Brock Bowers Already on track to be better than Gronk

[JiFtheOracle]

13 minutes ago, Rich Thornburgh said:

Bowers isn’t a WR

Well, I was just told he was but that's fine.  I think the biggest challenge many are having on this topic is that they dont quite understand how you determine a winner in a Football contest.  I'll share; it is a game in which you're required to score more points then you're opponent to win!  And players that have elite skill sets that help you accomplish this goal, are extremely valuable to achieving that outcome.  Brock Bowers, is one of those dudes and it's why 2 future HOF'ers (Gronk and Devante Adams) think he's well on his way to joining them when he's career is over.

 

 

[AFJF]

20 minutes ago, JiFtheOracle said:

Well, I was just told he was but that's fine.  I think the biggest challenge many are having on this topic is that they dont quite understand how you determine a winner in a Football contest.  I'll share; it is a game in which you're required to score more points then you're opponent to win!  And players that have elite skill sets that help you accomplish this goal, are extremely valuable to achieving that outcome.  Brock Bowers, is one of those dudes and it's why 2 future HOF'ers (Gronk and Devante Adams) think he's well on his way to joining them when he's career is over.

 

 

As you and I (and many others) have said, he's not a WR.  He's also not a TE, a fullback or an H-Back.  

He's all of those things.  He will play all of those positions and be a mismatch nightmare for opposing defenses for the foreseeable future.

He would have been lethal in a pairing with Rodgers, but the Jets don't need him because they re-signed Kenny Yeboah.

[Jetsfan80]

1 hour ago, JiFtheOracle said:

Well, I was just told he was but that's fine.  I think the biggest challenge many are having on this topic is that they dont quite understand how you determine a winner in a Football contest.  I'll share; it is a game in which you're required to score more points then you're opponent to win!  And players that have elite skill sets that help you accomplish this goal, are extremely valuable to achieving that outcome.  Brock Bowers, is one of those dudes and it's why 2 future HOF'ers (Gronk and Devante Adams) think he's well on his way to joining them when he's career is over.

Seems to me like people are trying to defend their silly pre-draft takes on Bowers in hindsight.  Even though folks like you and @Gastineau Lives have been proven correct and the argument is essentially over.  Dude is already a top-3 receiving TE and that doesn't justify a 1st round pick, not even a top-10 pick to boot?  GTFOH.

[Rich Thornburgh]

1 hour ago, JiFtheOracle said:

Well, I was just told he was but that's fine.  I think the biggest challenge many are having on this topic is that they dont quite understand how you determine a winner in a Football contest.  I'll share; it is a game in which you're required to score more points then you're opponent to win!  And players that have elite skill sets that help you accomplish this goal, are extremely valuable to achieving that outcome.  Brock Bowers, is one of those dudes and it's why 2 future HOF'ers (Gronk and Devante Adams) think he's well on his way to joining them when he's career is over.

 

 

No he’s not

[slats]

1 hour ago, JiFtheOracle said:

Brock Bowers, is one of those dudes and it's why 2 future HOF'ers (Gronk and Devante Adams) think he's well on his way to joining them when he's career is over.

How many active TEs do you think are currently on track for the HoF? There’s Kelce and who else? Kittle maybe? 

[JiFtheOracle]

37 minutes ago, slats said:

He’s basically a larger a slot receiver. It’s the same argument as last year, Edge > slot receiver, and OT > glorified slot receiver. First round picks on slot guys is dumb, in the first round you’re looking for #1 WRs. 
 
Positions listed in order of franchise tag value: 

• QB
• LB/EDGE
• WR
• OL
• DE
• DT
• CB
• S
• TE
• RB

Franchise number for the lowest valued position on defense is $17.1M, for TEs it’s $12.6M. It’s just not a position not worth a first round pick unless you’ve come accross one of those unicorns at the position, which Bowers is not. 
 
