Jump to content

Big Blocker

Members
  • Posts

    1,456
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Big Blocker

  1. You're right it was probably better to say he did not live up to his hype.
  2. Yep. Imo last year was the year for Williams to show he was worthy of being considered a starter, and he went backwards. I hate to be right when I am skeptical of a Jet player, but he proved while he has success ball hawking when facing the Qb, he can't consistently cover with his back to the Qb. I am not saying it's a bad move that they signed him now. They can still cut him if they end up with some better players in the secondary. But if he's not on the roster by Opening Day, I will not be unhappy. Not a fan...
  3. I said Agree on both questions. I did not go with strongly agree since they might not pick a Qb at 6 if Trubinsky has been taken by someone else, and I can't predict if they will take Watson there in such a situation. But in any event I am reasonably sure that the Jets are already down on Hackenberg's prospects.
  4. I haven't said anything on this subject since about a month ago, but nothing in the interim has changed my mind. Says here if Trubinsky is available at 6, the Jets will take him. Macc doesn't want to repeat the error Idzik made when he stood pat with one year's performance from Smith and did not draft Carr. Looks so far like Hackenberg is even less of a prospect than Smith was. Not playing him at all last season leads some to say how can you move on when he's not taken a single snap in a regular season game. It leads me to say they did that because they've already determined he's not going to pan out as the starter. They've got Petty and Hack on board to see who might be the backup in 18, so they still need a starter.
  5. ^ I don't like M Williams. If he ends up starting you will know the Jets will have a crap secondary.
  6. Thomas and Jones at least played some. In fact I don't think Thomas was going to be a complete bust until that fumble after which he never got his head together. Jones was injured, as was Faurot. Hard to know what to make of someone who didn't pan out because of injury. Having said that Milliner belongs because he had a history of injury before he was drafted, which is different. I would have put Sanchez on that list given where he was drafted and the huge hurt he put on the Jets' future when he didn't pan out. We're still paying for his pick. And yes Nagle really doesn't belong there. Only second round pick on the list, Nagle was more about not living up to the hype than he was about lack of value in the draft.
  7. As a general matter you are of course correct, but you in effect imply the fault for things getting messy is on the kind of player you mention. Meaning the whole fault. Given some of what has been going on with the Jets and the way they've been run the last few years, what the Qb position has been like, I have no doubt a big factor has been frustration for players who want to win. In other words I think PART of the problem with Holmes was that he didn't like the way the team was going, and losing. A player who wants to win can react badly when frustration gets to them. But I on the whole admire a player who gets frustrated more than one who seems to be fine with collecting his paycheck and losing.
  8. Not saying I thought we'd be friends or anything, but I didn't find Holmes to be the problem a lot of Jet fans did.
  9. Exactly. People who talk about them doing some kind of fakeout here by looking at Trubinsky, thinking the Jets are prepared to roll with Hackenberg, seem to often add in "We haven't even seen him play!" The CS has seen plenty of him, and if they really thought he is a great prospect going forward, why even waste time looking at Trubinsky? It doesn't make sense.
  10. If you, now obviously in hindsight after the 16 season, refuse to acknowledge that Fitz had a good year in 15, I don't know what to say. Other than that your position is not credible. For everyone else I would also add he had some good times in Houston.
  11. The approach taken with the vets on D I agree would not have made sense if there were better players on the bench. Sadly I do not think that was the case. Take CB - as bad as Revis was at times, who should have been playing instead? And it wasn't just the high priced vets. The Jets obviously have a big problem with Pryor who is still on his rookie K. A first round pick, only problem is he's mediocre. So who should Bowles have played instead of him? On O and taking RB, Powell did look better than Forte for the most part. But, in his sixth season last year, Powell carried more times than he did in all others except his 3rd. Not sure what you mean to say Forte was used "over" Powell. Seems like Powell got a lot more carries than in the two previous years. And didn't Bowles bench Fitz?
  12. Yeah, a lot of huffing and puffing about very little Says here Bowles was trying to buck up a player who'd had a very good year and a final last game that was bad, that Bowles knew that Woody and Macc wanted Fitz back, and so big deal he said something nice about Fitz. What was he supposed to say, there'd be a Qb competition with Smith???
