Jump to content

derp

Members
  • Content Count

    3,145
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by derp

  1. 1 hour ago, flgreen said:

    Those combine weights usually last about 15 mins until the player walks across  South Capitol Ave to Tavern South.  :) 

    Oh they’re certainly not consistent across careers. But it’s what he weighed when he wanted to perform well during testing - and athleticism is going to be paramount in this scheme. I don’t think he would’ve been able to perform well at his old playing weight.

    • Upvote 1
  2. 4 hours ago, munchmemory said:

    I have no idea.  To lose 20 pounds is significant.   Can Mosley be the same impact player at that weight?   Guess we'll find out.

    Who gives a sh*t about SF?  We're talking about a guy who has not played in two years and now shows up 20 pounds lighter.  And "buy in"?  lol   With this team's history, your mantra should always be "question everything".  You'll sleep better.

    …do you actually not know why SF is relevant?

    Mosley was also 234 at the combine when he came into the league. If he was at 250 this season it would be an awful weight for him.

    Also I thought your post was weird. Did you think I was telling you to buy in? Why would I do that? I know I worded mine lazily, but to be clear what I was intended to express was that I thought Mosley losing weight to better fit Saleh's scheme represented him buying in to what the staff wants - which I think is encouraging for a veteran player who's got a whole lot of guaranteed money heading his way regardless of what shape he shows up to camp in.

    By no means do I think him being in the low 230's means he'll be a Pro Bowler but I think he's got a better chance to play well in this scheme at that weight than he would have at 250.

    • Upvote 1
  3. 12 minutes ago, munchmemory said:

    I did not recognize Mosley now 20 pounds lighter.   That's gotta impact his game, no?  

    I hope it all goes well for him.  But this guy has been a weird cluster headache from the start.

    I don’t think SF had a starter above 230 last year. Would imagine he cut weight to better fit wha the scheme needs him to do. I viewed the weight loss as really positive. Buy in.

    • Upvote 3
  4. I think Q is pretty firmly third - both behind Wilson (the gap) and Becton (then gap) - and ahead of whoever is fourth. Interior disruption is extraordinarily valuable, and Q had a great year last year. But my thought is is he’s done it for one year we’ve seen no less than three guys over the last decade get drafted by the Jets, flash that skill set, and flame out.

    I’m looking for a long term piece at a premium position. It’s clearly Becton or Q but I value LT a little more highly and think Becton’s (smaller sample size) body of work when one the field is more consistent.

    The most important thing that really pushes this over the edge is my question with Quinnen is whether he will continue on the trajectory he laid out last year and my question for Becton is will he stay healthy. If you’re answering health affirmatively for Becton…that’s my guy.

    • Upvote 1
  5. Crowders first four games of the year were all double digit target games. Those four games accounted for almost half of his receptions, more than half of his yards, and two of his six touchdowns. The first three were all over 100 yards too, fourth was a pedestrian seven catches for 48 yards and no touchdowns on 13 targets.

    Only had three games with more than seven targets the rest of the year, none were double digit target games. The Browns game was nice, 7 catches for 92 yards and a TD. Other two were fine, 6 catches for 66 yards in one and 5 for 47 in the other (but with two TD’s). 

    Whether it was usage or him being banged up or something else, Crowder went off a cliff after the beginning of last year.

    Also for all the making fun in this thread, AFJF would’ve been better off posting per target stats because those are oddly different between the two groups. Granted it’s a pretty small sample in the low target games.

  6. 5 hours ago, slats said:

    Put Moore ahead of him, too, but who would be the fifth guy? 
     
    Either way, it’s disappointing. 

    Definitely disappointing. Maybe Berrios? Felt like I read a lot of him in OTA and minicamp tweet threads. 

    This is why you sign Cole. I do like Mims still and think he can have a role with his contested catch ability, particularly since Wilson seems to be the kind of guy who will make back shoulder throws. But he’s going to have to earn his spot.

