The pick at 6 has to be..

[SickJetFan]

5 minutes ago, Tinstar said:

So you think Earl Thomas had more to do with the Seahawks making the SB than say Marshawn Lynch and Russell Wilson .

Yes

[SickJetFan]

I am no football historian or expert here but it seems to me there is a good case study on how to build a team and get to the superbowl via the draft.

Pete Carroll....the year before he took over Seattle they finished 5-11, had an aging team, bad defense, QB throwing a lot of int (who was originally 6th rounder from Green Bay), and basically a team on a death spiral after a lot of years of moderate to good success in early 2000's.....sound familiar?

They needed, QB, defense, oline, etc...

So what does Pete do?

Draft a QB with every pick until he finds one?...ehhhhhhhhhhh no

In fact it was not until 2012 until he drafted his 1st

In his 1st draft in 2010 he drafts not 1 but 2 safeties no QB and 1 in 1st round...makes the plsyoffs

In his 2nd draft he drafts his CB and LB. ...no QB and pass on guys like malllett, Dalton, and others

In his 3rd draft he drafts his DE and OLB and waits until 3rd round to draft his QB.

All 3 years his defense getting better and better and by that 2012 season they are #1 in the league...

They plug in this 3rd rounder out of nowhere and walla superbowl in 2013 and perennial contender 

Did Pete panic and pick QB every year until he had one? Did he shy away from S in 1st round because it is not s premium position? Would Russell Wilson had the same success if he was drafted in 2010?

In conclusion....pfffffffftttttt that's me farting on any QB this year...and im ok with drafting a TE, RB, S...in this draft.

[Tinstar]

I know, we play this game and just maybe we get lucky and find a Russell  Wilson . Then maybe we find a Richard Sherman in the late rounds also. Bilal Powell can be our Beast mode .

[SickJetFan]

9 minutes ago, Tinstar said:

I know, we play this game and just maybe we get lucky and find a Russell  Wilson . Then maybe we find a Richard Sherman in the late rounds also. Bilal Powell can be our Beast mode .

So Pete Carroll comes up with a plan, executes it perfectly, has success and he is lucky?

Russell Wilson won lotto getting drafted by a team with #1 defense ..that's like me having a 40 yard race with Russell and he gets spotted 35 yards....(altho I think I could still take him).  How many chances to Seattle offense get per game while opposing defenses constantly on field and getting tired.

You ever think maybe.....just maybe.....some of Sherman success can be attributed to those 2 safeties....hmmmm

And btw I think we already have our Russell Wilson....his name is Bryce Petty and out beast mode has yet to be drafted..

[Tinstar]

7 minutes ago, SickJetFan said:

So Pete Carroll comes up with a plan, executes it perfectly, has success and he is lucky?

Russell Wilson won lotto getting drafted by a team with #1 defense ..that's like me having a 40 yard race with Russell and he gets spotted 35 yards....(altho I think I could still take him).  How many chances to Seattle offense get per game while opposing defenses constantly on field and getting tired.

You ever think maybe.....just maybe.....some of Sherman success can be attributed to those 2 safeties....hmmmm

And btw I think we already have our Russell Wilson....his name is Bryce Petty and out beast mode has yet to be drafted..

You think Bryce Petty is our Russell Wilson ?

Tell you what I'm going to do and just for you  . If you're even 5% right, I will support your plan to draft whatever safety you wish .

 

[SickJetFan]

3 minutes ago, Tinstar said:

You think Bryce Petty is our Russell Wilson ?

Tell you what I'm going to do and just for you  . If you're even 5% right, I will support your plan to draft whatever safety you wish .

 

Yes he has a chance...except his chance isn't spotted like Russell....jets QB must play from behind after the 1st Q

And i don't have s plan to draft a Safety...but would not object either.

[varjet]

11 hours ago, Tinstar said:

You think Bryce Petty is our Russell Wilson ?

Tell you what I'm going to do and just for you  . If you're even 5% right, I will support your plan to draft whatever safety you wish .

 

Russell Wilson is support for the theories that in large part QBs are born and not made, and what goes on between the ears is as important as important as the rest of the body.  

Those who watched Russell Wilson play in college knew it got the game and its speed, even if he was a bit short.  

I don't know whether people who watch Petty think the same thing.

