getting a jump on the offseason plan

[Phillyjet]

Haven't posted in a long-time, but figured it's time to flush the toilet on this season, and move forward.  I'm half-glass full and agree this season was nearly as bad as 1996, but not all bad: here are my assumptions:

1) Our young guys are actually showing some development: Brandon Shell is looking like a keeper at RT, Wesley Johnson showed he can start at center, the receiver situation is looking bright, and Jordan Jenkins, Darron Lee, and Mauldin will continue to develop (notice I put Jenkins first as I think he is the best of the bunch).  I even like Burris and Middleton in the secondary.

2) I trust Maccagnan, particularly to find gems on the o-line in later rounds; that was his reputation in Houston, and I believe we will complain that our o-line sucks until one day, we'll be like, "damn, how'd we get such a good line?"  That was Houston's experience.  And as much as we need a LT, this is a weak draft class, and someone will overreach for Cam Robinson; I hope it's not us.  This position remains almost as concerning as QB, and we will likely have to kick the tires in FA.

3) The lack of a QB is what continues to kill us, and it is clear that we can rely on neither Petty, Hack, or any of the 2017 draft class to answer this... Thus, a FA QB patch, with mid-round QB picks every year until we find one, seems to be what we are looking at.

4) Picking 6th, I think we will get a stud.  There are six players I think are elite/pro-bowl caliber at this point and at a position of need: Garrett and Barnett at DE/OLB,  Fournette and Cook at RB, and Hooker and Adams at safety.  Like I said, the tackles and QB are not in the elite group.  Given that our team lacks an identity and a franchise-caliber player, I would not be surprised if we go with Fournette or Cook if they are available, to get people excited again and take some pressure off the QB.  I end to lean toward Cook, because I like backs with low centers of gravity (I think they tend to be shiftier and have more long-term durability), and Fournette is already dinged up and runs more upright.  But damn, he is a specimen, and I would not be sad to see his name called on draft-day.

So based on those assumptions:

Released:  Fitzpatrick, Mangold, Revis, Clady, Giacomini, Gilchrist, Erin Henderson, Marshall, and Harris (I know, last one hurts, but maybe he would resign for cheaper, but his speed is diminishing, time to cut the cord), providing 50+ million in cap space, and some dead money (from Fitzpatrick and Revis in particular)

Free Agency (or Trade): QB: options Romo, Cutler, Tyrod Taylor, or Mike Glennon (or maybe Bradford).  Book it, one of these guys we will need to sign for 3 years, and continue to draft QBs for development. Romo won't come here, so it's one of the other three. I don't want to trade picks for Sam Bradford... If he is released though, he may be an option.  Tough to choose, and none excite me, but I like pocket passers, and so while Tyrod Taylor gets a lot of love, no thanks.  My lean is toward Cutler as a stop-gap, because he's still only 33, and we wouldn't be making a long-term commitment.  Even with the baggage.  And we'd be buying low! Glennon is unproven, although may be worth a shot (meh).  A Bradford release could change the calculus, but someone will trade for his rights. So, although it may pain the average fan here, Jay Cutler is a name we should discuss.

Besides QB, we need to focus on offensive tackle, although pickings will be slim: Jason Peters or Andrew Whitworth on the cheap after they are released as a hold-over until a draft pick develops? Will remain a  serious concern in 2017.  If offensive tackle options remain poor, would not hesitate to go after Zeitler at guard to replace WInters (or Ronald Leary). That could help solidify the core of the line, and they are both young.  Could also see us finding depth players in the secondary, on the line, or at linebacker.  And a spare TE.  One dark horse would be Calais Campbell on the d-line as he is getting older and still playing at an elite level (and he is a Bowles guy). 

Draft: only going to project the 1st pick at 6: Going to come down to  Fournette/Cook vs. Hooker/Adams at safety (I think Garrett and Barnett will be gone).  I think the fan-base will need some juice to bring some interest back to the team and help the limited QB situation.  It will be Fournette or Cook, depending on who is available or who are front office likes the most.  Later rounds will include cornerback, an additional TE (to pair with Seferian Jenkins), mid-round QB (Maybe a Pat Mahomes), another outside linebacker or ILB prospect, tackle/guard.