    • Like 1
  7. 16 minutes ago, HawkeyeJet said:

    So here is an interesting twist.  I've heard of this avenue before.  I actually just finished my MBA this spring.  I still have access to my school email and a photo id but not quite sure how the validation process goes.  I'll have to see if I can get it via that route.  That would be great. 

    I went back to school and it worked fine - I think they checked when I was enrolled at the time but honestly not certain. Definitely used the school email.

    Was a one year program so I figured it’d be done last year since I wasn’t enrolled (though I had been earlier in the calendar year). They ended up auto renewing me. Worked out great.

    • Upvote 1
    • Like 1
  8. I hope JFM grabs hold of that second edge position and gets extended reasonably in the midst of a breakout year. Saleh utilized a bigger guy in Armstead at DE.

    If there's going to be heavy rotation, JFM can certainly kick inside on passing downs when Rankins or Q need some rest and cause some havoc from in there too. Very good player.

    • Upvote 2
  9. On 5/19/2021 at 2:54 PM, johnnysd said:

    I am trying to find an advanced stat that discusses it. Just seems to me that a sack is not quite a turnover because not all sacks end a drive, but some do lead to direct turnovers. I believe I also looked at overall pressures as opposed to just sack numbers. If you think about it, a PD on 3rd down is extremely close the same value as a sack but no one discusses that. I am not saying sacks and especially pressures are not important I just feel that they are not quite as game changing as people think. They certainly can be -EDGE pressure clearly won the recent Denver SB, I am just not that convinced that going from a decent to elite EDGE has the impact people think it does. Elite EDGES are unicorns and paid as such, but are they really worth second and third contract money?

    I mean again, interior disruption is king over edge. You could argue that DB play is comparably important to defensive line play - guys like Rex and Bowles took more of that kind of approach. My guy can cover your guy and that enables me to bring more guys than you can block. The rules really favor receivers right now.

    I think pass rush is more impactful than back seven play for a few reasons. While you do have coverage sacks from time to time, that’s not one player making an impact - requires everyone doing their job. When the Jets had Revis and bad #2 corner play teams just picked on the other guy. One pass rusher getting to the QB changes the play. Maybe it’s a yardage loss or turnover but even just forcing an earlier or bad throw is positive and helps the DB’s. I think it’s just easier for that one guy to change plays. And if he ends up being doubled the numbers advantage gets even more favorable for the defense.

    Especially as the league becomes more passing oriented, the absolute best way to disrupt passing games is by changing the quarterback’s schedule with pass rush and ideally hitting him. 

    Stats in football are tough because it’s so situation based. Obviously the Bucs had a great pass rush last season. The Chiefs went from Dee Ford to Frank Clark - maybe not a completely elite unit but they get leads on teams and then let their pass rushers get after it. Chris Jones is important for them too. Those great Seahawks defenses got home with their front four, the Giants team that upset the undefeated Pats did the same. Broncos team that Manning won his last Super Bowl with had Von Miller. It’s definitely not every team, multiple ways to skin a cat for sure, but I still think pass rush is a very viable path towards being a Super Bowl caliber team. Especially when you can get home with four guys. Has to make defending so much easier when you’ve got numbers in your favor - if five can’t block four it leaves the defense with seven guys to cover five.

    • Upvote 1
    • Post of the Week 1
  10. 7 hours ago, jetstream23 said:

    Carter, Johnson and Coleman look like the best fits for this outside zone running scheme.  Coleman has a lot of familiarity with it.  Johnson and Carter seem to have the athletic profiles for it.

    At this point, Perine seems like the odd man out.  Wouldn't be shocked if he ends up on the PS.

    One thing Perine has going for him is his potential role on specials. I think he was drafted to be a #3 back who plays specials for four years. Boring but useful.

    6 hours ago, Defense Wins Championships said:

    It doesn't matter who our featured back is because 

    A.) Adam Gase is fired. 

    B.) We'll actually run... LEFT a lot behind Becton and Vera-Tucker. 