Game changing? LMFAO

Your entire premise here is dumb.  You're trying to utilize positional value as your rationale and it's being applied moronically.   This isnt the difference in taking a CB or DT or Edge or ILB.  Offense is completely different, especially when you're taking weapons.  The bottom line is, does this player help your offense move the chains and score points?  If that answer is yes, that's the value not "what position does he play?" or what does the franchise tag say.  That's asinine and nobody who understands roster structure looks at it in that fashion. 

And the most accomplished "TE" in collegiate history, who is capable of impacting the offense in more ways than just a RB, or just a WR, or just someone who plays OL, is in fact a unicorn because of his GAME CHANGING versatility and elite ability to do everything that is required on offense.  It's why guy like Gronk and Adams are calling him a HOF'er....but I'm sure you know more than the GOAT at TE and his HOF teammate?  Right?  LMFAO 

 

 

[JiFtheOracle]

30 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Seems to me like people are trying to defend their silly pre-draft takes on Bowers in hindsight.  Even though folks like you and @Gastineau Lives have been proven correct and the argument is essentially over.  Dude is already a top-3 receiving TE and that doesn't justify a 1st round pick, not even a top-10 pick to boot?  GTFOH.

The TE hang up seems to be the issue here, which is just stupid.  I've shared this before but my neighbor is a scout for the Lions.  He covers the South East,...remember when they took Gibbs at 12 last year and some simple minded people were like, OMG, the Lions are dumb who takes a RB at 12?   Well, guess what nobody is saying anymore?  And you know why?  Because the Lions didnt view him as just a "RB", they viewed him as a "weapon". 

This is the exact same situation and it's proved out and people are so desperate to be "right" they're just covering their eyes, sticking their fingers in their ears and screaming yeah but TE!!!

 

[JiFtheOracle]

34 minutes ago, Rich Thornburgh said:

No he’s not

Yes he is.

[slats]

3 minutes ago, JiFtheOracle said:

Your entire premise here is dumb.

I would turn around and say the same to you. First round TEs are never worth it. Kelce and Gronk would be two guys who had careers where you could argue that they would’ve been worth first rounders, but they weren’t. Look at Kyle Pitts, he was supposed to be way more generational than Bowers, got fed a ton of targets in his rookie year (like Bowers) on his way to a 1000 yard season before falling back to the Earth the last few. Still, Atlanta doubled-down on their bad decision by picking up his fifth year option for over $10M. Pretty ridiculous when you consider the tag value for TEs will be just north of $14M and he’s played nowhere near the level of a franchise type player. Gaining 10.9 ypc without a score does not a franchise player make. 

[JiFtheOracle]

29 minutes ago, slats said:

How many active TEs do you think are currently on track for the HoF? There’s Kelce and who else? Kittle maybe? 

Yeah, probably 2, maybe some other dudes depending on how their careers play out!  And it's crazy to think the Jets could have had the third, right?  Nuts! 

[JiFtheOracle]

Just now, slats said:

I would turn around and say the same to you. First round TEs are never worth it. Kelce and Gronk would be two guys who had careers where you could argue that they would’ve been worth first rounders, but they weren’t. Look at Kyle Pitts, he was supposed to be way more generational than Bowers, got fed a ton of targets in his rookie year (like Bowers) on his way to a 1000 yard season before falling back to the Earth the last few. Still, Atlanta doubled-down on their bad decision by picking up his fifth year option for over $10M. Pretty ridiculous when you consider the tag value for TEs will be just north of $14M and he’s played nowhere near the level of a franchise type player. Gaining 10.9 ypc without a score does not a franchise player make. 

Hill, St.Brown, Adams, Kupp, Brown, Samuel, Puka, Allen, Metcalf - all stud WR's, some of the best in the NFL, a couple of HOF'ers.  None were taken in the first round, therefore, taking a WR in the first round is stupid.

- Slats 

[slats]

Just now, JiFtheOracle said:

Hill, St.Brown, Adams, Kupp, Brown, Samuel, Puka, Allen, Metcalf - all stud WR's, some of the best in the NFL, a couple of HOF'ers.  None were taken in the first round, therefore, taking a WR in the first round is stupid.

