JetCane Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 Oh it's their fault all right. They are the "geniuses" that thought we could compete with this **** ass D line. I think they did run more 4-3 sets this week. They have run that hybrid 4-3 in the past with BThomas lined up like an end, but I'm pretty sure this week they had Mosley and DRob in together. That would indicate an actual two DT 4-3. They still sucked. Either that or DRob was at end. Either way it was a pitiful experiment and I'm not looking forward to seeing any more of it. 'Cane, I know you like Devito, is that from camp? He's an UDFA that projected as a 3-4 DE. I doubt he'll ever amount to anything if he can't crack this pitiful rotation.Did you see something to make you think otherwise? Looking at pictures of him he looks stoned (allergies?) and he has a couple of chins. Looks like he really needs to be put on an NFL "program". He showed a strong motor in pre-season games and tc. They need that on the field. The only other guy who showed a motor in p.s. was Harris. The other guys were just as bad in ps as they are in the reg season. So play the guys who at least looked good in the summer. If this FO was really commitedd to rebuilding, they'd activate him and see what he can do in real time. The DL has been horrid, so what do they have to lose by trying him out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 He showed a strong motor in pre-season games and tc. They need that on the field. The only other guy who showed a motor in p.s. was Harris. The other guys were just as bad in ps as they are in the reg season. So play the guys who at least looked good in the summer. If this FO was really commitedd to rebuilding, they'd activate him and see what he can do in real time. The DL has been horrid, so what do they have to lose by trying him out? They gave Hicks more chances this week. Devito hasn't been active, but maybe we'll see him before the end of the year. They seem to be rotating more guys on the D line lately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gangreenman Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 Of course it is their fault. THey are responsible for putting players out there. I dont believe that Hobson would be worse, and BT has svcked this year ever since he signed a new contract, so that isnt a consideration. Has the FO gotten a pass rusher in two years? How about a NT? Of course they are at fault! They dont get a pass. There is a 20% personnel turnover on a team every year. They could have 40% new guys if they wanted to, and those are their guys. If they have chosen FAs unwisely, that is on them. And if they decide to change schemes without the most important part in place, that is on them, too. 1st of all I said the coaches, not the FO. I think Tangini got handed down a team in shambles... And many of the leaders of that team are going to be gone after next year. They want the impact players, but they didnt want to risk a locker room fallout by benching a lot of leaders like Ellis and Vilma. I think the FO is doing the right thing by waiting it out and conserving cap for these next two offseasons, when a lot of those players from previous eras will be leaving. That way they can fill the spots without putting the team atmosphere in total jeapordy. That is why they didnt want to renegotiate with Kendall, and why theyre not in negotiations with Vilma, Robertson, or any of those players that they want to eventually replace. As I've said before, the scheme doesnt really matter, we dont have the talent to make any defense work imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gangreenman Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 He showed a strong motor in pre-season games and tc. They need that on the field. The only other guy who showed a motor in p.s. was Harris. The other guys were just as bad in ps as they are in the reg season. So play the guys who at least looked good in the summer. If this FO was really commitedd to rebuilding, they'd activate him and see what he can do in real time. The DL has been horrid, so what do they have to lose by trying him out? Who would we inactivate if we put in DeVito? Id like to see Mosley get more PT in the middle and guys like Drew Coleman play more in nickel packages. These are the players we should be looking to improve for the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 1st of all I said the coaches, not the FO. I think Tangini got handed down a team in shambles... And many of the leaders of that team are going to be gone after next year. They want the impact players, but they didnt want to risk a locker room fallout by benching a lot of leaders like Ellis and Vilma. I think the FO is doing the right thing by waiting it out and conserving cap for these next two offseasons, when a lot of those players from previous eras will be leaving. That way they can fill the spots without putting the team atmosphere in total jeapordy. That is why they didnt want to renegotiate with Kendall, and why theyre not in negotiations with Vilma, Robertson, or any of those players that they want to eventually replace. As I've said before, the scheme doesnt really matter, we dont have the talent to make any defense work imo. Mangini is the FO. It's just him and Tannenbaum. Tannenbaum has always been primarily a contract guy, IMO this is Mangini's team for better or for worse. Conserving cap was a nice idea when the cap was lower, but the way it's going up now there aren't going to be any decent players left by the time the Pats are done with their spending spree. Wouldn't it have been easier to replace Vilma and DRob if there were serviceable players to do so? IMO leaving $10M in cap space on the table with our current talent level was simply irresponsible. Who would we inactivate if we put in DeVito? Id like to see Mosley get more PT in the middle and guys like Drew Coleman play more in nickel packages. These are the players we should be looking to improve for the future. See above. Start with Hicks. He is 31 and will more than likely not be in the league next time the Jets make the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetCane Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 Who would we inactivate if we put in DeVito? Id like to see Mosley get more PT in the middle and guys like Drew Coleman play more in nickel packages. These are the players we should be looking to improve for the future. Is wondering who to de-activate really an important reaso? For any given game, they can deac Bowens, a TE or a fb, which they have already done. They can deac a backup LB, too. Or deac mosley or pouha for a week to see what devito can do. Drew Coleman is too small to last from playing f/t. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gangreenman Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 Mangini is the FO. It's just him and Tannenbaum. Tannenbaum has always been primarily a contract guy, IMO this is Mangini's team for better or for worse. Conserving cap was a nice idea when the cap was lower, but the way it's going up now there aren't going to be any decent players left by the time the Pats are done with their spending spree. Wouldn't it have been easier to replace Vilma and DRob if there were serviceable players to do so? IMO leaving $10M in cap space on the table with our current talent level was simply irresponsible. See above. Start with Hicks. He is 31 and will more than likely not be in the league next time the Jets make the playoffs. Good point. I still think that its best to wait for their contracts run out before we try to replace them with big name impact guys. I believe this is both Vilma's and Barton's contract year. Expect us to sign/draft an impact ILB to start alongside Harris. We may also pick up a NT late in the draft to groom for when DROB's contract expires next offseason. Rebuilding takes time, you cant just trade away all of the veterans on your team in one offseason... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 Rebuilding takes time, you cant just trade away all of the veterans on your team in one offseason... Good point, but they brought in plenty of bodies. If they had used some of that $10M they could have brought in another decent DE (assuming Coleman is decent) instead of Hicks/Haynes. Especially if they had saved that Kimo money. They could have brought in an impact pass rusher instead of Bowens (a guy who hadn't played without his hand in the dirt). Make a run at Adalius Thomas instead of say Bowens and Wadsworth. Maybe a real OG instead of retread injured players like Clarke and Wade Smith. Would have been a good idea considering that they knew the Kendall situation was brewing well before the draft. ANY live body to spell/compete with DRob and the parade of rejects behind him at NT. They didn't have to trade any vets, just cut some ****ty ones. Barton and Barrett are ripe to be cut, let alone some of the lower level guys like Kassell, Poteat, etc. The FA pieces they are adding do not seem to be long term solutions, just stop gaps. The one FA that looked good last year (Dyson) has landed in the doghouse. At four picks per year it will take decades to rebuild through the draft. They do not inspire confidence with personnel decisions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gangreenman Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 Good point, but they brought in plenty of bodies. If they had used some of that $10M they could have brought in another decent DE (assuming Coleman is decent) instead of Hicks/Haynes. Especially if they had saved that Kimo money. They could have brought in an impact pass rusher instead of Bowens (a guy who hadn't played without his hand in the dirt). Make a run at Adalius Thomas instead of say Bowens and Wadsworth. Maybe a real OG instead of retread injured players like Clarke and Wade Smith. Would have been a good idea considering that they knew the Kendall situation was brewing well before the draft. ANY live body to spell/compete with DRob and the parade of rejects behind him at NT. They didn't have to trade any vets, just cut some ****ty ones. Barton and Barrett are ripe to be cut, let alone some of the lower level guys like Kassell, Poteat, etc. The FA pieces they are adding do not seem to be long term solutions, just stop gaps. The one FA that looked good last year (Dyson) has landed in the doghouse. At four picks per year it will take decades to rebuild through the draft. They do not inspire confidence with personnel decisions. For now, theyre adding stop gaps. Once they replace Herms players with the players they want, then we'll go after talent. The next two offseasons are so key for this franchise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetCane Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 IMO leaving $10M in cap space on the table with our current talent level was simply irresponsible. Exactamundo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bugg Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 Anyone who watches the game could see we were in a 4-3 alignment a lot yesterday. probably even more that than the 3-4. True. Problem is not how they line up, but a question of talent. One more thing-if now, tosday, Mangini switches to the 4-3 to appease a few malcontents, where does that leave him if he gives up on his scheme?he'd become even less respected. There's a bloodletting coming this offseason. This is going to be a very different team. And one more thing- if anyone thinks scouts are drooling over the likes of itty bitty Jon Vilma, think again. There are lots of safeties that are bigger,and may some corners too.If gaurds and backs can knock him out of plays and his tackles are all 6-8 