What safetys are available? - Page 2

FreshBaked 24 7 · 03-06-2010, 10:21 PM

[QUOTE=Hydro22;3516989]i hope OJ Atogwe is the guy. he is better than rhodes and anything else we have playing safety on our Roster.............[/QUOTE]

28 going on 29 is a little old IMO :(

New Jerzey Jet · 03-06-2010, 10:25 PM

[QUOTE=Jason423;3517069]I think the Jets will try to convert Dwight Lowery to play safety and they will use a Lowery/Smith combo this season.[/QUOTE]

I hope not.

SMC · 03-06-2010, 10:29 PM

[QUOTE=New Jerzey Jet;3517080]I hope not.[/QUOTE]

+1

Lowery is the only experienced nickle on the team. Putting him at a new position weakens 2 spots.

Ven0m · 03-06-2010, 10:32 PM

Lowery is slow and not really a strong tackler either. He's a prototypical zone cornerback, or a Nickel or Dime guy. Putting him at Safety makes zero sense.

Atogwe needs to be on the next plane to New York. I'm worried the Rams will match any offer we make, but you have to at least try.

Scoop24 · 03-06-2010, 10:34 PM

[QUOTE=Ven0m;3517098]Lowery is slow and not really a strong tackler either. He's a prototypical zone cornerback, or a Nickel or Dime guy. Putting him at Safety makes zero sense.

Atogwe needs to be on the next plane to New York. [B]I'm worried the Rams will match any offer we make, but you have to at least try.[/B][/QUOTE]

not sure if the rules change. but we could add a "Poison Pill" in any contract offer we make.

Super Mario · 03-06-2010, 10:36 PM

[QUOTE=Ven0m;3517098]Lowery is slow and not really a strong tackler either. He's a prototypical zone cornerback, or a Nickel or Dime guy. Putting him at Safety makes zero sense.

Atogwe needs to be on the next plane to New York. I'm worried the Rams will match any offer we make, but you have to at least try.[/QUOTE]

It's going to be hard, I don't see why the Rams won't match any offer, that doesn't have a "poison pill clause" in it.

Will the NFL take action on a "poison pill clause"?

Ven0m · 03-06-2010, 10:36 PM

[QUOTE=Hydro22;3517100]not sure if the rules change. but we could add a "Poison Pill" in any contract offer we make.[/QUOTE]

Technically, it's still allowed, but there's a bit of a gentleman's agreement against using it after the NFL *****ed over the whole Hutchinson disaster. I doubt Tanny really wants to piss off the league (and his peers) too much. Lets just say, there's a reason we haven't seen one in 4 years.

Raider9175 · 03-06-2010, 10:42 PM

Maybe they call Al Davis about Michael Huff(one of the better cover safetys) Huff had a very good year in 2009. His strength isn't against the run but he is one of the better cover safeties. Huff is expendable for the Raiders as clearly Tyvon Branch and Mike Mitchell are the longterm safeties and eventually starting duo. Raiders aren't going to give Huff away because like I alluded to he has value as a pass defender(takes away some of the best Tes in coverage)

Acombination Of Eric Smith- against the run and M Huff- pass defense (JMO I think better cover safety than Rhodes) .

Ray Ray19 · 03-06-2010, 10:52 PM

[QUOTE=Raider9175;3517112]Maybe they call Al Davis about Michael Huff(one of the better cover safetys) Huff had a very good year in 2009. His strength isn't against the run but he is one of the better cover safeties. Huff is expendable for the Raiders as clearly Tyvon Branch and Mike Mitchell are the longterm safeties and eventually starting duo. Raiders aren't going to give Huff away because like I alluded to he has value as a pass defender(takes away some of the best Tes in coverage)[/QUOTE]

Blah blah blah

Everything Raiders is the bestest

You finally show up after months of hiding after the Jets destroyed your overhyped Raiders and you're still talking.

You know nothing, STFU.

tony montana · 03-06-2010, 10:58 PM

[QUOTE=Ray Ray19;3517136]Blah blah blah

Everything Raiders is the bestest

You finally show up after months of hiding after the Jets destroyed your overhyped Raiders and you're still talking.

