The Cromartie-Rhodes Debate

[Jetsfan80]

There's been a few on the board questioning our moves over the last couple of days regarding Antonio Cromartie and Kerry Rhodes. On the surface, bringing in Cromartie and trading away Rhodes seemed pointless because of how similarly frustrating these two players are. They bring to the table almost the same set of attributes, such as the following:

1) Both had one standout season that got them to a Pro Bowl, Rhodes in 2006 and Cromartie in 2007. Neither have done much since.

2) Both have off the field issues. Rhodes can't keep his mouth shut on his twitter page and has an acting/modeling career he seems to care about more than his career, whereas Cromartie has had 5 paternity suits over the last 2 seasons.

3) Neither are renowned for their ability to tackle.

Meanwhile, while it seemed we were playing "wife swap" with the Chargers and Cardinals, we let go of 32-year old class act Thomas Jones, which brought up its own set of questions. Personally, I supported the move to release Jones, not only because of his age but his refusal to sign for less.

I also support BOTH the moves with Cromartie and Rhodes. Here's the 2 primary reasons why:

1) The Rex Factor. Far and away the biggest reason to support these moves. Rex once said about Gholston, "if he can't play for me, he can't play for anyone". This will eventually be the kiss of death for Vernon, as he will be gone as soon as its financially viable, and it was the kiss of death for Rhodes, who seemed to be a mis-match for Rex from day 1.

Rex requires one thing and one thing only out of his corners: be able to cover your man in one-on-one coverage, allowing enough time for the pass-rush to get to the QB before he can hit on one of his alternative targets. Antonio Cromartie fits this role, and Rex would NOT have agreed to him joining the Jet roster if he he felt he couldn't help our defense succeed.

When it comes to free safeties, Rex requires something different, which Jim Leonhard, Eric Smith and even James Ihedigbo provide significantly better than Rhodes ever did: Punish receivers coming over the middle and help with the run. Being able to cover is not nearly as important for the FS than the CB for Rex.

Now that Rhodes (clearly not a Rex guy) is gone, we should give Rex the benefit of the doubt that he can get Cromartie to come in and perform in lock-step with his system. After all, San Diego is known for two things regarding its defense: a) The general lack of accountability both on and off the field (see: Merriman's 4-game suspension and Tila Tequila troubles, all the stupid penalties in the AFC Divisional game, etc.), and Its soft zone-defense. In New York, Rex will both hold Cromartie to a higher standard AND ask him to play the man-to-man defense Cromartie prefers to play. If he doesn't work out, its not that big of a deal, which I'll explain with my next point.

2) Draft Pick Management. Tannenbaum did a SUPERB job in shipping out Rhodes and acquiring Cromartie by giving up a future draft choice while earning a current pick and losing none of the other 2010 picks.

With little to no ability to sign quality UFA's, few draft picks to work with for 2010, already being labeled one of the deepest ever, and an uncertain NFL future, 2010 picks are MUCH more valuable than 2011 picks, even moreso than would usually be the case. They are like liquid gold, especially when you can use them to bring in RFA's, something I'm SURE Tannenbaum is looking into aggressively.

By securing a 4th rounder in THIS draft for Rhodes, which is where we got Rhodes in the first place in 2005 and has been a successful round for us in the past, we got very good value for our 27-year old locker-room cancer. Sure, a 3rd would have been great, but who are we kidding to believe that were in the best place to be picky? As I said, draft picks in 2010 are more valuable than most other drafts, and we just wanted to get rid of Kerry, PERIOD.

As for what we gave up for Cromartie, you have to love that we could not only avoid giving up any 2010 picks, but that we could get San Diego to take a CONDITIONAL 2011 draft choice. If 2009 was any indication, we're going to be a damn good team again next season or "die trying", so the worst we're looking at giving up is, say, an overall pick # in the late 40's. This is a far cry from the # 19 overall pick San Diego had to use to draft Cromartie originally, and we have a year before we have to cough it up, when there may not even BE an NFL season to use it.

Sure, San Diego fans are happy to be rid of Cromartie about as much as we are glad to be rid of Rhodes. But for all the reasons I've mentioned, we should be happy with the means by which these deals happened, and how they'll benefit us. Tannenbaum is further proving to be as savvy an NFL GM as they come, and already we're looking better off for 2010 than we did 72 hours ago.

