Jump to content

FREE AGENT NEWS


Recommended Posts

Just now, Augustiniak said:

the possibility that they try but get shut out of the qbs has to be considered.  teams could offer insane packages to get ahead of the jets and i think that factored into the bridgewater signing.  the jets do not control their own destiny here.  but they could always deal bridgewater during the season if/when a rookie is ready.  

BUt I do think they will draft a QB in this draft, regardless of where. They will try to trade up first

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 5.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Many of the same people who have bitched incessantly for a year about drafting 2 safeties and abhor the idea of drafting Minkah Fitzpatrick are now whining that we didn't sign Tyran Mathieu.  If there

Posted Images

3 minutes ago, Sonny Werblin said:

Agreed that it now looks like the Browns will go QB with the first pick. But, after the Browns select a QB, how do the Giants NOT take Barkley? And I really question the Giants trading out of the first 7 or 8 picks because the cream of the crop in this draft is the Quarterbacks, Barkley, Chubb, and Fitzpatrick. This is the Jets great advantage in trading up. If a team above the Jets makes a trade with the Jets, they can still get Barkely, Chubb, or Fitzpatrick. If a team picking in the top 5 trades with the Bills, they can say good bye to their shot at one of these guys. I think this makes the Jets a far better trading partner for the Giants, Colts or Browns than the Bills or any other team. I really can not envision the Jets screwing this up. 

 

 

The thing with the Giants is this: the head coach is a QB guy and everyone knows that Eli is done, even if they’re throwing roses at his feet on the way out the door. The new regime has a chance to set themselves up at QB for another ten years, or they can set themselves up for a, what, two year run with Barkley hiding Eli? If Gettleman is able to add Solder and Jensen today, I think they’re going QB at two, and Brkely drops to four. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

Agreed, but I don’t think either Maccagnan nor Bowles have ever wanted any part of drafting a QB at six regardless, even before signing Teddy. Even if only superficially, yesterday’s signings give them the cover they need to go in a different direction. 

Why did they bother talking to the qbs then?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, T0mShane said:

The thing with the Giants is this: the head coach is a QB guy and everyone knows that Eli is done, even if they’re throwing roses at his feet on the way out the door. The new regime has a chance to set themselves up at QB for another ten years, or they can set themselves up for a, what, two year run with Barkley hiding Eli? If Gettleman is able to add Solder and Jensen today, I think they’re going QB at two, and Brkely drops to four. 

Between this and zero chance Denver passes on a QB because Keenum! It will be interesting to see what’s left if the jets don’t trade up

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, nycdan said:

Maybe in their own minds, but nowhere else.  In no rational thoughtspace are McCown and Bridgewater on one-year deals a stable QB platform to build around for the next few years.

Which presupposes that Macc and Bowles care about anything more than next year, which they’ve never shown a hint of in their time here.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, nycdan said:

Meh.  I don't know much about him.  Not sure he's much of an upgrade.  Anyone have some intel?  As it stands, I wouldn't hate us taking a Center on day 2 if a good one falls right.

agree, Long was not a starter in Washington and ended the year on IR with knee issues

good size and 3rd round pick from Nebraska so agree it is probably an upgrade over Wesley but hardly a big signing that they needed on the O-line

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, UnitedWhofans said:

BUt I do think they will draft a QB in this draft, regardless of where. They will try to trade up first

true but at this point in mccags' 4th draft, any qb they take outside the 1st round has no shot of playing.  bowles can head off playing falk or lauretta but the national pressure to play someone like mayfield would cost him his job.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Augustiniak said:

the possibility that they try but get shut out of the qbs has to be considered.  teams could offer insane packages to get ahead of the jets and i think that factored into the bridgewater signing.  the jets do not control their own destiny here.  but they could always deal bridgewater during the season if/when a rookie is ready.  

Bridgewater just signed for punter money. He has no value to anyone but the Jets. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Augustiniak said:

true but at this point in mccags' 4th draft, any qb they take outside the 1st round has no shot of playing.  bowles can head off playing falk or lauretta but the national pressure to play someone like mayfield would cost him his job.

