Let's face it: Coples was a luxury pick and we should have taken an OL in the first

[Bronxville Jets Fan]

Originally Posted by John_0515

Great advice. I hope other posters heed this advice.

The amount of criticism of OPs on this board is bordering on the ridiculous. I can handle it personally, but it's getting incredibly irritating seeing and having to skip over the amount of posts that attack the topic of a particular thread, particularly when it comes to Coples. (Apparently it's ok to discuss how good he looks, but if anyone dares question the logic of the pick or how well he's looked in practice they're immediately criticized for forming premature judgments. Hypocrisy anyone?)

[John_0515]

Originally Posted by Bronxville Jets Fan

The amount of criticism of OPs on this board is bordering on the ridiculous. I can handle it personally, but it's getting incredibly irritating seeing and having to skip over the amount of posts that attack the topic of a particular thread, particularly when it comes to Coples. (Apparently it's ok to discuss how good he looks, but if anyone dares question the logic of the pick or how well he's looked in practice they're immediately criticized for forming premature judgments. Hypocrisy anyone?)

Well, it is a message board, and people have a right to say what they want. Problem is, many of he "insightful"............posters get upset at the people who call them out.

I agree with you, but it'll never change. The Jets could win the Superbowl, and people would find something to demean it. People don't cheer and root for the team, they mourn it.

[Jasper17]

Originally Posted by lageman4ever

Not guaranteeing Hunters contract would have been a good start. Then we have the freedom to use the $$ for a FA. Or bring Hunter back as a reserve with the option to cut him if he plays poorly.

A trade before the draft for a mediocre starting RT would have been best. It would have given the Jets the freedom to go BPA in the draft (which we did anyway) and still take care of our OL need.

First off, I'm not picking on you lage, just some questions for those in the trade for a RT camp (which for the record, would be the best solution):

Has anyone on here identified a single tackle out there that would be a good get?

When was the last time a starting offensive lineman was traded to fill a hole on another team's roster?

How many teams out there have enough substantial offensive line depth that they would be willing to trade away a starter? (Consider the Jets for example, who of the Ducasse, Schlauderaff, Griffin, and Howard/Hunter would you be comfortable enough with to start that you could trade away your current incumbent?)

Even if a team had a superfulous offensive lineman they would be willing to trade away, why wouldn't or why couldn't they demand whatever price they wanted? Any team looking to trade for a starting offensive lineman is obviously in a fairly dire need. At what cost would folks have been satisfied with this trade? A third? A second even?

As for signing a free agent tackle, I was licking my chops when Eric Wintston was out there but the market for him might have been a little stiffer than the Jets could afford. Nearly $5MM garunteed to Smitty and Hunter probably would have helped but ceste le vie.

Management has a tall order on their hands. Fortunately they have all the experts on JetsInsider.com here in '0-12.

[Jasper17]

Originally Posted by Bronxville Jets Fan

Ok, got it, so every argument on this board should be prefaced with "I may be wrong, but . . ." because that's exactly how actual water cooler discussions are structured. It's called an argument -- if you don't agree it, than try to convince the poster otherwise.

I'm trying to keep up. Are we casually debating or are we arguing?

Originally Posted by Bronxville Jets Fan

Apparently that's beneath someone of your self-perceived intellectual superiority, though.

I promise you I am not intellectually superior to anyone here, nor have I claimed as such.

Originally Posted by Bronxville Jets Fan

No one cares to hear your opinions about the quality of the debate or reasons for not engaging in the debate are, which, by the way, was over 5 pages long with quality discussion by the time you decided to chime in.

Eye of the beholder I suppose.

Originally Posted by Bronxville Jets Fan

It's people like you who are ruining this board.

Glad we cleared that one up. I was wondering. I apologize for my incessant ramblings assuming the automatic failure of professional football coaches, and talent evaluators my informed, infalable opinion of football ability and assumed omnition about the true intent of draft picks.

Originally Posted by Bronxville Jets Fan

The amount of criticism of OPs on this board is bordering on the ridiculous. I can handle it personally

Obviously.

[augustiniak]

you know it's bad on this website when so many complain that the jets took a good player in the first round, but it's not at the position they needed most. how many 1st rounders haven't panned out over the years for this franchise? now they have a DL who can actually get to the qb - something these same posters have moaned about since john abraham left - and that's not good enough b/c they needed a RT more. wow, just wow.

