Jump to content

jetblue95

Members
  • Posts

    389
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by jetblue95

  1. hmmm, if only the jets had a GM who was ahead of the curve in stocking up on 2022 draft picks...
  2. if the lineman they are targeting are gone, as are paye and the top CBs, i'd rather them take a RB at 23 and address the o-line at 34 then them take a WR at 23. the need for an elite RB is more dire than another WR. so if they are seeking to get zach weapons and the linemen they want are gone (and they don't want to reach for the next tier), then grab an elite play-maker. i too like carter a lot. don't think he makes it to the 3rd. maybe they could trade into 2nd to grab him.
  3. out of curiousity, how many super bowl winning teams have you been a part of? douglas has been part of 3. he learned from one of the best all-time in "how to put together a roster" and he helped philly get a title. so your chirping on the interwebz about how you are absolutely, positively sure that douglas doesn't know how to assemble a SB roster is cute. when you can show me your 3 rings, i may give you a little more credence than just being some message board, know-it-all, arm-chair GM
  4. that's irrelevant to your post. you asked "Problem is who is blocking for them" in response to a post that said: I know RB with a high pick is a hot-topic, but adding Jenkins and Javonte would go a long way toward changing our identity and take some heat off our new QB.
  5. you do realize that jenkins is an offensive lineman, right?
  6. again, you are offering your opinion. that is fine, and i too share a desire to see the offense upgraded. i think there have been more improvements than you just describe as adding a #2 WR (in addition to adding davis, a healthy, full-year mims, cole is vastly underrated, coleman is a solid RB platoon addition, and most importantly the new shannahan-inspired offensive system instead of gase feeding frank gore the ball 20 times a game offense). but nevertheless, i want to see the jets help wilson out by improving the line and adding more weapons. but you cannot claim you have been proven right when you cannot point to any such example as PROOF. i've given a bunch of examples of winning teams being built around a young QB along with a mix of offensive and defensive picks. grabbing one of the top CBs or edge rushers with one of the day 1/2 picks isn't malpractice. it's not the same as taking a box safety over a QB. they are premium positions, as well as positions of need for the team. it may not be my preference, but i certainly would understand going with one of those positions relatively early if that is how the board falls.
  7. you have NOT been proven correct. you continue to assert your opinion and claim it is correct. saying something over and over does not equal proof. the chiefs did not build a SB team by drafting only offense after getting mahomes. the texans did not follow up drafting watson with only offensive draft picks. the bucs did not just win the super bowl by loading up on offensive draft picks. let's do another one. the bills, after drafting josh allen, made 4 consecutive defensive picks that year. the following year, they picked a DT with their first pick, and in 2020, their first pick was a DE. proof would be showing a real world example. can you do such, where a team follows up taking a QB high in the draft with 3 or 4 consecutive offensive players in the same draft?
  8. no, the first pick they made after trading up for watson was a LB. the following year, while they had no picks in rounds 1 or 2 (watson trade and osweiller salary dump trade), their first pick was a S. hopkins and fuller were in place before they got watkins (as were watt and clowney on the defense), so they started at a better point than the jets are today. but they did not seek to load up the offense at the expense of the defense. and as i showed up, while their offensive production has remained relatively consistent, their defense fell off a cliff. granted they have been a horribly run team - o'brien really messed up what could have been a good thing between the tunsil and hopkins trades. now they are a complete mess, and that's not even including the whole watson-massage fiasco. again, i want an offensive-focused draft. but that doesn't mean it is malpractice to also help the defense, especially if the value of a defensive pick (at an area of need) outweighs the value of forcing an offensive pick for the sake of making an offensive pick.
  9. except if you look at houston's draft history, there is nothing to support your argument. they did not continue to stock up on players to surround watson at the exclusion of the defense. although truth is the really have been poor drafters on both sides of the ball. https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/htx/draft.htm and if you look further, they won more with watson when they played good defense. in 2020, they scored 384 pts and let up 464 (4-12) in 2019, they scored 378 pts and let up 385 (10-6 - benefit from crappy division i guess) in 2018, they scored 402 pts and let up 316 (11-5) the offense remained relatively consistent in producing points. the defense got much, much worse https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/htx/index.htm
  10. this is idiotic. you need to win on both sides of the ball. sure, you need a good offense as it's less like to win with a purely dominating defense and a crap offense these days. but the converse is true that a great offense can get shut down in the playoffs and if the defense stinks, you also aren't winning. look at the bucs draft history. heck, even look at the chiefs draft history. sure it helps to have an all-world QB, but the chiefs only became elite when they started playing defense. NE traditionally focuses on the defense in the draft. i too want a draft with an emphasis on offense (edited from originally saying defense). but calling for the GM to be fired on the spot if they pick a defensive player before day 3 is just plain moronic.
  11. i'm not going to pretend to be an insider or have any real sources. what i can offer is a story told to me by the cousin, who's boss is close with tepper (hedge fund guys). and tepper told his boss "i didn't pay $2.2 billion to watch teddy bridgewater play QB" now maybe sam settles tepper's desire to land a QB. maybe not.
