Greenseed3 Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 Vilma just had a very serious knee injury, and his knee was never in the best shape to begin with. He may never be the player he was at one point again, and because of that--you're right, the trade isn't fair. But its not fair for the Lions, we'd be getting a steal. If you recall, the Lions were going to dump him. Getting a Vilma in exchange is a godsend to their organization. We might be able to extract a later round pick in the deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iceman88 Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 It might look like a fair deal, but Vilma is 3 years younger than him. Vilma will fit better in their defense than Rogers in ours. It's not fair in my honest opinion. Who cares if Vilma fits better there, he doesn't do sh*t here and is coming off a knee injury. This is a great deal for us where we can get a legit NT. Vilma will walk next season when he is a FA no matter what so we might as well get what we can for him. Most teams won't want to take a player coming off a knee injury so this is probably the best deal we get if true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVM Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 If you recall, the Lions were going to dump him. Getting a Vilma in exchange is a godsend to their organization. We might be able to extract a later round pick in the deal. Dont get your hopes up. Even if they would have dumped him, the Jets obviously dont have much use for Vilma in the 3-4. He could MAYBE make the jump to OLB, but thats far from a sure thing(and Im just shooting off the hip with that, he's never played there before...its probably just wishful thinking because I like the guy). Vilma spent the last half of the year on the IR, and the first half he spent lost on the football field. Whether they would have dumped Rogers or not doesn't change the fact that Vilmas value is at an all time low right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 Who cares if Vilma fits better there, he doesn't do sh*t here and is coming off a knee injury. This is a great deal for us where we can get a legit NT. Vilma will walk next season when he is a FA no matter what so we might as well get what we can for him. Most teams won't want to take a player coming off a knee injury so this is probably the best deal we get if true. I don't see why everyone's so broken up over it. It's RIDICULOUSLY easier to find an ILB than a 3-4 NT. I don't know where this idea got started that Vilma was this unbelievably great, great player. He was good for a rookie in '04. Absolutely. He had a good season where he put up great gross #'s in terms of tackles a year later. But he's a lousy run-stopper, has always been a non-factor blitzing, and his coverage skills (while not totally awful) are vastly overrated. He works in exactly one particular scheme. A scheme we do not and will not incorporate here. He certainly isn't so incredibly great to build a team around because he happens to be here right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BroadwayJoe12 Posted February 25, 2008 Author Share Posted February 25, 2008 Dont get your hopes up. Even if they would have dumped him, the Jets obviously dont have much use for Vilma in the 3-4. He could MAYBE make the jump to OLB, but thats far from a sure thing(and Im just shooting off the hip with that, he's never played there before...its probably just wishful thinking because I like the guy). Vilma spent the last half of the year on the IR, and the first half he spent lost on the football field. Whether they would have dumped Rogers or not doesn't change the fact that Vilmas value is at an all time low right now. The jump to OLB?? You don't mean in a 34 do you? His knock on him for playing ILB is that he is too small and can't shed blockers, he would get absolutely demolished as an OLB going up against Tackles every down. I love vilma just as much as the next guy, which is why i'll cheer for him no matter where he ends up, outside of the afc east of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVM Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 The jump to OLB?? You don't mean in a 34 do you? His knock on him for playing ILB is that he is too small and can't shed blockers, he would get absolutely demolished as an OLB going up against Tackles every down. I love vilma just as much as the next guy, which is why i'll cheer for him no matter where he ends up, outside of the afc east of course. Did you not read what I wrote in the parenthesis? I openly admitted I didn't know what I was talking about, yet you still took the time to write that? lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BroadwayJoe12 Posted February 25, 2008 Author Share Posted February 25, 2008 Did you not read what I wrote in the parenthesis? I openly admitted I didn't know what I was talking about, yet you still took the time to write that? lol Well if you took the time to write it, I felt you deserved an answer. This question has come up many a time and i apologize if i sounded pi$sy, but i was moreso just trying to explain how impossible it would be for him to play there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECURB Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 Exactly, Some people just need to accept that Vilma can't play in the 3-4 Defence. Or maybe they think Mangini and his great 3-4 defense should get the F out of town... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gangreenman Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 Or maybe they think Mangini and his great 3-4 defense should get the F out of town... Or maybe we should just start Chad again and have him lead us to the SB land return this franchise to the glory it never had. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECURB Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 Or maybe we should just start Chad again and have him lead us to the SB land return this franchise to the glory it never had. This has nothing to do with Chad... but good job champ! Mangini is supposed to be a "defensive" coach... and he has shown no ability to adapt a defense to fit his players strengths... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gangreenman Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 This has nothing to do with Chad... but good job champ! Mangini is supposed to be a "defensive" coach... and he has shown no ability to adapt a defense to fit his players strengths... Thanks. Anyway, not so sure you're right about his defense either. When you think about it, yes Vilma, Ellis, and Robertson are all worse in the 3-4. On the other hand, Harris, Coleman, BThomas, and Hobson are/were all better in the 3-4. Honestly, with the players we had last season, we probably would have sucked either way. Adding Gholston and/or Rogers and/or Pace can go a long, long way for this defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECURB Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 Thanks. Anyway, not so sure you're right about his defense either. When you think about it, yes Vilma, Ellis, and Robertson are all worse in the 3-4. On the other hand, Harris, Coleman, BThomas, and Hobson are/were all better in the 3-4. Honestly, with the players we had last season, we probably would have sucked either way. Adding Gholston and/or Rogers and/or Pace can go a long, long way for this defense. Harris and Coleman were acquired for this system... I would sure hope they fit it... Hobson was better in 05' than he was in 07'.... 06' was just a hiccup apparently... and BThomas was a ghost again in 07'... Mangini does not adapt to his players.. and its not working... it leaves too many holes... he is trying to act like this is Madden football and he can just start with a clean slate... Look at the Steelers this year... Tomlin adapted his style to their abilities... what a concept... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BroadwayJoe12 Posted February 25, 2008 Author Share Posted February 25, 2008 Harris and Coleman were acquired for this system... I would sure hope they fit it... Hobson was better in 05' than he was in 07'.... 06' was just a hiccup apparently... and BThomas was a ghost again in 07'... Mangini does not adapt to his players.. and its not working... it leaves too many holes... he is trying to act like this is Madden football and he can just start with a clean slate... Look at the Steelers this year... Tomlin adapted his style to their abilities... what a concept... Tomlin didn't adapt his style to their abilities he just kept the same defense, because they were perenially considered one of the best defense in the leauge and had many key cogs for a good 34. Casey hampton is a NT plain and simple probably the best in the league. It's not like they had a decent 34 and he didn't switch them, they had a dominant 34. Mangini came into a 43 team that was OK not dominant like the steelers. We traded the oft injured Abraham and landed mangold. Abraham continues to be injured and is one of the main cogs in a 43 defense, they did the right thing trading him. Vilma was good but he wasn't elite. Hobson was better in '05, but 2 years has that affect on an aging linebacker who wasn't amazing in '05 to begin with. Bryan thomas switched positions, but yes he did have a better year in his contract year. Drob wasn't an elite 43 DT so its not like he's taking a warren sapp and making him play NT. Mangini is bringing with him the defense he thinks is the best for this team and the only person it doesn't seem to fit is vilma. We were about as far away from having an elite 43 defense than we are with a 34 defense. I would wait till the end of this year to really judge his defense, because you can see he actually has an eye for talent and a plan unlike the 43 under herm and bradway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irish Jet Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 Tomlin didn't adapt his style to their abilities he just kept the same defense, because they were perenially considered one of the best defense in the leauge and had many key cogs for a good 34. Casey hampton is a NT plain and simple probably the best in the