You know nothing, STFU.[/QUOTE]

lol ray ray is always so angry and i much enjoy

SMC · 03-06-2010, 11:01 PM

[QUOTE=Ven0m;3517103]Technically, it's still allowed, but there's a bit of a gentleman's agreement against using it after the NFL *****ed over the whole Hutchinson disaster. I doubt Tanny really wants to piss off the league (and his peers) too much. Lets just say, there's a reason we haven't seen one in 4 years.[/QUOTE]

Perhaps that's what next year's 7th rounder is about?

Total talking out my ass speculation--if the Jets wanted to sign a player with a Right of 1st Refusal Tender, wouldn't offering a nominal draft pick be good enough to get the original team not to match because if the original team failed to match they wouldn't get anything?

tony montana · 03-06-2010, 11:05 PM

[QUOTE=SMC;3517155]Perhaps that's what next year's 7th rounder is about?

Total talking out my ass speculation--if the Jets wanted to sign a player with a Right of 1st Refusal Tender, wouldn't offering a nominal draft pick be good enough to get the original team not to match because if the original team failed to match they wouldn't get anything?[/QUOTE]

good idea, but the rams may just be hoping that no one bites and ready to match if someone does

Jason423 · 03-06-2010, 11:55 PM

[QUOTE=SMC;3517155]Perhaps that's what next year's 7th rounder is about?

Total talking out my ass speculation--if the Jets wanted to sign a player with a Right of 1st Refusal Tender, wouldn't offering a nominal draft pick be good enough to get the original team not to match because if the original team failed to match they wouldn't get anything?[/QUOTE]

I dont think so only because many of the ROFR guys are given that tag because the home team wants the market to be set for the player and then have an option of matching it. If I had to guess its more about replenishing the lost Sheppard pick. Either Tannenbaum wants more chips to bring to the table on draft day to move up(he already alluded to the fact that they will do that again if they see the guy they want) or the team has their eye on some original draft round compensation RFAs that require a 4.

I still hope the details are wrong and the Jets got something else, even a condition on the 7th rounder that could move up. I think in terms of value the Jets got hosed here. And if this was really the Rhodes market value then the Jets extension of Rhodes was one of the worst contracts in recent memory that the team decided to pursue.

doggin94it · 03-07-2010, 12:04 AM

[QUOTE=HEMPSTEAD;3516846]You're right, dassin...

Rams tendered Atogwe "right of first refusual" rather than the other draft pick compensation.

So to avoid the mess, the Rams will just match any offer they deem reasonable enough to re-sign Atogwe.[/QUOTE]

Time to bust out the poison pill - give Atogwe a 1M bonus for each home game he plays in a dome :D

doggin94it · 03-07-2010, 12:07 AM

[QUOTE=SMC;3517155]Perhaps that's what next year's 7th rounder is about?

Total talking out my ass speculation--if the Jets wanted to sign a player with a Right of 1st Refusal Tender, wouldn't offering a nominal draft pick be good enough to get the original team not to match because if the original team failed to match they wouldn't get anything?[/QUOTE]

No. As Jason said, if the offer is reasonable, they'll match. That said, they were very clearly not looking to pay Atogwe 7M plus this season.

TechJet · 03-07-2010, 12:16 AM

[QUOTE=HEMPSTEAD;3516813]^You have no idea who OJ Atogwe is, do you? :rolleyes:

Atogwe isn't going anywhere anyway... he got tendered Right of First Refusal.[/QUOTE]

Me do..right away I like that name Atogwe sound so rebelous.
Tannerbaum go him now I tell ya! sign that beast call OJ atogwe
give him what he wants before he mash up the place.

Wallace Wright · 03-07-2010, 12:18 AM

We're gonna trade up for Taylor Mays.

SenorGato · 03-07-2010, 12:43 AM

Earl Thomas would be ideal, and Kam Chancellor is a personal favorite.

Ven0m · 03-07-2010, 12:44 AM

I think we might be able to out-price the Rams on Atogwe.

My reasoning being -

1) The Rams had the chance to tender him for 7 million for one year, they're stalling with the Right of First Refusal tag. They either have to pay him it or release him on June 1st. They seem to be on the fence about the decision to begin with.

