I still want Defense. The data says I’m wrong.

[The Crusher]

4 minutes ago, slimjasi said:

If we are going defense heavy, this is the approach I favor. 
 

bring back the sack exchange 

Is like to it more balance, but yes, if we must go heavy D, do this. Seems QB disruption is very 2022 and we got some nasty QB’s that need some serious disrupting in the AFC this year. Yikes! 

[Adoni Beast]

If Thibs and Sauce are staring at us at 4 and 10, take em…

…trade both 2nds (someone use their trade chart calculator to tell me how smart or stupid this sounds) back into the teens for Olave.

[Beerfish]

I want offense, you hire a D brainiac coach to get acceptable play with reasonable players on D, not build a roster of high end picks just for him.

The main issue in the end is just get difference makers on the team.  The jets draft D players high who are not difference makers.

[playtowinthegame]

We'll probably draft Quinnen Williams replacement in round one, then trade Quinnen Williams during the season for a 3rd round pick. Am I right @jgb?

#TAKEFLIGHT

[jeremy2020]

1 hour ago, Raideraholic said:

If you don’t have top 15 Qb you’re screwed. It’s doesn’t matter what you have on defense , or offense.

ouch.. the raiders wasted that money on Adams then

[bla bla bla]

3 hours ago, TuscanyTile2 said:

A team with as many holes as we have and we're still trading up in a draft where we have 4 premium picks?

I'm not suggesting trading both 2nd. I'm suggesting moving one of the 2nds for a 1st to get the 5th year option on a WR.

[varjet]

1 hour ago, playtowinthegame said:

We'll probably draft Quinnen Williams replacement in round one, then trade Quinnen Williams during the season for a 3rd round pick. Am I right @jgb?

#TAKEFLIGHT

Round 2, but yes. 

[TuscanyTile2]

As much as defense is devalued in today's NFL, if JD wanted to, he could potentially completely fix the defense in this draft (though it would take drafting D with our 1st 4 picks), while still adding a quality receiving TE to help out Zach for this year.   It's not going to happen of course (nor should it since I don't think you win with defense anymore) but I think there would probably be a lot of talent available considering the likely run on WR, OL and probably 2-3 1st round QBs.  

 

 

 

[JustInFudge]

17 hours ago, jetstream23 said:

With that said, I will still suggest that this particular Draft is one in which the defensive talent trumps the offensive talent, especially early…. and especially at positions of particular need and premium value for the Jets like Edge.

Feels like at least 2, but maybe 3 of those top 4 picks should be D. But again, it’s an offense driven league.

I agree with your conclusion.  I dont think you force the issue out of desperation and over draft just because the NFL is in fact, an offense driven league.  There are many ways to build a potent offense and luckily the Jets have a lot of high picks to do it, even if they go D in the top 10.

The whole weaponz thing is almost over blown to me at this point.  This offense was the most explosive in the league when Zach went down last year and it's improved in the offseason.  Berrios is probably better than Crowder and Zach loves him and I think you can replace Cole's production pretty easily and if they really want to, could probably bring him back after the draft but I think that easily goes to the new TE's.  And they should run the ball better with Tomlinson.

I just think it's silly at this point to think that just throwing a top 10 pick at the offense is all it takes! Boom!  Offense built! 

Here's an idea, what if Zach Wilson plays like the #2 overall pick?  That would be pretty helpful, no? 

[Augustiniak]

16 minutes ago, JiFapono said:

I agree with your conclusion.  I dont think you force the issue out of desperation and over draft just because the NFL is in fact, an offense driven league.  There are many ways to build a potent offense and luckily the Jets have a lot of high picks to do it, even if they go D in the top 10.

The whole weaponz thing is almost over blown to me at this point.  This offense was the most explosive in the league when Zach went down last year and it's improved in the offseason.  Berrios is probably better than Crowder and Zach loves him and I think you can replace Cole's production pretty easily and if they really want to, could probably bring him back after the draft but I think that easily goes to the new TE's.  And they should run the ball better with Tomlinson.

I just think it's silly at this point to think that just throwing a top 10 pick at the offense is all it takes! Boom!  Offense built! 