league. It's not like they had a decent 34 and he didn't switch them, they had a dominant 34. Mangini came into a 43 team that was OK not dominant like the steelers. We traded the oft injured Abraham and landed mangold. Abraham continues to be injured and is one of the main cogs in a 43 defense, they did the right thing trading him. Vilma was good but he wasn't elite. Hobson was better in '05, but 2 years has that affect on an aging linebacker who wasn't amazing in '05 to begin with. Bryan thomas switched positions, but yes he did have a better year in his contract year. Drob wasn't an elite 43 DT so its not like he's taking a warren sapp and making him play NT. Mangini is bringing with him the defense he thinks is the best for this team and the only person it doesn't seem to fit is vilma. We were about as far away from having an elite 43 defense than we are with a 34 defense. I would wait till the end of this year to really judge his defense, because you can see he actually has an eye for talent and a plan unlike the 43 under herm and bradway. There was no excuse for D-Rob and Vilma surviving last off-season, they both should have been gone. in this scheme they are liability. I'm giving up on Tangini if they don't bring in some real talent this off-season. They can **** off for all I care. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
will Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 There was no excuse for D-Rob and Vilma surviving last off-season, they both should have been gone. in this scheme they are liability. Hindsight is 20/20. Both Vilma and especially Robinson came on strong at the end of 2006. Robertson's improved play was the key reason the defense turned it around after the bye. It was not unreasonable to give these two guys, who are both great athletes, another chance in 2007. It clearly has not worked, and the Vilma injury was very bad luck, but it was not certain by any means that the defense couldn't work well with these two guys. I in favor of jettisoning both of these guys. In fact I would have favored it last year, but I cant say it was a slam dunk decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 I don't remember offhand, but I'm pretty sure that there were zero potential 3-4 NT available last offseason. In '06 they could have drafted Ngata or Gabe Watson and didn't. They (justly) get killed for those decisions, but after the '06 season there wasn't much out there. Only one I remember is that fat guy from JuCo (Walter Something-or-other) that didn't even make it out of mini-camp with somebody. Robertson was probably the best option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EM31 Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 The cap hit for cutting DROB last offseason would have exceeded the GNP of many 3rd world countries. DROB was for all practical puposes uncuttable. Some pieces of snot take a while to flick off your finger nail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaumerJet Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 Vilma for Rogers. DO IT. Here's the problem, Rogers has a weight issue. Each year for the last 3 of his 7 seasons he has come to camp well beyond the normal weight for a LB or even a DB! So overweight that he has sputtered in the 2nd half of each season. Sure, he'll average 5 sacks per season - But it will happen in the 1st half of the season, when we don't need him to be so forceful - we need a Defenseman who can push forward in the second half of the season. Rogers for Vilma? - Not unless Detroit gives us additional picks. Rogers for Drob? - That I would agree on... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 Here's the problem, Rogers has a weight issue. Each year for the last 3 of his 7 seasons he has come to camp well beyond the normal weight for a DB. So overweight that he has sputtered in the 2nd half of each season. Sure, he'll average 5 sacks per season - But it will happen in the 1st half of the season, when we don't need him to be so forceful - we need a back who can push forward in the second half of the season. Rogers for Vilma? - Not unless Detroit gives us additional picks. Rogers for Drob? - That I would agree on... I wouldn't be unhappy with either. But I see your point if Vilma in fact has more trade value than Rogers. Either way I don't really care. I'm not 100% sure that Vilma is even the 3rd-best LB'er on this team for a 3-4 front. So if it's Vilma for Rogers I won't cry about it. We get someone who should be a starter for someone who should be a backup here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irish Jet Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 Here's the problem, Rogers has a weight issue. Each year for the last 3 of his 7 seasons he has come to camp well beyond the normal weight for a DB DB?? Between this post and your sig I ahve to ask if you even know what a defensive back is???? It's sure as hell not the Position of Shaun Rogers or Chris Long. Rogers is a big body in the middle, something we need desperately. Vilma has proven he can't play effectively in the scheme. That would be a great