Jets’ draft room video shows Falcons wanted to make another stunning move after drafting Michael Penix

[NYJCAP2]

18 hours ago, Alka said:

For me, I would accept their 2024 2nd, 2024 3rd, 2025 1st, and 2025 2nd.  And I'm not sure that would enough.

If you remember, the Jets had to give up 3- 2nd round picks in order to go from #6 to #3 in the first round when getting Sam Darnold.

That's 3 - 2nd round picks to move up 3 spots.  You're asking the Jets to move completely out of the first round.  

Just using the chart as an exercise.

Jets pick at 10 = 1300

I’ll be favorable and say the Falcons get bounced in the wildcard next year. Pick 20.

Falcons picks 43, 72, 20 (‘25) = 1540

If you add their ’25 second additional 380 points.

1300 : 1920 in a year you would have a ton of expired contracts and older players. Even without the second it’s a no brainier for me, and you still get Corley and someone like Cooper Beebe this year. A safe GM would have felt more confident doing that.

[BreeceHallofFame]

One thing that still bothers me about the draft is why didn’t Tennessee trade down. They could have easily still gotten Latham at 10. 
 

If the pats were smart they would have traded down to 6 and taken Penix, who is a much better prospect than Maye 

[Sperm Edwards]

4 hours ago, Augustiniak said:

Seems like teams targeted their guy in the top 15 or so, esp. in the top 12 and didn’t want to move off of that.  So atlanta wanted to have its cake and eat it too, get their favorite qb and edge rusher and throw the jets some day 2 picks and next year’s 1.  There was no way the jets were doing that, trading out of the first round entirely with so many good players there at 10.  

The good thing is that with so many teams now invested in qbs the jets should be able to get one a bit easier in the next year or two if they want, at least in theory

Well maybe it was a sucker-offer.

It's been surmised by plenty of people that they grabbed Penix because they were afraid they wouldn't have a 1st rounder next year to grab a QB. 

Then they turn around and try to trade away a 1st rounder they may not even have?

No way the Jets could take that offer, since their #1 pick next year may not even be Atlanta's to trade away. Alternatively, maybe that'd result in docking the one after that, so Atlanta then wouldn't then technically get docked a 1st rounder until 2026, lessening the blow that much more (at least on paper). 

[bonkertons]

I wonder what ATL was offering to get to 10.  Obviously pick 35 and their '25 1st, but I'd imagine it would have taken even more than that.

[bonkertons]

8 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Well maybe it was a sucker-offer.

It's been surmised by plenty of people that they grabbed Penix because they were afraid they wouldn't have a 1st rounder next year to grab a QB. 

Then they turn around and try to trade away a 1st rounder they may not even have?

No way the Jets could take that offer, since their #1 pick next year may not even be Atlanta's to trade away. Alternatively, maybe that'd result in docking the one after that, so Atlanta then wouldn't then technically get docked a 1st rounder until 2026, lessening the blow that much more (at least on paper). 

Honestly, I wouldn't have hated having Johnny Newton and an extra 1st next year over Olu.  Then again how could you expect a dude like Newton to be there in the 2nd.  I'm happy with the way it turned out, not having to worry about our LT for a long time, but I don't think this would have been the worst move in the world.

[CTJetsFan]

5 hours ago, slats said:

I think they easily could’ve gotten away with trading back to #10 with the Jets. Not because no one else wanted Penix (Raiders 100% take him if he’s there at #13), but because no one ever thought that the Falcons were interested in a QB. Every mock draft had them going defense at #8. They just gave Cousins a $180M contract. There were no whispers, no rumors, and it’s still the biggest draft day surprise. I doubt the Jets were offering much more than #111, but a free pick is a free pick. 

True, but then the only question (had we flipped 8 and 10 with Atlanta and taken Rome) is would Chicago have traded out of 9 to another team that may have wanted Penix had they lost out on Rome? Or would they have stayed and taken Olu instead?

[Augustiniak]

12 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Well maybe it was a sucker-offer.

It's been surmised by plenty of people that they grabbed Penix because they were afraid they wouldn't have a 1st rounder next year to grab a QB. 

Then they turn around and try to trade away a 1st rounder they may not even have?