Still think we are 2 solid draft classes (including this upcoming one) away from replenishing this team, but hope to see improvement in 2017.  And maybe get lucky that one of these developmental qb prospects actually develops as they play behind a stop-gap (or else it will be three draft-classes, and a high-pick on qb in one of them).  Would let Petty, Hackenberg, and drafted QB compete for the back-up QB position in camp.  ANd for crying out loud, no more carrying four qbs!

Go Jets in 2017!

[Beerfish]

I like cook a lot more than Fournette.  Having said that I really think this regime puts LOW value on RBs in the draft,they may take one but not early.

[De-Jet-Erate/Duane]

Just now, Beerfish said:

I like cook a lot more than Fournette.  Having said that I really think this regime puts LOW value on RBs in the draft,they may take one but not early.

Do you think that might change now that Chan is gone?

[Beerfish]

1 minute ago, De-Jet-Erate/Duane said:

Do you think that might change now that Chan is gone?

I think it is Mac and Bowles philosophy to be honest.  They seem to like to sign old and injured guys for whatever reason.  (Ridley, Forte, Robinson) Perhaps the fact that Powell played so terrific at the end of the year will get them feeling differently or them seeing what elliot meant to the Cowboys.

[RoadFan]

Bring me in as an intern consultant to the scouting department?

[De-Jet-Erate/Duane]

1 minute ago, Beerfish said:

I think it is Mac and Bowles philosophy to be honest.  They seem to like to sign old and injured guys for whatever reason.  (Ridley, Forte, Robinson) Perhaps the fact that Powell played so terrific at the end of the year will get them feeling differently or them seeing what elliot meant to the Cowboys.

Elliot has definitely made things a little easier on their young Qb in Dallas. If we would take a Rb that high I hope they fix the O line and not allow a few years knocked off his career in his first season. 

[BurnleyJet]

There's a plan...

[Phillyjet]

21 minutes ago, Beerfish said:

I like cook a lot more than Fournette.  Having said that I really think this regime puts LOW value on RBs in the draft,they may take one but not early.

I actually agree with that strategy in most years, but these two seem like generational talents, like Peterson.  Outside of QB, I usually think of top 6 as defensive line/OLB or tackle, unless an elite qb is available.   This team needs a spark to say the least.  Will be hard to convince the fans with any of the journeyman qbs they'll be bringing in this winter.  Wish there was an elite left tackle available, and that we had solved our qb situation, as that would have been the obvious choice.  But this team has no identity right now.  They need a bonafide pro-bowl talent at a skill position more than ever right now.

[bostonmajet]

19 minutes ago, Beerfish said:

I think it is Mac and Bowles philosophy to be honest.  They seem to like to sign old and injured guys for whatever reason.  (Ridley, Forte, Robinson) Perhaps the fact that Powell played so terrific at the end of the year will get them feeling differently or them seeing what elliot meant to the Cowboys.

I agree - Mac likes BPA, but that is also based on position. There are some positions that you just don't pick early in the first round. RBs normally have a 3 year career. Why would you use a top ten pick on a player that won't be around in 4-5 years? Maybe if you are a RB away, but not when you have 10 holes on the team. Also, this year is stacked at RB, so although not nearly as good as the top RBs, we could get a quality RB in the 3rd or 4th. Finally, the most important thing for the running game is the OL and ours stinks. Let's also remember, the NFL is a passing league and most teams use a running back by committee.

IMO you only draft LT, WR, DE, OLB, and, of course QB in the top 5 (or six). As you get into the top 15, I would add CB and possibly FS. In addition to him sucking and there were better players around him, one of my biggest complaints about drafting Pyor is that you normally don't spend a first round pick on a SS. As you get to the bottom of the first round, I think you can add in other positions like C, etc. If you want a RB in the first, I would trade the hell down and get more picks.

