FloridaJetsFan Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 Who says that he was the only player they told that to? Rex probably said the same thing to Andrew Luck. Peshaw!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE ILK Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 It does not matter what the Jets want. #rextractorbeeminfulleffect Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
afosomf Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 The thing that doesn't add up is that unless the Jets thought there was almost no chance that Coples made it to them, what sense would it make for Rex to promise him that he'd be the pick at #16 if they truly had their heart set on a "sleeper" who they had to think would almost definitely be available at their draft slot? jets tried to trade out so they were not 100% sold on coples, i have a feeling Cimini was right, they wanted irvin just to rush the passer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 jets tried to trade out so they were not 100% sold on coples, i have a feeling Cimini was right, they wanted irvin just to rush the passer Tried, or listened to offers. There is a difference. At the end of the day, the Jets chose Coples, and any of this speculation after the fact is just that-speculation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSJets Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 Hey! How about that? How about what? It's already been proving false by another writer. But keep believing Cimini who is a ******* moron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 Let's be real here-NO team is EVER 100% on ANY draft choice they take. It is not that easy, and the draft is a known crap shoot. Does anyone believe that the Jets lacked for suitors on the #16 spot, if they in fact did not like Coples there, or did not like Coples as a Jet? The amount of action, prior to the Jets pick, and after the Jets pick, makes it sound they should not have lacked for an opt out, if they did not like where they stood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thor99 Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 If Rich Cimini wrote an article and someone defecated in his mouth as he was writing it, would it make a sound? It was years ago, and you're better off. Let it go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 It does not matter what the Jets want. #rextractorbeeminfulleffect HANDSELECTEDNESSTITUDE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyHector Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 Really can't put this together eh? They tell coples, coples tells 2 people, they tell 2 people, etc.. the real question is, if the Jets were dead set on Coples, why would they tell HIM that??? You have it reversed No, I completely understand the gamesmanship and misinformation involved, but I'm trying to take the positive (read: anti-RJF) viewpoint that they weren't just trying to throw off the scent from Irvin, only to have miserably misread the situation. What I don't get is why leak Coples name when he's a guy you clearly liked enough to draft? If you're going to be completely full of ****, why not throw Ingram's name out there instead to try to get Coples through to you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 What I don't get is why leak Coples name when he's a guy you clearly liked enough to draft? If you're going to be completely full of ****, why not throw Ingram's name out there instead to try to get Coples through to you? Because you have a coach with a big mouth, who more than anything wants to be loved by players, and does not understand the nuances of these parlor games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HessStation Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 jets tried to trade out so they were not 100% sold on coples, i have a feeling Cimini was right, they wanted irvin just to rush the passer Just bc Jets weren't sold doesn't mean Rex wasn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HessStation Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 Because you have a coach with a big mouth, who more than anything wants to be loved by players, and does not understand the nuances of these parlor games. Somewhat this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
afosomf Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 Just bc Jets weren't sold doesn't mean Rex wasn't. Oh rex will be accountable if coples blows, tanny will be shown door to Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyHector Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 Because you have a coach with a big mouth, who more than anything wants to be loved by players, and does not understand the nuances of these parlor games. Again, part of the reason why I would speculate that the guarantee to Coples was not merely gamesmanship to deflect attention from Irvin. Obviously, it's all conjecture at this point. For all we know, the Jets could've been on the phone with someone like San Diego, to see if they wanted to move up to select Ingram, or with the Browns to make sure nobody scooped up Weeden. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 Who says that he was the only player they told that to? that's my point... did you read the post i was responding to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 No, I completely understand the gamesmanship and misinformation involved, but I'm trying to take the positive (read: anti-RJF) viewpoint that they weren't just trying to throw off the scent from Irvin, only to have miserably misread the situation. What I don't get is why leak Coples name when he's a guy you clearly liked enough to draft? If you're going to be completely full of ****, why not throw Ingram's name out there instead to try to get Coples through to you? If we're to believe the Jets were targeting Irvin all along story.. i'd imagine you'd want a few leaks.. we know there was heavy rumors about Jets and Ingram.. false... maybe they were hoping Coples would spill to some other teams talking to him, like seattle.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyHector Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 If we're to believe the Jets were targeting Irvin all along story.. i'd imagine you'd want a few leaks.. we know there was heavy rumors about Jets and Ingram.. false... maybe they were hoping Coples would spill to some other teams talking to him, like seattle.. Regardless, I much prefer how things worked out, even if the Jets outsmarted themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 Not for nothing but the Seahawks GM is also claiming that at least 2 teams called him to cuss him out for taking Russell Wilson in addition to the Jets cussing him out for taking Irvin. This reeks of a GM trying to play CYA after being hammered for a bad draft. Do NFL GMs really cuss each other out for taking players they wanted like we do in a fantasy draft? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleedin Green Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 Regardless, I much prefer how things worked out, even if the Jets outsmarted themselves. Completely agree with this. Can't really be too worried about what the Jets may have wanted when I'm much happier with the outcome that occurred than the rumors of what may have been. I'm still not convinced how in love the Jets could have been with Irvin given them not making a move for him, something they've never shown a hesitation to do for a guy they really want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleedin Green Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 Not for nothing but the Seahawks GM is also claiming that at least 2 teams called him to cuss him out for taking Russell Wilson in addition to the Jets cussing him out for taking Irvin. This reeks of a GM trying to play CYA after being hammered for a bad draft. Do NFL GMs really cuss each other out for taking players they wanted like we do in a fantasy draft? Well duh, why do you think the Jets REALLY took so long to make their pick? They were too busy bullsh*tting on the phone with the Seahawks while on the clock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SenorGato Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 Oh rex will be accountable if coples blows, tanny will be shown door to Do you think Coples compares to Kerry Rhodes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustInFudge Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 Again, part of the reason why I would speculate that the guarantee to Coples was not merely gamesmanship to deflect attention from Irvin. Obviously, it's all conjecture at this point. For all we know, the Jets could've been on the phone with someone like San Diego, to see if they wanted to move up to select Ingram, or with the Browns to make sure nobody scooped up Weeden. I thought for sure when the pick didnt come in right away that the Jets had a player in mind, that was going to be available a couple of picks later and they were talking with someone who they thought coveted Ingram but probably told them they'd be fine with Coples. So the Jets basically got told, take Ingram, we'll take Coples or Jones or whoever...hence the delay even though the Jets knew if they were picking at 16 it would Coples if they could trade out of the spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SenorGato Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 Well duh, why do you think the Jets REALLY took so long to make their pick? They were too busy bullsh*tting on the phone with the Seahawks while on the clock. I want to make some kind of JFK joke but its too late to use a magic bullet theory or second shooter theory 40+ posts (at least a couple mine). DAMMIT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustInFudge Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 Oh rex will be accountable if coples blows, tanny will be shown door to If only Rex was more like Nick Saban... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 Well duh, why do you think the Jets REALLY took so long to make their pick? They were too busy bullsh*tting on the phone with the Seahawks while on the clock. This guy is so amazing at drafting everybody feels the need to curse him out for taking their guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gsnts725 Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 Who gives a ****? We picked Coples. It's over. god damn. Making an issue over nothing. Typical Cimini. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 that's my point... did you read the post i was responding to? The reason Rex told him, is that Rex wants to be buddy buddy with players-he thinks he is a part of their fraternity. He can't separate leadership from friendship. He has a big mouth. Just like when he tells the press that Coples and Hill are starters immediately. He does not know when to shut up. No mystery-just more of what we have witnessed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HessStation Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 Oh rex will be accountable if coples blows, tanny will be shown door to Their record will decide that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 No, I completely understand the gamesmanship and misinformation involved, but I'm trying to take the positive (read: anti-RJF) I'm not so much negative as I am fed up analytically. Just once this offseason I'd like to objectively look at something Tannenbaum has done and say "wow." But if our GM can't outwit the great Pete Carrol then I've officially going Duran on this front office. Then again I think I had already reached that point with Tebow. I like Coples, but the only other narrative that compares to the homeristic drivel on the board this week is Santorum actually denying the Lohan incident. Considering 'zomg 0-16' is the best retort I've seen to anything, yeah, I'd say that might give off a negative vibe when you skew someone's words that way; particularly when it couldn't be more irrelevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyanBe_Tweetin Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 Trent Richardson was also #1 on their board and they planned on trading up for Ingram. And then we weren't targeting a pass rusher until at least the 5th round Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 I'm not so much negative as I am fed up analytically. Just once this offseason I'd like to objectively look at something Tannenbaum has done and say "wow." But if our GM can't outwit the great Pete Carrol then I've officially going Duran on this front office. Then again I think I had already reached that point with Tebow. I like Coples, but the only other narrative that compares to the homeristic drivel on the board this week is Santorum actually denying the Lohan incident. Considering 'zomg 0-16' is the best retort I've seen to anything, yeah, I'd say that might give off a negative vibe when you skew someone's words that way; particularly when it couldn't be more irrelevant. Being "fed up analytically" may be one of the most comical retorts I have ever heard a fan mutter. Lat's get ourselves into lather, over pure speculation with any known grounds in reality. Fandoms really make me laugh at times. with this stuff. EDIT-You can't spell "analytically" without "anal" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustInFudge Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 I'm not so much negative as I am fed up analytically. Just once this offseason I'd like to objectively look at something Tannenbaum has done and say "wow." But if our GM can't outwit the great Pete Carrol then I've officially going Duran on this front office. Then again I think I had already reached that point with Tebow. I like Coples, but the only other narrative that compares to the homeristic drivel on the board this week is Santorum actually denying the Lohan incident. Considering 'zomg 0-16' is the best retort I've seen to anything, yeah, I'd say that might give off a negative vibe when you skew someone's words that way; particularly when it couldn't be more irrelevant. You should check out the Knicks thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyHector Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 You can't spell "analytically" without "anal" I got that one on Blu Ray a few weeks ago... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleedin Green Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 I got that one on Blu Ray a few weeks ago... Are you sure you really want to see that in HD? Greater detail isn't always better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larz Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 pfft I heard they wanted luck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.