Question for the Board

[phill1c]

Just now, bitonti said:

The franchise QB "hero worship" is based on the fact that every year they change the rules to make the QB more important and the fantasy points more plentiful.

Yes many years ago Parcells could take the air out of the ball and run Joe Morris into the ground. Those days are long gone.

If Dak Prescott needs that top OL to be a good player then he's no better than 2009 Sanchez. I think he's legit regardless of his line.  

He may be. and he was chosen in the 4th round. Proven that the surrounding cast is as important as the QB is. But I'm struck by your use of "fantasy points..." as if that really matters except to people playing FANTASY football.

EVERY QB needs to stay upright and the OL is what fuels that. EVERY QB needs quality surrounding him. And a FRANCHISE QB is ANY QB that takes advantage of the surrounding cast. And, just as often as not, it's not Andrew Luck at the top of the draft doing that.

[bitonti]

1 minute ago, phill1c said:

In the mix for what? They missed the playoffs and, really, haven't been particularly potent in recent memory. They are "in the mix" because people keep saying ad nauseum that Andrew Luck puts them there. I mean, wow, they are "in the mix" because the Texans are the division champs.

1

Remember when the Colts beat the sh*t out of the Jets on Monday Night football? The best player in the building that day was Andrew Luck 

Just like how when the Pats beat the sh*t out of the Jets last Saturday, the best player in the building was Brady. 

We can talk about all these other positions and yes you need them to get from 'in the mix' to championship level. But its like chess you are talking about Pawns and Knights I'm talking about Queens and Rooks. 

[dbatesman]

Just now, bitonti said:

Remember when the Colts beat the sh*t out of the Jets on Monday Night football? The best player in the building that day was Andrew Luck 

Just like how when the Pats beat the sh*t out of the Jets last Saturday, the best player in the building was Brady. 

We can talk about all these other positions and yes you need them to get from 'in the mix' to championship level. But its like chess you are talking about Pawns and Knights I'm talking about Queens and Rooks. 

You've been spitting fire this past week.

[Tinstar]

5 minutes ago, bitonti said:

Exactly. The more I scout linemen and write articles about lines the more I realize it's a nice to have not a need to have.  

look at the Pats. last year Solder was on IR all year. This year Vollmer is on IR all year. It doesn't matter. Heck even our very own Ryan Clady somehow got a Super Bowl ring while on IR, Peyton was doing work behind Chris Clark.

 

Peyton Manning has 2 SB rings, and in both cases, he should thank his defensive teammates . But that's another story .  It matters Bit and you know it does . Yes, a great QB matters more, but his protection is right behind him. Go ask Cam Newton, the NVP of 2015 if better protection would have made a difference in the SB . 

[bitonti]

1 minute ago, dbatesman said:

You've been spitting fire this past week.

[bitonti]

1 minute ago, Tinstar said:

Peyton Manning has 2 SB rings, and in both cases, he should thank his defensive teammates . But that's another story .  It matters Bit and you know it does . Yes, a great QB matters more, but his protection is right behind him. Go ask Cam Newton, the NVP of 2015 if better protection would have made a difference in the SB . 

4

You are right the Denver Defense was a huge part of that equation. 

But Peyton's protection wasn't that great. It was his ability to check out of bad plays and hit hot routes that made the difference. A great QB can protect himself. Either through audibles like Brady and Peyton or through elusiveness like Wilson and Cam. And just getting rid of it quickly, making pre snap reads etc. 

Originally you asked what position other than QB. Do you really think a Snacks NT is more important than a Dez Bryant WR?  the nose tackle only plays 2 downs. 

[Tinstar]

7 minutes ago, bitonti said:

The franchise QB "hero worship" is based on the fact that every year they change the rules to make the QB more important and the fantasy points more plentiful.

Yes many years ago Parcells could take the air out of the ball and run Joe Morris into the ground. Those days are long gone.

If Dak Prescott needs that top OL to be a good player then he's no better than 2009 Sanchez. I think he's legit regardless of his line.  

Then you're crazy Bit . The 2 Giant games prove that . Take away his running game and pressure him and the rookie shows up . He's going to be good, but he's not there yet. The reason I say he's going to be good is what he has done when his running game is working and he gets time to work . It's what makes him head and shoulders above Mark Sanchez . 

[Tinstar]

2 minutes ago, bitonti said:

You are right the Denver Defense was a huge part of that equation. 