[C Mart]

Something that doesn't get discussed enough...Does the O / blocking philosophy fit the prospective player..

 

Draft rumors: Passing along some Jets-related thoughts from scouts and personnel people around the league (their opinions, not mine):

General manager Mike Maccagnan is married to his best-player-available philosophy, which puts LSU running back Leonard Fournette into play at No. 6. ... Fournette needs to be in a power-running scheme, not a zone-based scheme that requires cutback running. ... Alabama tight end O.J. Howard is the real deal and is worth a top-6 pick. He'd be ideal in a West Coast offense, which the Jets likely will employ. ... Alabama's Reuben Foster has "as much natural talent as you will see in a linebacker," but he could struggle with the playbook and might not have the ability to call signals as a "Mike" linebacker. ... Ohio State safety Malik Hooker has "some Ed Reed qualities," but he might not be ready until training camp. He's recovering from hip and sports-hernia surgeries. ... "I hear they really like Charles Harris," a possible first-rounder from Missouri. "He'd fit as a rush linebacker in their scheme." ... LSU safety Jamal Adams "could step in from Day 1 and run Todd Bowles' secondary."

http://www.espn.com/blog/new-york-jets/post/_/id/67993/how-jon-gruden-feels-about-the-jets-mitch-trubisky-and-the-sixth-pick

[JiFtheOracle]

12 hours ago, SickJetFan said:

I am no football historian or expert here but it seems to me there is a good case study on how to build a team and get to the superbowl via the draft.

Pete Carroll....the year before he took over Seattle they finished 5-11, had an aging team, bad defense, QB throwing a lot of int (who was originally 6th rounder from Green Bay), and basically a team on a death spiral after a lot of years of moderate to good success in early 2000's.....sound familiar?

They needed, QB, defense, oline, etc...

So what does Pete do?

Draft a QB with every pick until he finds one?...ehhhhhhhhhhh no

In fact it was not until 2012 until he drafted his 1st

In his 1st draft in 2010 he drafts not 1 but 2 safeties no QB and 1 in 1st round...makes the plsyoffs

In his 2nd draft he drafts his CB and LB. ...no QB and pass on guys like malllett, Dalton, and others

In his 3rd draft he drafts his DE and OLB and waits until 3rd round to draft his QB.

All 3 years his defense getting better and better and by that 2012 season they are #1 in the league...

They plug in this 3rd rounder out of nowhere and walla superbowl in 2013 and perennial contender 

Did Pete panic and pick QB every year until he had one? Did he shy away from S in 1st round because it is not s premium position? Would Russell Wilson had the same success if he was drafted in 2010?

In conclusion....pfffffffftttttt that's me farting on any QB this year...and im ok with drafting a TE, RB, S...in this draft.

They were 7-9 under Carroll every year till they found Russell. 

QB is everything.

[Lil Woody]

38 minutes ago, C Mart said:

General manager Mike Maccagnan is married to his best-player-available philosophy, which puts LSU running back Leonard Fournette into play at No. 6. ... Fournette needs to be in a power-running scheme, not a zone-based scheme that requires cutback running. ...

A very Cimini comment considering LSU ran a ton of zone blocking concepts for him.

I love when these nerds with their little communications degrees speak so authoritatively and pretend to be experts on the topics they report on. Just another reminder that journalists are all full of sh*t.

[Savage69]

13 minutes ago, JiF said:

They were 7-9 under Carroll every year till they found Russell. 

QB is everything.

Here a interesting draft scenario it has the Jets trading 6 to Houston and picking up picks and trading out again getting more picks and finally getting Watson with pick 25 of the 1st rd..LOL   http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/2017-nfl-mock-draft-five-teams-trade-up-while-the-jets-move-down-twice/

[C Mart]

26 minutes ago, Lil Woody said:

A very Cimini comment considering LSU ran a ton of zone blocking concepts for him.

I love when these nerds with their little communications degrees speak so authoritatively and pretend to be experts on the topics they report on. Just another reminder that journalists are all full of sh*t.

maybe Rich got it from here:

Fournette and Florida State’s Dalvin Cook are widely considered the top two running backs in the draft. Cook is faster than Fournette, but he’s also smaller (5-11, 213) and might not mesh with the power run game that figures to be a prominent piece of Shula’s attack as he phases out the zone-read package.