No way the Jets could take that offer, since their #1 pick next year may not even be Atlanta's to trade away. Alternatively, maybe that'd result in docking the one after that, so Atlanta then wouldn't then technically get docked a 1st rounder until 2026, lessening the blow that much more (at least on paper). 

Amusing take, atlanta trading a pick they may not have.  I have read that blank was tired of watching the falcons rotate last year between 2 terrible qbs, and it sounded quite familiar.  We can only hope that travis becomes even a decent backup, they’re so underappreciated until you don’t have one. 

[Augustiniak]

19 minutes ago, BreeceHallofFame said:

One thing that still bothers me about the draft is why didn’t Tennessee trade down. They could have easily still gotten Latham at 10. 
 

If the pats were smart they would have traded down to 6 and taken Penix, who is a much better prospect than Maye 

You look at the top 12 picks and say ok, teams targeted their guy and didn’t want to move out.  And then there’s the titans, who took a slow footed RT with the 7th pick when you probably could have had that guy simply by trading with minny, and an extra 3rd rounder as well.  

[BreeceHallofFame]

3 minutes ago, Augustiniak said:

You look at the top 12 picks and say ok, teams targeted their guy and didn’t want to move out.  And then there’s the titans, who took a slow footed RT with the 7th pick when you probably could have had that guy simply by trading with minny, and an extra 3rd rounder as well.  

Yea it makes me question how hard we actually tried to trade up. It seems like moving to 7 would have been a realistic option if we were willing to give fair value. Ultimately I am glad we didn’t because Odunze is overrated IMHO

[Sperm Edwards]

8 minutes ago, bonkertons said:

Honestly, I wouldn't have hated having Johnny Newton and an extra 1st next year over Olu.  Then again how could you expect a dude like Newton to be there in the 2nd.  I'm happy with the way it turned out, not having to worry about our LT for a long time, but I don't think this would have been the worst move in the world.

That's irrelevant to my post. 

No one trades away the #10 pick in the country for a 2nd rounder in the same draft, and then ultimately a 1st rounder two years later because they inadvertently traded for a pick that got docked from the trading partner's team. 

The players acquired after that are incidental. It's a bad trade on paper even to risk it. 

[LionelRichie]

24 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Well maybe it was a sucker-offer.

It's been surmised by plenty of people that they grabbed Penix because they were afraid they wouldn't have a 1st rounder next year to grab a QB. 

Then they turn around and try to trade away a 1st rounder they may not even have?

No way the Jets could take that offer, since their #1 pick next year may not even be Atlanta's to trade away. Alternatively, maybe that'd result in docking the one after that, so Atlanta then wouldn't then technically get docked a 1st rounder until 2026, lessening the blow that much more (at least on paper). 

I think that was probably the assumption from ATL - you can’t take the pick in ‘25 if it’s already been traded.   So maybe it turns into 2nd rd fine or maybe it moves to ‘26.  

[Augustiniak]

6 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

That's irrelevant to my post. 

No one trades away the #10 pick in the country for a 2nd rounder in the same draft, and then ultimately a 1st rounder two years later because they inadvertently traded for a pick that got docked from the trading partner's team. 

The players acquired after that are incidental. It's a bad trade on paper even to risk it. 

It’s ballsy to even ask for that even if there’s no potential impending draft penalties for tampering.  I don’t think i can remember a team trading from that high up in a good top of the draft all the way out of the first round.  I mean at least the Vikings had another 1st rounder to deal.  

[Sperm Edwards]

8 minutes ago, Augustiniak said:

Amusing take, atlanta trading a pick they may not have.  I have read that blank was tired of watching the falcons rotate last year between 2 terrible qbs, and it sounded quite familiar.  We can only hope that travis becomes even a decent backup, they’re so underappreciated until you don’t have one. 

Could be, but that doesn't remove the possibility that the pick the Jets would've been acquiring could've been docked.

In practice, it's unlikely they'd get docked their 2025 1st rounder in such a scenario, seeing how Atlanta would be getting off with no penalty & instead shift that penalty to the Jets who didn't do anything wrong, but on the clock there isn't time to use coming up with the what-if scenarios of a trade with them involving any 2025 Falcons pick. 