    I'm hoping for a 1-2 punch featuring an ACC/SEC 1-2 punch of Carter and Perine. 

    The way Gase used the rookie RB last year and hurried him behind Gore was criminal and if you're to judge him due to his rookie season you're just as stupid as the idiot Gase. 

    Forget who but somebody pointed out with that left side they’ll be able to just collapse that side of the line on runs right and open up some cutbacks too.

    • Upvote 1
    • Like 1
  11. 14 hours ago, johnnysd said:

    I know that many people think edge is hugely important but I think they are in general massively overrated. Really really good ones are rare, and every so often there is a game where edge rushers dominate, but if you look throughout history it will show there is really not a strong attachment rate between elite pass rushing and success and winning Super Bowls. I did an analysis that I posted a while here that suggested to win a SB you essentially need a Top 10 offense, but in terms of pass rush the only correlation you could really make is that as a team you are not real successfull with a bottom tier pass rush.

    I do not disagree though that we won't take one high if he is there.

    I don't see us going early for corner as the early corners are usually man corners and that is very minimized in our defense. OL TE MLB seem to be likely biggest needs in next years draft. Who knows where we pick though.

    I'd argue it's hard to correlate pass rush statistics with quality of play at the position since the ability to rush the passer is very game flow dependent and there are a ton of confounding variables there.

    It's also pretty straightforward to make the point that interior disruption is king over edge disruption but when you're also making the really good ones are rare argument for edge rushers, the rarity of good interior rushers is far more pronounced. 

    Did you find anything else that was correlated? I can't tell if that indicates that edge rushers are overrated or nothing more than that, with the small sample size of Super Bowl winners and a salary cap environment in the NFL, there are a lot of ways to skin a cat. If what you've got is a top 10 offense there's room for pretty much anything to be overrated, right?

    I don't think you *need* a good pass rusher to win a Super Bowl, but on the same token it's pretty universally accepted that quarterback is the most important position in the sport and we've seen teams win Super Bowls without elite quarterbacks too. Ultimately a lot of games are won and lost up front, disrupting quarterbacks is key, and edge rushers are the most common part of that.

    Totally agree regarding corner being overrated as a need. I imagine linebacker gets punted to day two. Tight end is a huge one.

  12. 8 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

    You used the same approach as he did.  He told you why he loves the new uniforms, you why you Harte them or like others better.  Whatever, its the same thing.  Thats all

    Except I made a comment based on a post by a completely different poster, he then told me why my perspective was wrong, and then I continued arguing for my perspective. It’s not quite the same. Whatever.

  13. 14 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

    OK, I never told you that either.

    I commented that you did the same exact thing SAR did.  You want to keep arguing when thats exactly what you did, fine.  Im done

    What happened is you told me I was trying to change his perspective, I told you I wasn’t, you told me I was again (which was pretty obnoxious and why I’m still engaging with you on this), I explained that I knew I wasn’t going to change his perspective the whole time and was just ranting, and then you got confused, thought I was commenting on your perspective on uniforms, and then decided you said something different than what you actually said.

  14. 9 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

    Yeah, and you said I agree with SAR.  And I told you I havent given a perspective other that Im ok with the new, old and in between uniforms.  

     

    Once again, not about the uniforms. I was actually referring to you telling me what I was thinking after SAR did the same.

  15. 13 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

    Actually I dont take any side

    My likes or dislikes are what they are and others will differ.  Its a uniform, totally based on opinion.  I dont think my opinion, like or dislike is more important that others. I havent tried to convince anyone of my opinion or change their opinions.  

    Its a uniform, nothing cut and dried here

    .....I wasn’t referring to your perspective on the uniform.

  16. 4 minutes ago, SAR I said:

     

    s-l1600.jpg

    It's the only thing on the uniform that is representative of the '68 uniforms and Super Bowl Championship season.  The wordmark and the football.

    So you want to get rid of it.

    Makes no sense.

