Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by jamesr

  1. 2 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

    Love his ability on the field - who wouldn’t? - but he hasn’t played a full season since his 2nd year in the league. That’s 5 straight years where he’s missed multiple games (not counting games he left early with those injuries).

    If he’s looking for something pushing $20MM/yr, that’s way overboard for a guy who’s that unreliable from a health standpoint, especially with a 17th game added (and - gasp - playoffs beyond that if the Jets get their act together aside from just RG).

    I’ve got no issues paying up big for a RG, especially when the team’s LG counterpart is on a relatively cheap rookie deal for the next 3 seasons, and not having either tackle making in excess of $10MM. But it can’t be a guy who misses this many games, especially with Becton not being a 100%-snaps guy himself, to say the least:

    • 2017: missed 2 (knee)
    • 2018: missed 8 (shoulder in a brace earlier, then tore a pectoral, and would’ve missed the postseason)
    • 2019: missed 5 (ankle; and would’ve missed the postseason)
    • 2020: missed 3 (knee; played all snaps in WFT’s 1 playoff game)
    • 2021: missed 4 to injury (knee; then 2 more were because he tested positive for covid in late Dec, but I can’t fault him for that)

    Anyway that’s just way too many missed games for a guy demanding that much. Historically injury prone players don’t tend to get suddenly less injury prone, for the next few years in a row, starting at age 31.

    Given our existing concerns over injuries, this should 100% rule him out IMHO.

    Let's draft and develop our own guys (Brandon Moore says hi :-) ).


    • Like 1
  2. 4 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

    This brings up a question - Jets FA dilemma...

    If the Jets are only going to get the FA's that are basically solely about money?

    Are those the guys that aren't passionate about winning?

    If that's the case, is that why our FA seem far to often to be bums?

    In other words, the FA's that care about winning - we can't get.

    This is why our involvement in FA so far has been limited ... and will likely be so this year too.

    I see a lot of posts here that "JD has to spend this offseason". I don't see it happening for the exact reasons you posted - we're not a destination for players that want to win; until we develop organically to that stage our FA spending needs to be careful and controlled and VERY targeted at players who we feel will be foundational / part of the culture change. We are not looking at "quick fixes" to plug holes, and if people reckon a spending spree is coming, I think they're going to be disappointed.

    • Upvote 3
  3. 14 hours ago, Jetsfan80 said:


    I KNOW you're wrong about both, because every available metric demonstrates your wrongness.  Your argument is based on feelings and nonsensical hypotheticals.  Neither of those approaches win arguments.  

    No, no, there is no feelings, it's all factual ... like this quote, which is the last line of the original post:


    Also i hate Berrios.

    Perfectly rational and factual if you ask me.

    :D  :D  :D  

    • Haha 1
  4. If JD can find a way to bring Moses back that will go a long way to us fielding a better than average OL in 2022, however it works out. 3 starter quality players for 2 spots is a luxury a lot of better teams do not have.

    Moses did talk highly of the team not long ago and sounded open to staying - but not sure how much of that was genuine and how much was diplomacy.

    • Upvote 2
  5. 10 minutes ago, JoeWillieWhiteShoesHOF said:

    You’ll see quite a number of “flash plays” next year.....when he has more NFL quality talent at the skill positions added by Douglas.  Tom Brady would have trouble putting up 200 yards passing per game throwing to what was left of Wilson’s offensive unit toward the end of the year.  None could barely get half a yard of separation on their routes.

    I'm hoping so. If he can start to make "chunk" plays - whether it's down to spectacular catches by the surrounding talent or laser accurate throws from Zach himself - this will go a long way to making us a respectable offense. We can expect a few more turnovers to creep back in as a result, it'll be the ratio that is important. If it's 2-3 great plays and 2-3 boneheaded INTs each game, we're back to where we were. If the INTs are few and far between you can live with that if he's more than making up for it with good throws elsewhere.

    His pre injury stats were 4 TDs and 9 INTs. Post injury was 5 TDs and 2 INTs. If he kept that post injury ratio I think it'd be a good step forward, but it has to also increase in volume - 5 TDs in 7 games isn't what you want.

