Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 47

Thread: Slim Chance At McFadden Now. Combine Results.

  1. #21
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Rockland, New York
    Posts
    5,359
    [QUOTE=bonkertons;2386692]That's cool. You are wrong, but it's still cool.

    Nothing against Mendenhall, he will be a good player, but McFadden is THE best RB prospect in this years draft and possibly a better prospect than AP was last year. I couldn't be happier that his stock is falling right now since he'd look incredible in green and white.[/QUOTE]

    I think people are really just forgetting what kind of runner he was against the best SEC defenses in the country. I mean, yes, he had a good blocking line in front of him and he does have a few minor flaws to his game, but he is a legit home run threat every time he touches the ball.

  2. #22
    [QUOTE=bonkertons;2386692]That's cool. You are wrong, but it's still cool.

    Nothing against Mendenhall, he will be a good player, but McFadden is THE best RB prospect in this years draft and possibly a better prospect than AP was last year. I couldn't be happier that his stock is falling right now since he'd look incredible in green and white.[/QUOTE]

    In the right system (good OL, spread passing game) McFadden will be an absolute beast. He'll put up Adrian Peterson like numbers his first year.

    Behind the Jets sieve-like OL, McFadden would look bad. He'd be getting hit behind the line of scrimmage every play. Who can run well like that ? And with all of that contact, his likelihood of injury would go way up.

    On the Jets McFadden would be a bust.

  3. #23
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Rockland, New York
    Posts
    5,359
    [QUOTE=lageman4ever;2386705]In the right system (good OL, spread passing game) McFadden will be an absolute beast. He'll put up Adrian Peterson like numbers his first year.

    Behind the Jets sieve-like OL, McFadden would look bad. He'd be getting hit behind the line of scrimmage every play. Who can run well like that ? And with all of that contact, his likelihood of injury would go way up.

    On the Jets McFadden would be a bust.[/QUOTE]

    FWIW, Thomas Jones looks bad behind this sieve-like OL and is still only in the middle of the pack with a good OL.

    I understand the concern about taking RBs early because of the short shelf life. But let me ask you this question. Why does taking Mcfadden= not fixing the O-line? Like i said to you before, there is going to be a tackle prospect available in the 2nd round, and if we address guard in Free Agency we've upgraded.

    I just wouldn't want to sit there on draft day, deciding between McFadden and the 2nd tier and going with the 2nd tier guy.

  4. #24
    [QUOTE=Jets Voice of Reason;2386710]FWIW, Thomas Jones looks bad behind this sieve-like OL and is still only in the middle of the pack with a good OL.

    I understand the concern about taking RBs early because of the short shelf life. But let me ask you this question. Why does taking Mcfadden= not fixing the O-line? Like i said to you before, there is going to be a tackle prospect available in the 2nd round, and if we address guard in Free Agency we've upgraded.

    I just wouldn't want to sit there on draft day, deciding between McFadden and the 2nd tier and going with the 2nd tier guy.[/QUOTE]

    If we got a FA Guard and if we get a 2nd round RT, it could work. That means the top of our draft is all offense which might not be such a bad thing. Lord only knows we could use the spark on offense. Our defense would suffer but everything can't be fixed in 1 off-season. TJ teamed with McFadden would make for a nice combination to keep McFadden's carries down.

    It all goes to show that the more the team is successful in FA, the more flexibility we will have in the draft. If Tannenbaum signed free agents at Guard and OLB, we'd be looking pretty good. Another OL would make it even better. But with the sparse FA class this season, that might be a tough thing to do.

    But we must sign 1 FA Guard for this plan to work. I don't think a 3 round rookie starting on the OL would be enough.

    And I wouldn't expect productivity out of McFadden for more than about 5 years. So it's not a very long term plan. But if given the OL and play calling suport, he would be a fun player to watch.
    Last edited by lageman4ever; 02-25-2008 at 11:03 AM.

  5. #25
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Rockland, New York
    Posts
    5,359
    [QUOTE=lageman4ever;2386760]If we got a FA Guard and if we get a 2nd round RT, it could work. That means the top of our draft is all offense which might not be such a bad thing. Lord only knows we could use the spark on offense. Our defense would suffer but everything can't be fixed in 1 off-season. TJ teamed with McFadden would make for a nice combination to keep McFadden's carries down. It might work.