It's kind of a brilliant idea, to trade away the pick you might get docked before it gets docked, but no need for the Jets to get involved in it. Especially not so the Falcons could tamper with & then acquire Cousins, who used & then spurned the Jets several years earlier.

It's bad enough when you don't know what slot a pick's going to be the following year; not knowing with 100% certainty if the pick will be there at all muddies it too much to consider it while they're on the clock for their first round pick, also negotiating with others for the pick at the same time. 

[Augustiniak]

1 minute ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Could be, but that doesn't remove the possibility that the pick the Jets would've been acquiring could've been docked.

In practice, it's unlikely they'd get docked their 2025 1st rounder in such a scenario, seeing how Atlanta would be getting off with no penalty & instead shift that penalty to the Jets who didn't do anything wrong, but on the clock there isn't time to use coming up with the what-if scenarios of a trade with them involving any 2025 Falcons pick. 

It's kind of a brilliant idea, to trade away the pick you might get docked before it gets docked, but no need for the Jets to get involved in it. Especially not so the Falcons could tamper with & then acquire Cousins, who used & then spurned the Jets several years earlier.

It's bad enough when you don't know what slot a pick's going to be the following year; not knowing with 100% certainty if the pick will be there at all muddies it too much to consider it while they're on the clock for their first round pick, also negotiating with others for the pick at the same time. 

Also it’s not as if the jets were picking, say, 27th in round 1.  It’s a far fetched trade offer from several angles.  

[Sperm Edwards]

2 minutes ago, LionelRichie said:

I think that was probably the assumption from ATL - you can’t take the pick in ‘25 if it’s already been traded.   So maybe it turns into 2nd rd fine or maybe it moves to ‘26.  

Why would the Jets take a 1st rounder (of unknown slot) two full years later as compensation for dropping down from a known top 10 pick down a full round, also not knowing the position-run that'd occur right before that pick.

Anyone liking that idea now is playing with the hindsight knowledge of who was there & who wasn't. Not so when you're on the clock, and further if you're the GM of a win-now team whose seat was already at least warming up this same offseason. It'd be akin to career suicide to even consider it.

Also don't think Atlanta didn't also make that same offer to anyone else other than the Jets -- just that no one else bit on that offer either.  

[jetstream23]

21 hours ago, HighPitch said:

Wow

 

why didnt they trade with us to gain something and take penix at 10

This is the biggest question in my mind.

The Bears at #9 had just taken a QB.  The Jets obviously weren't taking a QB.  Why wouldn't Atlanta swap #8 for #10 and take Penix there?  They had to be 100% convinced someone would jump to #9 with the Bears for Penix.  And, it's obvious Atlanta had Penix much higher than JJ McCarthy and Bo Nix.

[NYJCAP2]

1 hour ago, jetstream23 said:

This is the biggest question in my mind.

The Bears at #9 had just taken a QB.  The Jets obviously weren't taking a QB.  Why wouldn't Atlanta swap #8 for #10 and take Penix there?  They had to be 100% convinced someone would jump to #9 with the Bears for Penix.  And, it's obvious Atlanta had Penix much higher than JJ McCarthy and Bo Nix.

Who’s trading up to 8, and NOT taking a QB? ATL could have been trading away their own guy. 
 

If they’re right on Penix, none of that is worth it.

[jetfan40yrs]

2 hours ago, jetstream23 said:

This is the biggest question in my mind.

The Bears at #9 had just taken a QB.  The Jets obviously weren't taking a QB.  Why wouldn't Atlanta swap #8 for #10 and take Penix there?  They had to be 100% convinced someone would jump to #9 with the Bears for Penix.  And, it's obvious Atlanta had Penix much higher than JJ McCarthy and Bo Nix.

Atlanta intended to keep the #8 pick for Penix AND trade up with the Jets at #10 for someone else.

[BreeceHallofFame]

Atl not trading makes sense because if we took odunze the bears could easily trade down with raiders who would have certainly drafted penix. 

Tennessee is the team that really should have traded down. 

[doitny]

19 hours ago, TuscanyTile2 said:

All we had to do was say "this is the game we play Izzy instead of Breece".  And that would've actually made sense to both protect Breece as well as get a sense of what we have in Izzy.

i didnt remember this when you first posted this but Hall was close to going over 1,000 yds. yeah i know they messed up the math but you dont bench a player from hitting a milestone unless you really want that player to hate you.

now he might hate the math guy for adding wrong but he doesnt hate Saleh cause he stopped him from even playing.