2) They already seem to be eyeing up replacements, Brodney Pool is scheduled to visit them on Monday (Link - [url]http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/03/06/brodney-pool-possibly-will-visit-with-the-rams/[/url])

Maybe they're just being cheap, I mean, they do have to worry about paying the #1 overall pick, after paying the #2 overall pick each of the previous 2 seasons before that. They've probably been hit harder then anybody else with the increasing price of rookie salaries (Of course, that's due to losing).

I think if we throw out a contract offer in the 7 per range, that they just might let him walk.

doggin94it · 03-07-2010, 01:59 AM

[QUOTE=Ven0m;3517287]I think we might be able to out-price the Rams on Atogwe.

My reasoning being -

1) The Rams had the chance to tender him for 7 million for one year, they're stalling with the Right of First Refusal tag. They either have to pay him it or release him on June 1st. They seem to be on the fence about the decision to begin with.

2) They already seem to be eyeing up replacements, Brodney Pool is scheduled to visit them on Monday (Link - [URL]http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/03/06/brodney-pool-possibly-will-visit-with-the-rams/[/URL])

Maybe they're just being cheap, I mean, they do have to worry about paying the #1 overall pick, after paying the #2 overall pick each of the previous 2 seasons before that. They've probably been hit harder then anybody else with the increasing price of rookie salaries (Of course, that's due to losing).

I think if we throw out a contract offer in the 7 per range, that they just might let him walk.[/QUOTE]

Yep

03-06-2010, 10:36 PM	#27
Ven0m a shutdown poster Hall Of Fame Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: NY Posts: 18,349	[QUOTE=Hydro22;3517100]not sure if the rules change. but we could add a "Poison Pill" in any contract offer we make.[/QUOTE] Technically, it's still allowed, but there's a bit of a gentleman's agreement against using it after the NFL ****ed over the whole Hutchinson disaster. I doubt Tanny really wants to piss off the league (and his peers) too much. Lets just say, there's a reason we haven't seen one in 4 years. Last edited by Ven0m; 03-06-2010 at 10:40 PM.*

03-06-2010, 10:42 PM	#28
Raider9175 Stay down for Clowney is new battle cry for 2013 All Pro Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 5,279	Maybe they call Al Davis about Michael Huff(one of the better cover safetys) Huff had a very good year in 2009. His strength isn't against the run but he is one of the better cover safeties. Huff is expendable for the Raiders as clearly Tyvon Branch and Mike Mitchell are the longterm safeties and eventually starting duo. Raiders aren't going to give Huff away because like I alluded to he has value as a pass defender(takes away some of the best Tes in coverage) Acombination Of Eric Smith- against the run and M Huff- pass defense (JMO I think better cover safety than Rhodes) . Last edited by Raider9175; 03-06-2010 at 11:01 PM.

03-06-2010, 10:21 PM	#21
FreshBaked 24 7 wait...wha? 0_o All League Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Midland Park, NJ Posts: 3,697	[QUOTE=Hydro22;3516989]i hope OJ Atogwe is the guy. he is better than rhodes and anything else we have playing safety on our Roster.............[/QUOTE] 28 going on 29 is a little old IMO :(

03-06-2010, 10:25 PM	#22
New Jerzey Jet Veteran Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 1,011	[QUOTE=Jason423;3517069]I think the Jets will try to convert Dwight Lowery to play safety and they will use a Lowery/Smith combo this season.[/QUOTE] I hope not.

03-06-2010, 10:29 PM	#23
SMC Day-to-day Jets Insider VIP Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: NYC Posts: 22,032	[QUOTE=New Jerzey Jet;3517080]I hope not.[/QUOTE] +1 Lowery is the only experienced nickle on the team. Putting him at a new position weakens 2 spots.

03-06-2010, 10:32 PM	#24
Ven0m a shutdown poster Hall Of Fame Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: NY Posts: 18,349	Lowery is slow and not really a strong tackler either. He's a prototypical zone cornerback, or a Nickel or Dime guy. Putting him at Safety makes zero sense. Atogwe needs to be on the next plane to New York. I'm worried the Rams will match any offer we make, but you have to at least try.