I am EXTREMELY excited to see what we do with the picks we have, whether we burn some in the RFA route or use them all in the deep 2010 draft class.

[lawngnome o-line]

Rex requires one thing and one thing only out of his corners: be able to cover your man in one-on-one coverage, allowing enough time for the pass-rush to get to the QB before he can hit on one of his alternative targets. Antonio Cromartie fits this role, and Rex would NOT have agreed to him joining the Jet roster if he he felt he couldn't help our defense succeed.

When it comes to free safeties, Rex requires something different, which Jim Leonhard, Eric Smith and even James Ihedigbo provide significantly better than Rhodes ever did: Punish receivers coming over the middle and help with the run. Being able to cover is not nearly as important for the FS than the CB for Rex.

2) Draft Pick Management. Tannenbaum did a SUPERB job in shipping out Rhodes and acquiring Cromartie by giving up a future draft choice while earning a current pick and losing none of the other 2010 picks.

With little to no ability to sign quality UFA's, few draft picks to work with for 2010, already being labeled one of the deepest ever, and an uncertain NFL future, 2010 picks are MUCH more valuable than 2011 picks, even moreso than would usually be the case. They are like liquid gold, especially when you can use them to bring in RFA's, something I'm SURE Tannenbaum is looking into aggressively.

By securing a 4th rounder in THIS draft for Rhodes, which is where we got Rhodes in the first place in 2005 and has been a successful round for us in the past, we got very good value for our 27-year old locker-room cancer. Sure, a 3rd would have been great, but who are we kidding to believe that were in the best place to be picky? As I said, draft picks in 2010 are more valuable than most other drafts, and we just wanted to get rid of Kerry, PERIOD.

As for what we gave up for Cromartie, you have to love that we could not only avoid giving up any 2010 picks, but that we could get San Diego to take a CONDITIONAL 2011 draft choice. If 2009 was any indication, we're going to be a damn good team again next season or "die trying", so the worst we're looking at giving up is, say, an overall pick # in the late 40's. This is a far cry from the # 19 overall pick San Diego had to use to draft Cromartie originally, and we have a year before we have to cough it up, when there may not even BE an NFL season to use it.

Sure, San Diego fans are happy to be rid of Cromartie about as much as we are glad to be rid of Rhodes. But for all the reasons I've mentioned, we should be happy with the means by which these deals happened, and how they'll benefit us. Tannenbaum is further proving to be as savvy an NFL GM as they come, and already we're looking better off for 2010 than we did 72 hours ago.

I am EXTREMELY excited to see what we do with the picks we have, whether we burn some in the RFA route or use them all in the deep 2010 draft class.

POTW -- nice analysis of the trades that many of us could question. The part I bolded though indicates my feeling that Rex could take Kyle Wilson (CB Boise State) if he's there, and experiment Lowery to move into the vacated safety position. I know many here will question why we'll be investing ample money in to our secondary (most specifically to the CB position) but will protect us god forbid Cromartie doesn't pan out in NY.

This year's draft is loaded with talent all around, and would not mind us keeping as many picks as possible to fill our needs, (DE, WR #2, RB #3, OL) but our first selection needs to be a splash that can play from day one and not be a project.

[SenorGato]

A CB is more valuable than a S for Rex, and Rhodes failed in his many chances to show that he didn't have his head in his ass.

It'd be hard to count on a draft pick bringing us what Cromartie can bring us, but a draft pick can handle safety with Revis, Cromartie, and Leonhard. We can also land a Sharper somehow...I'm not sure how since we can't.

[jetsjets]

Cromartieis a great pick up and he will PLAY 4 us. I believe the fact that revis is on the other side is gonna make him want to step his game up. and if we get any type of a pass rush. 4get it. Kerry cupcakes for a 4th. I..... Not..... sure.................... think we wanted him gone so bad we settled too quickly. I am more then happy he's gone but still think we could of got a 3rd 4 him. but to not have to hear him talk about hows a leader o this team, and watch him look like shi!! on Sunday. 4th it is lol

[JoeWillie]

There's been a few on the board questioning our moves over the last couple of days regarding Antonio Cromartie and Kerry Rhodes. On the surface, bringing in Cromartie and trading away Rhodes seemed pointless because of how similarly frustrating these two players are. They bring to the table almost the same set of attributes, such as the following:

1) Both had one standout season that got them to a Pro Bowl, Rhodes in 2006 and Cromartie in 2007. Neither have done much since.

