Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 30

Thread: Three simple answers to the three questions about the in inadequacies of the Jets

  1. #1

    Three simple answers to the three questions about the in inadequacies of the Jets

    The Jets did not upgrade the WR position! They are setting the offense up to fail!

    The Jets have done the whole "pick up a troubled WR" twice and they felt it did not solve their issues. They chose a different path, one that promotes continuity of receivers and choosing to develop through the draft.

    The Jets did not upgrade the offensive line

    Easily the biggest flaw on this team. It deserved attention, but their simply weren't much options. The Jets were high on Decastro in the draft. It was rumored that it was between Coples and Decastro with the 16th pick. Thankfully, they chose Coples. Decastro has looked awful at Steelers camp.

    The Jets are hurting Sanchez with the acquisition of Tim Tebow!

    At the same time, these critics were screaming "Sanchez needs a fire lit under him!" The jets believe in Mark's ability, but agree that he may have been coddled a little too much. Do we get a QB who can challenge Sanchez forthe starting gig, or can we get an offensive weapon that will pressure Sanchez, but still be a factor. The jets want Sanchez to succeed.

  2. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by NY State of Mind View Post
    The Jets did not upgrade the WR position! They are setting the offense up to fail!

    The Jets have done the whole "pick up a troubled WR" twice and they felt it did not solve their issues. They chose a different path, one that promotes continuity of receivers and choosing to develop through the draft.

    The Jets did not upgrade the offensive line

    Easily the biggest flaw on this team. It deserved attention, but their simply weren't much options. The Jets were high on Decastro in the draft. It was rumored that it was between Coples and Decastro with the 16th pick. Thankfully, they chose Coples. Decastro has looked awful at Steelers camp.

    The Jets are hurting Sanchez with the acquisition of Tim Tebow!

    At the same time, these critics were screaming "Sanchez needs a fire lit under him!" The jets believe in Mark's ability, but agree that he may have been coddled a little too much. Do we get a QB who can challenge Sanchez forthe starting gig, or can we get an offensive weapon that will pressure Sanchez, but still be a factor. The jets want Sanchez to succeed.
    1- why was the answer to pick up a troubled WR in the first place? Why would that ever be a consideration, why not pick up a good teammate WR?

    2. DeCastro looking bad? based on what? a comment to the media that the nfl was even more physical than he thought it would be? He was named the starter and looked great against the eagles. I wanted the pats to pick him myself and wished they had.

    3. You don't need to bring in the most popular and charismatic player in the NFL to light a fire under Mark, Campbell, Garrard, or any other qb with starting NFL exp, could have done that. Instead Mark is constantly publicly questioned on him being the qb of the jets and what's Tebow's effect on him.
    Remember this is after the public pursuit of Manning. Of course they want Sanchez to succeed, They have 50 mill reason for them to do so.

  3. #3
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    greenwich village, NYC
    Posts
    8,169
    Quote Originally Posted by patman View Post
    1- why was the answer to pick up a troubled WR in the first place? Why would that ever be a consideration, why not pick up a good teammate WR?

    2. DeCastro looking bad? based on what? a comment to the media that the nfl was even more physical than he thought it would be? He was named the starter and looked great against the eagles. I wanted the pats to pick him myself and wished they had.

    3. You don't need to bring in the most popular and charismatic player in the NFL to light a fire under Mark, Campbell, Garrard, or any other qb with starting NFL exp, could have done that. Instead Mark is constantly publicly questioned on him being the qb of the jets and what's Tebow's effect on him.
    Remember this is after the public pursuit of Manning. Of course they want Sanchez to succeed, They have 50 mill reason for them to do so.
    Perhaps I'm in a minority here, but I agree with the OP on the last point. Garrard or Campbell would have given Mark a run for his money as the starter and would have definitely set up a two QB race (see Miami). Tebow may have been a stunt (although I don't think it was) but his starting would require shifting the entire offense in a different direction from Sanchez. I think it was a move that the FO viewed as a win-win, precisely because it did not set up a direct competition.

  4. #4
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Mendham, NJ
    Posts
    14,269
    Quote Originally Posted by NY State of Mind View Post
    The Jets did not upgrade the WR position! They are setting the offense up to fail!

    The Jets have done the whole "pick up a troubled WR" twice and they felt it did not solve their issues. They chose a different path, one that promotes continuity of receivers and choosing to develop through the draft.