[TuscanyTile2]

10 hours ago, Jet Nut said:

And if he didn’t run Hall and they won the game anyway you’d be crying he passed the ball 40 times.  
Players play to win, coaches don’t turn those wins into loses chasing players they don’t know in January that will be available in April.  Plus months of moaning Salehs team only won 6 and were swept by the shltty Pats.  
To a man on 1JD the players were talking about going out to win that last game.  Moaning that they didn’t tank in their last game is such a waste of time, that’s not how football players or coaches think.  With good reason

 

Quote

And if he didn’t run Hall and they won the game anyway you’d be crying he passed the ball 40 times.  

You think I'd be complaining if Trevor Siemian threw the ball 40 times?  Lol

 

Quote

Players play to win, coaches don’t turn those wins into loses chasing players they don’t know in January that will be available in April

Agree about the players.  We have 2 recent examples of management tanking though (Doug Peterson playing Nate Sudfeld to move up from #9 to #6 and the Jaguars playing Mike Glennon over Gardner Minshew to guarantee themselves Trevor Lawrence).

With the Jets, it wouldn't have even been a big deal to bench Breece though.  Why risk him getting hurt in a meaningless game 17?  No matter how bad Izzy is in pass protection, they could've just run the ball when he was on the field.  Or played a different RB.  And again, 37 carries was 15 more than Breece's next highest total for the entire season.  How in the world can anyone possibly justify that workload for him in a meaningless game?!  They 15 freaking carries more than his previous high?!  It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.  Imagine he got hurt in that game?!  Then we would've been dealing with even more question marks going into this season.  Not only would it have made sense in terms of helping us get a better draft pick, it would've made a whole lot of sense in general.

Quote

Plus months of moaning Salehs team only won 6 and were swept by the shltty Pats.  
To a man on 1JD the players were talking about going out to win that last game.  Moaning that they didn’t tank in their last game is such a waste of time, that’s not how football players or coaches think.  With good reason

Honestly, running Breece 37 times in a meaningless game deserves far more complaints.  Again, if Breece got hurt in that game (let's say on his 37th carry), what would you have said?  Be honest.  

[TBJ]

Is Peenix gender neutral like Latinx?

[TuscanyTile2]

13 minutes ago, doitny said:

i didnt remember this when you first posted this but Hall was close to going over 1,000 yds. yeah i know they messed up the math but you dont bench a player from hitting a milestone unless you really want that player to hate you.

now he might hate the math guy for adding wrong but he doesnt hate Saleh cause he stopped him from even playing.

They said he had no financial incentives in his contract for this.  Though, as you said, they ran him 37 times and they still screwed it up.  Yet another indictment against this clown shoes staff (probably not even Saleh's guy but who knows).

And why not run him more when the games actually mattered?!  I'm not saying early in the season when he was still seeing how he was recovering, but look at the games prior to us being eliminated!  13, 10, 7, 13, 10, 6. 

Then when get eliminated, it's 20 (with 12 receptions), 13, 37.  WTAF?!

 

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/H/HallBr03/gamelog/2023/

[TuscanyTile2]

5 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

That's irrelevant to my post. 

No one trades away the #10 pick in the country for a 2nd rounder in the same draft, and then ultimately a 1st rounder two years later because they inadvertently traded for a pick that got docked from the trading partner's team. 

The players acquired after that are incidental. It's a bad trade on paper even to risk it. 

Has anything like that ever happened before?  I would imagine the NFL would step in and let the Jets have that pick next year and then do something like dock Atlanta's 2nd in 2025 and 1st in 2026.

[#27TheDominator]

17 minutes ago, TuscanyTile2 said:

They said he had no financial incentives in his contract for this.  Though, as you said, they ran him 37 times and they still screwed it up.  Yet another indictment against this clown shoes staff (probably not even Saleh's guy but who knows).

And why not run him more when the games actually mattered?!  I'm not saying early in the season when he was still seeing how he was recovering, but look at the games prior to us being eliminated!  13, 10, 7, 13, 10, 6. 