2) Both have off the field issues. Rhodes can't keep his mouth shut on his twitter page and has an acting/modeling career he seems to care about more than his career, whereas Cromartie has had 5 paternity suits over the last 2 seasons.

3) Neither are renowned for their ability to tackle.

Meanwhile, while it seemed we were playing "wife swap" with the Chargers and Cardinals, we let go of 32-year old class act Thomas Jones, which brought up its own set of questions. Personally, I supported the move to release Jones, not only because of his age but his refusal to sign for less.

I also support BOTH the moves with Cromartie and Rhodes. Here's the 2 primary reasons why:

1) The Rex Factor. Far and away the biggest reason to support these moves. Rex once said about Gholston, "if he can't play for me, he can't play for anyone". This will eventually be the kiss of death for Vernon, as he will be gone as soon as its financially viable, and it was the kiss of death for Rhodes, who seemed to be a mis-match for Rex from day 1.

Rex requires one thing and one thing only out of his corners: be able to cover your man in one-on-one coverage, allowing enough time for the pass-rush to get to the QB before he can hit on one of his alternative targets. Antonio Cromartie fits this role, and Rex would NOT have agreed to him joining the Jet roster if he he felt he couldn't help our defense succeed.

When it comes to free safeties, Rex requires something different, which Jim Leonhard, Eric Smith and even James Ihedigbo provide significantly better than Rhodes ever did: Punish receivers coming over the middle and help with the run. Being able to cover is not nearly as important for the FS than the CB for Rex.

Now that Rhodes (clearly not a Rex guy) is gone, we should give Rex the benefit of the doubt that he can get Cromartie to come in and perform in lock-step with his system. After all, San Diego is known for two things regarding its defense: a) The general lack of accountability both on and off the field (see: Merriman's 4-game suspension and Tila Tequila troubles, all the stupid penalties in the AFC Divisional game, etc.), and Its soft zone-defense. In New York, Rex will both hold Cromartie to a higher standard AND ask him to play the man-to-man defense Cromartie prefers to play. If he doesn't work out, its not that big of a deal, which I'll explain with my next point.

2) Draft Pick Management. Tannenbaum did a SUPERB job in shipping out Rhodes and acquiring Cromartie by giving up a future draft choice while earning a current pick and losing none of the other 2010 picks.

With little to no ability to sign quality UFA's, few draft picks to work with for 2010, already being labeled one of the deepest ever, and an uncertain NFL future, 2010 picks are MUCH more valuable than 2011 picks, even moreso than would usually be the case. They are like liquid gold, especially when you can use them to bring in RFA's, something I'm SURE Tannenbaum is looking into aggressively.

By securing a 4th rounder in THIS draft for Rhodes, which is where we got Rhodes in the first place in 2005 and has been a successful round for us in the past, we got very good value for our 27-year old locker-room cancer. Sure, a 3rd would have been great, but who are we kidding to believe that were in the best place to be picky? As I said, draft picks in 2010 are more valuable than most other drafts, and we just wanted to get rid of Kerry, PERIOD.

As for what we gave up for Cromartie, you have to love that we could not only avoid giving up any 2010 picks, but that we could get San Diego to take a CONDITIONAL 2011 draft choice. If 2009 was any indication, we're going to be a damn good team again next season or "die trying", so the worst we're looking at giving up is, say, an overall pick # in the late 40's. This is a far cry from the # 19 overall pick San Diego had to use to draft Cromartie originally, and we have a year before we have to cough it up, when there may not even BE an NFL season to use it.

Sure, San Diego fans are happy to be rid of Cromartie about as much as we are glad to be rid of Rhodes. But for all the reasons I've mentioned, we should be happy with the means by which these deals happened, and how they'll benefit us. Tannenbaum is further proving to be as savvy an NFL GM as they come, and already we're looking better off for 2010 than we did 72 hours ago.

