Jump to content

Jets Preparing Monster Offer For Nick Perry


SR24

Recommended Posts

Here is a scouting report on him prior to the draft maybe they were spot on with it, and he finally made the adjustment, kinda like Pace as someone else said earlier in thread.  Pretty sure Packers have always played a 3-4 D.

  • Weaknesses: 
  • Agility
  • Could struggle in space as a 3-4 outside linebacker
  • Doesn't look like natural as a 3-4 linebacker

  •  
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 160
  • Created
  • Last Reply
14 minutes ago, Jetster said:

We need an edge rusher & with 2 young LBs Lee & Jenkins ready to step up in their 2nd years, hopefully a Mo resurgence, Leo beasting & a revamped secondary, plus maybe Mauldin finally showing up, who knows?

Yea maybe we can get naked, shove roses up our asses, hold hands and jump through a tulip field. Then, eat chocolate sundays

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SR24 said:

Per @PackerReport on twitter. Not a fan of this. Guy had a solid year in a contract year but if you look at his #s before 2016 they are subpar at best. But this is such a Jets move so I'm not surprised

You don't even know what the "monster" offer entails. 

And based on Mcc's previous contracts there could be an out after 2 yrs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Report: Colts “very interested” in Nick Perry

40

 

Sounds like the Jets interested in Glennon stuff

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, HighPitch said:

So wait, half you guys bitched about paying glennon, a qb for christs sake, 15 m.......a fair salary

 

you said we need to build and develop through the draft.

 

but you're ok with spending 9m on a friggin lb

Agreed, we should use all our available cap space on a kicker. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Matt39 said:

Perry is a good player. I wouldn't hate this, would probably eliminate us from going EDGE at 6(it's a deep class)and Jenkins starts next year. Mauldin looks like he'll be released. 

The irritating thing about this is the Jets should have drafted Perry.

Why would Mauldin be released? He's not making starter money, plays ST, and has a role in sub packages? There are 53 guys for a reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason Perry's numbers were down over the first couple of years was due to injuries. He finally got healthy this year and produced (until he got hurt again). His lack of numbers previously doesn't concern me as much as the fact that he is always hurt. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Lupz27 said:

Yes the same rumblings about Perry are floating around with the Colts, same story with team ready to make big offer being written, but instead of the Jets it says Colts.

There's a template shared among the members  the media.  All you  to do is change team name and player names. Allows for more recreational time for the mediots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dcat said:

There's a template shared among the members  the media.  All you  to do is change team name and player names. Allows for more recreational time for the mediots.

Don't forget the agents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He averaged 30ish% snap count his first 4 years, and 75% snap count in 2016, seems he forced his way on the field finally, and produced.  Former 1st round pick only 27, gotta spend your money somewhere why not here, lord knows the Jets can't draft a edge rusher to save their life, and if by some miracle they also draft a stud edge rusher in this draft could you imagine having 2 guys off the edge capable of causing havoc, and Leo up front the D might be able to actually pressure the QB without playing man zero coverage with 3 blitzers who don't get there anyways.


If all the nays simply ignore this, it doesn't exist, so I'll quote it.

Though you'd wonder why the Pack would let defensive talent walk, but I always thought he was a pretty good player...



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SR24 said:

A definite possibility and I'm not denying that. My problem is paying a guy HUGE money hoping that his 2016 season was a coming of age season and not a contract year fluke. Both are possibilities but just because we have the money to do it doesn't mean it's wise to gamble that on a guy who could fall back to 3 or 4 sack seasons for the duration of his tenure with us

Definitely a fair concern. 

It appears tho that his playing time increased in 2016, as he started the most games of his career  

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/P/PerrNi00.htm

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, T0mShane said:

Beware guys with high sack numbers on awful defenses 

Packers defense was for most of the year the awful outfit who shat the bed vs. the Falcons in the NFC title game. 

Not totally opposed, it does fill a need. But the offense right now is scary historical bad. If this a precursor to Watson, might be ..okay?But issue remains the decision makers at Florham Park have a constant hard on for defense and act like scoring points is of no concern. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jetster said:

We were paying our center 9 million & he was being abused by a nobody in 2015. Some guys are gonna get paid. You have a minimum you need to spend. I don't want to pay anybody other than a QB 9 mill, but the league has changed. You will always have some overpaid players unless your the Pats with the best QB in history willing to take home team discounts.

You want to pay a qb 9 million? I thought we had enough backup qbs on the team

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, papz187 said:

Sounds like a poor mans Calvin Pace to me

Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk
 

Calvin had 10 sacks once in his career.  Couple 8 sack seasons. Maybe this year he will get to 11? Other than that not much better than this kids first few years. So no. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Calvin had 10 sacks once in his career.  Couple 8 sack seasons. Maybe this year he will get to 11? Other than that not much better than this kids first few years. So no. 

That was my point. Pace was solid but he got a nice contract from us after having a very good contract year, similar to what this guy did last season. The reason I said he seems to be a poor man's version of Pace is because Pace had slightly higher production and was overall a higher pick if I recall correctly, and was very good, just nothing special who got overpaid after a big contract year.

Sent from my SM-T230NU using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...