03-06-2010, 10:34 PM	#25
Scoop24 Up in the clouds somewhere All League Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: brooklyn,NY Posts: 4,664	[QUOTE=Ven0m;3517098]Lowery is slow and not really a strong tackler either. He's a prototypical zone cornerback, or a Nickel or Dime guy. Putting him at Safety makes zero sense. Atogwe needs to be on the next plane to New York. [B]I'm worried the Rams will match any offer we make, but you have to at least try.[/B][/QUOTE] not sure if the rules change. but we could add a "Poison Pill" in any contract offer we make.

03-06-2010, 10:36 PM	#26
Super Mario Hall Of Fame Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Back Home! Posts: 8,772	[QUOTE=Ven0m;3517098]Lowery is slow and not really a strong tackler either. He's a prototypical zone cornerback, or a Nickel or Dime guy. Putting him at Safety makes zero sense. Atogwe needs to be on the next plane to New York. I'm worried the Rams will match any offer we make, but you have to at least try.[/QUOTE] It's going to be hard, I don't see why the Rams won't match any offer, that doesn't have a "poison pill clause" in it. Will the NFL take action on a "poison pill clause"?

03-06-2010, 10:52 PM	#29
Ray Ray19 Not a SOJF Hall Of Fame Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 13,792	[QUOTE=Raider9175;3517112]Maybe they call Al Davis about Michael Huff(one of the better cover safetys) Huff had a very good year in 2009. His strength isn't against the run but he is one of the better cover safeties. Huff is expendable for the Raiders as clearly Tyvon Branch and Mike Mitchell are the longterm safeties and eventually starting duo. Raiders aren't going to give Huff away because like I alluded to he has value as a pass defender(takes away some of the best Tes in coverage)[/QUOTE] Blah blah blah Everything Raiders is the bestest You finally show up after months of hiding after the Jets destroyed your overhyped Raiders and you're still talking. You know nothing, STFU.

03-06-2010, 10:58 PM	#30
tony montana Veteran Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 343	[QUOTE=Ray Ray19;3517136]Blah blah blah Everything Raiders is the bestest You finally show up after months of hiding after the Jets destroyed your overhyped Raiders and you're still talking. You know nothing, STFU.[/QUOTE] lol ray ray is always so angry and i much enjoy

03-06-2010, 11:01 PM	#31
SMC Day-to-day Jets Insider VIP Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: NYC Posts: 22,032	[QUOTE=Ven0m;3517103]Technically, it's still allowed, but there's a bit of a gentleman's agreement against using it after the NFL *****ed over the whole Hutchinson disaster. I doubt Tanny really wants to piss off the league (and his peers) too much. Lets just say, there's a reason we haven't seen one in 4 years.[/QUOTE] Perhaps that's what next year's 7th rounder is about? Total talking out my ass speculation--if the Jets wanted to sign a player with a Right of 1st Refusal Tender, wouldn't offering a nominal draft pick be good enough to get the original team not to match because if the original team failed to match they wouldn't get anything?

03-06-2010, 11:05 PM	#32
tony montana Veteran Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 343	[QUOTE=SMC;3517155]Perhaps that's what next year's 7th rounder is about? Total talking out my ass speculation--if the Jets wanted to sign a player with a Right of 1st Refusal Tender, wouldn't offering a nominal draft pick be good enough to get the original team not to match because if the original team failed to match they wouldn't get anything?[/QUOTE] good idea, but the rams may just be hoping that no one bites and ready to match if someone does

03-06-2010, 11:55 PM	#33
Jason423 All Pro Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 9,671	[QUOTE=SMC;3517155]Perhaps that's what next year's 7th rounder is about? Total talking out my ass speculation--if the Jets wanted to sign a player with a Right of 1st Refusal Tender, wouldn't offering a nominal draft pick be good enough to get the original team not to match because if the original team failed to match they wouldn't get anything?[/QUOTE] I dont think so only because many of the ROFR guys are given that tag because the home team wants the market to be set for the player and then have an option of matching it. If I had to guess its more about replenishing the lost Sheppard pick. Either Tannenbaum wants more chips to bring to the table on draft day to move up(he already alluded to the fact that they will do that again if they see the guy they want) or the team has their eye on some original draft round compensation RFAs that require a 4. I still hope the details are wrong and the Jets got something else, even a condition on the 7th rounder that could move up. I think in terms of value the Jets got hosed here. And if this was really the Rhodes market value then the Jets extension of Rhodes was one of the worst contracts in recent memory that the team decided to pursue.