    The Jets did not upgrade the offensive line

    Easily the biggest flaw on this team. It deserved attention, but their simply weren't much options. The Jets were high on Decastro in the draft. It was rumored that it was between Coples and Decastro with the 16th pick. Thankfully, they chose Coples. Decastro has looked awful at Steelers camp.

    The Jets are hurting Sanchez with the acquisition of Tim Tebow!

    At the same time, these critics were screaming "Sanchez needs a fire lit under him!" The jets believe in Mark's ability, but agree that he may have been coddled a little too much. Do we get a QB who can challenge Sanchez forthe starting gig, or can we get an offensive weapon that will pressure Sanchez, but still be a factor. The jets want Sanchez to succeed.

    The choices were not just sign a troubled WR or draft one. There were other veteran WRs available this off season and the Jets chose to sign one that is incapable of staying healthy for more than 10 minutes. Drafting a young WR in the second round was a good move, something the Jets should have done a couple years ago, but on this team Hill can not be some developmental player this year. They need him to play like a #2 WR and contribute from day one.

  5. #5
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    20,944
    Tanny? Is that you?

    I didn't know you were a member.

  6. #6
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    In transit
    Posts
    6,192
    Quote Originally Posted by patman View Post
    1- why was the answer to pick up a troubled WR in the first place? Why would that ever be a consideration, why not pick up a good teammate WR?

    2. DeCastro looking bad? based on what? a comment to the media that the nfl was even more physical than he thought it would be? He was named the starter and looked great against the eagles. I wanted the pats to pick him myself and wished they had.

    3. You don't need to bring in the most popular and charismatic player in the NFL to light a fire under Mark, Campbell, Garrard, or any other qb with starting NFL exp, could have done that. Instead Mark is constantly publicly questioned on him being the qb of the jets and what's Tebow's effect on him.
    Remember this is after the public pursuit of Manning. Of course they want Sanchez to succeed, They have 50 mill reason for them to do so.
    I was on record as wanting DeCAstro. Mainly because long term, both the Jets guards are FA after the year. So Coples had better work out.

    But, who would be more valuable? A young Richard Seymour type or a young Logan Mankins type? Now, if Coples busts, I will be pissed they didn't take DeCastro, but if he really was that highly rated on their board than that is what you have to do.

    They did address WR with the second round pick. It's just they wanted to run the ball more, and with this line I don't know that you can do that. I view OL as a bigger need than WR. With time, an average receiver can get open. With no time, you can have Larry Fitz and Megatron getting open, if Mark is on his back the ball isn't getting there.

  7. #7
    time to FIRE TANNENBUM

  8. #8
    Hall of Fame
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Atlanta via NJ
    Posts
    8,310
    ... the jets have done a good job with all except RT ...

    ... let's see if the kid from last week takes the spot from hunter as we continue to wait and see if another team cuts someone in camp ...


    ... hill fills what we are looking for in our #2 wr ... let's see him keep stretching the field deep and open running lanes with downfield blocking ...







    l_j_r

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by chirorob View Post
    I was on record as wanting DeCAstro. Mainly because long term, both the Jets guards are FA after the year. So Coples had better work out.

    But, who would be more valuable? A young Richard Seymour type or a young Logan Mankins type? Now, if Coples busts, I will be pissed they didn't take DeCastro, but if he really was that highly rated on their board than that is what you have to do.

    They did address WR with the second round pick. It's just they wanted to run the ball more, and with this line I don't know that you can do that. I view OL as a bigger need than WR. With time, an average receiver can get open. With no time, you can have Larry Fitz and Megatron getting open, if Mark is on his back the ball isn't getting there.
    Seymour is more valuable than Mankins, But I think DeCastro is a lot closer to Mankins than Coples is to Seymour. The jets had a good D, they needed oline help a hell of a lot more. While you can argue that Coples may perform at a high level and plays a position of greater impact, his potential to bust, is also higher than Decastro.

    As far as a taking the higher ranked player, I can see it if you have one player ranked/graded much higher than the other. Everybody's board is different but these two must have been close on most boards. If the players are close i rather have a team take the player at the greater position of need.

    The jets addressed the long term need at wr in Hill for sure. But I think due to his background in the option type offense and only catching 50 balls in 3 years and running #9 routes, his effectiveness this year I think will be very limited. But I would have taken him there.