yards upfield, there's no market for such a player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetCane Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 I have no sympathy for the lack of talent argument. Not when they are $10M under the cap, but raise parking and concession prices. The FO, from the owner down to the HC was too cheap to spend the money on talent and exercise their right to spend money on talent up to the cap. Instead, we got an inferior product to watch, and a few basically crappy FAs who may have been cheaper and not so good. The CS has failed at making even a halfway decent transition from one scheme to another, and has utterly failed to properly utilizze the talent they have while making that transition. Guys who are "supposed" to be 3-4 guys arent producing, and they nullified the strengths of the players they have. This CS and FO gets NO PASS on this, and think they could use the lack of talent defense. What a crock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gangreenman Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 I have no sympathy for the lack of talent argument. Not when they are $10M under the cap, but raise parking and concession prices. The FO, from the owner down to the HC was too cheap to spend the money on talent and exercise their right to spend money on talent up to the cap. Instead, we got an inferior product to watch, and a few basically crappy FAs who may have been cheaper and not so good. The CS has failed at making even a halfway decent transition from one scheme to another, and has utterly failed to properly utilizze the talent they have while making that transition. Guys who are "supposed" to be 3-4 guys arent producing, and they nullified the strengths of the players they have. This CS and FO gets NO PASS on this, and think they could use the lack of talent defense. What a crock. By the end of the 2009 season, if we agree to stick with Tangini, the Jets will have an elite defense in the 3-4. Book it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetCane Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 By the end of the 2009 season, if we agree to stick with Tangini, the Jets will have an elite defense in the 3-4. Book it. If they do, it wont be Sutton coaching it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gangreenman Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 If they do, it wont be Sutton coaching it. I already took that to the bank, they didnt accept it. Again, the fact that we have no talent isnt Sutton's fault. He's not the one bringing in the players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JETSFAN5180 Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 Ive been saying 4-3 all season. Mangini is not the same coach he was last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BP Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 I already took that to the bank, they didnt accept it. Again, the fact that we have no talent isnt Sutton's fault. He's not the one bringing in the players. Sutton is gone after this year. what happened this past Sunday with the play calling on defense was the exact same thing that happened in Cleveland last year in the 2nd half. it's embarrassing and humiliating for your HC to take over the defensive play calling on defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gangreenman Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 Ive been saying 4-3 all season. Mangini is not the same coach he was last year. He didnt play 4-3 last year either though. Again, give me a good reason why this team is better off in the 4-3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gangreenman Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 Sutton is gone after this year. what happened this past Sunday with the play calling on defense was the exact same thing that happened in Cleveland last year in the 2nd half. it's embarrassing and humiliating for your HC to take over the defensive play calling on defense. I really dont see a need to throw him under the bus. His D did fine in the 1st half and he has no real talent to work with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JETSFAN5180 Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 He didnt play 4-3 last year either though. Again, give me a good reason why this team is better off in the 4-3. Reason #1 we are 1-6.....................do you need another?????????????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gangreenman Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 Reason #1 we are 1-6.....................do you need another?????????????? Thats not good enough, no. We're 1-6... But that would be true regardless of what defensive scheme we played. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BP Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 I really dont see a need to throw him under the bus. His D did fine in the 1st half and he has no real talent to work with. They run blitzed more in the second half of the season last year, and played more 8 men fronts (or at least showed them) to stop the run. they sucked in the first half of last year stopping the run too. that 1st half of the Cleveland game last year was almost as embarrassing on defense as the Bengals game. luckily for Mangini and Sutton they had the bye after that, and that turned the whole season around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gangreenman Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 They run blitzed more in the second half of the season last year, and played more 8 men fronts (or at least showed them) to stop the run. they sucked in the first half of last year stopping the run too. that 1st half of the Cleveland game last year was almost as embarrassing on defense as the Bengals game. luckily for Mangini and Sutton they had the bye after that, and that turned the whole season around. Halftime of that CLE game is when Mangini and Sutton decided to turn the D loose. We gave up something like 30 rush yds in the 2nd half of that game i believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BP Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 Halftime of that CLE game is when Mangini and Sutton decided to turn the D loose. We gave up something like 30 rush yds in the 2nd half of that game i believe. And they played like that the rest of the year. a pressure defense. Now, the linebackers are 5-6 yards behind the LOS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JETSFAN5180 Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 BOTTOM LINE.....................without a pass rush no secondary can contain recievers for the amount of time opposing QBs have to throw. 