03-07-2010, 12:04 AM	#34
doggin94it Hall Of Fame Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,392	[QUOTE=HEMPSTEAD;3516846]You're right, dassin... Rams tendered Atogwe "right of first refusual" rather than the other draft pick compensation. So to avoid the mess, the Rams will just match any offer they deem reasonable enough to re-sign Atogwe.[/QUOTE] Time to bust out the poison pill - give Atogwe a 1M bonus for each home game he plays in a dome :D

03-07-2010, 12:07 AM	#35
doggin94it Hall Of Fame Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,392	[QUOTE=SMC;3517155]Perhaps that's what next year's 7th rounder is about? Total talking out my ass speculation--if the Jets wanted to sign a player with a Right of 1st Refusal Tender, wouldn't offering a nominal draft pick be good enough to get the original team not to match because if the original team failed to match they wouldn't get anything?[/QUOTE] No. As Jason said, if the offer is reasonable, they'll match. That said, they were very clearly not looking to pay Atogwe 7M plus this season.

03-07-2010, 12:16 AM	#36
TechJet Still waiting for the next Jet SB crown. Hall Of Fame Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Fr:NYC to Mid Ga. Posts: 8,548	[QUOTE=HEMPSTEAD;3516813]^You have no idea who OJ Atogwe is, do you? :rolleyes: Atogwe isn't going anywhere anyway... he got tendered Right of First Refusal.[/QUOTE] Me do..right away I like that name Atogwe sound so rebelous. Tannerbaum go him now I tell ya! sign that beast call OJ atogwe give him what he wants before he mash up the place.

03-07-2010, 12:18 AM	#37
Wallace Wright Come at the King, You Best Not Miss. All Pro Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 1,315	We're gonna trade up for Taylor Mays.

03-07-2010, 12:43 AM	#38
SenorGato still a little buzzed. Hall Of Fame Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 8,281	Earl Thomas would be ideal, and Kam Chancellor is a personal favorite.

03-07-2010, 12:44 AM	#39
Ven0m a shutdown poster Hall Of Fame Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: NY Posts: 18,349	I think we might be able to out-price the Rams on Atogwe. My reasoning being - 1) The Rams had the chance to tender him for 7 million for one year, they're stalling with the Right of First Refusal tag. They either have to pay him it or release him on June 1st. They seem to be on the fence about the decision to begin with. 2) They already seem to be eyeing up replacements, Brodney Pool is scheduled to visit them on Monday (Link - [url]http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/03/06/brodney-pool-possibly-will-visit-with-the-rams/[/url]) Maybe they're just being cheap, I mean, they do have to worry about paying the #1 overall pick, after paying the #2 overall pick each of the previous 2 seasons before that. They've probably been hit harder then anybody else with the increasing price of rookie salaries (Of course, that's due to losing). I think if we throw out a contract offer in the 7 per range, that they just might let him walk.

03-07-2010, 01:59 AM	#40
doggin94it Hall Of Fame Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,392	[QUOTE=Ven0m;3517287]I think we might be able to out-price the Rams on Atogwe. My reasoning being - 1) The Rams had the chance to tender him for 7 million for one year, they're stalling with the Right of First Refusal tag. They either have to pay him it or release him on June 1st. They seem to be on the fence about the decision to begin with. 2) They already seem to be eyeing up replacements, Brodney Pool is scheduled to visit them on Monday (Link - [URL]http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/03/06/brodney-pool-possibly-will-visit-with-the-rams/[/URL]) Maybe they're just being cheap, I mean, they do have to worry about paying the #1 overall pick, after paying the #2 overall pick each of the previous 2 seasons before that. They've probably been hit harder then anybody else with the increasing price of rookie salaries (Of course, that's due to losing). I think if we throw out a contract offer in the 7 per range, that they just might let him walk.[/QUOTE] Yep