deal for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaumerJet Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 DB?? Between this post and your sig I ahve to ask if you even know what a defensive back is???? It's sure as hell not the Position of Shaun Rogers or Chris Long. Rogers is a big body in the middle, something we need desperately. Vilma has proven he can't play effectively in the scheme. That would be a great deal for us. IRISH, I want Chris Long as our new ILB. I am aware that is the position that Shaun Rogers plays. The whole reason that the Lions are interested in trading him is DUE TO HIS WEIGHT PROBLEM! If an ILB can not stop the run or can not get past the line in order to get the QB late in the season because every other play - HE'S ON THE SIDELINE TRYING TO GET O2 - I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT! We can get better for a lot less from Matt Millen! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irish Jet Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 IRISH, I want Chris Long as our new ILB. I am aware that is the position that Shaun Rogers plays. Rogers or Long are not ILB's (Inside Linebackers) Long is a Defensive End and Rogers is a Defensive Tackle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flgreen Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 Before we get to excited about Rogers, there is also this Rogers to Buffalo? Decision could be Jauron's Posted by: Connor Byrne on February 25, 2008 12:59 AM Ever since the 2007 season ended for the Detroit Lions, speculation has run rampant regarding what the team will do with troubled defensive tackle Shaun Rogers. A two-time Pro Bowler, the 28-year-old Rogers is on the outs in the Motor City because of some past off-field issues and an inability to properly control his weight. Despite all the baggage Rogers brings, there are a decent amount of teams interested in acquiring the 6-foot-4, 340-pounder. One of those organizations is believed to be the Buffalo Bills, a club whose biggest need may very well be D-tackle. To acquire Rogers, it might only take a second- or third-round pick. And if "Big Baby," as he's come to be known, can return to his dominant form, he'd certainly be worth a first- or early second-day draft selection. After all, he's more proven in the pros than any of the big-name tackles entering this April's draft (mainly Glen Dorsey and Sedrick Ellis, among others) or the painfully mediocre ones available in free agency, which begins this Friday. Character and weight issues aside, Rogers is truly a perfect fit for Buffalo. Detroit, like the Bills, employs the Tampa 2 defense, a scheme not normally based around large linemen. However, Rogers isn't exactly unathletic for a defender his size, and Bills coach Dick Jauron has already stated this offseason that he'd like to beef up the middle of his 'D'. Can anyone blame him? Buffalo finished last season ranked 25th against the rush, and with the exception of improving youngster John McCargo, its smallish, athletically gifted defensive tackle corps -- Larry Tripplett and Kyle Williams, et al. -- was eaten alive by enemy running backs on a nearly weekly basis. As for Jauron, he very well might hold the key to Rogers' fate. If Jauron informs Bills brass that Rogers is the type of player he can work with, then odds are good Buffalo will try to acquire the oft-terrific tackle for the middle of its defense. If not, though, the character-obsessed Bills won't pursue Rogers. The reason Jauron knows Rogers well is because Buffalo's coach was recently a member of the Lions' staff. The 57-year-old Jauron, a longtime defensive coordinator, spent two seasons with the Lions (2004-05), including a five-game stint as their head man. When Jauron was at the helm of Detroit's 'D', the multidimensional Rogers amassed 109 total tackles, 9.5 sacks and two forced fumble in 30 games. In addition, both of Rogers' Pro Bowl seasons came under Jauron's tutelage. Clearly, then, the pair worked quite well together. Ultimately, if Rogers is traded to Buffalo, then the move received Jauron's blessing. Though he's been a mediocre coach for the Bills in two years, Jauron has a chance to truly help improve the team's roster now by encouraging Buffalo's overstaffed front office to acquire Rogers come Friday, when the NFL's trading ban ends. Of course, adding a proven player of Rogers' ilk would also send the proper message to a dejected fan base that has Toronto, Ontario, on its mind more than an ever-so-elusive playoff berth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JETSFAN5180 Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 Ever since the 2007 season ended for the Detroit Lions, speculation has run rampant regarding what the team will do with troubled defensive tackle Shaun Rogers. Hes not a Mangini type player with the "troubled" label being applied.I dont see him being a New York Jet.No way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irish Jet Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 Ever since the 2007 season ended for the Detroit Lions, speculation has run rampant regarding what the team will do with troubled defensive tackle Shaun Rogers. Hes not a Mangini type player with the "troubled" label being applied.I dont see him being a New York Jet.No way. If mangini passes on him for that reason he seriously has to **** off to some other team!