But Peyton's protection wasn't that great. It was his ability to check out of bad plays and hit hot routes that made the difference. A great QB can protect himself. Either through audibles like Brady and Peyton or through elusiveness like Wilson and Cam. And just getting rid of it quickly, making pre snap reads etc. 

Originally you asked what position other than QB. Do you really think a Snacks NT is more important than a Dez Bryant WR?  the nose tackle only plays 2 downs. 

Yes I do . If I had the choice between paying a NT like Snacks and a WR like Bryant, Bryant is playing for another team . Edge rushers are useless if  you can't stop the run . A premier NT like snacks protects both the Middle Linebacker and the guys on the outside  .

[peebag]

1 hour ago, Kleckineau said:

Linebacker. Esp very small but really fast ones.

I prefer Diminutive Gridiron Midfielders©

[phill1c]

15 minutes ago, bitonti said:

Remember when the Colts beat the sh*t out of the Jets on Monday Night football? The best player in the building that day was Andrew Luck 

Just like how when the Pats beat the sh*t out of the Jets last Saturday, the best player in the building was Brady. 

We can talk about all these other positions and yes you need them to get from 'in the mix' to championship level. But its like chess you are talking about Pawns and Knights I'm talking about Queens and Rooks. 

Oh, so beating a 4-11 team is supposed to be some sort of feat? He was the best player on the field because the Jets defense didn't show up. His team is 7-8 and out of the playoffs to a team that had Brock Osweiller as its starter. Please stop.

On the other hand, Brady is a HOFer on a team that is top-to-bottom better than we are. So, yeah, you get points for sucking Brady's dick :-).

That said, and no disrespect intended, we're talking about pawns and knights and queens and kings. YOU NEED ALL of them. As for QB you need a guy playing well. You seem to fixate on the GUY part and I'm saying I just need a guy PLAYING WELL and you can't really predict where you're going to find it. Brady was a 6h rounder. Bledsoe a 1st. Ryan Leaf a first rounder. It's about the TEAM. If you don't have a OL that can keep a franchise qB healthy you might as well not have a franchise QB. If you don't have a defense that can stop people and no receivers, what's the point? Denver won last year, not because of the stellar play of Peyton Manning, Franchise QB. They won because they had the best defense that beat Cam Newton, Franchise QB.

 

I'll take a Meh QB and  loaded otherwise team over a Franchise QB and a few good players. You're right, the league has made a lot of rule changes in favor of the offense. which, IMO, makes having a so-called Franchise QB less necessary because virtually anyone can be a franchise QB.

[peebag]

30 minutes ago, bitonti said:

Exactly. The more I scout linemen and write articles about lines the more I realize it's a nice to have not a need to have.  

look at the Pats. last year Solder was on IR all year. This year Vollmer is on IR all year. It doesn't matter. Heck even our very own Ryan Clady somehow got a Super Bowl ring while on IR, Peyton was doing work behind Chris Clark.

 

again - good qbs make everyone around them better.

[RutgersJetFan]

15 minutes ago, bitonti said:

Do you really think a Snacks NT is more important than a Dez Bryant WR?

 

2 minutes ago, Tinstar said:

Yes I do .

[phill1c]

3 minutes ago, peebag said:

again - good qbs make everyone around them better.

Name ONE so-called "good qb" NOT NAMED TOM BRADY that has made everyone around them better. I think it's most commonly the opposite: a good surrounding cast makes mediocre QBs better.

bitonti made the chess analogy. When your supporting cast sucks, i.e., when you expose your Queen, she gets taken and you generally lose. It's the same in football. You better have a good OL protecting your QB, you better have great playmakers to catch those passes and a run game and defense  to salt away victories otherwise you lose.

[bitonti]

19 minutes ago, Tinstar said:

Yes I do . If I had the choice between paying a NT like Snacks and a WR like Bryant, Bryant is playing for another team . Edge rushers are useless if  you can't stop the run . A premier NT like snacks protects both the Middle Linebacker and the guys on the outside  .

 

A #1 Wr scores touchdowns. Touchdowns win games.

Stopping the run prevents points which is important but winning games 42-35 is what the league wants. The league doesn't want 13-10 defensive struggles. 

[TuscanyTile2]

4 minutes ago, phill1c said:

Name ONE so-called "good qb" NOT NAMED TOM BRADY that has made everyone around them better. I think it's most commonly the opposite: a good surrounding cast makes mediocre QBs better.

bitonti made the chess analogy. When your supporting cast sucks, i.e., when you expose your Queen, she gets taken and you generally lose. It's the same in football. You better have a good OL protecting your QB, you better have great playmakers to catch those passes and a run game and defense  to salt away victories otherwise you lose.