I am EXTREMELY excited to see what we do with the picks we have, whether we burn some in the RFA route or use them all in the deep 2010 draft class.

Terrific post and right on the money.

[PS17]

Couldn't agree more.

[Bruce Banner]

I agree with a lot of this except for the part about safety coverage ability not being that important. Dallas Clark type tight ends have taken over the league and you need a safety who can cover them. Kerry Rhodes was perfect for that.

Truthfully, Arizona is good place for Rhodes. Adrian Wilson will handle the hitting and Rhodes will handle the coverage. That couldn't happen with the Jets because Rex has a bromance with Leonhard who is too small. If Eric Smith was starting over Leonhard he could handle the hitting and let Rhodes be a ballhawk and everyone would have loved Rhodes like they used to.

[#27TheDominator]

Good post

+1

A CB is more valuable than a S for Rex, and Rhodes failed in his many chances to show that he didn't have his head in his ass.

It'd be hard to count on a draft pick bringing us what Cromartie can bring us, but a draft pick can handle safety with Revis, Cromartie, and Leonhard. We can also land a Sharper somehow...I'm not sure how since we can't.

This is what's important. CB is more valuable than S for everybody. Safeties step up from nowhere all the time. When was the last time you remember a very good man to man CB coming out of the weeds?

I agree with a lot of this except for the part about safety coverage ability not being that important. Dallas Clark type tight ends have taken over the league and you need a safety who can cover them. Kerry Rhodes was perfect for that.

Truthfully, Arizona is good place for Rhodes. Adrian Wilson will handle the hitting and Rhodes will handle the coverage. That couldn't happen with the Jets because Rex has a bromance with Leonhard who is too small. If Eric Smith was starting over Leonhard he could handle the hitting and let Rhodes be a ballhawk and everyone would have loved Rhodes like they used to.

I agree coverage is still important for safeties and I specifically have been whining about Smith covering Dallas Clark since the first Colts game. OTOH, Rhodes started opposite Smith (and IMO a better S in Elam) in 2008 and we all saw him blow. Very few people were still loving him in 2008. We all hope Rex would get him back to form, but he actually regressed. He isn't a real ballhawk. He's a solid safety, but didn't buy in to the system. The system is better than him, so he's out. I think whoever we get will be much faster.

[Jetsfan80]

I agree with a lot of this except for the part about safety coverage ability not being that important. Dallas Clark type tight ends have taken over the league and you need a safety who can cover them. Kerry Rhodes was perfect for that.

I thought I remembered Jim Leonhard helping a lot in covering Antonio Gates in the Divisional round, and while he did a fine job in that match-up, the Colts just had too many weapons for our secondary to handle, including Rhodes.

With two solid cover guys and a good chance we look for a nickle corner in the draft (or otherwise use a healthy Donald Strickland) AND pick up a replacement for Rhodes, we can hang with the Colts a lot better than we did in the AFC Title game.

[DMaynard]

Good post.

I think "Big Daddy" Cromartie will thrive in this defense.

[SoFlaJets]

Kerry Rhodes never made the pro bowl-don't you guys remember Ray Lucas always being pissed about it?

[Jetsfan80]

Kerry Rhodes never made the pro bowl-don't you guys remember Ray Lucas always being pissed about it?

Yes he did, he just wasn't a starter.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_All-Pro_Team

[neckdemon]

Yes he did, he just wasn't a starter.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_All-Pro_Team

that's all-pro not pro-bowl....and that really just means that he was the first runner-up.

[SoFlaJets]

that's all-pro not pro-bowl....and that really just means that he was the first runner-up.

I didn't think so-they gave it to John Lynch even though Rhodes DID actually deserve to be there

[Bruce Banner]

Good post.

I think "Big Daddy" Cromartie will thrive in this defense.

Its funny because its true.

[Maxman]

There's been a few on the board questioning our moves over the last couple of days regarding Antonio Cromartie and Kerry Rhodes. On the surface, bringing in Cromartie and trading away Rhodes seemed pointless because of how similarly frustrating these two players are. They bring to the table almost the same set of attributes, such as the following:

1) Both had one standout season that got them to a Pro Bowl, Rhodes in 2006 and Cromartie in 2007. Neither have done much since.