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/sports/nfl/carolina-panthers/article135263549.html#storylink=cpy

[JetFanatic]

10 hours ago, SickJetFan said:

I am no football historian or expert here but it seems to me there is a good case study on how to build a team and get to the superbowl via the draft.

Pete Carroll....the year before he took over Seattle they finished 5-11, had an aging team, bad defense, QB throwing a lot of int (who was originally 6th rounder from Green Bay), and basically a team on a death spiral after a lot of years of moderate to good success in early 2000's.....sound familiar?

They needed, QB, defense, oline, etc...

So what does Pete do?

Draft a QB with every pick until he finds one?...ehhhhhhhhhhh no

In fact it was not until 2012 until he drafted his 1st

In his 1st draft in 2010 he drafts not 1 but 2 safeties no QB and 1 in 1st round...makes the plsyoffs

In his 2nd draft he drafts his CB and LB. ...no QB and pass on guys like malllett, Dalton, and others

In his 3rd draft he drafts his DE and OLB and waits until 3rd round to draft his QB.

All 3 years his defense getting better and better and by that 2012 season they are #1 in the league...

They plug in this 3rd rounder out of nowhere and walla superbowl in 2013 and perennial contender 

Did Pete panic and pick QB every year until he had one? Did he shy away from S in 1st round because it is not s premium position? Would Russell Wilson had the same success if he was drafted in 2010?

In conclusion....pfffffffftttttt that's me farting on any QB this year...and im ok with drafting a TE, RB, S...in this draft.

I like this a lot.  Carroll sounds like he had a plan and stuck to the plan.  Having picked Russell Okung and Earl Thomas with their 2 picks in the first round and having them pan out definitely helped them out tremendously.  They also came away with Kam Chancellor, Walter Thurmond and Golden Tate in that draft.  Excellent draft for them that started shaping their team.

This draft is very similar in that it's loaded with talent and the Jets can very well get four or five players two of which turn out into stars and the other two being about average to all star type players.  

[SickJetFan]

1 hour ago, JiF said:

They were 7-9 under Carroll every year till they found Russell. 

QB is everything.

Lol. ..guess you missed the point...no matter

What I find ironic is their defense got them to 2 superbowls and completely shutdown Denver in 1st superbowl but in 2nd all they needed was 1 fkg yard from their QB..they put their faith in him and rest is history.  You are right sometimes QB is everything.

[19andOhWait]

Cimini column on QB at 6: 

 I brought up North Carolina's Mitchell Trubisky, who has been linked to the Jets in many mock drafts, including Mel Kiper's latest version. Gruden said he'd be surprised if the Jets, even with their quarterback issues, take Trubisky at No. 6 overall.

"I can’t see them going that high for that," Gruden said. "There’s a lot of unknown with some of these quarterbacks. Five of the seven are underclassmen. Trubisky has played one year of college football. I don’t know. A lot of it will be dependent on what they truly think of their young quarterbacks they currently have."

Gruden likes Trubisky's upside, but he said the lack of experience (13 starts in college) is a "concern." Of the seven quarterbacks who participated in Gruden's QB Camp TV series, which starts April 11 on ESPN2, Trubisky had by far the fewest amount of starts.

I agree with Gruden on two points: It's too risky to take Trubisky at six and the Jets' feelings about Christian Hackenberg and Bryce Petty will come to the surface in this draft. If they draft Trubisky, a possibility, it would be a blow to both young passers.

[CrazyCarl40]

3 hours ago, Lil Woody said:

A very Cimini comment considering LSU ran a ton of zone blocking concepts for him.

I love when these nerds with their little communications degrees speak so authoritatively and pretend to be experts on the topics they report on. Just another reminder that journalists are all full of sh*t.

This blanket generalization says more about you than anything about journalists or journalism. There's plenty of good of both out there. If you don't like Cimini, why do you care what he writes or thinks? I personally don't care for him so I don't follow him or read much of his stuff unless it's posted here. Plenty of places to get news and analysis. No need to drag an entire profession through the mud because of one writer. 

[NYJCAP2]

Mali Hooker and don't look back

[Lil Woody]

4 hours ago, CrazyCarl40 said:

This blanket generalization says more about you than anything about journalists or journalism. There's plenty of good of both out there. If you don't like Cimini, why do you care what he writes or thinks? I personally don't care for him so I don't follow him or read much of his stuff unless it's posted here. Plenty of places to get news and analysis. No need to drag an entire profession through the mud because of one writer. 