    It all goes to show that the more the team is successful in FA, the more flexibility we will have in the draft. If Tannenbaum signed free agents at Guard and OLB, we'd be looking pretty good. Another OL would make it even better. But with the sparse FA class this season, that might be a tough thing to do.

    But we must sign 1 FA Guard for this plan to work. I don't think a 3 round rookie starting on the OL would be enough.[/QUOTE]

    I agree. Personally, I'd prefer making a dominant defense, but like you said, we can't fix everything this offseason. Our offense is [B]prehistoric[/B]

  6. #26
    Schluberator & Gadfly
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    26,589
    Sign Faneca
    Trade Coles to Jax for picks
    Get Wideouts and Defensive help thru draft

    JMHO of course.

  7. #27
    [QUOTE=AG;2386451]There were rumors that McFadden was not going to most of the work out at the combine. But now a number draft boards had McFadden falling to number 6 to us. Im guess he saw that his stock fell a tiny bit and he decided and was told to work out. It was hit or miss for him on the 40 yard dash. If he messed up and had a slower time it was almost certain he would fall to us at 6 not he hit the dash dead on running a[B] 4.33 [/B](official time), faster than Adrian Peterson. The only team that I could 100% see not taking McFadden in the top 5 is St.Louis, other than that its anyones guess.

    Combine results: [url]http://www.fflivewire.com/players/PlayersCombine.asp[/url][/QUOTE]

    This is an amazing time for a 325 6'4" linemen..Oh wait he's a Rb. We don't need no stinkin' RB. We need Linemen on both sides.

  8. #28
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    22,105
    That's good news on Run DMC because, hopefully, he'll be top 5.

    The thing is, with Dorsey having the stress fracture in his leg, there are now questions if he is top 5. The more prospects that are viewed as Top 5 possibilities, the better chance the Jets get a Top 5-caliber player at 6.

    Top 5 right now have the following possibilities in no particular order: Ryan, Ellis, Chris Long, Jake Long, Run DMC, Dorsey? If teams are willing to overlook the injury concern, then that's 6 in the top 5.

    Reports are that the Chiefs are high on Brohm. Would they go top 5 with him? He's working out at the combine, so he may have gotten wind of that. If he, somehow, jumps into the top 5 mix, the Jets will be in even a better position.

  9. #29
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    22,105
    [QUOTE=TKasper01;2386781]This is an amazing time for a 325 6'4" linemen..Oh wait he's a Rb. We don't need no stinkin' RB. We need Linemen on both sides.[/QUOTE]

    Dude, just imagine in a 6'4" 325lb lineman ran a 4.33. That would be the greatest feat in the history of physical performance.

  10. #30
    Veteran
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Queens, NY
    Posts
    1,535
    [QUOTE=Jets Voice of Reason;2386454]The issue of McFadden falling or not was never due to straightline speed. people just had concerns about his character and his lower frame. The 40 didn't change any of that.

    [B]And for the record, I think McFadden is the top RB in the draft[/B]...[/QUOTE]

    wow, bold statement dude. :rolleyes:

  11. #31
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Rockland, New York
    Posts
    5,359
    [QUOTE=flashlight1;2386802]wow, bold statement dude. :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]

    it is when half the people in the draft forum are switching to mendenhall.

  12. #32
    [QUOTE=Jets Voice of Reason;2386766]I agree. Personally, I'd prefer making a dominant defense, but like you said, we can't fix everything this offseason. Our offense is [B]prehistoric[/B][/QUOTE]

    In general I'm still a fan of drafting RB low. Teams tie up so much money with a first round pick (especially a top 10) and RB just get injured at such a high rate. I don't think they are a good risk.

    Also look at teams with great lines - Giants, Packers, Steelers, Broncos. They plug in any UDFA reject and he rushes for 100 yards. I think that's the better model to emulate.

  13. #33
    [QUOTE=PatsFanTX;2386497]

    Combine results mean absolutely nothing.[/QUOTE]

    [URL=http://imageshack.us][IMG]http://img254.imageshack.us/img254/731/williamsmarioapbm0.jpg[/IMG][/URL]

  14. #34
    Waterboy
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    93
    The one thing that agitates me about 40 times is that the guys run out of a sprinters stance. How the hell does that translate into NFL speed? I'd love to see them get in a 2 point or 3 point stance; something that is relevant. But, hey, what the hell do I know?