Currently, there aren't any LTs and QBs rated that high for us at 6. I would imagine the world would explode if we draft another DL at 6, so I would guess we are either going OLB, WR, or we are trading down. Just my opinion of course.

[bostonmajet]

9 minutes ago, Phillyjet said:

I actually agree with that strategy in most years, but these two seem like generational talents, like Peterson.  Outside of QB, I usually think of top 6 as defensive line/OLB or tackle, unless an elite qb is available.   This team needs a spark to say the least.  Will be hard to convince the fans with any of the journeyman qbs they'll be bringing in this winter.  Wish there was an elite left tackle available, and that we had solved our qb situation, as that would have been the obvious choice.  But this team has no identity right now.  They need a bonafide pro-bowl talent at a skill position more than ever right now.

The question is would an AP do anything for us at this point? Weak QB play and a poor line, teams are going to stack the box.

[Pcola]

The plan is great at everything but QB.  None of those guys you mentioned is ever going to get us to the playoffs.  Yet we are going to throw $12-$15M for three years?

And by wasting another mid to late round pick on another mega project QB is another mistake.  If we sign a vet AND draft another guy we are cutting Oetty or Hack.  Can't carry 4 QBs again.  So does the team cut Petty when he is clearly better than Hack?  Or cut your losses on Hack and admit what everybody already knows?

Bowles doesn't seem to prefer to play rookies.  If I am the owner, we don't sign a FA over 28.  No more past their prime players just to give fans a "name."

[Phillyjet]

1 minute ago, bostonmajet said:

The question is would an AP do anything for us at this point? Weak QB play and a poor line, teams are going to stack the box.

Your points are well-made, and I normally agree with you.  I would have said an edge rusher, or one of the elite free safeties in a normal year (since there are no qbs or left tackles worth that pick).  In a normal year, I am wishing that Derek Barnett falls to us... would help complete the LB overhaul; dude's a stud out of Tennessee. 

But fan interest is way down, and these RBs are arguably generational talents, not reaches.  And you are right, they will stack the box in this situation.  Imagine if we sign a couple of players on the line (Zeitler or Leary being one of them), and then take a Fournette or Cook.  Yes, they will stack the line, but that is an opportunity for single coverage on the outside for a young or journeyman qb.  Takes a lot of pressure off.  And remember that Bowles wants to establish the running game more; that is why he moved on from Chan; we didn't have the QB for Chan's offense.  This fits with a renewed emphasis on the running game, which we will undoubtedly see next year. 

And don't underestimate the effect of the empty seats on this decision.  The team literally has no identity right now... and only one player on the interior line who received a received a single vote for the pro-bowl (Carpenter).

[Phillyjet]

8 minutes ago, Pcola said:

The plan is great at everything but QB.  None of those guys you mentioned is ever going to get us to the playoffs.  Yet we are going to throw $12-$15M for three years?

And by wasting another mid to late round pick on another mega project QB is another mistake.  If we sign a vet AND draft another guy we are cutting Oetty or Hack.  Can't carry 4 QBs again.  So does the team cut Petty when he is clearly better than Hack?  Or cut your losses on Hack and admit what everybody already knows?

Bowles doesn't seem to prefer to play rookies.  If I am the owner, we don't sign a FA over 28.  No more past their prime players just to give fans a "name."

DIdn't say I liked it, but sh*t, we are screwed right now.  And $12-15 million is a fairly pedestrian rate in this type of qb market.  Doesn't kill our cap. As long as it's short money, 2-3 years, we can get out sooner.  But competent qb play is a must to at least keep us competitive.  And I don't believe they think that Petty or Hack are ready.  Petty just went under the knife and will miss most of OTAs. 

And if it backfires again, and Cutler, Glennon, or Bradford  sh*t the bed, then we'll be doing whatever it takes to get Darnold or one of the 2018 qbs, which will be a much better draft class.  My gut is we're looking at 7-9 or 8-8 next year, a pick in the teens.  There's no way they don't sign a journeyman qb; they won't tank 2017 just to have a shot at a qb in the 2018 draft.