It's like the chicken and the "egg back there" problem.

[phill1c]

1 minute ago, bitonti said:

A #1 Wr scores touchdowns. Touchdowns win games.

Stopping the run prevents points which is important but winning games 42-35 is what the league wants. The league doesn't want 13-10 defensive struggles. 

Yeah, the NT is of diminishing import. It's a "nice to have" but if you ain't got sackers or people who can cover or intercept, really, who cares? Nobody is trying to run for 100 yards between the tackles anymore BESIDES THE JETS that is.

[Beerfish]

outside pass rusher

CB

LT

In that order.  (Now I can go back and read what everyone else answered)

[phill1c]

I've said a lot. But, really, I can't fully discount the 'franchise qb is the most important player' viewpoint.

Sure, the Indianapolis Colts are "in the mix" because they have a NAME at QB. People get excited about teams with a NAME at QB and discount teams without a NAME at QB. PLAYERS are excited when they think they have the answer at QB. That means something. But when you look at the really successful teams, they aren't just some "Andrew Luck, a WR, and crap..." they are actual, well-balanced teams that beat you from every side of the ball. THAT's what I want the Jets to be.

[Tinstar]

1 minute ago, bitonti said:

A #1 Wr scores touchdowns. Touchdowns win games.

Stopping the run prevents points which is important but winning games 42-35 is what the league wants. The league doesn't want 13-10 defensive struggles. 

Bit old buddy, I can give 2 sh*ts what the league wants . I want to win the SB .Las yr the league Celebrated the Carolina Panthers, gave the MVP to Cam Newton and then crucified him when he acted the way he did because his team lost and he couldn't stand it . A WR can't score anything unless he gets his hand on the ball . He's not getting his hand on the ball if the QB is lying on his back . If you hand the ball to a WR on a Jet sweep, he's a RB not a WR.  That position is a luxury position . We signed an UDFA who was the most explosive player on our roster at WR this yr . 

All our QBs suck .

Our LT suck

We have no Edge rushers

Our SS can't cover me and I'm old and fat

Our NT plays for a suddenly potent Giants defense while our DEs and Middle Linebackers are getting nullified .

Our OC is old and injured and his replacement is developing nicely . 

There's no NT worth talking about in the 1st round when we pick

There's no QB worth talking about until day 3 IMHO

I don't like any of the edge rushers because they all look weak at the POA

The best player when we pick will probably be a DE where we are stacked and can't protect or a

SS who hits like a linebacker and has the speed and athletic ability to cover in space .

 

It's going to come down to this come draft weekend 2017 . Either we trade down and take a lesser player, take a DE because he's BPA, draft a RB we can't open holes for or take Jabril Peppers and pray .

I want to trade down and target Ryan Ramczyk  if his medical checks out . 

[InstantClassic]

OL and DL..win in the trenches 

[TJ]

3 hours ago, Spoot-Face said:

Football Research Director

Without that, you'll never get away with cheating.

Ernie is all pro! 

[56mehl56]

3 hours ago, Spoot-Face said:

Football Research Director

Without that, you'll never get away with cheating.

Ah - good ol Ernie Adams.

[Sperm Edwards]

56 minutes ago, Beerfish said:

outside pass rusher

CB

LT

In that order.  (Now I can go back and read what everyone else answered)

I don't know that LT is necessarily top-3 in importance so much as it is that expensive to find a really good one in free agency. Also they (like QBs) tend to get overdrafted, so if you're a team that needs one it can influence a GM into overdrafting one himself in turn. But the difference between an elite LT vs a merely-competent LT isn't likely winning you the superbowl. 

The exception I suppose I could make is if we had a really good QB whose biggest weakness was he takes just a bit too long to get rid of the ball every dropback, but is otherwise solid. Give someone like that a top LT and maybe he goes from sucky/ok to good/really good, and all the good things that domino thereafter. 

[Beerfish]

If you have a bad LT you hurt,  having a pro bowler might not be a must but not having a terrible one is pretty important.

[NoBowles]

I'd like to see our line start holding like other teams do so we don't need to worry about elite talent on the line. The Giants and Cheaters practically rape the DL and LB'ers on every play and its rarely ever called. Of course they have playmakers that the league wants to highlight and be drafted in FF leagues, and we don't. So yeah, go get some damn playmakers and start holding!

[Sperm Edwards]

4 minutes ago, Beerfish said:

If you have a bad LT you hurt,  having a pro bowler might not be a must but not having a terrible one is pretty important.