1-6 WE ARE WHAT WE ARE.................................NOTHING Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gangreenman Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 And they played like that the rest of the year. a pressure defense. Now, the linebackers are 5-6 yards behind the LOS. Yeah, I noticed that... Sad part is the OL still finds a way to get to them before the ball is even handed off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gangreenman Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 BOTTOM LINE.....................without a pass rush no secondary can contain recievers for the amount of time opposing QBs have to throw. 1-6 WE ARE WHAT WE ARE.................................NOTHING very good JF180...Now tell me, did you figure that out all by yourself? You suggest we should switch to the 4-3 but still have not given any reason as to how that system will improve our defensive play. Can you, or are you just saying that because "everyone else is"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JETSFAN5180 Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 very good JF180...Now tell me, did you figure that out all by yourself? You suggest we should switch to the 4-3 but still have not given any reason as to how that system will improve our defensive play. Can you, or are you just saying that because "everyone else is"? NO greenman but we dont have the proper personnel to succesfully run a 3-4. For starters we dont have a NT who can run stuff or a dominate pass rushing defensive end. No go get a warm glass of milk,get a book about football and read it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetCane Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 NO greenman but we dont have the proper personnel to succesfully run a 3-4. For starters we dont have a NT who can run stuff or a dominate pass rushing defensive end. No go get a warm glass of milk,get a book about football and read it! LOL! Here's a good place to start. And btw, how many sacks do our 3-4 OLBs have this season? http://www.footballbabble.com/football/defense/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gangreenman Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 NO greenman but we dont have the proper personnel to succesfully run a 3-4. For starters we dont have a NT who can run stuff or a dominate pass rushing defensive end. No go get a warm glass of milk,get a book about football and read it! :rl: You're telling me to read about football.... I agree, we dont have the personell to run a 3-4, but we dont have the personell for a 4-3 either. As I was saying, we dont have the talent, it doesnt matter what defensive scheme we're in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gangreenman Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 LOL! Here's a good place to start. And btw, how many sacks do our 3-4 OLBs have this season? http://www.footballbabble.com/football/defense/ Ive read plenty about football, trust me. I also used to play as well and I am a team statistician now. BTW, you havent defended the 4-3 that well either... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetCane Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 Ive read plenty about football, trust me. I also used to play as well and I am a team statistician now. BTW, you havent defended the 4-3 that well either... That's your opinion, and as i said at the outset, it is impossible to know for sure without going back in time and replaying things. You are no authority on how they would do in a 4-3 either, especially after your defense of Sutton in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JETSFAN5180 Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 ganggreenman KNOWS it all......................................................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gangreenman Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 JC i just read through that link.... DE These players stop the run, but are also highly skilled pass rushers. Especially in the 4-3 defense...In the 4-3 defense, defensive ends tend to be the sack leaders. Which DE on our team fits that description?? LB .... In the 3-4 defense, the outside linebackers are also sack leaders. Who lead our team in sacks last year? Whose leading the team this year? 4-3 Defense .... In the 4-3, the three linebackers have specific duties. The middle linebacker is the largest of the three. Vilma is the smallest of our LB's. He patrols the line of scrimmage from sideline to sideline, trying to fight off guards and fullbacks and tackling the ball carrier. Now, Im not saying our talent is good for the 3/4 either. As I said before, I dont think we have enough defensive talent for it to make much of a difference what D we play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gangreenman Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 ganggreenman KNOWS it all......................................................... true. You dont need to back that up:Nuts: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.