Here's an idea, what if Zach Wilson plays like the #2 overall pick?  That would be pretty helpful, no? 

but here’s what actually happens during the season.  Moore gets hurt, and they have no speed.  Prior to signing 2 TEs, they had none of those either.  So for the jets, the whole weaponz thing has not been overblown.  This team has been so easy to cover and defend.  The only guy in recent memory who seemed to actually threaten defenses was moore - when he played.  So i do think there’s a case to be made for taking someone like wilson, to have multiple deep threats, and along with some real TEs, that’s approaching what an average nfl team has for weapons, not a bottom 5 team.

That said, the jets have 4 early picks, so it seems they can address both sides of the ball with them.  Go OL and wr, edge and either lb or secondary, and those 4 picks have been used wisely.  

[Barton]

The defense needs better coaching. Greg Williams had a worse cast to work with and had them perform far better.

 

[jetstream23]

1 hour ago, JiFapono said:

The whole weaponz thing is almost over blown to me at this point.  This offense was the most explosive in the league when Zach went down last year and it's improved in the offseason.  Berrios is probably better than Crowder and Zach loves him and I think you can replace Cole's production pretty easily and if they really want to, could probably bring him back after the draft but I think that easily goes to the new TE's.  And they should run the ball better with Tomlinson.

 

I heard a podcast the other day when a guy basically said, "Remember the housing bubble back in 2008, and how not too many realized it until a couple years later?  The same thing is happening with wide receivers.  There's a bubble.  Prices are sky high and inventory is starting to pour into the League.  It may take another year or two but people will look back and realize it was a bit of an irrational feeding frenzy."

I don't disagree.  How many recent Drafts have we walked into where everyone is saying that it's loaded with WRs?  We're just seeing a big influx of wideouts right now and the teams that have traditionally been very good at managing themselves are SELLING (i.e. trading or letting guys walk), not buying or overpaying.  GB letting Adams go, KC letting Hill go, etc. I think there will be some "reversion to the mean" on these wide receiver deals at some point. In the 1980's and 90's teams were throwing money at RBs and it felt like you needed an elite RB1 to contend.  Heck, look at the Hershel Walker trade, the Ricky Williams draft trade by the Saints, etc.  RB was THE position everyone wanted.  Now, we might not see a single one go in Round 1 this year and the highest drafted RB in recent years, Saquon Barkley, looks like he was overdrafted.  Carolina wants to move the contract of McCaffrey, etc.  Don't be surprised if we see a similar ebb and flow at the WR spot over the next 5 years.

[Beerfish]

6 minutes ago, Barton said:

The defense needs better coaching. Greg Williams had a worse cast to work with and had them perform far better.

 

Agreed 100% I look at the suggestions of players we should get on D and some of them would be a complete and utter waste.  (such as Jordan Davis)

[JohnnyLV]

13 hours ago, Larz said:

Stop me if you’ve heard this before, but to win, the jets have to hide the QB, so the best bet is defense and a running game. 

Horsebleep... you win by protecting Zach and lettting him play. This is not 1985

[bitonti]

Don't look at this like "what do the Jets need to do to win a title?" 

look at it like "what does JD need to do to keep his job?" 

All JD has to do is make sure Zach Wilson is not a bust, and he'll get another contract from Woody. The team just has to be entertaining. It doesn't have to actually win anything of significance. 

They can be entertaining with more offense. Yes they will need defense to become a contender but that's wishful thinking. They are going to draft offense to at least make the team watchable 

[Barton]

5 minutes ago, Beerfish said:

Agreed 100% I look at the suggestions of players we should get on D and some of them would be a complete and utter waste.  (such as Jordan Davis)

Seriously. Outside of Hutchinson and maybeeee Sauce, there isnt another defensive player worth considering in the 1st 2 rounds for this team. Minimum 3 of the first 4 picks should be for the offense. 