    Let's say for arguments sake he has 20 TDs and 8 INTs in 2022 ... that would be progress and hint at better days ahead, but still not near the level of "star QB" that we all want him to be. 


  6. I would ask ... as depressing as that chart looks, at what point does it kind of become irrelevant?

    Making the playoffs once, getting bounced and not making it back again won't make any of us feel all that much better IMHO.

    Are Broncos / Giants / Lions / Dolphins / etc fans looking at that and thinking "hey, at least we're not the Jets"? How great does Washington's playoff spot last year feel after how this season went? Houston and Minny can hardly be basking in their 2019 successes right now.


    • Upvote 1
  7. 6 minutes ago, Jets1958 said:

    the Giants have injury problems 

    Thanks for this. Tough to know sometimes whether things are fact or perception. 

    Interesting too that before the last week we were 28th and NYG were 27th. I'd not be too worried about the last week as we probably "shut down" some players that would have suited up if the game was relevant to playoffs etc.

  8. 8 hours ago, Beerfish said:

    The thing that doomed pretty well all of our last great hope qbs was bad turnovers.   The second half of the season was a really good start, he has to build on it.  He also needs more reliable help.

    Agree with this 100%.

    Early on Zach was losing us games single handed. They worked on stopping that after his return from injury - we see more caution, more throwaways, potentially a rise in sacks / running out of bounds rather than risking turnovers.

    One down side to this is it also took away the "flash plays" that he made from time to time. The ones that got everyone excited. What tehy need to work on now is putting back in the "good Zach" that they lost without also bringing back the "bad Zach" that they worked hard to eliminate.

    In short - he isn't losing us games anywhere near as much now. Next step is he has to start winning them for us. That is the 2022 challenge.

    • Upvote 2
  9. No way are we throwing draft picks and a ton of money at older players ... we'll draft our own and develop them. If anything we'll trade draft picks to move up for specific players (e.g. AVT) but on the whole things aren't likely to change in terms of our approach this year.

    I know people get excited for big splash moves every off season, but that's not this GMs way. Think of last year, we signed Lawson as a FA, that was our biggest "splash". Other than that ... Corey Davis? Jarrad Davis? Hardly blockbuster stuff. 

  10. 10 hours ago, mrcoops said:

    Flores is a perfect fit for this job.

    Damn Giants are going to luck into a good coach.

    There are better openings available ... he'll likely have more than one option. Why would he choose the Giants in particular?

  11. 9 hours ago, doitny said:

    honestly i would love to see the stats on how many players get injured there? i think that field has alot to do with our injury problems. and maybe look at Florham park too

    It's been posted in another thread that more of our injuries have happened during away games.

    If the field was the issue surely the Giants would have the same problem?

  12. I’d add another IOL as well.  There was horrible depth this season.  
    The Dr is talking about quitting to be a Doctor, so that would be 2 IOL that need to be added.  
    LDT did not mention quitting. He said he needs to clarify his situation as he has not yet met the standard expectations of a prospective doctor - the rules likely don't factor in professional sports in any way. All he referred to was sorting out some sort of exemption with the Canadian medical board - i.e. so he can keep playing football.

    His situation is rather unique I'd imagine.

    Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

  13. 10 hours ago, PavlovsDogs said:

    Jimmy is no Jag but yeah highly unorthodox.  Hey it's the Jets - we've sucked badly for a decade why not go against the grain?  We're worried about the fragile ego of a 22 year old QB who went 4 and 13?  It's not like hiring Urban Meyer and giving him millions to be a destructive a-hole!

    And to be clear, Jimmy will only come here as the starter.  Did anyone on this board watch the Niners Rams game yesterday?  Jimmy balled out man.  Coming back from a 17 point deficit at halftime and winning that game.  It was nice.

    No one is fretting about a fragile ego. This is a narrative designed to make Zach look like some sort of weakling that needs to be got rid of.