    SAR I

    Would make a great use of throwback attire, a secondary logo, a patch on the jersey, or even a part of the helmet with *any* nod to the actual team name besides it spelled out in letters. 

    Don’t like it standalone with JETS on the helmets.

  17. 2 minutes ago, SAR I said:

    chicago-bears-full-size-replica-riddell-

    I forgot one.  The Bears actually have 2 footballs on their helmet.  The outer "C" and the inner "c" are both footballs, the one on the inside is even in simulated motion.

    So that's 8 teams, or a quarter of the league, that have something very hokey and related directly to the sport of football on their helmets or jerseys or coaches gear.

    Should I add the other ones that must be nonsensical to you?  Like a star on the Cowboys helmet?  Who needs that?  Bengal stripes?  A literal Jaguar head?  A full sized Buffalo?   A full sized Lion? 

    And what about the pretend Vikings and Rams with horns, literally, coming out of their brains?

    Outrage!  Anger!  

    SAR I

    Yes obviously two footballs on the Bears helmet. Excellent point. Quarter of the league.

    Shame on me for hoping for something more creative than the team name and a ball.

  18. Just now, Jet Nut said:

    OK.  But you are, just saying.

    I know my username is derp but I’ve seen SAR post about the uniforms for some time and when I posted above I was well aware nothing I post is going to change his opinion. 

    Thanks for your thoughts on the matter, though. Based on that post I see why you might take his side. Two peas.

  19. 5 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

    Wait, you start off telling him "You telling me they’re good isn’t going to change my perspective."

    Then go on a 3 paragraph diatribe telling him why they're not good to change his perspective.

    I find the whole "I hate uniform X and love uniform Y" perspective, as if anyone's opinion is right, more than others

    I’m not trying to change his perspective. I’m annoyed he’s telling me to change mine.

  20. 7 minutes ago, SAR I said:

    49ers - Helmet logo in shape of a football.

    Packers - Helmet logo in shape of a football.

    Buccaneers - Helmet logo with football on flag.

    Browns - Primary team logo is a football helmet.

    Raiders - Helmet logo features a football helmet.

    Football Team - "Washington" and "Football" is literally their logo in its entirety.

    Now don't ask me again.

    SAR I

     

     

    So...only the Bucs. If the Jets put a football on a Jet I wouldn’t mind so much.

  21. 2 minutes ago, SAR I said:

    SENTENCE.jpg

    So you're saying that something the Jets have been doing uniquely for 50 years is bad because we didn't copy everyone else?

    The origin of the Jets logo is that we were a struggling AFL franchise in a huge city with too many sports teams in a sport that wasn't exceptionally popular.

    The logo says "New York Jets Football".  There's an NY.  There's the word "Jets".  And there's a football.

    The wordmark "Jets" and the little football is our logo.  Always has been, except for the span when we went full boring in the 80's.

    SAR I

    No, I’m not. You, like always, are changing the argument to deflect from the question I asked you. Putting equipment in the logos is common in other sports. Not in football. And as I pointed out when I added to the post, the majority of those logos aren’t part of the uniforms those teams wear.

    Also, something a team has done for 50 years *except almost 20 years in the middle* isn’t actually something that a team has done for almost 50 years.

    If the Washington Football Team doesn’t change their name and decides to put a football on their new helmet, that would make sense to *me*. *My* opinion is that the Jets are not the New York Footballs, and I personally am not a fan of putting a football instead of something related to the team’s name on a piece of equipment exclusively used for that sport. Regardless of whether they’ve done it for 50 years with an almost 20 year gap.

    I thought they had an opportunity to do something creative with the team’s name as a part of their base logo and the name. They didn’t. They put wings facing each other instead of outward on the jerseys. You posting pictures of the other sports logos, old Jets logos, and the wings won’t change *my* perspective that the redesign is not what *I* wanted to see as a fan. You think they did a great job. That’s wonderful. Enjoy the uniforms.

    • Upvote 1
×
×
  • Create New...