Integrity28 Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 He couldn't of, the board "elite" insisted that maudlin was rated higher. Nobody said that, at all. People did say that the dropoff from Eli Harrold to Mauldin was inconsequential when you factor in getting Devier Posey, and the picks. In other words, Eli was probably rated a hair higher, but not so much higher that we lost out on a sure thing, and people would rather have the multitude of picks/players we ended up with, because: logic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity28 Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 I'll bet it was Duke and not Harold. Harold was projected as an early to mid 2nd almost everywhere. To assume he would last another 12 picks to the mid third round would be foolhardy. On the other hand, Duke was supposed to a 3rd round RB. Much greater chance he falls 12 spots than Harold. I would bet anything it was Duke, he was the best player taken in that span. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Schroy Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 He couldn't of, the board "elite" insisted that maudlin was rated higher. I don't recall anyone saying that. But I do like this kid Mauldin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LunAticcalm Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 Nobody said that, at all. People did say that the dropoff from Eli Harrold to Mauldin was inconsequential when you factor in getting Devier Posey, and the picks. In other words, Eli was probably rated a hair higher, but not so much higher that we lost out on a sure thing, and people would rather have the multitude of picks/players we ended up with, because: logic. Well it clearly wasn't inconsequential if the gm is admitting to making a mistake, so your " logic" was wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Lonelyhearts Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 Or Mannion. Almost certainly Odighizuwa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbatesman Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 Almost certainly Odighizuwa. My first thought too. Shades of Tanngini missing out on Chris Gocong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerfish Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 My first thought too. Shades of Tanngini missing out on Chris Gocong. Brainiac Tanny got a 7th round pick for trading down in that 3rd round, What a total butt head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerfish Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 Almost certainly Odighizuwa. Agree on this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 Almost certainly Odighizuwa. Who knows if Odighizuwa's hips will hold up, but that'd be pretty brutal if Maccagnan let Reese beat him to a freak edge rusher given Reese's history of jumping at those picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetsFanInDenver Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 Or Mannion. JETS did not miss out on Mannion in the 3rd. JETS picked with #82 pick. Mannion with the #89th pick. So it is Eli Harold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Brown Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 No my teachers didn't look like this... Just sayin... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoop24 Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 can listen here http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2015/05/07/mike-maccagnan-new-york-jets-mike-francesa/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 Did he make any mention of if he wants the team to be good or not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flushing Roots Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 Did he make any mention of if he wants the team to be good or not? Or maybe if he plans on hitting the salad bar soon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity28 Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 Well it clearly wasn't inconsequential if the gm is admitting to making a mistake, so your " logic" was wrong. He's not admitting to making a mistake, he's admitting to a guy getting taken that he would have considered after the trade-down. He sounded more than content about the decision to trade down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TuscanyTile2 Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 Most importantly he spoke highly of Matt Simms. I think he said something like very pleasantly surprised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LunAticcalm Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 He's not admitting to making a mistake, he's admitting to a guy getting taken that he would have considered after the trade-down. He sounded more than content about the decision to trade down. He's admitting to a guy he WANTED to take. He has to sound content now that the draft has played itself out. The fact that even mentioned missing out on a player that he wanted means two things, 1. He is honest 2. It was significant enough to mention when he didn't have too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
win4ever Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 I'll bet it was Duke and not Harold. Harold was projected as an early to mid 2nd almost everywhere. To assume he would last another 12 picks to the mid third round would be foolhardy. On the other hand, Duke was supposed to a 3rd round RB. Much greater chance he falls 12 spots than Harold. I think it was a RB. Both Coleman and Duke were on the board at the time, and both fit a need for the Jets as speed guys that can catch the ball out of the backfield. I'm guessing they assumed one of them would fall down to them, and hope they could get value out of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obrien2Toon Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 I'll bet it was Duke and not Harold. Harold was projected as an early to mid 2nd almost everywhere. To assume he would last another 12 picks to the mid third round would be foolhardy. On the other hand, Duke was supposed to a 3rd round RB. Much greater chance he falls 12 spots than Harold.this is what I was thinking. Most would be surprised that he was still there, no way that he'd think he'd last 12 more picks. Though maybe his hopes got up a couple before our pick when he was still there. We'll never know. But I think it was a mistake, maybe Mac doesnt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LIJetsFan Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 can listen here http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2015/05/07/mike-maccagnan-new-york-jets-mike-francesa/ That was a damn good interview. Thanks for posting the link. If this was all I knew about Francesa I'd come away thinking he was a good guy and a good interviewer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larz Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 He's admitting to a guy he WANTED to take. He has to sound content now that the draft has played itself out. The fact that even mentioned missing out on a player that he wanted means two things, 1. He is honest 2. It was significant enough to mention when he didn't have too. of course he was hoping for