Just imagining the narrative on Sunday broadcasts if Mayfield is backing up McCown makes me laugh.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, T0mShane said:

The thing with the Giants is this: the head coach is a QB guy and everyone knows that Eli is done, even if they’re throwing roses at his feet on the way out the door. The new regime has a chance to set themselves up at QB for another ten years, or they can set themselves up for a, what, two year run with Barkley hiding Eli? If Gettleman is able to add Solder and Jensen today, I think they’re going QB at two, and Brkely drops to four. 

That makes sense. What if the Giants really do like Davis Webb, and they were not just blowing smoke when they said so?

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, UnitedWhofans said:

#Jets source to me "No, that [McCown & Bridgewater] doesn't take us out of the running for a QB at #6 at all, we had to get a talent infusion at the position, we don't have another viable starter on the roster."

So you're saying Hack and Petty aren't working out?

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Pac said:

The only jabronies who thought the Jets were throwing anything was your insufferable wolf pack.  Sorry but no coaches or players ever considered your feelings when it was time to go play a game.

I accept your apology.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Augustiniak said:

in fairness to bowles, he had 2 backup qbs who couldn't execute a play last year.  so i get the bridgewater signing.  

This narrative that Bowles will not play the young QB can only be proved if they get a young QB that's better than the veteran QBs.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

Every team talks to the QBs. The Patriots talk to the QBs. The Steelers are working out Lamar. 

Your mind is a scary place. It presupposes irrational thought to feed its own delusion that fit its own construct. 

Much the way that I read serial killers operate. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Sonny Werblin said:

That makes sense. What if the Giants really do like Davis Webb, and they were not just blowing smoke when they said so?

The thing is neither Gettleman nor Shurmur had anything to do with Webb. I’m sure Shurmur looked at him leading up,to the draft last year, but it’s hard to see how he’d rate compared to Rosen or Darnold.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, UnitedWhofans said:

This narrative that Bowles will not play the young QB can only be proved if they get a young QB that's better than the veteran QBs.

let me tell you, if mccagnan trades up for rosen or mayfield and he's not playing by midseason and the team is 2-6 the pressure to play this qb will result in either the rookie playing or bowles losing his job at the end of the season and being replaced by an offensive minded hc who understands the importance of developing a young qb.  bowles does not win this one.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mike135 said:

Macc has really turned this around.

The only dark cloud now is the insane report that Mccown has already been named the starter.

the "naming mccown" the starter at this point seems dumb to me. I don't see the benefit to doing so. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, nycdan said:

You might want to let that last sentence roll around in your head a little bit :)

I have. If the Jets walk away from this draft without Rosen, Darnold, Mayfiled, Allen, or Jackson, I'm going to start rooting for another team because there is no excuse for not getting one of these guys when they have the 6th pick. Either take who is left at 6, or trade up since no one else can offer what the Jets have i.e the 6th pick, which would end up being either Barkley, Chubb, or Fitzpatrick.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ScarletKnight89 said:

I don't love him. But he's still a big upgrade over Wesley Johnson.

 

 

An inanimate carbon rod would be an upgrade over Johnson.  If i had the patience i would go back to last year at this time when some of us were calling for us to draft a center and the usual  happy joy joy gang were telling us that Johnson was fine.

  • Upvote 1
  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Augustiniak said:

let me tell you, if mccagnan trades up for rosen or mayfield and he's not playing by midseason and the team is 2-6 the pressure to play this qb will result in either the rookie playing or bowles losing his job at the end of the season and being replaced by an offensive minded hc who understands the importance of developing a young qb.  bowles does not win this one.

Exactly. Bowles has always said he plays the QB "that give him the best chance to win" What if the young guy is that? He's stuck

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Stark said:

the "naming mccown" the starter at this point seems dumb to me. I don't see the benefit to doing so. 

 

Very possible he would've taken less money elsewhere or at least claimed he would and knew he what Macc over a barrel. That would've been the ultimate embarassment and sabotage the rest of FA.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Stark said:

the "naming mccown" the starter at this point seems dumb to me. I don't see the benefit to doing so. 

 

Me neither.  It's kind of infuriating.

Unless maybe it's some sort of misdirection to make other teams think we're not drafting a QB.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...