[jetstream23]

6 hours ago, bla bla bla said:

I like WR in round 1 but I prefer it in a trade up into the tail end of the first. Only WR I may consider in the top 10 is Jameson Williams

I think Jameson Williams is the only WR talent truly worthy of a Top 10 pick this year, injury notwithstanding.  The other guys are very good but not great IMO.  Wilson, London, Olave, Burks... all just feel like guys who should go no earlier than 10+ or the teens.  There will be better overall football players left on the board when teams draft some of these WRs.

Would rather see the Jets stick to their Board, take the best players available which could be Edge, CB, or OL when they're on the clock at 4 and 10.  And then, do what you suggest... package 35 and 69, or even 35 and 38 if they want to move aggressively and get the WR3 or WR4 on their Draft board somewhere in the teens or 20's.  I mean, how about leaving this Draft with Jermaine Johnson, Sauce Gardner and Chris Olave or something like that?  Not bad.

[JohnnyLV]

13 minutes ago, jetstream23 said:

 

I heard a podcast the other day when a guy basically said, "Remember the housing bubble back in 2008, and how not too many realized it until a couple years later?  The same thing is happening with wide receivers.  There's a bubble.  Prices are sky high and inventory is starting to pour into the League.  It may take another year or two but people will look back and realize it was a bit of an irrational feeding frenzy."

I don't disagree.  How many recent Drafts have we walked into where everyone is saying that it's loaded with WRs?  We're just seeing a big influx of wideouts right now and the teams that have traditionally been very good at managing themselves are SELLING (i.e. trading or letting guys walk), not buying or overpaying.  GB letting Adams go, KC letting Hill go, etc. I think there will be some "reversion to the mean" on these wide receiver deals at some point. In the 1980's and 90's teams were throwing money at RBs and it felt like you needed an elite RB1 to contend.  Heck, look at the Hershel Walker trade, the Ricky Williams draft trade by the Saints, etc.  RB was THE position everyone wanted.  Now, we might not see a single one go in Round 1 this year and the highest drafted RB in recent years, Saquon Barkley, looks like he was overdrafted.  Carolina wants to move the contract of McCaffrey, etc.  Don't be surprised if we see a similar ebb and flow at the WR spot over the next 5 years.

Unless the NFL moves away from 11 personnel being by FAR the most important personnel grouping, this bubble concept is really dubious at best. But who knows maybe as more and more defenses go to defending 11 running out of 12 makes a comeback

[jetstream23]

4 hours ago, Adoni Beast said:

If Thibs and Sauce are staring at us at 4 and 10, take em…

…trade both 2nds (someone use their trade chart calculator to tell me how smart or stupid this sounds) back into the teens for Olave.

Said something similar.

Turning the Jets 4, 10, 35 and 38 picks into THREE excellent players isn't a bad idea.  

[jetstream23]

2 minutes ago, johnnysd said:

Unless the NFL moves away from 11 personnel being by FAR the most important personnel grouping, this bubble concept is really dubious at best. But who knows maybe as more and more defenses go to defending 11 running out of 12 makes a comeback

49ers continue to be one of the most notable teams employing a consistently used FB these days.  Kittle and Juscyck are on the field at the same time quite often and it's worked for Shanahan relying on Deebo and Aiyuk.

[varjet]

In the 1st round I like an Edge and WR.  I would rather reach for the WR at 4 and get the leftover Edge at 10. 
 

In Rounds 2 and 3 I like a RB and a FS.  The other pick could be a developmental T or LB.  Then he can look for BPAs. 

If Garrett Wilson, Jermaine Johnson, Breece Hall and Jacquan Brisker/Dayton Hill, plus another good player, are on the 2022 roster, it’s a better team. 

[Adoni Beast]

39 minutes ago, jetstream23 said:

Said something similar.

Turning the Jets 4, 10, 35 and 38 picks into THREE excellent players isn't a bad idea.  

If you can draft 3 potential pro bowlers and still have picks in the 3rd, multipacks in the 4th and 5th to fill out the roster you take that any day of the week.

You can still address Safety, LB need and fill out depth for IDL, OL, TE, RB

[JustInFudge]

1 hour ago, Augustiniak said:

but here’s what actually happens during the season.  Moore gets hurt, and they have no speed.  Prior to signing 2 TEs, they had none of those either.  So for the jets, the whole weaponz thing has not been overblown.  This team has been so easy to cover and defend.  The only guy in recent memory who seemed to actually threaten defenses was moore - when he played.  So i do think there’s a case to be made for taking someone like wilson, to have multiple deep threats, and along with some real TEs, that’s approaching what an average nfl team has for weapons, not a bottom 5 team.