[lageman4ever]

Originally Posted by Jasper17

First off, I'm not picking on you lage, just some questions for those in the trade for a RT camp (which for the record, would be the best solution):

Has anyone on here identified a single tackle out there that would be a good get?

When was the last time a starting offensive lineman was traded to fill a hole on another team's roster?

How many teams out there have enough substantial offensive line depth that they would be willing to trade away a starter? (Consider the Jets for example, who of the Ducasse, Schlauderaff, Griffin, and Howard/Hunter would you be comfortable enough with to start that you could trade away your current incumbent?)

Even if a team had a superfulous offensive lineman they would be willing to trade away, why wouldn't or why couldn't they demand whatever price they wanted? Any team looking to trade for a starting offensive lineman is obviously in a fairly dire need. At what cost would folks have been satisfied with this trade? A third? A second even?

As for signing a free agent tackle, I was licking my chops when Eric Wintston was out there but the market for him might have been a little stiffer than the Jets could afford. Nearly $5MM garunteed to Smitty and Hunter probably would have helped but ceste le vie.

Management has a tall order on their hands. Fortunately they have all the experts on JetsInsider.com here in '0-12.

I didn't say a trade would have been easy to achieve. Other than Eric Winston as a FA I don't have any ideas what the Jets should have done. But that's why Tannenbaum is paid the big bucks, to figure this stuff out. That we needed a RT was obvious to anyone on JI. How we get him, not so much.

Tannenbaum did bring in two guys who hadn't played in a while but neither worked out. I just don't know if the team really gave them a true shot at competing for the job. But I did respect the fact that the FO was willing to void the Otah trade when it was clear he's uninterested in football right now. So I'll give them credit for trying. But ultimately the Jets are judged solely on whether they are successful or not. And right now that's not too clear.

If pressed I'd say go to teams with deep OL and try to trade for a guy who's been in the league for 3 or 4 years. It could be a guy on the bench. Maybe Green Bay, Cincinnati, Baltimore, Philadelphia. See if there's anybody on our roster these teams are interested in. DeVito or Pouha would be likely candidates since our DL is deep.

[Bronxville Jets Fan]

Originally Posted by Jasper17

I'm trying to keep up. Are we casually debating or are we arguing?



I promise you I am not intellectually superior to anyone here, nor have I claimed as such.



Eye of the beholder I suppose.



Glad we cleared that one up. I was wondering. I apologize for my incessant ramblings assuming the automatic failure of professional football coaches, and talent evaluators my informed, infalable opinion of football ability and assumed omnition about the true intent of draft picks.



Obviously.

Yeah, so going back to my original point, fan messageboards clearly serve no purpose for you . So why exactly are you here? I would think someone of your advanced intellectual capabilities could find better uses of their time than to question the qualifications of every poster on this board.

[JamesR]

My own view is that the failure at the RT position this year is more to do with a neglect of the OL in the previous drafts rather than this one in particular.

With OL being a position that takes time to learn, it's best to draft a guy a couple of years before you need him, rather than hoping a mid round rookie will plug in and be serviceable from day one. We find ourselves in that situation now, IMHO - Howard is by no means an upgrade over Hunter, just the next option on a (very short) list. I guess we tried to do this with Vlad, but he's never looked up to the job at RT so now he's being pegged as a guard to get some value from him (and we WILL need options at guard next off season).

OL (if you include a blocking TE / 6th O Lineman) is over 50% of the offensive personnel, yet in three years we've only drafted 3 guys (2 6th round guards and Vlad - intended as an OT but now ... a guard). You can always try to get a tackle to play guard, but not the other way around. Prior to that we spent a 6th and a 7th on Bender and Garner ... both were let go pretty soon after.

At some point you need to spend some mid round picks on your OL ... in the SIX YEARS since Brick and Mangold we've spent only one decent pick on the O line - compared to 4 mid rounders (and one late rounder) on running backs.

Under investment in recent years has cost us - hopefully the FO now realises this and starts to prioritise the position in the next two or three drafts to get some talent and depth back to a vital part of our team.

[lageman4ever]

Originally Posted by JamesR

My own view is that the failure at the RT position this year is more to do with a neglect of the OL in the previous drafts rather than this one in particular.

With OL being a position that takes time to learn, it's best to draft a guy a couple of years before you need him, rather than hoping a mid round rookie will plug in and be serviceable from day one. We find ourselves in that situation now, IMHO - Howard is by no means an upgrade over Hunter, just the next option on a (very short) list. I guess we tried to do this with Vlad, but he's never looked up to the job at RT so now he's being pegged as a guard to get some value from him (and we WILL need options at guard next off season).