    This team is going to win or lose with Zach - that much is clear. And Jimmy G will only come here to start - that much is also clear. So if you sign Jimmy G, you have decided to move on from Zach. Not because of his ego, but because you just signed a guy that is going to take his job for the next three years (barring injury). At the end of that you have to decide on the contract of a guy you chose not to play for 3 years. 

    So - do we sign an expensive vet, anoint him as starter, and look to trade last year's top draft pick after 13 games? Or do we continue to develop that draft pick - for better or worse? 

  14. 4 hours ago, slats said:

    He had nowhere to go yesterday behind a makeshift line. Every time he turned around, he had another defender in his face. The worst one was when he ran out of bounds for a nine yard “sack,” but Piñiero bailed him out. Otherwise, for the most part, he at least managed to safely get rid of the ball. It’s to his credit, considering what he faced yesterday, that he managed to finish the season with five straight games without a pick. That’s good stuff. 

    Early in the year we were losing games because of Zach. He's worked to improve that and we haven't lost because of him since his return from injury. 

    The next big step is for him to start being the reason we win games. That one is a big ask and will potentially take more than next season. We also need to upgrade the talent around him to improve the chance of it happening.

    • Upvote 1
  15. 5 minutes ago, HawkeyeJet said:

    Spielman has produced quite a bit of talent in Minnesota.  Bears would be smart to pursue him in some capacity in FO

    Vikings always struck me as a team where the whole was less than the sum of the parts.

    They even traded away a disgruntled star WR (Diggs) but then turned the draft pick compensation into a non disgruntled star WR who is younger and costs a lot less. Not often that you see that happen.


    • Upvote 1
    • Haha 1
  16. 13 minutes ago, docdhc said:

    I think we need a good free agent vet corner to solidify that group. Mentor all the young guys. Save the high picks for play maker positions like edge and WR. 

    If we bring in a FA to compete I'd be OK with that. Not so keen to bring in a guy if he gets handed the job (and a high salary as a result). All in all I'd rather go the road that has worked well so far - late round picks and UDFAs - and keep the competition open. E.g. If a guy outplays Echols then he deserves to start and Echols becomes strength in depth. But I wouldn't want to pay a vet $10m per year to be only a small upgrade over the guy we already have. And absolutely no way do I want us to spend high draft picks at the position.

  17. I'd much rather we get NFL caliber players at more positions than some good players and some busts. Let's level up the roster then look for the "unicorns" once we can actually field a respectable team.

    E.g. I keep hearing we shouldn't draft a LB high. But if there's a guy that we can draft at 10 who can do for our D what Micah Parsons did for Dallas, I want him! "Premium" position be damned.


    • Upvote 3
  18. 1 minute ago, Jet Nut said:

    I think you’re not looking at the whole picture.  We’ve had some young players step up and field a position but while they played well at times they’re probably not the long time solution as a starter at that position.  But they’ll provide good depth.  We have CBs and Ss that fit in perfectly as backups 

    CB is still kind of sorting itself out ... adding another guy to the mix will increase competition and depth, I just don't want to see that come via a high draft pick (Say No to Stingley!). Having another guy like Echols / Hall / Carter added to the mix should suffice to give us depth with decent starting talent.

    S is a mess ... kind of like TE, it needs a complete overhaul. FA / draft / UDFA all need to be in the mix.

    The places we ended up stronger than we might have thought were on offense (IMHO). Our OL survived a couple of injuries; WR depth started to show (Berrios was a pleasant surprise). RB we also had a decent amount of production out of "next man up".

    None of that is to say that any position is "sorted" - I fully hope we draft a WR in Round 1 this year to continue to build that unit up further. 

    • Upvote 1
  19. 10 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

    We have nowhere near the talent the Bills have.  That extends to the depth they have behind their starters

    Exactly. We have started to see talent emerge in places at some starter positions, but to expect us to also have strong depth is a step too far IMHO. In fact I think we were remarkably lucky with the depth that we did have on OL, when all is said and done.

    As we start to fill more holes in starting positions we can start to apply more resources to finding capable depth. 

  • Create New...