Then when get eliminated, it's 20 (with 12 receptions), 13, 37.  WTAF?!

 

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/H/HallBr03/gamelog/2023/

Some might say that it is a clown shoes organization that feeds a running back that is averaging 2.44 ypc, which is what Breece Hall was averaging over that span.  It would have taken him 409 carries to get there at that rate.

[TuscanyTile2]

2 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

Some might say that it is a clown shoes organization that feeds a running back that is averaging 2.44 ypc, which is what Breece Hall was averaging over that span.  It would have taken him 409 carries to get there at that rate.

Feeding 1 of our 2 star weapinzz (especially with our anemic offense) in games that actually matter is a clown shoes move?  On what planet?

One of the things they used to always praise Barry Sanders for was that he could get stopped a bunch of times in a row and then break a big gainer.  Breece isn't Barry Sanders but he is one of the best RBs in the entire NFL.

[#27TheDominator]

3 minutes ago, TuscanyTile2 said:

Feeding 1 of our 2 star weapinzz (especially with our anemic offense) in games that actually matter is a clown shoes move?  On what planet?

One of the things they used to always praise Barry Sanders for was that he could get stopped a bunch of times in a row and then break a big gainer.  Breece isn't Barry Sanders but he is one of the best RBs in the entire NFL.

When a "weapon" is getting 2.4 yards per carry, it is not much of a weapon.  You want to feed the name?  Then they might as well have kept giving the ball to Dalvin Cook.  He was not one of the best RB in the entire NFL those weeks. You're the one that posted the numbers. 

[TuscanyTile2]

Just now, #27TheDominator said:

When a "weapon" is getting 2.4 yards per carry, it is not much of a weapon.  You want to feed the name?  Then they might as well have kept giving the ball to Dalvin Cook.  He was not one of the best RB in the entire NFL those weeks. You're the one that posted the numbers. 

In 4 of those games I listed, he had 10 carries or less (and 13 each in the other 2).   So is your argument that if Breece doesn't have a good rushing average in his first 10 carries that it makes sense to shut him down entirely?! 

[Jet Nut]

15 hours ago, TuscanyTile2 said:

 

You think I'd be complaining if Trevor Siemian threw the ball 40 times?  Lol

 

Agree about the players.  We have 2 recent examples of management tanking though (Doug Peterson playing Nate Sudfeld to move up from #9 to #6 and the Jaguars playing Mike Glennon over Gardner Minshew to guarantee themselves Trevor Lawrence).

With the Jets, it wouldn't have even been a big deal to bench Breece though.  Why risk him getting hurt in a meaningless game 17?  No matter how bad Izzy is in pass protection, they could've just run the ball when he was on the field.  Or played a different RB.  And again, 37 carries was 15 more than Breece's next highest total for the entire season.  How in the world can anyone possibly justify that workload for him in a meaningless game?!  They 15 freaking carries more than his previous high?!  It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.  Imagine he got hurt in that game?!  Then we would've been dealing with even more question marks going into this season.  Not only would it have made sense in terms of helping us get a better draft pick, it would've made a whole lot of sense in general.

Honestly, running Breece 37 times in a meaningless game deserves far more complaints.  Again, if Breece got hurt in that game (let's say on his 37th carry), what would you have said?  Be honest.  

You’ve missed the main point.  Players and coaches play to win.  Not to throw games for players who don’t exist. 
That’s left for fans while playing MMQB and with handset as an ally decide that an extra loss would have brought in player X

Jags didn’t tank, they had injured QBs.  Pederson was raked over the coals for what he did and lost his job. 

[CanadienJetsFan]

They could have had Zach for pennies on the dollar.

Those fools!

[TuscanyTile2]

5 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

You’ve missed the main point.  Players and coaches play to win.  Not to throw games for players who don’t exist the year before.
That’s left for fans while playing MMQB and with handset as an ally decide that an extra loss would have brought in player X

Would anyone have been upset if Breece was left on the bench the final week of the year to give Izzy a chance to play?  It wouldn't have been looked at as a tank move.  It would've been a "that makes complete sense" move.

And even if they wanted to play Breece, why did he get 37 freaking carries?!  His next highest total for the entire season was 22.

