Jump to content

O-line was supposed to be Joe Douglas' expertise


freestater

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, FTL Jet Fan said:

After 45 years as a fan it’s just like reliving the same scenario  over and over. How as an owner can you sit there and watch that kid take a beating without having a serious sit down with your GM and staff. I hope this is corrected but I won’t hold my breath. 

after that one hit I dont know how they did not pull him and honestly was surprised the league did not have him get pulled and checked by the drs

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

Really?  AVT and Moses?  2 out of 5 are new and they just dont need to work together, the comment about an OL needing to work together doesnt count?

We dont have good players?  Becton, AVT and Moses arent good?  

Moses didnt' start.

Becton-AVT-McGovern-GVR-Fant

That is the same starting OL as the worst one in the NFL last year - with a rookie guard.

As for Moses - if he couldn't beat out George Fant - then, frankly, he was a bad signing.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, kmnj said:

after that one hit I dont know how they did not pull him and honestly was surprised the league did not have him get pulled and checked by the drs

I said the same thing earlier.  No doubt Zack's head whipped against the turf on that sack.  Should have been examined by the independent neurologist the NFL mandates to be present on game days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

Moses didnt' start.

Becton-AVT-McGovern-GVR-Fant

That is the same starting OL as the worst one in the NFL last year - with a rookie guard.

As for Moses - if he couldn't beat out George Fant - then, frankly, he was a bad signing.

He played a large part of the game.  That doesn’t count.  And one new player, who hasn’t played in over 5 weeks, yup they should all have played together like a unit that was together for a year. 

Honestly, I don’t care to argue with the same handful of people doing a SAR  impersonation.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

He played a large part of the game.  That doesn’t count.  And one new player, who hasn’t played in over 5 weeks, yup they should all have played together like a unit that was together for a year. 

Honestly, I don’t care to argue with the same handful of people doing a SAR  impersonation.  

Understand where you are coming from and agree to an extent. We are lucky the kid is resilient but we can only go week to week to come to judgment. The preseason wasn’t all that  impressive against a vanilla D. What happens when we pl play just the teams in our division, they will feast on Wilson if this is not corrected. 
 

The kid was impressive, at this point I don’t care about anything else beside keeping this kid healthy and not fearing for his health before the snap of every play. Run the ball, WR screens, slants until these guys get it together. I used to worry every Time one of our quarterbacks dropped back to pass  it was going to end up being an interception,  now I  worry about our rookie quarterback getting leveled. How many games can he keep up at this pace. 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jet Nut said:

Youre the most in demand assistant looking to become a HC and the GM tells you hes going to tell you who to play, when and how, how to run the ball, etc

You taking that job?  No one is

Maybe there’s scheme / personnel mismatch… Zone blocking with emphasis on lateral movement… Behemoth OL that excel at imposing their will… 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, munchmemory said:

56 for me this year, FTL.   Totally agree.  How many GMs now have told us they would address/fix the O line problem?  

55 for me. At least we got to see the Jets win the greatest Super Bowl ever. Now, I don't think some of us old timers will ever live to see another. I hope Zach proves me wrong.

  • Sympathy 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jet Nut said:

He played a large part of the game.  That doesn’t count.  And one new player, who hasn’t played in over 5 weeks, yup they should all have played together like a unit that was together for a year. 

Honestly, I don’t care to argue with the same handful of people doing a SAR  impersonation.  

Don’t give me that.  
 

ive been excited about this team and GM.  I liked the way the D played. Our WR’s could catch and - The fact is The OL stinks and Becton has been a disappointment.  

Not everything has to be roses.  
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, DonCorleone said:

A young an inexperienced line, would lack communication, it would lack trust and there would be tons of mix ups. What I saw yesterday was a bunch of individuals who were beat one on one. They were slow off the ball and looked weak individually. IMO, that has NOTHING to do with youth. 

So that fact that those five guys had never played a snap together would not impact their performance?  To each his own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, FidelioJet said:

As for Moses - if he couldn't beat out George Fant - then, frankly, he was a bad signing.

He was not a bad signing regardless.  If we didn't sign him either Connor McDermott or Chuma Edoga could be protecting Zach's blindside for the next 6 weeks.  I am not nearly as panicked as I woul dhav ebeen without Moses.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Lith said:

He was not a bad signing regardless.  If we didn't sign him either Connor McDermott or Chuma Edoga could be protecting Zach's blindside for the next 6 weeks.  I am not nearly as panicked as I woul dhav ebeen without Moses.

It's a bad signing because Fant stinks.  If Moses is worse than him - he's not doing anything to protect anyone. 

They would have had someone as a back up..  Fant is a back-up level player - and if Moses is worse than we didn't need to pay him what we did.

Find a good player, trade for a good player, draft more T's....That's the GM's job.

Signing sh*tty players to relatively large contracts doesn't make a good GM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

It's a bad signing because Fant stinks.  If Moses is worse than him - he's not doing anything to protect anyone. 