[bostonmajet]

1 minute ago, Phillyjet said:

Your points are well-made, and I normally agree with you.  I would have said an edge rusher, or one of the elite free safeties in a normal year (since there are no qbs or left tackles worth that pick).  In a normal year, I am wishing that Derek Barnett falls to us... would help complete the LB overhaul; dude's a stud out of Tennessee. 

But fan interest is way down, and these RBs are arguably generational talents, not reaches.  And you are right, they will stack the box in this situation.  Imagine if we sign a couple of players on the line (Zeitler or Leary being one of them), and then take a Fournette or Cook.  Yes, they will stack the line, but that is an opportunity for single coverage on the outside for a young or journeyman qb.  Takes a lot of pressure off.  And remember that Bowles wants to establish the running game more; that is why he moved on from Chan; we didn't have the QB for Chan's offense.  This fits with a renewed emphasis on the running game, which we will undoubtedly see next year. 

And don't underestimate the effect of the empty seats on this decision.  The team literally has no identity right now... and only one player on the interior line who received a received a single vote for the pro-bowl (Carpenter).

I think fan enjoyment shouldn't be high on the list if I was a GM, but it probably is. Of course, winning games would work too. Maybe the excitement of watching a kid run (rookie of the year) and a few wins would do the trick, but that would assume:

1. there isn't another player available that can make just as big of (if not bigger) difference to the team - watching sacks is pretty fun too; with our DL and a stud OLB we could see another sack exchange

2. the GM is willing to admit that we are going to stink next year again (maybe get that QB) and willing to pull the trigger to keep the fans happy.

3. Although not great, our RBs aren't terrible and there are way bigger holes to fill - I know BPA, but they would have to pick a less important position (for first) and a more crowded position.

The other thing to remember, is that you only are allowed a 5th year option on first round players. So, normally you would want to sign players that have long careers (and re-sign after 4 years using the 5th year as leverage).

That being said, clearly it wouldn't be the dumbest first round pick we have made by a wide margin and it was also fun to watch a player run wild.

[Pcola]

29 minutes ago, Phillyjet said:

DIdn't say I liked it, but sh*t, we are screwed right now.  And $12-15 million is a fairly pedestrian rate in this type of qb market.  Doesn't kill our cap. As long as it's short money, 2-3 years, we can get out sooner.  But competent qb play is a must to at least keep us competitive.  And I don't believe they think that Petty or Hack are ready.  Petty just went under the knife and will miss most of OTAs. 

And if it backfires again, and Cutler, Glennon, or Bradford  sh*t the bed, then we'll be doing whatever it takes to get Darnold or one of the 2018 qbs, which will be a much better draft class.  My gut is we're looking at 7-9 or 8-8 next year, a pick in the teens.  There's no way they don't sign a journeyman qb; they won't tank 2017 just to have a shot at a qb in the 2018 draft.

You're right.  We'll keep doing the same crap that we've been doing for 20 years.  And we can talk about how to fix the problem because it's obvious to anyone paying attention.  

I guess the Jets are here to give the Cheaters, etc. a team to embarrass every year.

[Joe Jets fan]

No way do you draft a RB at 6.  Thankfully, Jets won't do that.   

[Phillyjet]

24 minutes ago, Pcola said:

You're right.  We'll keep doing the same crap that we've been doing for 20 years.  And we can talk about how to fix the problem because it's obvious to anyone paying attention.  

I guess the Jets are here to give the Cheaters, etc. a team to embarrass every year.

what's the alternative? just play Hackenberg and let the chips fall where they may?  As far as I am concerned he has to earn the job, not have it handed to him.

[section314]

1 hour ago, bostonmajet said:

I agree - Mac likes BPA, but that is also based on position. There are some positions that you just don't pick early in the first round. RBs normally have a 3 year career. Why would you use a top ten pick on a player that won't be around in 4-5 years? Maybe if you are a RB away, but not when you have 10 holes on the team. Also, this year is stacked at RB, so although not nearly as good as the top RBs, we could get a quality RB in the 3rd or 4th. Finally, the most important thing for the running game is the OL and ours stinks. Let's also remember, the NFL is a passing league and most teams use a running back by committee.