- Slats 

Let me create a strawman because I’m losing the actual argument badly. 
 
-JiF

[slats]

8 minutes ago, JiFtheOracle said:

The TE hang up seems to be the issue here, which is just stupid.  I've shared this before but my neighbor is a scout for the Lions.  He covers the South East,...remember when they took Gibbs at 12 last year and some simple minded people were like, OMG, the Lions are dumb who takes a RB at 12?   Well, guess what nobody is saying anymore?  And you know why?  Because the Lions didnt view him as just a "RB", they viewed him as a "weapon". 

This is the exact same situation and it's proved out and people are so desperate to be "right" they're just covering their eyes, sticking their fingers in their ears and screaming yeah but TE!!!

 

RB is a completely different animal than TE. RBs don’t get paid because they typically hit the wall before they hit 30, but that doesn’t mean they can’t be a first round value. I wanted the Jets to trade up and take Breece in the first round so that they’d have the fifth year option with him. As it is, I’ve stated many times on this board that I would happily make Breece the league’s highest paid back as soon as next year if he builds on the production he had last year. I look forward to Bowers gaining 1585 yards from scrimmage along with 9 TDs some year. 
 
TEs don’t get paid because despite their relative longetivity, they’re rarely worth it. 

[TuscanyTile2]

28 minutes ago, JiFtheOracle said:

The TE hang up seems to be the issue here, which is just stupid.  I've shared this before but my neighbor is a scout for the Lions.  He covers the South East,...remember when they took Gibbs at 12 last year and some simple minded people were like, OMG, the Lions are dumb who takes a RB at 12?   Well, guess what nobody is saying anymore?  And you know why?  Because the Lions didnt view him as just a "RB", they viewed him as a "weapon". 

This is the exact same situation and it's proved out and people are so desperate to be "right" they're just covering their eyes, sticking their fingers in their ears and screaming yeah but TE!!!

Really?!?!  Can you pass along the following message to your neighbor:

 

[Jetsfan80]

29 minutes ago, JiFtheOracle said:

The TE hang up seems to be the issue here, which is just stupid.  I've shared this before but my neighbor is a scout for the Lions.  He covers the South East,...remember when they took Gibbs at 12 last year and some simple minded people were like, OMG, the Lions are dumb who takes a RB at 12?   Well, guess what nobody is saying anymore?  And you know why?  Because the Lions didnt view him as just a "RB", they viewed him as a "weapon". 

This is the exact same situation and it's proved out and people are so desperate to be "right" they're just covering their eyes, sticking their fingers in their ears and screaming yeah but TE!!!

I think its fair to argue that taking a RB or TE top 5 overall is probably not wise.  But once you get outside the top 10 picks....weapons are weapons, like you say.  It's better to take an elite weapon at 12 overall who can help your team for "only" 4-5 years than taking a nice safe RT merely because there's a better chance he's there for a decade. 

Positional value matters but at a certain point in the draft it's acceptable to say "f**k it" and shoot for the special talents regardless of what position they play.

[JiFtheOracle]

28 minutes ago, slats said:

Let me create a strawman because I’m losing the actual argument badly. 
 
-JiF

Got it, so when you do it, it's valid!  When I do it, strawman! 

lol  this is cute, you're cute

 

[slats]

1 minute ago, JiFtheOracle said:

Got it, so when you do it, it's valid!  When I do it, strawman! 

lol  this is cute, you're cute

 

I don’t do it, though. But yes, I’m quite adorable. 

[JiFtheOracle]

30 minutes ago, slats said:

RB is a completely different animal than TE. RBs don’t get paid because they typically hit the wall before they hit 30, but that doesn’t mean they can’t be a first round value. I wanted the Jets to trade up and take Breece in the first round so that they’d have the fifth year option with him. As it is, I’ve stated many times on this board that I would happily make Breece the league’s highest paid back as soon as next year if he builds on the production he had last year. I look forward to Bowers gaining 1585 yards from scrimmage along with 9 TDs some year. 
 
TEs don’t get paid because despite their relative longetivity, they’re rarely worth it. 