OL (if you include a blocking TE / 6th O Lineman) is over 50% of the offensive personnel, yet in three years we've only drafted 3 guys (2 6th round guards and Vlad - intended as an OT but now ... a guard). You can always try to get a tackle to play guard, but not the other way around. Prior to that we spent a 6th and a 7th on Bender and Garner ... both were let go pretty soon after.

At some point you need to spend some mid round picks on your OL ... in the SIX YEARS since Brick and Mangold we've spent only one decent pick on the O line - compared to 4 mid rounders (and one late rounder) on running backs.

Under investment in recent years has cost us - hopefully the FO now realises this and starts to prioritise the position in the next two or three drafts to get some talent and depth back to a vital part of our team.

Those missing mid round draft picks are the ones Tannenbaum has been throwing around like candy over the last few years. Rounds 3 4 5 are where the core of most teams' offensive lines are built. But, as you rightly point out, it takes a year or two for these guys to learn & develop.

But once the position has been neglected for a while, a team is almost forced to use its 2nd and even 1st round picks to get OL who can play immediately. Thus this lack of foresight costs the team high value / skill players who normally go in those high spots (DE, OLB, WR, RB).

[sameoldjets]

you've got to be kidding? the jets need their defense to be fresh and talented if they want to compete with the patsies and other teams. by taking coples the jets were able to strengthen a good defense and possibly make them great. by taking a olineman, the jets may have only made their mediocre offense a little better. well, average defense plus average offense means 8-8 or less. great defense with average offense can mean superbowl.

[JamesR]

Originally Posted by sameoldjets

you've got to be kidding? the jets need their defense to be fresh and talented if they want to compete with the patsies and other teams. by taking coples the jets were able to strengthen a good defense and possibly make them great. by taking a olineman, the jets may have only made their mediocre offense a little better. well, average defense plus average offense means 8-8 or less. great defense with average offense can mean superbowl.

Question is ... are we even an average offense? I guess we'll see when it's for real in a couple of weeks.

[revischrist]

Originally Posted by JamesR

My own view is that the failure at the RT position this year is more to do with a neglect of the OL in the previous drafts rather than this one in particular.

With OL being a position that takes time to learn, it's best to draft a guy a couple of years before you need him, rather than hoping a mid round rookie will plug in and be serviceable from day one. We find ourselves in that situation now, IMHO - Howard is by no means an upgrade over Hunter, just the next option on a (very short) list. I guess we tried to do this with Vlad, but he's never looked up to the job at RT so now he's being pegged as a guard to get some value from him (and we WILL need options at guard next off season).

OL (if you include a blocking TE / 6th O Lineman) is over 50% of the offensive personnel, yet in three years we've only drafted 3 guys (2 6th round guards and Vlad - intended as an OT but now ... a guard). You can always try to get a tackle to play guard, but not the other way around. Prior to that we spent a 6th and a 7th on Bender and Garner ... both were let go pretty soon after.

At some point you need to spend some mid round picks on your OL ... in the SIX YEARS since Brick and Mangold we've spent only one decent pick on the O line - compared to 4 mid rounders (and one late rounder) on running backs.

Under investment in recent years has cost us - hopefully the FO now realises this and starts to prioritise the position in the next two or three drafts to get some talent and depth back to a vital part of our team.

fair enough, but they were building a team to win a championship and the price was depth down the road. If not for some of those moves the Jets would not have made the AFC Championship game two year in a row, but they would be better off now. Its a balance all teams deal with.

They picked Wilson to replace Cro, but when it was apparent that he wasn't going to be as good as thought, they had to bring Cro back and that cost them money to go out and correct the lack of draft depth. The Ducasse bust is also a factor.

Building an NFL is a challenge for all the teams in the NFL. The patriots have made far more draft mistakes than the Jets but they have Tom brady so it masks those mistakes.

[SAR I]

Originally Posted by sameoldjets

you've got to be kidding? the jets need their defense to be fresh and talented if they want to compete with the patsies and other teams. by taking coples the jets were able to strengthen a good defense and possibly make them great. by taking a olineman, the jets may have only made their mediocre offense a little better. well, average defense plus average offense means 8-8 or less. great defense with average offense can mean superbowl.

Offense wins Championships.

The times have changed.

SAR I

[SAR I]

Originally Posted by Snell41

That right there is the answer folks.

SAR I

[eifmp]

Originally Posted by SAR I

Offense wins Championships.