They would have had someone as a back up..  Fant is a back-up level player - and if Moses is worse than we didn't need to pay him what we did.

Find a good player, trade for a good player, draft more T's....That's the GM's job.

Signing sh*tty players to relatively large contracts doesn't make a good GM.

He signed a one year, $4.25M deal.  That is not a large contract for a guy who has started for 6 seasons in the league.  At the point in the offseason when we added him, I am not sure anyone else was available.  If we didn't sign Moses, we would be looking at bottom of the roster guys right now.  I have no idea why Fant was named starter ahead of him, but I will judge him based on his play and not Fants. 

How about we see  how Moses plays for more than a quarter before calling him a bust or a bad signing.  Right now, I am glad we have him.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, FTL Jet Fan said:

The preseason wasn’t all that  impressive against a vanilla D. What happens when we pl play just the teams in our division, they will feast on Wilson if this is not corrected. 

Wilson wasnt touched once in the preseason games.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, FidelioJet said:

Don’t give me that.  
 

ive been excited about this team and GM.  I liked the way the D played. Our WR’s could catch and - The fact is The OL stinks and Becton has been a disappointment.  

Not everything has to be roses.  
 

 

And yet after losing our first game by 5 points, a game we were the underdogs you've turned it all around.

No everything doesnt have to be roses but only those who have no idea about this game think its all over after one games, want the GM fired and just cant stop whining.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, FidelioJet said:

This is a bad take.  The rusher came free.  ZW didn’t even have time to get to that read. 
ZW wasn’t perfect by any means but this play wasn’t on him.  

The back could’ve chipped the free rusher yet squeezed past him instead, shying away from any contact at all. I think it was Coleman, ty Johnson surprisingly provided solid pass protection later on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

And yet after losing our first game by 5 points, a game we were the underdogs you've turned it all around.

No everything doesnt have to be roses but only those who have no idea about this game think its all over after one games, want the GM fired and just cant stop whining.

 

I haven't turned anything around.  

All I've stated is the OL was terrible and the fact that 4 of the 5 starters are the same as the worst OL in the NFL last year.  And the only change was adding a rookie (who he should have known would struggle early.  This isn't opinion, it's fact!

I gave JD the benefit of the doubt, that maybe guys were hurt or he knew something I didn't.  But the OL was terrible yesterday and looked very much like last year's worst OL in the league.

If you watched that game and came away thinking the OL was fine - then we have nothing to discuss.

I still like a lot of what JD has done, but he dropped the ball on the OL, there's really no other way to see it.  I don't know why it's so hard for you to accept any critisism.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

All I've stated is the OL was terrible and the fact that 4 of the 5 starters are the same as the worst OL in the NFL last year.  And the only change was adding a rookie (who he should have known would struggle early.  This isn't opinion, it's fact!

You actually think the 4, no Moses dont need to work together because they did a year ago?  That you just plug in a rookie and the line just functions smoothly because some played together a year ago.   

Never mind that in short order the line was playing with 2 lineman who weren't here a year ago, one a rookie who missed all of the preseason and a huge hunk of camp with a pectoral injury.  And probably isnt close to top shape.  Its the simple reasons sometimes.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Embrace the Suck said:

Or maybe its the first game of the season with multiple new guys one rookie (who was out for a while) and they need some time to... I ----ing hate to use this word, but it's true of the o-line "gel" as all lines do.

The Jets would be lucky not to lose Wilson for the year if they block like this for many more games.   That was ugly and the only reason it wasn't worse is because he dodged some free runners.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I watched the game and also noticed the line performed better when Becton was out, but I thought his side was Okay when he was in, the other side was trash. 

So my question is, the rearrangement of the line due to Becton's injury possibly put other players in better positions to succeed? Is this the view of other people here? Or is it just the line was better overall with Becton out? Because I find the latter hard to believe though it seems the view of some posters here from replies I've seen in other threads. 

Having said that if the line overall performs like it did that first half from week to week our QB will not be far from serious injury. Adjustments will have to be made. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, freestater said:

those saying that oh...the o-line will improve, they need more time together to gel....you do realize that this was the week the games start to matter, right?

it's been the same nonsense all training camp and preseason. as if the reports just didn't matter. becton getting beat like a drum every practice? thats no problem he will be great when the games start. etc etc.....well the games started and the oline looked like one of the worst the league has ever seen. it was that bad. a complete piece of sh*t

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, PLO said:

So I watched the game and also noticed the line performed better when Becton was out, but I thought his side was Okay when he was in, the other side was trash. 

So my question is, the rearrangement of the line due to Becton's injury possibly put other players in better positions to succeed? Is this the view of other people here? Or is it just the line was better overall with Becton out? Because I find the latter hard to believe though it seems the view of some posters here from replies I've seen in other threads. 

Having said that if the line overall performs like it did that first half from week to week our QB will not be far from serious injury. Adjustments will have to be made. 

 

idk but i can tell you one thing....becton is a sh*t left tackle. he is a good run blocker....thats it

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
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...