IMO you only draft LT, WR, DE, OLB, and, of course QB in the top 5 (or six). As you get into the top 15, I would add CB and possibly FS. In addition to him sucking and there were better players around him, one of my biggest complaints about drafting Pyor is that you normally don't spend a first round pick on a SS. As you get to the bottom of the first round, I think you can add in other positions like C, etc. If you want a RB in the first, I would trade the hell down and get more picks.

Currently, there aren't any LTs and QBs rated that high for us at 6. I would imagine the world would explode if we draft another DL at 6, so I would guess we are either going OLB, WR, or we are trading down. Just my opinion of course.

Mike Williams, WR, Clemson.

[UnknownJetFan]

Not mentioned is possibly if Cook or Fournette are there if another team really wants them that bad maybe we can trade down and get a good coup for them that can enable us to get multiple Olineman, a pass rusher, CB, etc. in this draft. If not we take the RB then if the deal to trade down is not good enough.

[56mehl56]

1 hour ago, Joe Jets fan said:

No way do you draft a RB at 6.  Thankfully, Jets won't do that.   

What's the best way to help a young Qb on offense ??.  RB is a need and they'd be stupid to pass on Fournette or even Cook if they are there at 6. 

[bostonmajet]

33 minutes ago, section314 said:

Mike Williams, WR, Clemson.

I would rather have an OLB (as we are much better there than at LB), but he seems like a damn good at WR. Are you also hoping for Watson to drop to the 2nd - at least they would then have plenty of chemistry together

[varjet]

3 hours ago, Phillyjet said:

DIdn't say I liked it, but sh*t, we are screwed right now.  And $12-15 million is a fairly pedestrian rate in this type of qb market.  Doesn't kill our cap. As long as it's short money, 2-3 years, we can get out sooner.  But competent qb play is a must to at least keep us competitive.  And I don't believe they think that Petty or Hack are ready.  Petty just went under the knife and will miss most of OTAs. 

And if it backfires again, and Cutler, Glennon, or Bradford  sh*t the bed, then we'll be doing whatever it takes to get Darnold or one of the 2018 qbs, which will be a much better draft class.  My gut is we're looking at 7-9 or 8-8 next year, a pick in the teens.  There's no way they don't sign a journeyman qb; they won't tank 2017 just to have a shot at a qb in the 2018 draft.

Who says in the short run the Jets are supposed to be competitive?  The team has gaping holes in multiple areas.

I think the options are to play the young QBs with maybe a cheaper Hoyer-like hold the fort guy and develop them as best you can and see what you have.  Carr and Dalton are 2nd Round QBs-Hack theoretically should have the potential to start.  They need to find out.

Build the other areas of the team this year through FA and the draft.   If after 2 years the FO feels the defense/OL and running game is solid, then they can buy a QB in the FA market to make the team competitive in 2018.

I think long term builds are not practical in the NFL, but the question is whether its a one year re-tool or a two year rebuild.  The Jets are a two year rebuild, at best.  I would not pay big money for a 30 year old injury prone QB to make a splash in 2017.  If they went for a Glennon, Cousins or Taylor (none of which would cost a draft pick), and then build the team up simultaneously, that is building for something.  

[BigRy56]

When you hear people talk about Fournette, once in a generation type of talent is usually mentioned. Comparisons to Adrian Peterson are common.

If that's the case, you MUST take him. We are going to have a lot of money to spend on a LT, CB, or pass rusher (or all 3) in free agency. You cannot pass on talent like that because a lot of teams don't value running backs. Most of those teams have quarterbacks.... we don't and even of we did, this is the AFC East and an elite run game comes in handy when the weather gets bad.

