JMJ Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 Too bad the Jets are stupid and will not pursue him. No, instead we're going to bank 110% on a draft pick instead of bringing in Holt AND taking someone at 17. Henry Ellard who is now our receivers' coach was Holt's receiver coach from 2001-2008. He's seen Holt at his absolute best and worst. If we don't pursue him it is because we have the most inside of inside sources on him and he's deemed as finished or a shell of his old self. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECURB Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 Yeah. Imagine if you had Derrick Mason as your #1 WR. Damn, that would suck. Did they just bring him in once he got old and/or slow? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
124 Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 Did they just bring him in once he got old and/or slow? Thats what Tennessee thought he was. Whose to say St. Louis is wrong? A lot of people believe they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECURB Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 Thats what Tennessee thought he was. Whose to say St. Louis is wrong? A lot of people believe they are. Holt has more miles on his tires than Mason did though... Holt has played in 158 games and actually saw significant time playing his first years in the league... Mason played 122 games before leaving Tenn and 45 of them he was barely used... so really only 77 games of actually playing and wearing himself out... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aec4 Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 I'm sure his agent has already called everyone... heck he most likely did "quietly" before they released him... Problem is... Coles set the bar way to high for old WR's with his silly contract,... Probably did, I agree. You need to just talk to him if you haven't already. You never know if he'll play for less. Probably not, Im sure. I'd sign him for a 1 yr or 2 yr deal at TO money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECURB Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 Probably did, I agree. You need to just talk to him if you haven't already. You never know if he'll play for less. Probably not, Im sure. I'd sign him for a 1 yr or 2 yr deal at TO money. Yeah if he is game for that... thats fine... but not a Coles deal... no way... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
124 Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 Yeah if he is game for that... thats fine... but not a Coles deal... no way... So you'd give Holt a 2 year, $13 million deal but not a 4 year, $28 million deal? Not too much of a difference except in the amount of years. He is less prone to injury than Coles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irish Jet Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 You have to at least take a good look at him. We are in desperate need at WR. Holt still could be very useful, especially in this offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MasonJet Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 We don't need a super star at QB, we need a game manager. Jeff Garcia can do that and has done that many times effectively before. Tory Holt is not over the hill, he was on a garbage time with zero Offensive Line and once the OLine goes down hill, so does the QB and the passing game meaning the recievers numbers are going to go down. He is still a #1 WR in this league. Is he Top 5 like he once was? Nope, but he's still a #1 and a major upgrade over anything we've had here in YEARS. Look how far Baltimore got last year with Joe Flacco mananging the offense. Take a look at that offense and how our offense would look like with Tory Holt and get back to me on who has the better offense. I agree about Holt but Garcia is not a Super Bowl QB. He just isn't. The only way Garcia would make a Super Bowl is if the D was the best in the entire NFL, and I think our D will be very good this year but not that good. Signing Leftwich and Garcia isn't worth it because they are not going to be the difference between the Jets making the Super Bowl or not making it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alk Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 Patriots| Could be interested in Holt Fri, 13 Mar 2009 16:37:45 -0700 Alk, of *********.com, reports the New England Patriots may or may not be interested in FA WR Tory Holt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECURB Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 Patriots| Could be interested in Holt Fri, 13 Mar 2009 16:37:45 -0700 Alk, of *********.com, reports the New England Patriots may or may not be interested in FA WR Tory Holt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alk Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 How does Epic Fail compare to Eternal Fail? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECURB Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 How does Epic Fail compare to Eternal Fail? How many superbowls did it take the Pats to win... 30 something right? JETS got it in 3 tries... and now will do it again in about the same time it took the pats to do it for the first time... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larz Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 I'm torn on this one. he's old for a WR, but we need a WR in the worst way I think he signs somwhere else he saw what coles and TO got, he's not coming here cheap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 You shoot yourself in the foot before you type... "kobe>Jordan" Nobody can trust what you say... lol It's like saying Favre is the best QB ever, it's debatable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECURB Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 It's like saying Favre is the best QB ever, it's debatable. No its not... he is not the best ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alk Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 How many superbowls did it take the Pats to win... 30 something right? JETS got it in 3 tries... and now will do it again in about the same time it took the pats to do it for the first time... What does that have to do with anything? The fact is you weren't even born when they won it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECURB Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 What does that have to do with anything? The fact is you weren't even born when they won it. It has everything to do with it... JETS won one WAY before the Pats ever could... and if they win another soon they got back and won in about the same time it took the Pats to get their first... If the Pats dont get back and win for 30+ years... when that time comes... will you tell your son/grandson that they eternally suck because they were young/barely alive when it happened for the 1st time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECURB Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 What does that have to do with anything? The fact is you weren't even born when they won it. It took the Pats 34 years to win a Superbowl, it took the JETS 3. So by saying the JETS are in eternal "fail" you claiming that the Pats are just that but with a blip of success 5 years ago... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larz Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 It took the Pats 34 years to win a Superbowl, it took the JETS 3. So by saying the JETS are in eternal "fail" you claiming that the Pats are just that but with a blip of success 5 years ago... by my count, the pats* haven't won one yet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECURB Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 by my count, the pats* haven't won one yet I am not including that in this argument... this is just a straight up... took them 34 years to win it all... and its been 5 since... by alks count thats a blip of sucess on a long timeline of eternal failure... lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxman Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 Holt has missed 2 games in ten years. He has had 1,000 years every year except his rookie season and last year. I think someone is going to give him a contract that makes him not an option. I wouldn't break the bank for him at 32. But seeing as how Coles just got paid, I think Holt is getting to get a decent (bigger) payday himself. That is the only thing that would stop me from signing him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
124 Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 No its not... he is not the best ever. But it is debatable. Just because you don't think he is doesn't mean that there are others out there who think he is (I am not in that catagory). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alk Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 It took the Pats 34 years to win a Superbowl, it took the JETS 3. So by saying the JETS are in eternal "fail" you claiming that the Pats are just that but with a blip of success 5 years ago... I never said the Jets were in "Eternal Fail", you did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECURB Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 But it is debatable. Just because you don't think he is doesn't mean that there are others out there who think he is (I am not in that catagory). It is not even debatable... multiple superbowls are required to be in the discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECURB Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 How does Epic Fail compare to Eternal Fail? I never said the Jets were in "Eternal Fail", you did. Oh sorry you meant that other team... rightt.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
124 Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 It is not even debatable... multiple superbowls are required to be in the discussion. Why? Quarterbacks who win multiple Super Bowls are only up for discussion? I guess that eliminates Dan Marino (foolishly). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeWillie Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 Oh Bull****... all of these guys made instant impacts on offense... 2008 2nd round Donnie Avery - 674 yards Eddie Royal - 980 yards DeSean Jackson - 912 yards 2007 1st round Calvin Johnson - 756 yards Tedd Ginn - 420 yards Dwayne Bowe - 995 yards Anthony Gonzalez - 576 yards 2006 1st round Santonio Holmes - 824 yards 2nd round Gregg Jennings - 632 yards Joey Galloway 67, 1039, 7 TD's (1995) Marvin Harrison 64, 836, 8 TD's (1996) Randy Moss 69, 1313, 17 TD's (1998) Antonio Bryant 44, 733, 6 TD's (2002) Andre Johnson 66, 976, 4 TD's (2003) Anquan Boldin 101, 1377, 8 TD's (2003) Lee Evans 48, 843, 9 TD's (2004) Roy Williams 54, 817, 8 TD's (2004) And a little closer to home ... Wayne Chrebet 66, 726, 4 TD's (1995) Keyshawn Johnson 63, 844, 8 TD's (1996) While it is true that rookie receivers often don't make a huge impact in Year 1, it does happen every year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECURB Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 Why? Quarterbacks who win multiple Super Bowls are only up for discussion? I guess that eliminates Dan Marino (foolishly). Why is that foolish? Gotta have the rings baby! (think about it... if Vinatieri misses the kicks... Brady is not considered as good as he is now with the wins... ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
124 Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 Why is that foolish? Gotta have the rings baby! (think about it... if Vinatieri misses the kicks... Brady is not considered as good as he is now with the wins... ) Brady put them in those situations. Tom Brady would still be viewed as one of the great of all time if Vinatieri shanks those kicks, you just would hear about how much of a choke artist he was and how Brady couldn't catch a break. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alk Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 Why is that foolish? Gotta have the rings baby! (think about it... if Vinatieri misses the kicks... Brady is not considered as good as he is now with the wins... ) So now we're getting somewhere. Belichick really isn't considered a great coach because of Brady, it was because of his kicker. Finally the pieces are beginning to fall together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
124 Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 Oh Bull****... all of these guys made instant impacts on offense... 2008 2nd round Donnie Avery - 674 yards Eddie Royal - 980 yards DeSean Jackson - 912 yards 2007 1st round Calvin Johnson - 756 yards Tedd Ginn - 420 yards Dwayne Bowe - 995 yards Anthony Gonzalez - 576 yards 2006 1st round Santonio Holmes - 824 yards 2nd round Gregg Jennings - 632 yards 400, 500 & 600 yards are making impacts? No, not quite. We are going to be looking for someone to be a number ONE, not a number two or three. Royal, Jackson, Bowe, Holmes & Johnson made impacts. The rest? Not quite. There are tons who do not produce. Tons. And I'm sorry, but that receiver needs to come down with 60, 70 balls and 700+ yards at least to be considered somewhat effective as a rookie. At least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMaynard Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 This is a no brainer to me now that Holt is a free agent. I don't want to trade any more draft picks. But now they should really try to get this guy. He is only 32, never had a serious injury. He has plenty left and will help the young receivers. His decline in production is more about the state of the Rams than his age. The Jets supposedly have all of this cap space and there is no Calvin Johnson in this draft, certainly not at #17. Get this guy!!!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thai Jet Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 So now we're getting somewhere. Belichick really isn't considered a great coach because of Brady, it was because of his kicker. Finally the pieces are beginning to fall together. * That's all I have to say on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
afosomf Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 So now we're getting somewhere. Belichick really isn't considered a great coach because of Brady, it was because of his kicker. Finally the pieces are beginning to fall together. Einstein finally figured it out...way to go okie:D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.