a certain player to fall. he still got a player with a similar grade (his words not mine) at a position of need and another pick and a veteran WR what is the problem here ? I don't see the downside Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity28 Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 He's admitting to a guy he WANTED to take. He has to sound content now that the draft has played itself out. The fact that even mentioned missing out on a player that he wanted means two things, 1. He is honest 2. It was significant enough to mention when he didn't have too. No, lol, it only means he's honest. The "significance" piece is just conjecture on your part, because: derp. He literally says, "going into the draft he really wanted to get more picks" and that "there was a group of players we had targeted [for our third round pick], and wanted to see if we could get more picks". Meaning they had a cluster of guys equally ranked at the time of the trade back. On Mauldin, "he was a guy that we had potentially targeted, who would be in that mix of guys when we were thinking about who we would initially take at our pick", as in before the trade back. My take-away is that Mac got both the extra picks he had prioritized before the draft, and a player he was considering taking with the 3rd rounder anyway. Did you even listen to the interview? Or just glom onto someone else's inability to understand English? I listed to the interview through the Petty pick twice now, and at no point when talking about Mauldin and the trade back, does he say he missed out on a guy he wanted. Does he revisit the subject at the end and suddenly drop this nugget out of context? Or are you just wetting your pants again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity28 Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 Macagnon admitted there was a guy the really wanted after trading down that got picked a few spots ahead. He was probably referring to Eli Harold. He also mentioned the team that was trying to trade up (the browns) stopped after their pick pretty much accusing Pettine of lying. Pettine said after they were trying to trade up but were targeting a different player not Bryce Petty. When did he mention the bold? Was it when he was talking about the Mauldin pick? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity28 Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 Wait, wait, wait... are you dopes extrapolating the part of the interview where he makes the "part of the job" statement "maybe you miss out on a guy you wanted in free agency, or maybe you miss out on a guy by trading back, but those things are just part of the job"? He was making a generalized statement about wanting to be right on everything, not remarking specifically about how trading back in the third resulted in him missing out on the guy he really wanted. Wow, way to take it out of context and bend it to an agenda... I guarantee Lunaderp and everyone that bit on his twist on this didn't even listen to the ******* interview. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 Can we please agree right now not to call our GM "Macca?¤ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SAR I Posted May 8, 2015 Author Share Posted May 8, 2015 At last! A GM that says something. I really like this guy. +1 Great interview. I really feel good about this guy. SAR I Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRONX DUDE Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 Fatcessa seemed overmatched. I person with a brain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TuscanyTile2 Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 At the end of the day, he gave a good interview. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dcat Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 "at the end of the day........." must have said that a hundred times. But it's a lot better than Mangini's "It's a process" or Rex's "Without a doubt"/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thshadow Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 His honesty / transparency is pretty impressive. For example, after the draft, he didn't blow smoke and say that Williams was the top of their board (like Rex always did), he said he was in their top 3. And he admits that when they traded down they missed out on one player they would have liked to have. Honestly evaluating your performance and mistakes is a critical part of improving. Also, if he was honest when he said they were considering Mauldin before the trade down, then the player that he missed out on had to be a different position (e.g. Duke Johnson). If they were much higher on Eli than Mauldin, then they wouldn't have been considering Mauldin... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Harris Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 Great interview - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snell41 Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 Fatcessa seemed overmatched. I person with a brain. Oh the ironing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlakeSpenceBlockedPunt Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 I just listened to the interview and was extremely impressed. It's hard not to genuinely believe that things are changing for the better with our franchise. People talk a lot about how Rex was great for the media and fans. I prefer someone like Macc. He provides legitimate insight into how things are going. He shares what he can in a way that's very believable and insightful. He doesn't come off as someone who is promoting an agenda or projecting some type of image or brand. He's doing his job and sharing with the fan base what his strategy is. I actually feel like I know the plan (I'm sure the players do too) and feel that our coach and GM are on the same page. I literally can't get over how rational and logical things feel now. I used to listen to the folks running our organization (Tanny, Herm, Rex, Idzik) and cringe. Speaking out of both sides of their mouth. Rarely straightforward. Spinning a lot. Considered media friendly but for the most part only good for a solid quote (not Idzik). Macc is different. Macc deferring to Todd for player insight. Macc saying it's now up to the player to determine if he's going to be good or not. Macc not dodging QB questions. Macc building legit depth in all player groups and letting the players decide who plays based upon how they play. They said Macc wasn't too media friendly...I disagree. I like his style a lot and like his plan a lot. Now Todd and his staff need to coach them and the players themselves need to deliver on the opportunity they have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dcat Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 Can we please agree right now not to call our GM "Macca?¤ Absolutely. I suggest that the next person to refer to him as "Macca" be banned for a week. Really... we can't have any of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaBallhawk Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 Great interview - Obviously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.05f3dc52804d5fd84cf09ccfcd7bd10b.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.