Jump to content

Why not AJ?


JoeWillie

Recommended Posts

1.) Linebacker is NOT a team need.

2.) AJ Hawk is the next Brian Bosworth.

This pretty much sums up why I don't think we should take him,but I probably would have worked Andy Katzenmoyer's name in there too cause I'm an Ass.

I still want to grab a 3-4 OLB/DE in this draft though,and would like to see Lawson or Carpenter fall to 29

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Carpenter is a possibilty and a good choice at 29, especially if we pass on Hawk at #4.

I'm not sure I understand why people don't think LB is a need for the Jets. I know Vilma is great and I like Hobson, but is AJ Hawk not a major upgrade over Barton, Chatham or McGlover? I know we have other needs, as well, but you have to start somewhere and a great linebacking corps, especially in the 3-4 Defense, is a good place to start IMO.

If we walked away with Mario and either Carpenter or Lawson in the 1st round, I'd be ecstatic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Carpenter is a possibilty and a good choice at 29, especially if we pass on Hawk at #4.

I'm not sure I understand why people don't think LB is a need for the Jets. I know Vilma is great and I like Hobson, but is AJ Hawk not a major upgrade over Barton, Chatham or McGlover? I know we have other needs, as well, but you have to start somewhere and a great linebacking corps, especially in the 3-4 Defense, is a good place to start IMO.

If we walked away with Mario and either Carpenter or Lawson in the 1st round, I'd be ecstatic.

Being as Eric Barton led the team in tackles in 2004, I would say HELL NO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being as Eric Barton led the team in tackles in 2004, I would say HELL NO.

That was two seasons ago. Curtis Martin led the entire NFL in rushing the same year. Does that mean you wouldn't draft Reggie Bush this year if you had the chance?

I know you think AJ Hawk is the next Brian Bosworth, but let's see who the better player is two years from now, Hawk or Eric Barton.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being as Eric Barton led the team in tackles in 2004, I would say HELL NO.

That was two seasons ago. Curtis Martin led the entire NFL in rushing the same year. Does that mean you wouldn't draft Reggie Bush this year if you had the chance?

I know you think AJ Hawk is the next Brian Bosworth, but let's see who the better player is two years from now, Hawk or Eric Barton.

Curtis Martin is a 33-year old running back. Eric Barton is a 29-year old linebacker in the prime of his career. Just because he was injured doesn't mean he suddenly sucks.:rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Curtis Martin is a 33-year old running back. Eric Barton is a 29-year old linebacker in the prime of his career. Just because he was injured doesn't mean he suddenly sucks.:rolleyes:

Troll- Never said Barton sucks. You said Hawk sucks, compared him to Brian Bosworth, I believe. What I said was that Hawk will be a better player than Barton. That said, I think Barton's a very good player and I would love to see a LB corps of Barton, Vilma, Hobson, and Hawk.

By the way, Curtis was hurt last year, too, but that hasn't stopped people from writing him off this year. I know he's 33 in May, but that doesn't mean he's washed up either, which is why I think we can wait until next year or the year after on drafting a RB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One another note ...

If the Jets are moving to 3-4 as anticipated, we need quick, athletic OLB's who can flow to the ball and rush the passer. In the 3-4, most QB sacks are generated by the OLB's, not the defensive line, who have more gap coverage responsibility. Quick, agile athletes like Joey Porter and Terrell Suggs flourish in the 3-4 defense. Additionally, I think most coaches would agree that it is easier to find outside linebackers than it is to find defensive linemen.

That said, AJ's the man at #4.

JV and Barton in the middle. Hawk and Hobson/Carpenter outside. I'd sign for that in a heartbeat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not that I don't think O Line is a need. I do. I just hate to build it in the top of the draft because you're paying more money than you need to. You can build an O-line through the later rounds and through Free Agency without paying as much.

Save your higher salary spots for guys who are bigger impact players ... QBs, RBs, LBs, maybe a good DE. As good as D'Brick might be, I don't think it's smart to pay an OT the kind of money you pay a QB, RB, or impact defensive player.

Williams, Hawk ... these guys are impact players who can make a much bigger impact quicker, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see Hawk as being an inside backer in a 3-4 defense. You don't need to draft an inside backer at the 4th overall. Plus, I really think that Victor Hobson is going to get the inside spot next to Vilma. I see us going for a 245lb+ outside backer. I see Carpenter or one of the hybrid ends being draft later in the draft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This just hit me because I don't watch that much college football but Ohio State had 2 stud LB's on their roster last year? Their defense must have been excellent, no? One more question, did Vince Young put a whoopin' on Ohio State last year or is that just my imagination?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO, Hawk should be the pick @ #4. Barton-Hawk-Vilma-Hobson....or line those 4 up all over, depending on gameplans. IMO, Hawk makees a dramatic improvement in our lineup, regardless of LB not being a pressing need.