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flgreen Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 Ever since the 2007 season ended for the Detroit Lions, speculation has run rampant regarding what the team will do with troubled defensive tackle Shaun Rogers. Hes not a Mangini type player with the "troubled" label being applied.I dont see him being a New York Jet.No way. I tend to agree, but for a player the team really needs, ya never know. Keep in mind Elam had a sexual assualt charge against him in college. Strangely enough the Bills have a very strong policy on "character guys" also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
124 Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 Baumer, I think you're a little confused with positions. Chris Long = Defensive End or Outside Linebacker, depending if you run a 43 or a 34. Shaun Rogers = Defensive Tackle. Neither is an Inside Linebacker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irish Jet Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 Baumer, I think you're a little confused with positions. Chris Long = Defensive End or Outside Linebacker, depending if you run a 43 or a 34. Shaun Rogers = Defensive Tackle. Neither is an Inside Linebacker. Yeah and in his sig he has long as a DB. WTF??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
124 Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 Yeah and in his sig he has long as a DB. WTF??? Maybe we under-rated Chris Long. He may be a man of many talents. Defensive End, Outside and Inside Linebacker AND a Defensive Back? Christ, can he play Quarterback too? Draft this beast now! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaumerJet Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 Maybe we under-rated Chris Long. He may be a man of many talents. Defensive End, Outside and Inside Linebacker AND a Defensive Back? Christ, can he play Quarterback too? Draft this beast now! Ok, Ok - I FIXED IT!!! :baby::baby::baby: That being said, long could easily fit into an ILB position based on his movements at DE as well as OLB. We need a Strong/Fast LB at middle to fill in the slot position as both pass & especially Run defense. I think Long would fit that position - at least until Ellis retires. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irish Jet Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 Ok, Ok - I FIXED IT!!! :baby::baby::baby: He's not a LB'er either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
124 Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 IJ, Long can be considered a Outside Linebacker, in the 34. He's a hybrid. 43 DE / 34 OLB. However, BaumerJet, there is no way Chris Long could be an effective 34 ILB. No way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterNorth09 Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 Ever since the 2007 season ended for the Detroit Lions, speculation has run rampant regarding what the team will do with troubled defensive tackle Shaun Rogers. Hes not a Mangini type player with the "troubled" label being applied.I dont see him being a New York Jet.No way. Rogers is not a Mangini player? So let's get rid of Mangini then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BroadwayJoe12 Posted February 25, 2008 Author Share Posted February 25, 2008 Ok, Ok - I FIXED IT!!! :baby::baby::baby: That being said, long could easily fit into an ILB position based on his movements at DE as well as OLB. We need a Strong/Fast LB at middle to fill in the slot position as both pass & especially Run defense. I think Long would fit that position - at least until Ellis retires. It would be a waste of money and talent. ILBs in the 34 are not nearly as important as your pass rushing OLB. 34 ILBs are generally easier to find because they don't have to be super athletic just be good against the run and sometimes drop back in coverage. Besides NT, a pass rushing OLB is one of the key cogs in a 34 defense. I agree with you that chris long is a great pick, but only for OLB and if we run a 43 base soemtimes he can run some 43 DE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbyjet69 Posted February 26, 2008 Share Posted February 26, 2008 It would be a waste of money and talent. ILBs in the 34 are not nearly as important as your pass rushing OLB. 34 ILBs are generally easier to find because they don't have to be super athletic just be good against the run and sometimes drop back in coverage. Besides NT, a pass rushing OLB is one of the key cogs in a 34 defense. I agree with you that chris long is a great pick, but only for OLB and if we run a 43 base soemtimes he can run some 43 DE. He would basically take the place of BT. You know? That guy who came on so strong in 06 and dispeared again after signing a contract ext!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.