Profession is a very poor choice of a word for what they have become. Journalism stopped being an actual profession years ago.

But you are right. I don't read Cimini. I was responding tot he posting. I clicked the link to see who it was and just shrugged and said...eh I should have known.

[CrazyCarl40]

1 hour ago, Lil Woody said:

Profession is a very poor choice of a word for what they have become. Journalism stopped being an actual profession years ago.

But you are right. I don't read Cimini. I was responding tot he posting. I clicked the link to see who it was and just shrugged and said...eh I should have known.

How many journalists do you actually know? As a person? If you rely on the big papers and the big stations, yeah, they're a little jaded but there is plenty of journalists out there that exude professionalism. I'd love to know what high and mighty perch you speak from as a professional. 

[Lil Woody]

Well I did get to work in media and publishing for a little over 6 years. I'd put my total number somewhere maybe slightly north of 50. Of course I didn't really hang out with any of them, we mainly exchanged pleasantries and I listened to their concerns about the business and how managing costs were making their jobs difficult. The guys that had real integrity retired or we cut them loose for costing too much. The smart ones got out of the companies before we sold them. The business leaders changed all focus to being profitable over being professional and responsible. Our journalists cried a lot and pounded the table like they were making some big stand, but the majority were all full of sh*t and just angry at the world for not being what they wanted it to be. The last 2 years I was there they were shooting down every truly newsworthy article, and focused all efforts on engagement and circulation. Finally, having wasted enough time in a dying industry I left that industry for a much more profitable one. I don't think I've every really looked back at it since. The people there were nice, they generally meant well, but what really stuck with me what there was a real sense of naivety about how business operates, how humanity operates, and how the world really works. I will say the guys that were the most grounded and saw things for how it really was and not some romanticized idealistic version of it were the photojournalists.  Those dudes were awesome, a ton of fun and didn't need to put on any pretense at all.  If you ever meet any of those folks - especially the ones who have traveled into the war zones and seen the sh*t, go out for a few beers with them.  They have the some of the best stories around.

Anyway, I'm going way off topic I guess, as to your point about journalists that exude professionalism. Yeah they would have to be out of the major conglomerates. But the biggest issue people have with them is their complete disregard/disdain for providing unbiased journalism. They bitched and moaned all the time complaining that the tenets of journalism do not require them to be unbiased but merely accurate...fair...transparent...etc.  But the thing they almost all unilaterally failed to understand is the basic premise that facts and truth in a pure form are always unbiased. Somewhere along the way, the first tenet of journalism got changed from a pure obligation to the truth and reporting facts, to presenting the truth as they see it and which alllowed them to obfuscate their readers with selective facts and create their own version of the truth as they see fit to report. There is no professionalism there, just ego. They want to tell "their" story. But typically the intelligent consumer doesn't give a rats ass what they want or how they feel. We just want actual facts, unbiased presentation, and we want to make up our own minds about it. We don't need to be told how to think by some sanctimonious douchebag with a poisoned pen presenting their own ideologies and projecting their own values into their reporting.  I found that the biggest issue is the bullsh*t these kids are fed in journalism schools. They get indoctrinated about how important their job is and how it is their job to act as the civic leadership for the world before they ever write a single article. The only journalists I actually felt were completely committed to providing the truth (the real truth, not "their" version of it) were the science journalists, Science demanded it. There was a greater purpose to serve than their own ego and their own presentation of it. If they failed to provide the story as it actually was, they got eviscerated in peer review and became a pariah and washed out. Those guys will always have my respect.

