Jump to content

#27TheDominator

Members
  • Content Count

    45,903
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    40

Posts posted by #27TheDominator

  1. On 12/2/2021 at 7:20 PM, phill1c said:

    For hurting your feelings, I'm very very sorry. I apologize unreservedly.

    I guess I just don't understand the opinion. Berrios is undersized, like a number of NFL players at many positions. That's all. Other than that, he has burst, catches the football in the clutch (punts count as clutch catches in my book), makes big plays when they are there, and doesn't screw up.

    Did you have the same opinion about Wayne Chrebet? "He's great on 3rd down, but I'm kinda looking to upgrade there..." NO, no sane person would say that.

    Berrios is small. But dude has more heart than you'll ever have, looking ONLY at measurables instead of actual performance. WTF is wrong with you?

    If you think Berrios is really providing great performance, fine.  I don't.  I would describe him as a JAG, but that has taken on way too negative a connotation and I was one of the guys sticking up for him around here.  He is fine.  He is a solid enough player that belongs in the league, but he hasn't even hit 400 yards in a season.  There is room for him on the team, but not at the top my roster.

    I have plenty of heart.  I couldn't run a 4.44 40.  Braxton Berrios has fine measureables.  He is just teeny.  His 3 cone and shuttle were why I loved him and thought he was a great waiver pickup.

  2. On 12/2/2021 at 10:50 PM, Doggin94it said:

    He came from SF. They paid Ward under 10M per year in a deal signed last offseason - that's the 16th highest paid safety in the league. Their other safety is Jacquiski Tartt, who they drafted 7 years ago and are currently paying less than 2M per. In total, the 9ers are middle of the league (18th) in positional spend at S.

    He got the job in SF based on his work as LB coach in Jacksonville under Gus Bradley who he worked under on the defensive staff of the Legion of Boom.  

  3. 36 minutes ago, phill1c said:

    Yeah, like every word in the language. It probalby means something a little different to each person.

    So, your post is a meaningless (my definition: adding nothing of substance) addition to the conversation.

    Oh dear.  You have hurt my feelings!  

    You think Berrios has excelled as a receiver?  He has been okay.  Solid.  Maybe even good, but I don't think a team in the league would pencil him in as a starter and not try to upgrade.  

     

  4. 9 minutes ago, phill1c said:

    I want him to start. Over Crowder. But, I also see his value as a special teamer and I wouldn't want to put all eggs--starting slot WR and kickoff/put returner--in Berrios basket.

    And I'm definitely not seeing why anyone wouldn't see Berrios value since he's been here awhile, excelling in whatever role he's been given.

    Probably because we all have different definitions of the word excel. 

  5. 47 minutes ago, Warfish said:

    Certainly possible, I have been VERY dismissive of guys like Berrios for a very long time.  And I must admit, my view could very much have been wrong in not seeing them as important role-players a bit further down the depth chart.

    I think this is right, and not far from why I was dismissive actually.  I think, perhaps, that my objection to "Berrios" talk was always around him being inflated to be something legit, something like a #2 WR or the like.  I do not think he is.

    But as a valuable piece, for depth, for returns (if we don't have anyone better or those who are better can't be risked on returns) he's fine.  In point of fact, with Crowder likely moving on, and perhaps not enough draft capital to solve all our problems, keeping Berrios may be quite wise going forward, as a low-cost, experienced, still-get-use-as-return-man backup to Moore in the slot.  

    To be clear, I do not want to see him starting or getting alot of plays at WR, but I also no longer want him immediately replaced as I once did.

    I totally get that.  The thing with a guy like Berrios is that yeah, you don't want him to start, but Berrios + good starting guard might be better than Crowder + Van Roten.  It isn't that you don't want a better option, but in a salary cap world sometimes you have to pick your poison.  Berrios is not a stud, but as poison it could be a hell of a lot worse. 

    Trouble is that you are coming around on him as he enters free agency.  He's the kind of guy you want back, but you don't want to pay.  Depending on where/how they spend, they might even let him walk to help the comp formula.  The Jets will probably be buyers, but with LDT, Moses and Flacco they added a few pieces that might factor in.  Add them to Maye, Crowder, Shepherd, Fatukasi and all of the guys on one year deals that they signed they may have something on that side of the ledger.  If they spend on guys that are cap cuts or trade for a bigger piece they may see a comp pick for a change.

    • Upvote 1
  6. 8 minutes ago, CanadaSteve said:

    I still call it an indictment on the staff.  If there are issues with Mims, as a coach, you gotta figure out how to use him.  The spent a 2nd round pick on him.  You gotta see what you got there.  Kid was highly regarded in the draft, and averages 18 yards a catch.  Get him on the field and see.  At the very least, make him trade bait.

    You are going to indict the staff because he was a 2nd?  Every bust WR is not an indictment on the staff.  He has missed a ton of time and is not the best fit.  The idea that he is going to be some great help while Moore is running around open getting missed all day seems silly to me. 