That said, the jets have 4 early picks, so it seems they can address both sides of the ball with them.  Go OL and wr, edge and either lb or secondary, and those 4 picks have been used wisely.  

Right, that's kind of what I said.  I didnt say it wasnt a need, it is but I dont think it's so dire that you have to make a desperate attempt to address it.  You can take D in the top 10 and still find a WR in the 2nd and speed at WR throughout. 

 

[nickfoshizal]

Pretty much all teams that win with a top 10 offense, and a not top 10 defense, still have star players on the defensive side, and right now the Jets really don’t. We shouldn’t necessarily be trying to build the best defense in the league, but one high draft pick or two on that side really shouldn’t destroy any hope for the offense and Zach. Especially when you consider our offensive system isn’t built to play coming from behind every game, it certainly makes sense to use premium assets on impact defenders even if the ultimate goal is to build a top tier offense and not defense. The key is hitting on these picks, which the Jets just have not done since the mid 2000s at best. 

[rtnelson]

Defense needs to be opportunistic and make the plays when they need to be made.

Can you blame the TB loss on Zach?  Sure you can... he did a boneheaded thing trying to QB sneak for 2 yards after on 3rd down the center rolled the ball back to him and let the nose tackle through completely untouched and he still somehow completed a pass for a few yards.

But what truly broke that game was the complete breakdown defensively in the moment where you need all 11 to step up and do their jobs. 95 yards no timeouts and something like 45 seconds on the clock.  You don't even have to do your job well, just not completely fail at being a football player.

If you have a defense that wins those key drives at a good clip, you win ballgames.  Overall defensive statistics be damned.

[JohnnyLV]

21 hours ago, jetstream23 said:

49ers continue to be one of the most notable teams employing a consistently used FB these days.  Kittle and Juscyck are on the field at the same time quite often and it's worked for Shanahan relying on Deebo and Aiyuk.

Not as much as you would think. They ran 12 personnel like 10% of the time and 11 and 21 (with Deebo) like 80% of the time and 21 with Deebo is actually disguised 11.

[rex-n-effect]

There is distortion in the defense rankings because the stats don't reflect the realities of the games or schedules. When you're a bottom ranked team (Panthers, Bears, Broncos) you play several games against other bottom ranked teams. If your offense sucks then teams don't have to shootout to win, they just need to rack up a comfortable lead and then game/time manage to a victory. If such a team has a halfway decent defense then they are in a position to look better than they would playing a tougher schedule or against teams that needed to put up thirty points or more to win. Most of the top teams on defense were at the bottom on offense and even those teams that reached the playoffs were middling offensively. 

Defensive ranking is a nice bragging point but doesn't really mean anything towards success. It's great to have a good defense but most of the successful teams under the current rules have a serviceable defense and a good offense. 

 

[Sperm Edwards]

On 4/10/2022 at 3:46 PM, JiFapono said:

Right, that's kind of what I said.  I didnt say it wasnt a need, it is but I dont think it's so dire that you have to make a desperate attempt to address it.  You can take D in the top 10 and still find a WR in the 2nd and speed at WR throughout. 

 

Jets fans have seen so much disappointment with certain positions that they’ve come to deduce that the only players worth having are drafted in round 1. Like if we’re not trading picks for someone else’s proven veteran, there are 2 options: drafting top 10 prospects, or being stuck with garbage.

Worried about Becton? Fant isn’t inked to an extension yet? Draft a 3rd left tackle at #4 or #10 overall, as though it’s the kind of position & slot you even consider benching for a season as injury depth. Not even the top of round 2, mind you, but #4 overall. For depth. At a position that doesn’t rotate on & off the field.