[CrazyCarl40]

9 minutes ago, Lil Woody said:

Well I did get to work in media and publishing for a little over 6 years. I'd put my total number somewhere maybe slightly north of 50. Of course I didn't really hang out with any of them, we mainly exchanged pleasantries and I listened to their concerns about the business and how managing costs were making their jobs difficult. The guys that had real integrity retired or we cut them loose for costing too much. The smart ones got out of the companies before we sold them. The business leaders changed all focus to being profitable over being professional and responsible. Our journalists cried a lot and pounded the table like they were making some big stand, but the majority were all full of sh*t and just angry at the world for not being what they wanted it to be. The last 2 years I was there they were shooting down every truly newsworthy article, and focused all efforts on engagement and circulation. Finally, having wasted enough time in a dying industry I left that industry for a much more profitable one. I don't think I've every really looked back at it since. The people there were nice, they generally meant well, but what really stuck with me what there was a real sense of naivety about how business operates, how humanity operates, and how the world really works. I will say the guys that were the most grounded and saw things for how it really was and not some romanticized idealistic version of it were the photojournalists.  Those dudes were awesome, a ton of fun and didn't need to put on any pretense at all.  If you ever meet any of those folks - especially the ones who have traveled into the war zones and seen the sh*t, go out for a few beers with them.  They have the some of the best stories around.

Anyway, I'm going way off topic I guess, as to your point about journalists that exude professionalism. Yeah they would have to be out of the major conglomerates. But the biggest issue people have with them is their complete disregard/disdain for providing unbiased journalism. They bitched and moaned all the time complaining that the tenets of journalism do not require them to be unbiased but merely accurate...fair...transparent...etc.  But the thing they almost all unilaterally failed to understand is the basic premise that facts and truth in a pure form are always unbiased. Somewhere along the way, the first tenet of journalism got changed from a pure obligation to the truth and reporting facts, to presenting the truth as they see it and which alllowed them to obfuscate their readers with selective facts and create their own version of the truth as they see fit to report. There is no professionalism there, just ego. They want to tell "their" story. But typically the intelligent consumer doesn't give a rats ass what they want or how they feel. We just want actual facts, unbiased presentation, and we want to make up our own minds about it. We don't need to be told how to think by some sanctimonious douchebag with a poisoned pen presenting their own ideologies and projecting their own values into their reporting.  I found that the biggest issue is the bullsh*t these kids are fed in journalism schools. They get indoctrinated about how important their job is and how it is their job to act as the civic leadership for the world before they ever write a single article. The only journalists I actually felt were completely committed to providing the truth (the real truth, not "their" version of it) were the science journalists, Science demanded it. There was a greater purpose to serve than their own ego and their own presentation of it. If they failed to provide the story as it actually was, they got eviscerated in peer review and became a pariah and washed out. Those guys will always have my respect.

Lol. You have no idea what you're talking about obviously. If you watch real news, you'll exactly what you're looking for. If you watch an opinionated talk show, then that's what you get. I understand what people don't like about the mainstream media, but it only became that way because that's what people wanted. They wanted the if it bleeds it leads storytelling and mentality and the 24 hours shock. But yeah, mostly you don't know what you're talking about and you're spewing opinions while not knowing the difference between a news article and a column. 

[joewilly12]

Jets

• According to Rich Cimini, Jets GM Mike Maccagnan is “married to his best-player-available philosophy,” which could leave LSU RB Leonard Fournette in play for them at No. 6 overall.
• Cimini has spoken to scouts and personnel people who consider Alabama TE O.J. Howard to be “the real deal” worthy of the No. 6 overall pick.
• Cimini’s sources said that Alabama LB Reuben Foster has “as much natural talent as you will see in a linebacker,” but may struggle with the playbook and may not be able to make the calls.
• According to Cimini’s sources, OSU S Malik Hooker has “some Ed Reed qualities.”
• Interestingly enough, Cimini’s sources “hear they really like Charles Harris,” a possible first-round pick.
• As for LSU S Jamal Adams, Cimini’s source said he “could step in from Day 1 and run Todd Bowles‘ secondary.”

[Lil Woody]

Whatever you say CrazyCarl. My opinion doesn't match your own, so therefore I don't know what I'm talking about. Typical twitter style debate. Rather than engage and provide any actual conversation...just ignore, deflect and denigrate. That's too bad. 

I'll say this. One thing you got right is that MSM feeds consumer demand. If consumers didn't want that kind of coverage, it wouldn't exist. But that's why I qualified the "intelligent" consumer from the general ones.

Also fwiw. I'd suggest that anyone who does want unbiased reporting should never "watch" their news. If you watch your news you can not remove the programming from it. I read the news and I separate any presented facts from editorialization as I go by crossing out any reporters leading remarks or incomplete factual representation with a pen. Helps you think for yourself as you consume. I highly recommend it to anyone who wants to see how much facts are reported vs bias and commentary. Especially in the news articles. Though most good reporters will not write anything not presented as fact, but their presentation is still entirely biased and leading and you can pick it out very easily.