[Tinstar]

37 minutes ago, BigRy56 said:

When you hear people talk about Fournette, once in a generation type of talent is usually mentioned. Comparisons to Adrian Peterson are common.

If that's the case, you MUST take him. We are going to have a lot of money to spend on a LT, CB, or pass rusher (or all 3) in free agency. You cannot pass on talent like that because a lot of teams don't value running backs. Most of those teams have quarterbacks.... we don't and even of we did, this is the AFC East and an elite run game comes in handy when the weather gets bad.

He's not that good . He's maybe a fraction better  then the big RB in NE . He has better speed, about the same hands out of the backfield and not as much power IMO . Give him a big hole and he will run people over because of his down hill style . Take the hole away and he falls down when he gets hit .

[56mehl56]

35 minutes ago, Tinstar said:

He's not that good . He's maybe a fraction better  then the big RB in NE . He has better speed, about the same hands out of the backfield and not as much power IMO . Give him a big hole and he will run people over because of his down hill style . Take the hole away and he falls down when he gets hit .

Wow - as an LSU fan I've watched almost every single game he has played in - and your about as far away in your analysis as you can be. 

[Phillyjet]

1 hour ago, varjet said:

Who says in the short run the Jets are supposed to be competitive?  The team has gaping holes in multiple areas.

I think the options are to play the young QBs with maybe a cheaper Hoyer-like hold the fort guy and develop them as best you can and see what you have.  Carr and Dalton are 2nd Round QBs-Hack theoretically should have the potential to start.  They need to find out.

Build the other areas of the team this year through FA and the draft.   If after 2 years the FO feels the defense/OL and running game is solid, then they can buy a QB in the FA market to make the team competitive in 2018.

I think long term builds are not practical in the NFL, but the question is whether its a one year re-tool or a two year rebuild.  The Jets are a two year rebuild, at best.  I would not pay big money for a 30 year old injury prone QB to make a splash in 2017.  If they went for a Glennon, Cousins or Taylor (none of which would cost a draft pick), and then build the team up simultaneously, that is building for something.  

Fair points, but that's assuming they believe in Hackenberg.  Reality is that Cousins is unlikely to leave DC (they'll franchise him again or get a deal done), and if you sign Taylor or Glennon, you are looking at $12 mil - $15 mil a year, so there is no competition that's happening there.  Cutler is still only 33, and I am thinking you can buy low at $5-$10 million right now, so he is closer to a Hoyer hold-the-fort guy than you think.  What they do in free agency will speak volumes about their faith in Petty and Hack.  If they go Hoyer, then it says they are willing to let those guys go through growing pains.  If they go with Taylor or Glennon (and even Cutler), then we don't have our future franchise QB on this roster right now, and they are trying to strike gold with journeymen.  Cutler intrigues me only if they can get him on the cheap; I say pass if his asking price is over $8 million a year.

I, personally, would be ok with giving Hack a shot to see if he can grow, and assume that we won't win too many games next year.  If he develops, we keep building, if we tank, then we are in prime position for a 2018 qb.  But not sure the fans will be patient enough. This is NY unfortunately.

[dcJet]

I agree.  start the kids.  No Fitzsalikes.

[jeremy2020]

2 minutes ago, dcJet said:

I agree.  start the kids.  No Fitzsalikes.

I will bet a dozen donuts that the Jets sign a veteran jag and he inexplicably named the starter despite being ''meh"

[JohnnyLV]

6 hours ago, Phillyjet said:

DIdn't say I liked it, but sh*t, we are screwed right now.  And $12-15 million is a fairly pedestrian rate in this type of qb market.  Doesn't kill our cap. As long as it's short money, 2-3 years, we can get out sooner.  But competent qb play is a must to at least keep us competitive.  And I don't believe they think that Petty or Hack are ready.  Petty just went under the knife and will miss most of OTAs. 

And if it backfires again, and Cutler, Glennon, or Bradford  sh*t the bed, then we'll be doing whatever it takes to get Darnold or one of the 2018 qbs, which will be a much better draft class.  My gut is we're looking at 7-9 or 8-8 next year, a pick in the teens.  There's no way they don't sign a journeyman qb; they won't tank 2017 just to have a shot at a qb in the 2018 draft.