Not thrilled with a perfectly serviceable veteran center? Over-draft one at #10 overall , which (to my knowledge) has never been done in NFL history even by teams that had just a backup there as of the draft, ignoring that most probowl centers were taken later and half the recent round 1 centers were busts and no one can remember the last SB team to field a 1st round center in any slot. Was it Damien Woody 2 decades ago? So all we need is that, and Tom Brady, and some strategically placed video cameras. Meanwhile this offseason some here actually proposed a center as high as #4 ffs.

For some, last year, it was drafting a RB in round 1.

Draft a WR? Must be taken in the top 10, and possibly at #4, even if the talent doesn’t match. (I’m actually on board with the former if the talent would’ve matched a mere ~5 slots later; if someone’s worth the #15 pick then, in a weaker class, he’s worth the #10 pick when the team’s got that particular need, and the team’s flush with draft picks so they don’t need to get cute trading down 3 slots & maybe miss out on the guy they truly want).

Meanwhile all the WRs we’re linked to, or had interest in trading for, were drafted when?

• Hill in round 5;
• Metcalf bottom of round 2 #64;
• AJ Brown bottom half of round 2 #51;
• McLaurin round 3 #76;
• Deebo top of round 2 #36;
• Cooks is the only one we’ve been linked to who was drafted in round 1 (#20 back in 2014), whose new contract guarantees his age 29 and 30 seasons, after bouncing among 4 teams thus far, and whose services were recently no longer needed on the then-SB-loser and current SB champs because of a 3rd round pick who’s also made how many combine-driven draft experts look stupid for arguing value over not just tenths but even hundredths of a second on prospects’ 40 times in gym shorts. Run-on sentence ftw!

They should draft positions of need, at impact positions, without reaching. Or trade down (or I guess trade a pick for a WR insta-starter if they can; not my favorite, nor the best pound-for-pound use of picks and cap, but it’s one less excuse for Wilson, who’s on a super-cheap contract for 3 more years anyway so they can fit one WR indulgence like that when they have so many extra draft picks to boot). No HC wants to start half a team of rookies & 2nd year players anyway, unless his goal is excusing why his team didn’t make the playoffs again.

[Augustiniak]

6 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Jets fans have seen so much disappointment with certain positions that they’ve come to deduce that the only players worth having are drafted in round 1. Like if we’re not trading picks for someone else’s proven veteran, there are 2 options: drafting top 10 prospects, or being stuck with garbage.

Worried about Becton? Fant isn’t inked to an extension yet? Draft a 3rd left tackle at #4 or #10 overall, as though it’s the kind of position & slot you even consider benching for a season as injury depth. Not even the top of round 2, mind you, but #4 overall. For depth. At a position that doesn’t rotate on & off the field.

Not thrilled with a perfectly serviceable veteran center? Over-draft one at #10 overall , which (to my knowledge) has never been done in NFL history even by teams that had just a backup there as of the draft, ignoring that most probowl centers were taken later and half the recent round 1 centers were busts and no one can remember the last SB team to field a 1st round center in any slot. Was it Damien Woody 2 decades ago? So all we need is that, and Tom Brady, and some strategically placed video cameras. Meanwhile this offseason some here actually proposed a center as high as #4 ffs.

For some, last year, it was drafting a RB in round 1.

Draft a WR? Must be taken in the top 10, and possibly at #4, even if the talent doesn’t match. (I’m actually on board with the former if the talent would’ve matched a mere ~5 slots later; if someone’s worth the #15 pick then, in a weaker class, he’s worth the #10 pick when the team’s got that particular need, and the team’s flush with draft picks so they don’t need to get cute trading down 3 slots & maybe miss out on the guy they truly want).

Meanwhile all the WRs we’re linked to, or had interest in trading for, were drafted when?

• Hill in round 5;
• Metcalf bottom of round 2 #64;
• AJ Brown bottom half of round 2 #51;
• McLaurin round 3 #76;
• Deebo top of round 2 #36;
• Cooks is the only one we’ve been linked to who was drafted in round 1 (#20 back in 2014), whose new contract guarantees his age 29 and 30 seasons, after bouncing among 4 teams thus far, and whose services were recently no longer needed on the then-SB-loser and current SB champs because of a 3rd round pick who’s also made how many combine-driven draft experts look stupid for arguing value over not just tenths but even hundredths of a second on prospects’ 40 times in gym shorts.