[MDL_JET]

12 hours ago, C Mart said:

Something that doesn't get discussed enough...Does the O / blocking philosophy fit the prospective player..

 

Draft rumors: Passing along some Jets-related thoughts from scouts and personnel people around the league (their opinions, not mine):

General manager Mike Maccagnan is married to his best-player-available philosophy, which puts LSU running back Leonard Fournette into play at No. 6. ... Fournette needs to be in a power-running scheme, not a zone-based scheme that requires cutback running. ... Alabama tight end O.J. Howard is the real deal and is worth a top-6 pick. He'd be ideal in a West Coast offense, which the Jets likely will employ. ... Alabama's Reuben Foster has "as much natural talent as you will see in a linebacker," but he could struggle with the playbook and might not have the ability to call signals as a "Mike" linebacker. ... Ohio State safety Malik Hooker has "some Ed Reed qualities," but he might not be ready until training camp. He's recovering from hip and sports-hernia surgeries. ... "I hear they really like Charles Harris," a possible first-rounder from Missouri. "He'd fit as a rush linebacker in their scheme." ... LSU safety Jamal Adams "could step in from Day 1 and run Todd Bowles' secondary."

http://www.espn.com/blog/new-york-jets/post/_/id/67993/how-jon-gruden-feels-about-the-jets-mitch-trubisky-and-the-sixth-pick

if they can't make a player like fournette work because of scheme then they're not the right coach for the job. Sorry, but with talent like that, you find a way. 

[Lil Woody]

2 minutes ago, MDL_JET said:

if they can't make a player like fournette work because of scheme then they're not the right coach for the job. Sorry, but with talent like that, you find a way. 

That's fair if you get a player forced on you that doesn't fit your system. Then you have to adjust your system to fit the talent. But if you are a smart organization, you draft more purposefully. You wouldn't spend a bunch of picks creating an outstanding OL that fits your organizational vision and then take a RB that only works in a different system. I mean the JETS would, but smart teams with an actual chain of command and real leadership and vision would not.

[joewilly12]

10 minutes ago, Lil Woody said:

That's fair if you get a player forced on you that doesn't fit your system. Then you have to adjust your system to fit the talent. But if you are a smart organization, you draft more purposefully. You wouldn't spend a bunch of picks creating an outstanding OL that fits your organizational vision and then take a RB that only works in a different system. I mean the JETS would, but smart teams with an actual chain of command and real leadership and vision would not.

What system??????  The so called system hasn't worked here for 48 years. 

[Lil Woody]

1 minute ago, joewilly12 said:

What system??????  The so called system hasn't worked here for 48 years. 

None in particular. Just talking theoretically.

[SickJetFan]

1 hour ago, Lil Woody said:

Well I did get to work in media and publishing for a little over 6 years. I'd put my total number somewhere maybe slightly north of 50. Of course I didn't really hang out with any of them, we mainly exchanged pleasantries and I listened to their concerns about the business and how managing costs were making their jobs difficult. The guys that had real integrity retired or we cut them loose for costing too much. The smart ones got out of the companies before we sold them. The business leaders changed all focus to being profitable over being professional and responsible. Our journalists cried a lot and pounded the table like they were making some big stand, but the majority were all full of sh*t and just angry at the world for not being what they wanted it to be. The last 2 years I was there they were shooting down every truly newsworthy article, and focused all efforts on engagement and circulation. Finally, having wasted enough time in a dying industry I left that industry for a much more profitable one. I don't think I've every really looked back at it since. The people there were nice, they generally meant well, but what really stuck with me what there was a real sense of naivety about how business operates, how humanity operates, and how the world really works. I will say the guys that were the most grounded and saw things for how it really was and not some romanticized idealistic version of it were the photojournalists.  Those dudes were awesome, a ton of fun and didn't need to put on any pretense at all.  If you ever meet any of those folks - especially the ones who have traveled into the war zones and seen the sh*t, go out for a few beers with them.  They have the some of the best stories around.