    His per catch average is a function of him not catching many balls  He is at 50%. Jeff Smith has better than a full yard more per target.  This is like stumping for Jonathan Carter. He has the tools.  He may end up being good, but thinking it makes sense to force coaches to play a kid that was never good in the NFL is ridiculous.  The season is about helping Wilson.  If Mims can't, **** him. 

    • Upvote 1
  7. 59 minutes ago, Patriot Killa said:

    I disagree about not needing a TE. A big target is a huge security blanket for QB’s in all levels of football. a sure handed big guy you can toss it to over the middle is an important option to have while scanning the field.

    you should especially look into getting one if you have no big body WR to rely on

    Who said we don't need a TE?  I think I might have been the only one arguing that Shanahan doesn't rely on 100+ target TEs.  I think they will bring in at least 2 more TEs.  I just disagree that they will be top fo the draft guys.  I think they will bring in at least 1 block first guy that is better than Wesco.  Probably a vet that is decent or maybe some injury risk guy (like the Niners bringing in Jordan Reed in 2020).  I don't see burning a first (particularly top 10) on a guy unless it's a Pitts level prospect.  

    1 hour ago, Warfish said:

    Admittedly, I was probably wrong on Berrios' value.  I've never been a fan of his, to me he falls into the same category as Danny Woodhead did for me, a guy you keep when you just don't have anyone better and you don't want to spend anything on that depth spot.  

    I think you and I had an annoying argument about Berrios.  Interesting guy for purposes of this thread.  He is an NFL player and belongs on roster, but I don't see him being somebody you "build around."  He is a guy you keep going forward if you can, but he doesn't solve any need other than preventing an Adrien Clarke/Chris Hogan disaster at slot, or providing a solid rotation piece.  

    He is an UFA, so it will be interesting if he sticks around.  They have a ton of money, so he might, but he is not a guy you want to overspend on.  Besides questions about his value on the field, he is hurt  a ton.

    • Upvote 1
  8. The reason Queens says the town names is because it wasn't an incorporated city when it became part of NYC.  Brooklyn already was a city with different neighborhoods.  Queens was not.  I used to tell people I was from Brooklyn.  Then I was in the foreign service and every a$$hole that spent two weeks in Williamsburg is telling people they are from Brooklyn.  I tell people I am from Bensonhurst.

    • Upvote 1
  9. 1 hour ago, Hex said:

    I didn't say 2 or 3 good TEs, I just said a good TE. The 49ers have Kittle, which is more than enough. Just check out their record when he's hurt... Not great

    Because Kittle is their #1 option.  The guy got the job off of what he did in Atlanta running the Julio Jones show.  Was Shanahan running his offense through Jacob Tamme?  He had 31 targets in 2016,

  10. I think everybody is blowing the TE thing way out of proportion.  Will they have a new TE next year?  I'm sure at least one.  Do I think it is a huge hole?  Nah.  I think it is more important to get another playmaker.  Doesn't matter if it is WR, RB or TE.  I tend to think it unlikely that they find a TE that will move the needle without a ton of luck.  If they are looking at Pitts?  Sure, but I'm not sure there is anybody like that in this class.  

    I like Carter a bunch, but still think it's pretty likely they will draft another back later on.  Moore seems like a very nice piece.  Hopefully they keep them coming.   

  11. 14 minutes ago, More Cowbell said:

    You can have it both ways. You jist posted how Houston had not done anything the entire half, now you are worried about 40 seconds. By this tway of thinking, we probably get the ball back after they go 4 and out

    I truly have no idea what you are talking about.  You are winning you shorten the game.  You are losing you lengthen it.  Their O hadn't do anything, so you want to give them another 6 or 7 plays to heave it deep?  It makes zero sense.  None.  It's coaching 101.  If the OC sees something that he KNOWS he can take advantage of, okay.  I'm not going to crucify a pass attempt, but the idea that the ONLY reason to run is because you distrust the QB is asinine. With a capital ASS.  The drive prior they let him throw a bunch of times and they were up 4.  

  12. 20 minutes ago, More Cowbell said:

    If the pass os an incomplete,  then you are still punting it and still making them drive 80 yards or more. I mean they had no time outs and if things were so one sided as you say, what was the danger in trying to throw and not give the ball back unless you thought,  let's  not risk a pick here. 

    if the pass is incomplete then you add 40 seconds to the clock.  You're giving them 200% more time.  I was literally the Daryl Lamonica of U21 coaches and I would have done the same.  

  13. 17 minutes ago, More Cowbell said:

    Look, if you don't think the CS made a statement by not letting him throw on third down during the last drive only being up by one score, you clearly are also biased.  You don't give the ball back to a team who is down by one score when one first down wins the game, you at least try to get it and end the game right there. You don't run it on 3rd down when it is a passing down in that situation unless you think your QB might do something that will lose the game. 

    Or maybe because you want to kill another 45 seconds?  I mean what the ****?  They were up 7 points. 