They should draft positions of need, at impact positions, without reaching. Or trade down (or I guess trade a pick for a WR insta-starter if they can; not my favorite, nor the best pound-for-pound use of picks and cap, but it’s one less excuse for Wilson, who’s on a super-cheap contract for 3 more years anyway so they can fit one WR indulgence like that when they have so many extra draft picks to boot). No HC wants to start half a team of rookies & 2nd year players anyway, unless his goal is excusing why his team didn’t make the playoffs again.

For the past decade the jets have had a bottom 5 offense.  Bad qbs, bad wrs and bad rbs.  And terrible TEs.  This has coincided with taking a defensive player in round 1 nearly every time until douglas arrived.  It’s also coincided with taking some of the worst 2nd round offensive players as well.  This is the primary reason why the jets are always overbidding for offensive guys from other teams.  It just seems easier at this point, with 2 1sts and 2 2nd rounders, to just take your favorite wr rather than enveloping yourself in “BAP” or a similar philosophy.  We sit here wishing for guys like mclauren and Ridley, yet wilson is right there for the taking.  In sum, i agree, don’t adhere too strictly to the draft boards, if a guy is worth taking at 8 he’s worth taking at 4.

[Sperm Edwards]

20 hours ago, rex-n-effect said:

There is distortion in the defense rankings because the stats don't reflect the realities of the games or schedules. When you're a bottom ranked team (Panthers, Bears, Broncos) you play several games against other bottom ranked teams. If your offense sucks then teams don't have to shootout to win, they just need to rack up a comfortable lead and then game/time manage to a victory. If such a team has a halfway decent defense then they are in a position to look better than they would playing a tougher schedule or against teams that needed to put up thirty points or more to win. Most of the top teams on defense were at the bottom on offense and even those teams that reached the playoffs were middling offensively. 

Defensive ranking is a nice bragging point but doesn't really mean anything towards success. It's great to have a good defense but most of the successful teams under the current rules have a serviceable defense and a good offense. 

 

Also arbitrary cutoffs like top 10 defenses are just that.

The difference between the #8 defense (KC, 264 PA) and a bottom-half defense (#17 Cin, 276 PA) is not even 1 full point per game.

That alone can be fueled by schedule (e.g. NE played us twice, plus Jacksonville, Carolina, Cleveland, Atlanta, Houston, and Henry-less Tennessee. Was their offense-rank helped by the D’s 1.5 sacks, 1 FR, 2 INTs per game? Prolly, just like running up the score in 3 games, when most teams just play vanilla with such big 2nd-half leads, helped their offense’s rank climb from #16 to #6 by piling on 50+ garbage points that had no impact on the games’ outcomes).

Not to mention points surrendered by the offense or special teams contribute to which are & aren’t top 10 defenses; never mind the short fields given to opponents by one’s own stagnant offense, especially at opportune times.

Just saying the season is still short enough that a small number of outlier games - or halves - can have a major, 10-slot impact on a team’s final team rank in offense or defense. 

[Jet Nut]

Thed OP is kind of positioned to say that teams that win in the playoffs either have a to 10 offense or a top 10 defense.  

Theyre not mutually exclusive to each other.  Tampa won two years ago with a top 10 offense (7th) but also had a top 10 defense (6th) that was actually higher ranked.   

[#27TheDominator]

The whole thing is a bit of a sham.  Teams with good offenses will have "worse" defenses by those rankings, even when they are not actually worse.  Teams that are winning will generally give up more yards and often more points.  Just because you are not going to  shut people out does not mean that you can play 11 UDFA on defense and win the super bowl.  The Rams stacked their D with Jalen Ramsey, Von Miller, paid Donald.  Now they went out and added Bobby Wagner.  Did they win because of those guys or brecause they drafted Van Jefferson in the 2nd round?

I also think it is a joke that I keep reading that we have to draft offense because "the rules favor the offense."  Doesn't that mean that lesser players will succeed on offense?  Yes, yes it does.  Guys like Berrios would not have even gotten off the LOS in the "good old days."   Take the best players at the most important positions.  They are on both sides of the ball.