Dude talking to me about positional value but wanted to trade up into the first for a RB because weapon.

lmfao just stop, 

[JiFtheOracle]

16 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

I think its fair to argue that taking a RB or TE top 5 overall is probably not wise.  But once you get outside the top 10 picks....weapons are weapons, like you say.  It's better to take an elite weapon at 12 overall who can help your team for "only" 4-5 years than taking a nice safe RT merely because there's a better chance he's there for a decade. 

Positional value matters but at a certain point in the draft it's acceptable to say "f**k it" and shoot for the special talents regardless of what position they play.

As the league has evolved, positional value doesnt quite hold the same weight as it once does, especially on offense.  Yes, I think it is 100% applicable for defense.  No doubt.  But there is nothing more valuable than elite play making ability on the offensive side of the ball. 

I've talked about this ad nauseum but in a league where the entire play design is to get the ball out in 2.5 seconds, having guys who get insta-open, are arguably the most valuable aspect to any offense.  

The irony behind this conversation, is Slats loves Corley.  Ya know, an undersized, gimmicky slot WR from a bull sh*t conference but he doesnt like, a perfectly sized slot WR, oh excuse me, TE, from the best team in the best conference who had historic numbers.  It's really brilliant, when you think about it.

 

[JiFtheOracle]

25 minutes ago, slats said:

I don’t do it, though. But yes, I’m quite adorable. 

You literally just did...but whatever, the fact this conversation is literally solved by simply calling Bowers a WR instead of a TE is enough to laugh in your face during his HOF career.  Like that silly stupid distinction means nothing but here you are!!!!

[slats]

13 minutes ago, JiFtheOracle said:

Dude talking to me about positional value but wanted to trade up into the first for a RB because weapon.

lmfao just stop, 

Certainly not into the top 10 or 11 picks, where it’s generally dumb to draft RBs or TEs, but to jump into the bottom of the round to get that fifth year option for a top shelf RB is kinda huge, especially if your plan is to franchise him for a year or two before letting him walk. 
 
You’re abandoning logic and giving a lot of attitude because first round TEs are never worth it, especially little ones. It’s really surprising to me how you fell so hard for the hype around this player who only went as high as he did because a notoriously dumb franchise failed to recover from Atlanta grabbing their guy at #8. 

[jamesr]

Why is it that Brock Bowers is getting particular attention? His stats so far are 18 / 197 / 0. Brian Thomas Jr is 11 / 189 / 1. Bowers was taken 12th, Thomas 23rd.

Is it that Bowers is somehow better because he's a TE? Except he isn't ... but he is ... sort of ... except when he isn't.

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk

[slats]

45 minutes ago, JiFtheOracle said:

The irony behind this conversation, is Slats loves Corley.  Ya know, an undersized, gimmicky slot WR from a bull sh*t conference

5’11, 215 is hardly undersized for a WR. 
 
edit: ftr, I’d’ve loved Bowers with the first pick in the third round, and hated Corley at pick #11. Context matters. 

40 minutes ago, JiFtheOracle said:

You literally just did...but whatever, the fact this conversation is literally solved by simply calling Bowers a WR instead of a TE is enough to laugh in your face during his HOF career.  Like that silly stupid distinction means nothing but here you are!!!!

I’m talking apples to apples, you’re the one trying to put words in my mouth that were never there. I describe Bowers as a bigger slot WR not to say that he’s better than a TE, but rather to say that he’ll never be a complete TE. For reference, Allen Lazard has 148 yards and three TDs on 16 targets (13.5 ypc), big slot Bowers has 197 yards on 21 targets with 0 TDs for a 10.9 ypc. If Bowers is on the way to the HoF, I guess they should fit Lazard for a gold jacket, first. 

[Gastineau Lives]

32 minutes ago, jamesr said:

Is it that Bowers is somehow better because he's a TE? Except he isn't ... but he is ... sort of ... except when he isn't.

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk
 

Now you’re getting it.