  15. #35
    [QUOTE=SteveC1834;2386879]The one thing that agitates me about 40 times is that the guys run out of a sprinters stance. How the hell does that translate into NFL speed? I'd love to see them get in a 2 point or 3 point stance; something that is relevant. But, hey, what the hell do I know?[/QUOTE]

    If everyone performs exactly the same test, the assumption is fast 40 guys will be fast players on the football field. And that's a pretty fair assumption to make.

    Now players with good instincts will tend to play a little better than their times because they are anticipating the plays correctly. This is especially true for LB and DB. And bad instincts will cost you time. But quantifying that would be a very hard thing to do.

    So the 40 time isn't the end-all, be-all exact measure of a player's game speed. But it's a pretty good evaluation. It's not perfect but it at least allows some objective numbers to be discussed.

  16. #36
    We all know that the Jets offensive line was bad last year, but people act as if we drafted McFadden, that it would only matter what his performance would be behind a line of comparable ineptitude.

    There is still a FA period coming up as well as the draft in which to improve the line. D'Brick might actually put on some weight this offseason and he and Mangold will have another offseason of experience. And then there's the offseason after that to improve the line. And the year after that.

    If we draft McFadden, it's not about next season; it's about the next 7-10 years.

  17. #37
    [QUOTE=AG;2386451]There were rumors that McFadden was not going to most of the work out at the combine. But now a number draft boards had McFadden falling to number 6 to us. Im guess he saw that his stock fell a tiny bit and he decided and was told to work out. It was hit or miss for him on the 40 yard dash. If he messed up and had a slower time it was almost certain he would fall to us at 6 not he hit the dash dead on running a 4.33 (official time), faster than Adrian Peterson. The only team that I could 100% see not taking McFadden in the top 5 is St.Louis, other than that its anyones guess.

    Combine results: [url]http://www.fflivewire.com/players/PlayersCombine.asp[/url][/QUOTE]

    I think he will almost definitely be there at 6.

  18. #38
    [QUOTE=JohnnyHector;2387257]We all know that the Jets offensive line was bad last year, but people act as if we drafted McFadden, that it would only matter what his performance would be behind a line of comparable ineptitude.

    There is still a FA period coming up as well as the draft in which to improve the line. D'Brick might actually put on some weight this offseason and he and Mangold will have another offseason of experience. And then there's the offseason after that to improve the line. And the year after that.

    If we draft McFadden, it's not about next season; it's about the [B]next 7-10 years[/B].[/QUOTE]

    RB last 5 or 6 years. Then they fall apart.

    Their prime is the first 2 or 3 seasons they play.

    If we didn't fix our OL immediately, we'd be wasting some of McFadden's best years.

  19. #39
    [QUOTE=lageman4ever;2387546]RB last 5 or 6 years. Then they fall apart.

    Their prime is the first 2 or 3 seasons they play.

    If we didn't fix our OL immediately, we'd be wasting some of McFadden's best years.[/QUOTE]

    I knew somebody would give that response, even though I stated that we have plenty of opportunities to fix the OL situation before he's dipping into his pension.

    If McFadden's legs are always dead on contact, then he'll last even longer in the league. :D

  20. #40
    [QUOTE=SteveC1834;2386879]The one thing that agitates me about 40 times is that the guys run out of a sprinters stance. How the hell does that translate into NFL speed? I'd love to see them get in a 2 point or 3 point stance; something that is relevant. But, hey, what the hell do I know?[/QUOTE]
    it does not.........but what does matter is the first ten yds.........every team looks at the 10 and twenty splits with DE DT and LB...........that is what makes you elite...........with OLB they also look at their cone drills too tell them about how fast out of breaks they are...........Gholtson kille dthose too and Groves ran his cone this spring and it was like he was a running back being below 6.5............it was jaw dropping..............CLong had a decent cone score but he is not close to the other two...........

    I'll give you another point..........3 cones are big for the WR too..........Remember Boldin ran a 4.78 and he still went in two to AZ and everyone said they were nuts..............well he had the third best 3 cone time and it told them he was outstanding out of breaks.............guess who posted the third best 3 cone for WR this yr.............Earl Bennett and his 4.51 forty............i bet he goes much higher now than anyone expects. You can have a guy a run 4.3 time but a 4.5 guy can be the better player because long speed is rarely used in a football game............everything is out of breaks.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us