The times have changed.

SAR I

No. I disagree with you.

During the Giants 2 superbowl runs they have allowed only ONE team to score over 20 points in the playoffs, and that was the Packers last year. That's defense.

The Saints won the NFC Championship game and the Superbowl with 2 game changing interceptions. That's defense

During the Green Bay Packers Championship in 2010...they allowed an average of 20 points per game in the playoffs. That's defense.

Tom Brady, Joe Montana, John Elway, Terry Bradshaw....what do they all have in common besides being multiple Superbowl winners: All of those championship teams had a top 10 defense. Hell I would even dare say a top 5 defense.

The number of titles has Tom Brady won with a subpar defense: 0

The Colts were the WORST run defense in the league in 2006. But before the playoffs they get Bob Sanders back and they become an OUTSTANDING Run defense in the playoffs. They allowed a little over 16 points per game during their playoff run.

Defense. Wins. Championships.

[Dunnie]

Originally Posted by eifmp

No. I disagree with you.

During the Giants 2 superbowl runs they have allowed only ONE team to score over 20 points in the playoffs, and that was the Packers last year. That's defense.

The Saints won the NFC Championship game and the Superbowl with 2 game changing interceptions. That's defense

During the Green Bay Packers Championship in 2010...they allowed an average of 20 points per game in the playoffs. That's defense.

Tom Brady, Joe Montana, John Elway, Terry Bradshaw....what do they all have in common besides being multiple Superbowl winners: All of those championship teams had a top 10 defense. Hell I would even dare say a top 5 defense.

The number of titles has Tom Brady won with a subpar defense: 0

The Colts were the WORST run defense in the league in 2006. But before the playoffs they get Bob Sanders back and they become an OUTSTANDING Run defense in the playoffs. They allowed a little over 16 points per game during their playoff run.

Defense. Wins. Championships.

Wrong.

Above average offense + Above average defense. Wins. Championships.

You do realize that you have referenced some of the all time great offenses in you post ... Right ? Brady, Montana, Elway,Bradshaw ... Lol.

Those super bowls would never have been won with defense alone.

Our HC has not comprehended this yet.

Dilfer ruined our future ! Hahahah.

[SAR I]

Originally Posted by eifmp

No. I disagree with you.

During the Giants 2 superbowl runs they have allowed only ONE team to score over 20 points in the playoffs, and that was the Packers last year. That's defense.

The Saints won the NFC Championship game and the Superbowl with 2 game changing interceptions. That's defense

During the Green Bay Packers Championship in 2010...they allowed an average of 20 points per game in the playoffs. That's defense.

Tom Brady, Joe Montana, John Elway, Terry Bradshaw....what do they all have in common besides being multiple Superbowl winners: All of those championship teams had a top 10 defense. Hell I would even dare say a top 5 defense.

The number of titles has Tom Brady won with a subpar defense: 0

The Colts were the WORST run defense in the league in 2006. But before the playoffs they get Bob Sanders back and they become an OUTSTANDING Run defense in the playoffs. They allowed a little over 16 points per game during their playoff run.

Defense. Wins. Championships.

Patriots: Second-best QB in modern NFL history.

Colts: Best QB in modern NFL history.

Packers: Aaron Rodgers the best QB in the NFL today.

Saints: Drew Brees air show, redefined big-play offense.

Giants: Both Super Bowls won in final minutes on clutch, stellar Eli Manning led offense.

Offense. Not defense. Of course you need both. Point is the Jets have had a SB caliber defense since 2009. It's the ignored offense that's killing us.

SAR I

[SAR I]

Originally Posted by Dunnie

Our HC has not comprehended this yet.

Dilfer ruined our future ! Hahahah.

Don't laugh. You're more right than you can imagine.

SAR I

[BRONX JET]

Yes, offense is more important. But it can be done with defense. Remember, the Ravens should have won the AFCC game last yr, and if the Niners don't drop two sure picks and get an unfortunate bounce on a punt they go to the Superbowl. It takes luck too.

[ARodFLKeysJetsFan]

Originally Posted by BRONX JET

Yes, offense is more important. But it can be done with defense. Remember, the Ravens should have won the AFCC game last yr, and if the Niners don't drop two sure picks and get an unfortunate bounce on a punt they go to the Superbowl. It takes luck too.

The 2000 Ravens did it with defense & Trent Dilfer as their QB & the 2002 Bucs as well, with defense & Brad Johnson as their starting QB.....