[JoeNamathsFurCoat]

1 hour ago, JiFtheOracle said:

Yeah, probably 2, maybe some other dudes depending on how their careers play out!  And it's crazy to think the Jets could have had the third, right?  Nuts! 

You can't have everyone.

Bowers has played 3 games and you want to put him in the HOF.

The Raiders are a brutal organization.

They have a TE but no QB.

We have a QB and we need to protect him.

If you draft Bowers, you don't have Olu right now and instead leave your franchise QB's fate in the hands of Maxx freaking Mitchell to try and protect him.

[TuscanyTile2]

1 hour ago, JoeNamathsFurCoat said:

You can't have everyone.

Bowers has played 3 games and you want to put him in the HOF.

The Raiders are a brutal organization.

They have a TE but no QB.

We have a QB and we need to protect him.

If you draft Bowers, you don't have Olu right now and instead leave your franchise QB's fate in the hands of Maxx freaking Mitchell to try and protect him.

I'm happy with Olu, especially considering Tyron is on a 1 year deal (and Moses is not young).  But I'll make a more generic argument that having a weapon of that caliber (assuming Bowers lives up to billing) at a position that not a lot of teams have a comparable at could potentially be very advantageous.  

[Gastineau Lives]

1 hour ago, JoeNamathsFurCoat said:

You can't have everyone.

Bowers has played 3 games and you want to put him in the HOF.

The Raiders are a brutal organization.

They have a TE but no QB.

We have a QB and we need to protect him.

If you draft Bowers, you don't have Olu right now and instead leave your franchise QB's fate in the hands of Maxx freaking Mitchell to try and protect him.

Not Carter freaking Warren the guy ahead of Max Mitchell on the actual real life depth chart? 
 

So afraid you couldn’t find a non turnstile ( backup tackle in the third round to supplement Warren (who they like) that you’re willing to pass up on one of if not the best TE prospects in history?

Also imagine that they actually did get Odunze like they wanted to. Is Aaron Rodgers head non esplodable if they went that route?

 

[Joe W. Namath]

Another waste of a thread along w/ the reddick thread.  Who cares about brock bowers?

The Jets are good and we cant accept that so lets waste our time in these pointless threads.

Jet fans......

[Jack Straw]

5 hours ago, slats said:

He’s 230 lbs. He does not bring the valuable intangible quality you look for in a, “generational TE,” and that is the ability to be an additional OL when needed. He’s a flanker or a larger slot receiver, the sort of player you don’t burn first round picks on. RBs are the lowest paid position n the league because of the frequency with which they fail to produce for the entirety of a second contract. The TE position is right down there, though, and that’s because it’s not considered a valuable position to the league. If you can only perform a portion of the job, that would make you less valuable. 

Repeatedly claiming Bowers is 230 pounds doesn't make it true. He weighed in at 243 at the combine. And I must ask, did you ever watch him play at Georgia? Because he was a good, effective blocker despite not being the size of traditional tight ends.

Additionally, Bowers leads all NFL tight ends in receptions and ranks second in yards - as a rookie with the league's worst starting QB. These aren't just good stats; they're putting him on the path to a historic rookie season.

You claim Bowers isn't a "generational" tight end. So enlighten us - what does one look like? If it's not the rookie outperforming every veteran at his position despite subpar quarterback play, who is it?

Kyle Brady? 

[JiFtheOracle]

1 hour ago, slats said:

5’11, 215 is hardly undersized for a WR.
 
edit: ftr, I’d’ve loved Bowers with the first pick in the third round, and hated Corley at pick #11. Context matters. 

I’m talking apples to apples, you’re the one trying to put words in my mouth that were never there. I describe Bowers as a bigger slot WR not to say that he’s better than a TE, but rather to say that he’ll never be a complete TE. For reference, Allen Lazard has 148 yards and three TDs on 16 targets (13.5 ypc), big slot Bowers has 197 yards on 21 targets with 0 TDs for a 10.9 ypc. If Bowers is on the way to the HoF, I guess they should fit Lazard for a gold jacket, first. 

