: FreedomInvestingReport.com, its managers, its employees, and assigns (collectively “The Company”) do not make any guarantee or warranty about what is advertised above. Information provided by this website is for research purposes only and should not be considered as personalized financial advice. The Company is not affiliated with, nor does it receive compensation from, any specific security. The Company is not registered or licensed by any governing body in any jurisdiction to give investing advice or provide investment recommendation. Any investments recommended here should be taken into consideration only after consulting with your investment advisor and after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company.

    Copyright © 2023 FreedomInvestingReport.com | All Rights Reserved