[doitny]

2 hours ago, TuscanyTile2 said:

They said he had no financial incentives in his contract for this.  Though, as you said, they ran him 37 times and they still screwed it up.  Yet another indictment against this clown shoes staff (probably not even Saleh's guy but who knows).

And why not run him more when the games actually mattered?!  I'm not saying early in the season when he was still seeing how he was recovering, but look at the games prior to us being eliminated!  13, 10, 7, 13, 10, 6. 

Then when get eliminated, it's 20 (with 12 receptions), 13, 37.  WTAF?!

 

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/H/HallBr03/gamelog/2023/

its not about the contract its about personal milestones for them. remember how GW said it was very important to break 1,000 yds for the 2nd year in a row. who knows he could go on to get 1,000 yds for the next 15 years straight and break a record for it. 

but if you would have had your way you probably would have benched him once we got eliminated so you could get a better draft pick. that stuff matters to players. it would matter to you too if it was you playing. 

and i agree with @#27TheDominator. you cant give a guy 20 carries if hes getting 2 YPC. some days guys have it and some they dont.

i was just looking at Derrick Henrys games from last year and they gave him a few 11 carry games when he was getting 2 YPC too. and he might be the best RB in the league.

and your boy Vrabel ran Henry 19 times in a meaningless last game win vs Jax. i guess he wasnt worried about draft picks and Henry getting hurt and not being able to play 9 months later

[Bobby816]

Would’ve liked to see footage of us trying to trade up more. I think it was clear we wanted odunze. Seemed no team wanted to trade with us. And then CHI drafted him. 

[Jetsplayer21]

8 hours ago, BreeceHallofFame said:

One thing that still bothers me about the draft is why didn’t Tennessee trade down. They could have easily still gotten Latham at 10. 
 

If the pats were smart they would have traded down to 6 and taken Penix, who is a much better prospect than Maye 

Honestly I think it’s an ego thing. They ( gms ) would basically have to admit the player they think is so great, the rest of the league disagrees and doesn’t think is so great. I think they want to believe “ someone will probably take him if we trade down. “ Joe Douglas did it with Will McDonald. Nobody was picking him before 20, likely closer to 30 or 2nd round. Daniel jones definitely shouldn’t have been a top 10 pick. Another likely 2nd rounder. Then Giants doubled down on their refusal to admit jones was never that good. Giving him 40 mil a yr, while no one in NFL was giving him anything close to that. They wanted to believe and Will him to being a franchise qb, hoping to pay him like one would make it true ha. Just glad Zach Wilson was so bad, otherwise JD might have done the same shhit with him.

[TuscanyTile2]

29 minutes ago, doitny said:

its not about the contract its about personal milestones for them. remember how GW said it was very important to break 1,000 yds for the 2nd year in a row. who knows he could go on to get 1,000 yds for the next 15 years straight and break a record for it. 

but if you would have had your way you probably would have benched him once we got eliminated so you could get a better draft pick. that stuff matters to players. it would matter to you too if it was you playing. 

and i agree with @#27TheDominator. you cant give a guy 20 carries if hes getting 2 YPC. some days guys have it and some they dont.

i was just looking at Derrick Henrys games from last year and they gave him a few 11 carry games when he was getting 2 YPC too. and he might be the best RB in the league.

and your boy Vrabel ran Henry 19 times in a meaningless last game win vs Jax. i guess he wasnt worried about draft picks and Henry getting hurt and not being able to play 9 months later

 

Quote

and i agree with @#27TheDominator. you cant give a guy 20 carries if hes getting 2 YPC. some days guys have it and some they dont.

So after 10 carries, if Breece is averaging 2.4 yards or less then he should get 0 carries the rest of the game?  That's what you're looking for us to do next season?

 

Quote

and your boy Vrabel ran Henry 19 times in a meaningless last game win vs Jax. i guess he wasnt worried about draft picks and Henry getting hurt and not being able to play 9 months later

19 times.  Breece ran it 37 times.  That's 1 carry fewer than double.  And his next highest total for the entire season was 22.  How does it make sense to run him 37 times when you're already eliminated?!  And this with a RB who was coming off an ACL injury.  If Breece had gotten hurt, you don't think you'd be screaming about this?