  13. Fitz had a very good year in 15. Last year he did not. Bowles wanted the Qb he had in 15 back. That Fitz was not that Qb in 16 was a problem, but why that was the case is something I can't say Bowles himself was a significant factor in. So it's really hindsight to complain about what Bowles said at the beginning of the off season last year. I also highly doubt he was speaking then without an awareness of what Woody and Macc wanted. In other words the decision to bring back Fitz was not Bowles's sole responsibility by any means. So to point the finger at him as responsible for what ended up happening with Fitz is just plain silly.
  14. I don't consider myself a pro-Bowles partisan here, but it does seem to me that a lot of the criticism he gets here is over the top. For example on this point Bowles did want Fitz, but he didn't ask the FO to dilly dally with his contract through the spring and well into the summer such that Fitz came in so late there was minimal time to get chemistry with the new wideouts, which became that much more important when Decker went down - another factor. Bowles critics are free to downplay the timing of Fitz's signing, but imo it is ludicrous to think the timing was in keeping with what Bowles wanted early in the off season when he referred to Fitz as the Qb he wanted. And yea I do think that hurt Fitz's preparation. As did the first six games on the schedule.
  15. I generally agree but would have said on the last sentence that he needs the players to perform at a level reasonably related to their potential.
  16. On the article posted by the OP, it seems to me that making too much of what Bowles said is what too many seem to be doing. Sure it was problematic as a statement, but the only thing that matters is what Bowles does and doesn't do to manage the locker room during the coming season. What he says now is irrelevant, and I don't think even says anything about what approach he will take. I don't recall a lot of issues about the locker room during the 15 season, and I don't think you can blame Bowles for such things as Smith getting punched out by IK. That was on Smith, and after the event I think the CS handled it well. There were a number of factors at work last season that make it hard to isolate the HC as the variable in the locker room. But yeah this season the roster will have some significant changes, and if the net result is a locker room with a lot of problems, then it becomes more persuasive to put more of the blame on Bowles.
  17. We all know what happened to the last GM who picked his guy in the second round and passed on top prospects in the following year despite the Qb he did pick not showing real promise. No reason Macc should not be aware of that history, and what it means. I would not predict the Jets trading up to get say Trubisky who I take it is seen as the better prospect. But if he's available at 6, why would it make sense to say "Nah, I already have the future in Christian Hackenberg."? It wouldn't.
  18. Your opinion about last year is beside the point. He has not been fired yet. Which he would have been if Woody and whoever was inclined to do so based on your view of such performance. The question on an ongoing basis is what would lead to his firing in the future.
  19. Bowles haters somehow ignore that if Woody and Macc felt it was Bowles who was primarily responsible for 16, as compared to his first season as HC in 15 when the Jets were 10-6, when I guess they say he wasn't responsible for that, but putting 15 aside for the moment... If they mostly blamed him for last year, he would have been fired already. but he hasn't been. So now you sign McCown as the Qb, cut a bunch of vets and replace them with who?, and that is supposed to add up with a competent HC to a winning season? Forget about that. Lots of fans here claimed to be alright with a rebuilding year. I am not so sure a rebuilding year was really necessary, but the point is once you are on board with rebuilding, the HC gets a pass unless the team really falls apart. I know there was an issue with the locker room last year. Was that on Bowles? Hard to say, frankly. but now they've let go some of those involved whether culpable or not, so Bowles should do better with the locker room. Sure if he doesn't he might be fired on that basis. But with this roster, this Qb, expecting a solid team? As in it would be the HC's fault if the team was not good? Forget that. This is a bottom quarter roster right now, especially at Qb. Who are the weapons on O? How about that OL? The secondary? And how about those slow linebackers? Add it up and 4-12 will not in itself kill Bowles. He has to lose the locker room in order to lose his job.
  20. What an overreaction. Must have something to do with your being a Mets fan, but I doubt all Mets fans would react similarly. Bowles was talking to a reporter who BROUGHT UP the Yankees, and was a Mets fan. So what was so bad about his teasing response? It's not a good thing to have thin skin.
  21. I don't consider last year a rebuilding season.
  22. Last I checked he's still the HC after they signed McCown. I understand there's a lot of Jet fans unhappy with Bowles. But what evidence is there that Bowles is SPECIFICALLY ill suited to being HC on a rebuilding team as compared to being HC in general? Can't think of any, certainly not based on prior history.
  23. He might be, but not if the team holds together and merely fails because of an obvious lack of talent.
×
×
  • Create New...