2) Both have off the field issues. Rhodes can't keep his mouth shut on his twitter page and has an acting/modeling career he seems to care about more than his career, whereas Cromartie has had 5 paternity suits over the last 2 seasons.

3) Neither are renowned for their ability to tackle.

Meanwhile, while it seemed we were playing "wife swap" with the Chargers and Cardinals, we let go of 32-year old class act Thomas Jones, which brought up its own set of questions. Personally, I supported the move to release Jones, not only because of his age but his refusal to sign for less.

I also support BOTH the moves with Cromartie and Rhodes. Here's the 2 primary reasons why:

1) The Rex Factor. Far and away the biggest reason to support these moves. Rex once said about Gholston, "if he can't play for me, he can't play for anyone". This will eventually be the kiss of death for Vernon, as he will be gone as soon as its financially viable, and it was the kiss of death for Rhodes, who seemed to be a mis-match for Rex from day 1.

Rex requires one thing and one thing only out of his corners: be able to cover your man in one-on-one coverage, allowing enough time for the pass-rush to get to the QB before he can hit on one of his alternative targets. Antonio Cromartie fits this role, and Rex would NOT have agreed to him joining the Jet roster if he he felt he couldn't help our defense succeed.

When it comes to free safeties, Rex requires something different, which Jim Leonhard, Eric Smith and even James Ihedigbo provide significantly better than Rhodes ever did: Punish receivers coming over the middle and help with the run. Being able to cover is not nearly as important for the FS than the CB for Rex.

Now that Rhodes (clearly not a Rex guy) is gone, we should give Rex the benefit of the doubt that he can get Cromartie to come in and perform in lock-step with his system. After all, San Diego is known for two things regarding its defense: a) The general lack of accountability both on and off the field (see: Merriman's 4-game suspension and Tila Tequila troubles, all the stupid penalties in the AFC Divisional game, etc.), and Its soft zone-defense. In New York, Rex will both hold Cromartie to a higher standard AND ask him to play the man-to-man defense Cromartie prefers to play. If he doesn't work out, its not that big of a deal, which I'll explain with my next point.

2) Draft Pick Management. Tannenbaum did a SUPERB job in shipping out Rhodes and acquiring Cromartie by giving up a future draft choice while earning a current pick and losing none of the other 2010 picks.

With little to no ability to sign quality UFA's, few draft picks to work with for 2010, already being labeled one of the deepest ever, and an uncertain NFL future, 2010 picks are MUCH more valuable than 2011 picks, even moreso than would usually be the case. They are like liquid gold, especially when you can use them to bring in RFA's, something I'm SURE Tannenbaum is looking into aggressively.

By securing a 4th rounder in THIS draft for Rhodes, which is where we got Rhodes in the first place in 2005 and has been a successful round for us in the past, we got very good value for our 27-year old locker-room cancer. Sure, a 3rd would have been great, but who are we kidding to believe that were in the best place to be picky? As I said, draft picks in 2010 are more valuable than most other drafts, and we just wanted to get rid of Kerry, PERIOD.

As for what we gave up for Cromartie, you have to love that we could not only avoid giving up any 2010 picks, but that we could get San Diego to take a CONDITIONAL 2011 draft choice. If 2009 was any indication, we're going to be a damn good team again next season or "die trying", so the worst we're looking at giving up is, say, an overall pick # in the late 40's. This is a far cry from the # 19 overall pick San Diego had to use to draft Cromartie originally, and we have a year before we have to cough it up, when there may not even BE an NFL season to use it.

Sure, San Diego fans are happy to be rid of Cromartie about as much as we are glad to be rid of Rhodes. But for all the reasons I've mentioned, we should be happy with the means by which these deals happened, and how they'll benefit us. Tannenbaum is further proving to be as savvy an NFL GM as they come, and already we're looking better off for 2010 than we did 72 hours ago.

I am EXTREMELY excited to see what we do with the picks we have, whether we burn some in the RFA route or use them all in the deep 2010 draft class.

Excellent write-up 80.

I put this on the front page, really good job.