[#27TheDominator]

On 4/10/2022 at 2:35 PM, bitonti said:

Don't look at this like "what do the Jets need to do to win a title?" 

look at it like "what does JD need to do to keep his job?" 

All JD has to do is make sure Zach Wilson is not a bust, and he'll get another contract from Woody. The team just has to be entertaining. It doesn't have to actually win anything of significance. 

They can be entertaining with more offense. Yes they will need defense to become a contender but that's wishful thinking. They are going to draft offense to at least make the team watchable 

Zach WIlson simply "not being a bust" might be the literal worst case scenario.   If he turns out like Goff and you want to keep him?  You're looking at $30+M for a QB that kinda sucks and you aren't winning with one of those Tannehill level QBs without a great D and running game.

[Sperm Edwards]

On 4/9/2022 at 8:08 PM, jetstream23 said:

Maybe I’m different here. I’m willing to open my mind and admit I need to move my needle some more…and I’ll even start a thread about it.

Some good data here from Joe Caporoso…

 

With that said, I will still suggest that this particular Draft is one in which the defensive talent trumps the offensive talent, especially early…. and especially at positions of particular need and premium value for the Jets like Edge.

Feels like at least 2, but maybe 3 of those top 4 picks should be D. But again, it’s an offense driven league.

 

 

So - and this is all great stuff above - there’s some other stuff going on, though.

The refs really loosened things up in the playoffs and all we can remember are these unstoppable AFC offenses in the playoffs, where even the best defenses couldn’t stop offenses from scoring at will. NE has the #2 defense, and then in the WC game they give up 7 TDs; the AFC shootouts between KC/Buf and then KC/Cin (which itself followed KC’s rout of Pittsburgh after sleepwalking through the first half, before making it look like they were playing against small children). 

It’s easy to take both sides of the same coin, though. Like Green Bay getting bounced by losing 13-10 in the playoffs. Lazy stats (not pointing at you here) would suggest their offense didn’t show up, and that’s why they lost, rather than it looking that way because of SF’s defense. A week later, if SF was able to run the ball behind their premiere OL - which is to say without saying it, if LA’s defense hadn’t stopped them - and merely had more than a weak mush throwing it, to also help open up the run that way, there’s every likelihood they get to the super bowl, perhaps winning it, behind their defense. Winning on the strength of a strong defense doesn’t mean you therefore are putting everything on the D’s shoulders. Offenses are too good now. But that doesn’t mean the game is all offense either, tempting as it is to look that way.

Should Buffalo have stopped KC (OT coin toss or not)? Yeah, maybe. They had that #1-ranked defense, but it wasn’t just pure defensive strength. Their offense running up the score early-on in many games helped make opposing offenses more one-dimensional, and therefore easier to defend. It further didn’t hurt that they played so many weak (or if not weak on paper, certainly paper-tiger) offenses on their schedule: Jetsx2, Miax2, NEx2, Hou, Wash, Jax, Atl, Car, NO with Siemian — that’s a dozen of their games there, facing rookie or backup-level QBs. So was their defense that great, or was it a merely ok paper tiger defense themselves, lifted in rankings by facing mostly nothing QBs, but was then exposed in the playoffs,? Combine all that with some of their better but older defenders (Hughes, Hyde) losing steam, not to mention on Thanksgiving losing an all-pro CB who hadn’t given up a TD all season? Do they still lose that playoff game with Tre'Davious White on the field? Given how close it was without him, I doubt it.

But even if there are some holes in it, I’m a sucker for lots of the stuff you posted here anyway. ?

[bitonti]

1 minute ago, #27TheDominator said:

Zach WIlson simply "not being a bust" might be the literal worst case scenario.   If he turns out like Goff and you want to keep him?  You're looking at $30+M for a QB that kinda sucks and you aren't winning with one of those Tannehill level QBs without a great D and running game.

None of this is what I want 

If it were up to me they would not have drafted wilson at all 

I'll say it again, because you seem to be stuck on the hardware:

JD does not need a ring to keep his job. He just needs the team to entertain