Anyway, I'm going way off topic I guess, as to your point about journalists that exude professionalism. Yeah they would have to be out of the major conglomerates. But the biggest issue people have with them is their complete disregard/disdain for providing unbiased journalism. They bitched and moaned all the time complaining that the tenets of journalism do not require them to be unbiased but merely accurate...fair...transparent...etc.  But the thing they almost all unilaterally failed to understand is the basic premise that facts and truth in a pure form are always unbiased. Somewhere along the way, the first tenet of journalism got changed from a pure obligation to the truth and reporting facts, to presenting the truth as they see it and which alllowed them to obfuscate their readers with selective facts and create their own version of the truth as they see fit to report. There is no professionalism there, just ego. They want to tell "their" story. But typically the intelligent consumer doesn't give a rats ass what they want or how they feel. We just want actual facts, unbiased presentation, and we want to make up our own minds about it. We don't need to be told how to think by some sanctimonious douchebag with a poisoned pen presenting their own ideologies and projecting their own values into their reporting.  I found that the biggest issue is the bullsh*t these kids are fed in journalism schools. They get indoctrinated about how important their job is and how it is their job to act as the civic leadership for the world before they ever write a single article. The only journalists I actually felt were completely committed to providing the truth (the real truth, not "their" version of it) were the science journalists, Science demanded it. There was a greater purpose to serve than their own ego and their own presentation of it. If they failed to provide the story as it actually was, they got eviscerated in peer review and became a pariah and washed out. Those guys will always have my respect.

Not much hope left here for ever fixing this either...damage was done by the deregulation and Clinton only hope would be some sort of drastic breakup like banks which will never happen but getting too political for here.

[JiFtheOracle]

22 hours ago, SickJetFan said:

Lol. ..guess you missed the point...no matter

What I find ironic is their defense got them to 2 superbowls and completely shutdown Denver in 1st superbowl but in 2nd all they needed was 1 fkg yard from their QB..they put their faith in him and rest is history.  You are right sometimes QB is everything.

I got your point but Hooker is no Berry or Thomas.  Both had a lot more games on tape to evaluate.  They didnt just pop up out of no where and carry their draft stock on 1 year of play.  And in this example, Thomas was taken at 14th, not 6th.  Ironically, that's where Carroll took a franchise LT in the same draft he took Thomas...which is a positional value and all that jazz.

Carroll didnt draft a LT and S and the rest was history.  Sure, they made the playoffs at 7-9.  That's not impressive and they were not good.  The part of the story you left out is Seattle drafted better than anyone in the league from the 1st RD to the 5th for 3 straight years and that was the difference.  They were hitting in every round, on every player like they had a crystal ball but still, were a 7-9 team.  And then when they finally found a QB, finally the rest was history. Because prior to him, they were a below .500 team even with the best RB in the league and the best D in the league. 

I get why you chose to look at his "plan" as the blue print but I think you're giving them a little too much credit.  It was all for nothing without Russell Wilson. 

 

 

[SickJetFan]

15 minutes ago, JiF said:

I got your point but Hooker is no Berry or Thomas.  Both had a lot more games on tape to evaluate.  They didnt just pop up out of no where and carry their draft stock on 1 year of play.  And in this example, Thomas was taken at 14th, not 6th.  Ironically, that's where Carroll took a franchise LT in the same draft he took Thomas...which is a positional value and all that jazz.

Carroll didnt draft a LT and S and the rest was history.  Sure, they made the playoffs at 7-9.  That's not impressive and they were not good.  The part of the story you left out is Seattle drafted better than anyone in the league from the 1st RD to the 5th for 3 straight years and that was the difference.  They were hitting in every round, on every player like they had a crystal ball but still, were a 7-9 team.  And then when they finally found a QB, finally the rest was history. Because prior to him, they were a below .500 team even with the best RB in the league and the best D in the league. 

I get why you chose to look at his "plan" as the blue print but I think you're giving them a little too much credit.  It was all for nothing without Russell Wilson. 

 

 

That really was not my point.  I actually have no preference on any of the top 10 in this draft.  I think they all good in their own way.  I dont think the Jets should copy verbatim what seatte did as we already have some of the pieces they didnt when they started and the Jets are already in year 2.  My point was the jets need to build the whole team and there is no such thing as a non premium every down player (kicker yes is non premium or some sort of 3rd down specialist or any player that does not have a defined role for every single down).  So i would have no issue with S, TE, or RB with that 6th pick IF Macc and his scouts deemed worth it. 

