Kentucky Jet Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 Grading the Jets Roster: Part 7 - The Offensive Line By Joe Caporoso | January 11th, 2008 Today is the seventh segment in our extended look at the current Jets roster and the changes they need to make to improve. We will begin by grading all the players from the team this past season, now moving to the offensive line. Each article will also contain updates on any player or coaching news as it comes out. Updates: - Nothing really going on. The Jets signed Darnell Bing, who was a pretty good player at USC but has obviously struggled in the NFL if the Jets were able to sign him right now. Divisional Round Playoff Pics: Green Bay - 27 Seattle - 24 : Green Bay has a good enough pass defense to slow down Seattle and force them to try and run the ball, which is something they cannot do. However, Holmgren knows the Packers well and Seattle has a better defense than most people think so expect a close game. New England - 34 Jacksonville - 21 : Jacksonville will play step for step with New England for about 3 quarters, until it comes to crunch time and the difference between Tom Brady and David Garrad shows itself. Colts - 38 San Diego - 14 : This will be the weekend Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kentucky Jet Posted January 12, 2008 Author Share Posted January 12, 2008 Callahan interviews, but is it window dressing January 11 Bill Callahan won Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4HCrew Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 But I Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bitonti Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 i still refuse to believe that because Brick hasn't made the pro bowl yet that he never will. after 2 years? it takes 3-5 years for these guys to develop and even so pro bowl is more about team wins for OL. if the Jets had 12 wins Brick would be in the conversation for pro bowl. also Robert Turner isn't terrible. maybe he's a C or a D plus but he's not an F. i thought he did ok in limited duty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green DNA Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 The only reason that Clarke and Clement got an F is because there is no F-. Moore should get an F also, he is horrible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 I'm with Bit. This report card seems based on expectations. Why would Wade Smith get a C when he can't crack the lineup while Montgomery and Clarke get Fs? Motgomery is new to the team and seemed OK. I don't see how Turner gets an F when he is a rookie practice squad project and showed enough ability to see the field. IF Turner gets an F then what do you give Bender? IMO, Mangold is good, but gets way too much praise here for simply not ****ing up. Unlike the rest of these guys he doesn't give up sacks, but what C does? I also think Clement is significantly better than Clarke and Moore is significantly better than Clement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kentucky Jet Posted January 12, 2008 Author Share Posted January 12, 2008 I'm with Bit. This report card seems based on expectations. Why would Wade Smith get a C when he can't crack the lineup while Montgomery and Clarke get Fs? Motgomery is new to the team and seemed OK. I don't see how Turner gets an F when he is a rookie practice squad project and showed enough ability to see the field. IF Turner gets an F then what do you give Bender? IMO, Mangold is good, but gets way too much praise here for simply not ****ing up. Unlike the rest of these guys he doesn't give up sacks, but what C does? I also think Clement is significantly better than Clarke and Moore is significantly better than Clement. I agree with you for the most part. I wonder about BRICK though. We knew he was not a good run blocker due to physical limitations coming out of college. In 2 years he has proven that he is NOT a competant run blocker. Do we really think that he will ever be more then barely passing as a run blocker? A. Clements gets a lot of bad press. In the past two years he has allowed fewer sacks then BRICK and has been a much better run blocker. TOURNER should get more playing time. he was a force in college and was hurt. I hope he develops and saves us some searching for another OG with size and aggressiveness as well as blocking ability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drago Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 i still refuse to believe that because Brick hasn't made the pro bowl yet that he never will. after 2 years? it takes 3-5 years for these guys to develop and even so pro bowl is more about team wins for OL. if the Jets had 12 wins Brick would be in the conversation for pro bowl. also Robert Turner isn't terrible. maybe he's a C or a D plus but he's not an F. i thought he did ok in limited duty. Along with what you said...Brick hasn't been used as efficently as he really could. He has been forced to stay in on the line and help out the guard on any type of run plays, where as, if we had compitant, or very good guard play, Brick would be allowed to give his DE a push, then sprint out left as another lead blocker. I see all the great OT's make that play, and there is no reason to think that brick doesn't have the speed for it. All we need is a good punishing LG to give our line the opportunity to become active. Brick has a few faults, one of them being his weight. We can turn that into a positive if we allow him to actually use his athleticism. No question in my mind that he could make a pro bowl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoFlaJets Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 The only reason that Clarke and Clement got an F is because there is no F-. Moore should get an F also, he is horrible. I agree...POTW nom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BroadwayJoe12 Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 Along with what you said...Brick hasn't been used as efficently as he really could. He has been forced to stay in on the line and help out the guard on any type of run plays, where as, if we had compitant, or very good guard play, Brick would be allowed to give his DE a push, then sprint out left as another lead blocker. I see all the great OT's make that play, and there is no reason to think that brick doesn't have the speed for it. All we need is a good punishing LG to give our line the opportunity to become active. Brick has a few faults, one of them being his weight. We can turn that into a positive if we allow him to actually use his athleticism. No question in my mind that he could make a pro bowl. That's a very good point right there, because he does have the athleticism to do that. Our ineptitude at the LF and RT position also hinders the playmaking ability of chris baker, becuase he is more often asked to chip on a DE and not run routes, which he is capable of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.