I look down on Corley and that is unacceptable.  So he's undersized, the same way Bowers is undersized by your estimation.

I'd have loved MHJ in the 3rd round and maybe Jayden Daniels in the 5th instead of Jordan Travis but context, I guess? 

Do you think Garnder Minshew and Aaron Rodgers are equivalent quarterbacks of the Football?  I'm going out on a limb and guess that you think Rodgers is a better QB.  Do you think there is any advantage to playing 6 years w/ Rodgers vs playing 3 games w/ Minshew?  Maybe you dont, but then again, maybe you should because I kind of remembering us talking about Lazard bouncing back and that being a problem for this featured role you were expecting from Corley because of his chemistry w/ Lazard and yet still, as you sit here and type a bunch of words, Bowers is on a historic pace for a rookie "TE" and has more receptions than any rookie WR other than Malik Nabers. 

 

[JiFtheOracle]

8 minutes ago, Jack Straw said:

Repeatedly claiming Bowers is 230 pounds doesn't make it true. He weighed in at 243 at the combine. And I must ask, did you ever watch him play at Georgia? Because he was a good, effective blocker despite not being the size of traditional tight ends.

Additionally, Bowers leads all NFL tight ends in receptions and ranks second in yards - as a rookie with the league's worst starting QB. These aren't just good stats; they're putting him on the path to a historic rookie season.

You claim Bowers isn't a "generational" tight end. So enlighten us - what does one look like? If it's not the rookie outperforming every veteran at his position despite subpar quarterback play, who is it?

Kyle Brady? 

The problem w/ this part of the conversation, my friend from Wichita, is that Slats admittedly doesnt watch college Football.  So when you say things like, Brock Bowers was arguably the best player in college Football and undoubtedly the best offensive weapon on the best team in the best conference in Football and had historic numbers for the "position", it doesnt register and instead, he has to do the things he's doing which is purely making assumptions because of size and position and ignoring anything else, like proof and data.

[Gastineau Lives]

6 minutes ago, Joe W. Namath said:

Another waste of a thread along w/ the reddick thread.  Who cares about brock bowers?

The Jets are good and we cant accept that so lets waste our time in these pointless threads.

Jet fans......

My thread proposals:

Jets Are Awesome But Just HOW Awesome Are They

Going On Vacation: Italy or Met Life/East Rutherford HELP ME DECIDE

Woody Is The Handsomest Owner In Sports (Next To Chris)

Bald Is Beautiful (Non Pretzel Version)

Have You HAD The Nachos At MetLife

Giant Air Conditioners: Where Football Stadiums Are Going

 

 

 

 

[Sperm Edwards]

24 minutes ago, Gastineau Lives said:

Not Carter freaking Warren the guy ahead of Max Mitchell on the actual real life depth chart? 
 

So afraid you couldn’t find a non turnstile ( backup tackle in the third round to supplement Warren (who they like) that you’re willing to pass up on one of if not the best TE prospects in history?

Also imagine that they actually did get Odunze like they wanted to. Is Aaron Rodgers head non esplodable if they went that route?

 

If they drafted Odunze then Moses wouldn't have gotten injured, silly man.

[bicketybam]

15 minutes ago, Joe W. Namath said:

Another waste of a thread along w/ the reddick thread.  Who cares about brock bowers?

The Jets are good and we cant accept that so lets waste our time in these pointless threads.

Jet fans......

Everybody, listen to me

And return me my ship

I'm your captain, I'm your captain

Though I'm feeling mighty sick

 

 

 

[Rich Thornburgh]

4 minutes ago, JiFtheOracle said:

The problem w/ this part of the conversation, my friend from Wichita, is that Slats admittedly doesnt watch college Football.  So when you say things like, Brock Bowers was arguably the best player in college Football and undoubtedly the best offensive weapon on the best team in the best conference in Football and had historic numbers for the "position", it doesnt register and instead, he has to do the things he's doing which is purely making assumptions because of size and position and ignoring anything else, like proof and data.

Based on that logic Matt Leinart and Mike Williams should have both been NFL hall of famers