Totally agree. Brick and Clady (and after-Cladys) hurt the team a lot these past few seasons. It's not imperative to have a 2009 Clady at LT, but it is imperative we don't have a 2016 Clady. That much more important when there's a Breno Giacomini (or his own replacement) as the other bookend.

Like a Jason Fabini, for example, was plenty good enough.

[Big Blocker]

I could say an owner who doesn't screw the franchise up.  But the question was about positions on the field, so...

Center.  I used to think LT and C were equally important, but I give the nod here to C, and mention C first to give the overall nod to the importance of the OL.

CB.  A quality CB who can play an opponent's #1 wideout in man coverage does so much for the overall D I rate it first as a defensive position.

LB edge rusher.

DT/NT.

WIdeout.

In that order...

[T0mShane]

DT, DT, DT, ILB, SS.

[Sperm Edwards]

Just stay away from cheap positions in round 1 until we've filled the major/expensive ones already, including a second starting CB, and they're among the final pieces to a puzzle.

In other words:

1. no more safeties in round 1
2. no more smallish LBers (or any ILBers in general) in round 1
3. no more TEs in round 1
4. no guards or RTs inside the top 10-15 (and even if shortly thereafter they'd better be great not just good). 
5. no centers. Not even if we cut Mangold. Not in or near the top half of round 1.
6. (honorable mention) no more DE/DTs in any round this year, for obvious reasons. Not even in round 7. For depth with no serious shot at starting, I'd rather pick up a veteran making the league minimum who at least knows what he's doing (e.g. Douzable). Same with WRs; we have 7 already, and it's a position with a high bust rate anyhow.

None of these cheap-position guys, unless they are guaranteed to play for 10 years at a HOF level. Reserve round 1 for difference-makers you can't just pluck up in FA, or for FA positions that cost $8M just to get into top-20 territory. Expensive enough positions where, even if you draft just an ok starter, it's still an excellent draft pick. 

[RutgersJetFan]

1 hour ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Totally agree. Brick and Clady (and after-Cladys) hurt the team a lot these past few seasons. It's not imperative to have a 2009 Clady at LT, but it is imperative we don't have a 2016 Clady. That much more important when there's a Breno Giacomini (or his own replacement) as the other bookend.

Like a Jason Fabini, for example, was plenty good enough.

Plus every time Fabini got called for a hold, we would get the camera shot of Parcells losing his sh*t. 

[Mecca]

Offense

1. QB

2. LT

3. WR1

Defense

1. Pass Rusher OLB in 3-4 or DE in 4-3

2. CB1

[Sperm Edwards]

11 minutes ago, RutgersJetFan said:

Plus every time Fabini got called for a hold, we would get the camera shot of Parcells losing his sh*t. 

Yes, there was that as well. Still, he kept the QBs upright unless they were made of eggshell (or suffered a fluke ruptured achilles tendon after the "warrior" effectively fumbled away a SB-favorite season in week 1).

Also it was cool when he and Jumbo would get arrested for acting like roided up goons in the Huntington bar scene.

[UnitedWhofans]

21 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Just stay away from cheap positions in round 1 until we've filled the major/expensive ones already, including a second starting CB, and they're among the final pieces to a puzzle.

In other words:

1. no more safeties in round 1
2. no more smallish LBers (or any ILBers in general) in round 1
3. no more TEs in round 1
4. no guards or RTs inside the top 10-15 (and even if shortly thereafter they'd better be great not just good). 
5. no centers. Not even if we cut Mangold. Not in or near the top half of round 1.
6. (honorable mention) no more DE/DTs in any round this year, for obvious reasons. Not even in round 7. For depth with no serious shot at starting, I'd rather pick up a veteran making the league minimum who at least knows what he's doing (e.g. Douzable). Same with WRs; we have 7 already, and it's a position with a high bust rate anyhow.

None of these cheap-position guys, unless they are guaranteed to play for 10 years at a HOF level. Reserve round 1 for difference-makers you can't just pluck up in FA, or for FA positions that cost $8M just to get into top-20 territory. Expensive enough positions where, even if you draft just an ok starter, it's still an excellent draft pick. 

Even if they are projected? Because I am starting to see Jamal Adams pop up on some mocks

[jeremy2020]

Owner, GM, Coach.

[Larz]

6 hours ago, Tinstar said:

What positions do you folks consider Premium positions on a football team, other than QB  ?

 

the hierarchy of footballs needs is;

Get the QB

Protect the QB

rush the QB