    The Texans had literally done nothing on offense.  I think they had 2 1st downs in the 2nd half, both in the 3rd quarter.  They hadn't scored since like 2 minutes into the 2nd quarter.   The Texans needed a TD.  Making that sh*tty team drive the length of the field with only 20 seconds on the clock made way more sense than trying to go for it and potentially giving them the ball with a minute and already at a distance where Taylor could reach the end zone.

  14. On 11/28/2021 at 8:17 PM, Untouchable said:

    The dude has Captain Hook hand.

    He’s done as an upper tier QB. If people want to trade multiple picks for what is going to at best amount to Jeff Garcia dipped in milk chocolate moving forward, well…that’s Jets fans.

    That's the mother****er I wanted in 2006 and 2007, but no, we have go after Patrick Ramsey and Marques Tuiasosopo.  **** you Manginious, your roster moves sucked balls. 

    • Upvote 1
  15. 6 hours ago, Irish Jet said:

    Why didn't they include completion %, QB rating or QBR?

    For those who don't know, against those teams respectively:

    Mac Jones:

    Texans - 76.7% - 95.3 Rating - 70.0 QBR - 25 points - Win

    Falcon - 84.6% - 96.6 Rating - 39.1 QBR - 25 points - Win

    Titans - 71.9% - 123.2 Rating - 72.9 QBR - 36 points - Win

    Panthers - 66.7%- 85.2 Rating - 24.8 QBR - 24 points - Win

    Zach Wilson

    Texans - 58.3% - 58.5 Rating - 9.8 QBR - 21 points - Win

    Falcons - 59.4%  - 63.5 Rating - 19.7 QBR - 20 points - Lose

    Titans - 61.8% - 97.3 Rating - 45.3 QBR - 27 points - Win

    Panthers - 54.1% - 82.9 Rating - 32.7 QBR - 14 points - Lose

    -----------------------------------------------

    Hilarious.

    Even in your cherry picked games and Zach's garbage time inflation Mac absolutely destroys him. This is honestly the saddest attempt at coping that I have ever seen. 

    It's just f*cking pathetic reading this place of late. Embarrassing levels of denial, desperately clinging on to any hope that the very clearly very bad QB is good actually. 

    Mac Jones is a far better QB than Zach Wilson. The sooner you accept that the less painful it will be. 

    To me the most interesting thing about this is that they both had their best games against the Titans.  I thought they were the one of those four teams that was supposed to be for real?

    • Upvote 1
  16. 1 hour ago, doitny said:

    you can build a dominate line without using thre 1st rd picks on it. the only other teams to use 3 are Atlanta and Detroit. 

    the best teams and HCs

    in the NFL dont waste 1st rd capital on the OL most have zero or one.

    but hey maybe we will be the 1st team to have 3 and not be complete garbage.....i doubt that

    I am also not too fired up to use another super high pick on the OL.  I get that Linderbaum is seen as an elite prospect in some circles, but I am wary of using a top 10 pick on a sub-300 lb C.  He does seem to be a good fit for this scheme.

    I think it becomes a more reasonable thought when we are looking at a near perfect match of need and prospect.  The fact that we have all the extra picks makes the idea much more reasonable.  As Jet fans we like to look back to the last time we had anything resembling "glory days" and in 2009 we had 4 guys that were 1st rounders on the Oline - 2 were ours and Faneca and Woody were 1sts for other teams and high level FAs.

    Depending where our 2nd first lands, I can certainly see going for Linderbaum or trading down to a spot where he makes sense.  Of course if he is that good a player that creates a bunch of risk.

  17. 2 hours ago, doitny said:

    i bet the numbers say he is much more accurate 20 or more yds downfield then the short passes. ok he can still work on making better short passes but dont take away the best part of his game. the mid to deep pass.

    I know numbers are it, but I think you have to look to the eye test too.  Longer passes are always "more accurate" because the receiver can adjust to them.  Look at the catch Cole made over the middle.  That was behind him and Cole had to reach back for it.  If it were a shorter pass, he would not have the ability to do that and you get those balls bouncing around the RBs on swings. 

    • Upvote 2
  18. 54 minutes ago, Jets Voice of Reason said:

    The mental gymnastics to not call a spade a spade is perplexing. It's a mechanical issue. It's a timing issue. If you watched two seconds of his college tape you knew that he has good arm talent but plays yolo ball all the time against inferior competition frequently throwing 50-50 balls that his receivers would win a higher percentage of the time because of the talent discrepancy. He lacks touch on the short passes, always throwing the heater no matter the situation. He's still not stepping into his throws consistently, which is infuriating that nobody is drilling this and repping it out of him.

    Will he get it fixed? Maybe. I hope so.  He's the QB for at least another 1 or 2 years in all likelihood. This is who he was, a highly risky prospect with physical tools who doesn't have a lot of experience. The people goo-goo over him just ignored that fact. I'm just glad that people had 4 weeks of watching this system operate at a higher level so people actually realize how poor Zach has been and that the system obviously works in the league.

     

    I literally sent only one text message during the game.  It said  It's official.  Wilson is the problem. 

    • Upvote 1
×
×
  • Create New...