  12. what scares you about that? that the jags may not take lawrence or that the jets could be bluffing and wind up taking fields?
  13. while it may be a little premature to rule on the latter grouping, i think you just blew up your theory of taking the "better prospect"
  14. that's cute. interwebz tough guy running to mommy
  15. seems your reading comprehension is as lacking as your understanding of the word fact. i have not made any conclusions. i have not even offered an opinion of who the jets should take. i readily admit i am in no position to evaluate them, having seen wilson play a handful of snaps and seeing fields play in parts of a few games. but what i do know is that how someone was viewed as a PROSPECT coming out of high school is utterly and completely meaningless in evaluating the nfl draft. i will trust the professionals to make the decision. doesn't mean they will always make the right choice. but they sure have more information and more experience in making these judgments than some internet blowhard who seems to think that being a higher ranked QB coming out of high school means diddly squat to being prepared to succeed in the nfl.
  16. i'm sorry. here i was thinking we were discussing who to draft in the nfl, not who our favorite college programs are going to sign on signing day. when people on a jets board, in the lead up to the nfl draft where the jets own the 2nd pick and are assumed by pretty much everyone to be taking a QB, discuss who is a better prospect, one would assume they mean as a pro. not 5 years ago coming out of high school. maybe you are still living in the past, where you think it's fun to act like a d-bag clown and pose as some faux tough guy. but this is the real world sparky and the grown ups were discussing who the jets may take to be their QB as a pro. but maybe you also thought the jets should have drafted ryan perilloux, mitch mustain, jimmy clausen, ryan mallet, dayne christ, terrelle pryor, ej manuel, matt barkley, aaron murray, jake fromm, max browne, and garrett gilbert, among other 5 star PROSPECTS.
  17. apologies on missing the full context of the prior conversation. in general, you make a good point. given how i would expect saleh/lafleur to mimic the SF offense and rotate backs (unless one grabs the job and runs away with it), i don't have a problem with taking a RB high and playing him. the QB will start (if not game 1, then pretty shortly thereafter). if they take an o-line with a day 1-2 pick, chances are he will start. i get the hesitancy on playing 2 rookies on the line protecting a rookie QB, so can't dispute that one. don't think adding a talented rookie RB (traditionally the "easiest" position for a rookie to come in and play) gives me extra pause. the jets need talent on offense. they need to surround wilson with good weapons. there are a few backs in this draft who i think can really help the offense. shouldn't pass on them for fear of playing too many youngsters.
  18. you have your head so high up your arse, you probably think your shyte smells like roses
  19. and ben roethlisberger sucks because he played at miami, ohio pat mahomes sucks because he played at texas tech and not one of the bigger school in the conference josh allen sucks because he played wyoming matt ryan sucks because be played at BC and dwayne haskins, cardale jones, terrelle pryor, troy smith were great nfl QBs? also, steve young says hi (as does jim mcmahon) - only 5 super bowl rings for BYU QBs. this may be the worst take i've ever seen here. amazing such a know it all clown would make such a preposterous claim. i'm wondering what college you attended to come up with such crap (also, learn WTF the word FACT means)
  20. well the rookie HC and OC aren't on the field. not sure why they count as one of the 4 rookies on offense. but it seems your preference would be to go with hoyer (or fill-in-the-blank vet QB) and run back the same o-line and RB group as last year? does that add to more than 3 wins? i'd rather take lumps with rookies getting on-field experience than has-beens/never-has-beens stinking up the joint
  21. i didn't see anyone calling fields geno smith. i also didn't see anyone else posting as an infallible know-it-all, who called wilson a prepubescent teen, nor anyone else so definitive in their evaluation that fields is and always will be the better prospect. again, if you don't want to read my posts, put me on ignore
  22. this i think the need is more dire to add a RB than a WR. so as long as the o-line is addressed with one of these picks, i'd be fine adding a RB with the other. the draft is supposedly deep in slot WRs, so that can be addressed later. you have davis and mims as young WRs already locked in for the future. i'm not sold on the RB room, although i liked coleman as a veteran addition. i understand RBs can be found anywhere in the draft, so i'm not pounding the table for them to take one early. i'd prefer to take the OL in the 1st and RB in the 2nd, but good chance the top 2 RBs are off the board before the 2nd.
  23. and if you trade down and fields isn't there? of course, "getting a haul for wilson" seems to imply that other professional talent evaluators also think wilson is the better prospect and are willing to give up said "haul" to move up and get him. your post assumes fields is the better prospect. that is your opinion, and apparently, many other people's opinion. on the flip side, many other people think wilson is the better prosepct. we don't know. in the end, you trust the front office to get the right guy. to do their diligence and evaluate the alternatives and pick the guy they think will be the best. pontificating on message boards doesn't make one right...or wrong. and being a GM doesn't make one right...or wrong. but the GMs and scouts sure have a lot more information to work with than those of us on the interwebz, unless of course you have conducted multiple interviews with the players, their coaches, dissected game film, watched them throw in person standing next to them on the field, and so on.
×
×
  • Create New...