Signing a veteran QB is flat idiotic. We need to develop our QBs. Period.

[Integrity28]

8 hours ago, Beerfish said:

I like cook a lot more than Fournette.  Having said that I really think this regime puts LOW value on RBs in the draft,they may take one but not early.

Everything I'm reading says RB is deep in this draft. It would be terrible to use a top 10 pick on a RB or Safety. 

Bad year to have the #6

[Integrity28]

8 hours ago, De-Jet-Erate/Duane said:

Do you think that might change now that Chan is gone?

 

8 hours ago, Beerfish said:

I think it is Mac and Bowles philosophy to be honest.  They seem to like to sign old and injured guys for whatever reason.  (Ridley, Forte, Robinson) Perhaps the fact that Powell played so terrific at the end of the year will get them feeling differently or them seeing what elliot meant to the Cowboys.

Economics of the position make RB a terrible investment in R1.

[FidelioJet]

Stopped reading at it's clear we can't rely on Hack. It's completely unclear that is the case.


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

[Jetster]

12 hours ago, 56mehl56 said:

Wow - as an LSU fan I've watched almost every single game he has played in - and your about as far away in your analysis as you can be. 

I know, NOT THAT GOOD? My god, the people labeling his talent are opposing coaches for gods sake. People like that don't throw around comparisons like that unless your pretty damn special. Jets need some stars so unless a big time EDGE RUSHER falls to them at 6 they need some star power. I'm ok with either Fournette or Cook. 

Leaning towards Fournette, we already have Powell to give him breathers & catch balls out of the backfield. A big back like Fournette gets the Oline excited when they make plays & smash a CB or Safety to the ground. Gives the Oline a bit of feeling of invincibility & they want to be the guy that gives him that sliver of daylight so he can do some damage.

[Phillyjet]

11 hours ago, Integrity28 said:

Everything I'm reading says RB is deep in this draft. It would be terrible to use a top 10 pick on a RB or Safety. 

Bad year to have the #6

That's the problem... if you go best player available, and if you assume that the two stud DE/LBs are not available (Garrett and Barnett), then you are staring down the RB vs. Safety decision.  We have needs at both.  Otherwise we will reach for a 1B player.  Yes, the RB class may be deep, but should not prevent you from choosing a generational talent, if you believe that Fournette or Cook are in that category and BPA at 6.  What will be interesting is if a guy like Derek Barnett falls to 6, do you go DE/OLB and forego the skill position player.  But right now, I am thinking Fournette or Cook, even though I have never embraced a RB in the first round before.  This team needs some juice desperately.

Who else is a top six player in this draft?  Peppers? Nah, he's a hybrid looking for a position.  Mike Williams?  Is he a generational talent?  Who's gonna throw to him?  Tim Williams?  Is he a three down backer or a pass-rush specialist.  Beware the pass-rush specialist; translation, fast, but a little on the slight side (can you say Maybin?)  The guys who are the best are big and fast with tremendous flexibility for their size.  See Khalil Mack Von Miller or Demarcus Ware or John Abraham in the day.  They are the elite talents.  No 3rd down specialists please!

For those who want Hack to play, then a generational RB is his best friend.  You want them to stack the box to make it easier for him. For those who think we've lost any identity (ie for those who are not sure what jersey they would even buy for their kids besides Leonard Williams), then a generational RB is an instant conversation changer.   It just makes too much sense in THIS year.

[Beerfish]

On 2017-01-07 at 8:04 PM, Integrity28 said:

Everything I'm reading says RB is deep in this draft. It would be terrible to use a top 10 pick on a RB or Safety. 

Bad year to have the #6

I literally hear that every single year about rbs, In all honestly I think the last 10 years has been a 'deep year' for rbs.   I look at how much our high dline picks have made such a difference for us and they really haven't.  We have not drafted a weapon on offense in forever.