I just don't think it'll happen, though. Why are people saying Hawk's a bust? He hasnt done anything to indicate he's a bust. All I see is a guy that can play ILB and/or OLB and will be on the field for downs one through three.....but I'm not being objective, of course.;) Spare me the Bosworth and Katz comparisons, too. Some of these same posters say Brick is a slam dunk! You want to compare him to Mandirich and Gallery? Those 2 were hardly worth the spot they were drafted.

The reason these players are talked about being in the top 10 is because they played that way. The draft always has, and always will be, an inexact science

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hawk is projected by most coaches and "draft SMEs" as being an OLB in the 3-4. Fantastic speed, ala Joey Porter.

I agree with you on Carpenter. He'd be a good pick at #29 or #32.

If you project him as an outside backer, give me the name of a modern day dominant, white, outside backer who was 6' 1"? I don't see it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO, Hawk should be the pick @ #4. Barton-Hawk-Vilma-Hobson....or line those 4 up all over, depending on gameplans. IMO, Hawk makees a dramatic improvement in our lineup, regardless of LB not being a pressing need.

First, I think the team would be better served in this situation with Hawk outside & Hobson inside. Hobson's a little short for the position at barely over 6'0 but he's a big dude for a LB & a big guy will be needed next to Vilma in 3-4 sets. I'm sure Mangini will pick the lineup he thinks would work best.

However, we're not going to be doing exclusive 3-4's this year. If we were the Steelers in need of a single ILB/OLB then it would make sense. But absent a true NT we're not going to be using just 3-4's. As such, Hawk may end up being a part-time player or switching from ILB (3-4) to OLB (4-3) which is a tall order for a rookie. For a complimentary ILB I'd rather take a shot on a Kai Parham in the late 3rd if he's there, or one of the mid-round OLB/DE 'tweeners in the late 3rd/early 4th for the outside (McClover, etc).

Frankly, If Mario's gone, we're not trading down, & not going to take a QB or Brick, I'd rather take Ngata or Davis at 4 than Hawk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

welcome joewillie, cool name, you are obviously a true jetfan

:smile:

d brick ,mario, aj work for me

Thanks Joewilly.

Sorry 'bout the name. I can change if you'd like ...

Any of your 3 would also work well for me.

Cheers.

no problem willie, I think jn is thankful this board finally has a namath namesake with good football input

:cheers:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you project him as an outside backer, give me the name of a modern day dominant, white, outside backer who was 6' 1"? I don't see it.

Off the top of my head, Kevin Greene was pretty good as an OLB in the 3-4. How 'bout Mike Vrabel who lines up outside alot. Chad Brown has also been a pretty good player, although I think he's only half-white. :-)

I see your point, but that doesn't mean there aren't exceptions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This just hit me because I don't watch that much college football but Ohio State had 2 stud LB's on their roster last year? Their defense must have been excellent, no? One more question, did Vince Young put a whoopin' on Ohio State last year or is that just my imagination?

They also beat USC, so I guess that means nobody should draft Bush or Leinart, too.

Brilliant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Off the top of my head, Kevin Greene was pretty good as an OLB in the 3-4. How 'bout Mike Vrabel who lines up outside alot. Chad Brown has also been a pretty good player, although I think he's only half-white. :-)

I see your point, but that doesn't mean there aren't exceptions.

Those guys are all taller than 6' 1". I just don't see how a relatively short, white guy is going to translate as an outside linebacker in the pros.

BTW, Kevin Greene is 6' 3", Vrabel is 6' 4" and Chad Brown is 6' 2" and are any of them worthy of the number 4 pick?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those guys are all taller than 6' 1". I just don't see how a relatively short, white guy is going to translate as an outside linebacker in the pros.

BTW, Kevin Greene is 6' 3", Vrabel is 6' 4" and Chad Brown is 6' 2" and are any of them worthy of the number 4 pick?

Greene was voted to the 90's All-Decade team at OLB, so he was a pretty good player, I think worthy of a #4 pick.

I see your point, though. Not a huge number of predecesors fitting Hawk's description at that position. If that's your basis for not taking him, I understand it.

I just don't agree with it.

But good discussion.

Cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...