What i think is silly is picking QB with every pick and hoping to strike gold when you have holes everywhere else.  If the Jets had picked Russell he would be a back up somewhere in league shell shocked by now so I also disagree that QB is everything.  And i did not gloss over anything, you see what you want to see and can look it up.  Fact is it took 3 years and they did it right by building a good foundation and then finding their QB and then won wuperboal.  I think you overvalue the 3rd round QB because he is what he is.  Any QB picked with 6th pick in this year draft will either sit and red shirt or get thrown to the wolves and fail or be damaged goods while never knowing what you already have and then a new class in 2018 where the grass will always be greener.

and btw Seattle are not luckier than everyone else in league in their drafting.  They just have good scouts, coach who recruited, and great teachers...something I was arguing for in the Idziot years...there are posts in JN from me about that subject from years ago.  Which btw we have some of now with Macc and his scouts I think are above average although this draft is their make or break and we have crap teaching but I am optimistic in the new coach\teachers hires especially around QB.

[JiFtheOracle]

2 hours ago, SickJetFan said:

That really was not my point.  I actually have no preference on any of the top 10 in this draft.  I think they all good in their own way.  I dont think the Jets should copy verbatim what seatte did as we already have some of the pieces they didnt when they started and the Jets are already in year 2.  My point was the jets need to build the whole team and there is no such thing as a non premium every down player (kicker yes is non premium or some sort of 3rd down specialist or any player that does not have a defined role for every single down).  So i would have no issue with S, TE, or RB with that 6th pick IF Macc and his scouts deemed worth it. 

What i think is silly is picking QB with every pick and hoping to strike gold when you have holes everywhere else.  If the Jets had picked Russell he would be a back up somewhere in league shell shocked by now so I also disagree that QB is everything.  And i did not gloss over anything, you see what you want to see and can look it up.  Fact is it took 3 years and they did it right by building a good foundation and then finding their QB and then won wuperboal.  I think you overvalue the 3rd round QB because he is what he is.  Any QB picked with 6th pick in this year draft will either sit and red shirt or get thrown to the wolves and fail or be damaged goods while never knowing what you already have and then a new class in 2018 where the grass will always be greener.

and btw Seattle are not luckier than everyone else in league in their drafting.  They just have good scouts, coach who recruited, and great teachers...something I was arguing for in the Idziot years...there are posts in JN from me about that subject from years ago.  Which btw we have some of now with Macc and his scouts I think are above average although this draft is their make or break and we have crap teaching but I am optimistic in the new coach\teachers hires especially around QB.

Lot's to disagree with here but all good.  I hope your optimism is on point. 

[thadude]

On April 8, 2017 at 6:44 PM, SickJetFan said:

Yes

Huh?  Pls explain how earl Thomas was more valuable to the Seahawks than Wilson or Lynch

[thadude]

On April 8, 2017 at 8:42 PM, Tinstar said:

You think Bryce Petty is our Russell Wilson ?

Tell you what I'm going to do and just for you  . If you're even 5% right, I will support your plan to draft whatever safety you wish .

 

Petty is as similar to Wilson as Melissa McCarthy is to Jessica Alba

[Paradis]

I think there's a missing element to all this equatory talk.  Yes, there's an element of BPA -- as in, who are the best prospects on the board.... And yes, there's a sense of need -- who can help us fill holes in the roster... but there's also "the plan" or "system"... Who is the best player available, that we need -- who can help us do _X_

A GM/brass always has a sense of "this is how we do it, and this the direction we're going in"... it's fluid of course, but its what maybe decides the question of "Do we take a chance on Trubisky..." or Is Howard more valuable to them then Lattimore or Adams... that's the unspoken part of this process. It's not JUST about BPA  or need. 

[Ex-Rex]

On 4/2/2017 at 7:47 PM, Paradis said:

relax, i would curse anyone with that comparison. But its a good example of when Management get oogled by measurables (Hill) and neglect the obvious (Jeffery). 

First of all Hill was a mistake of Mike Tannenbaum and not Mike Maccagnan so ANY comparison or grading of the pick is not even applicable here. Different regime altogether. That's like comparing Kyle Wilson to Dee Milliner to Dexter McDougle. Each was a missed CB from a different GM.