  10. #10
    Its funny how after all the problems we had with problem WRs people want to add another one. Its easier for Mark to become a leader with WRs that aren't talking back to him and causing problems.

    Our biggest issue with the WRs right now is their health. We need them to get healthy first.

  11. #11
    You are all nuts you know that? This is the perfect team that will not only go 19-0 and with the SB, but will blow out all of their opponents by more than 3TDs in every game.

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by ASH_1962 View Post
    You are all nuts you know that? This is the perfect team that will not only go 19-0 and with the SB, but will blow out all of their opponents by more than 3TDs in every game.
    Definitely not what I'm trying to say. All I'm saying is I don't think Mike T terminally ignored any one area.

  13. #13
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    In transit
    Posts
    6,192
    Quote Originally Posted by patman View Post
    Seymour is more valuable than Mankins, But I think DeCastro is a lot closer to Mankins than Coples is to Seymour. The jets had a good D, they needed oline help a hell of a lot more. While you can argue that Coples may perform at a high level and plays a position of greater impact, his potential to bust, is also higher than Decastro.

    As far as a taking the higher ranked player, I can see it if you have one player ranked/graded much higher than the other. Everybody's board is different but these two must have been close on most boards. If the players are close i rather have a team take the player at the greater position of need.

    The jets addressed the long term need at wr in Hill for sure. But I think due to his background in the option type offense and only catching 50 balls in 3 years and running #9 routes, his effectiveness this year I think will be very limited. But I would have taken him there.
    I like the Hill pick. If he can catch 40 passes for 600 yards and a few TD's, that's great to me for a rookie. The Jets want to run, he should be a very good run blocking WR. With his speed, he should help to keep the D back just a bit, the Jets must throw deep to him 1-2 times per game. Complete or no, just to keep the safety back.

    We'll see on Coples. I don't disagree with you at all. I figured, if nothing else, on 3rd and short run between DeCastro and Mangold and that should be 2 yards everytime. The Jets must have really felt that Coples was going to be a Seymore type player, or they made a mistake (to me).

  14. #14
    Undrafted Free Agent
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Langhorne, PA
    Posts
    191
    The kind of wide receiver I'd still like to add would be someone like James Jones of the Packers. He was rumored to be on the trade block earlier this summer and he's owed a manageable $3 million or so in each of the next three years. He's talented, but with the emergence of Randall Cobb, Jones is probably no better than the No. 4 receiver in Green Bay.

    The frustrating thing is that he was available as a free agent last offseason and we were rumored to be interested. Instead, we went with Plaxico Burress. While Burress was productive as a red zone target, Jones would have given us more of the speed we were sorely lacking and we would have had him for more than just the one season.

    Jones is still only 28, and I'd feel a lot better with a top four of Holmes, Jones, Hill and Kerley than I do with a top four of Holmes, Hill, Kerley and Turner. I still think it's worth investigating what the Packers would want for Jones.

    On another note, if Jeff Otah would be capable of passing a physical, say, two or three weeks from now, wouldn't it still be worth bringing him back in?

  15. #15
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Mendham, NJ
    Posts
    14,269
    Quote Originally Posted by J-E-F-F View Post
    The kind of wide receiver I'd still like to add would be someone like James Jones of the Packers. He was rumored to be on the trade block earlier this summer and he's owed a manageable $3 million or so in each of the next three years. He's talented, but with the emergence of Randall Cobb, Jones is probably no better than the No. 4 receiver in Green Bay.

    The frustrating thing is that he was available as a free agent last offseason and we were rumored to be interested. Instead, we went with Plaxico Burress. While Burress was productive as a red zone target, Jones would have given us more of the speed we were sorely lacking and we would have had him for more than just the one season.

    Jones is still only 28, and I'd feel a lot better with a top four of Holmes, Jones, Hill and Kerley than I do with a top four of Holmes, Hill, Kerley and Turner. I still think it's worth investigating what the Packers would want for Jones.

    On another note, if Jeff Otah would be capable of passing a physical, say, two or three weeks from now, wouldn't it still be worth bringing him back in?
    The Jones issue was discussed around here a few weeks ago, most likely the Packers would not want to eat any cap money by trading him after only one season. He probably has some bonus money that was pro rated and will count against the cap if he is traded now. Also, the Packers throw the ball a lot, having a deep group of WRs is necessary. Jennings was already dinged up this pre-season. Donald Driver will not play forever either and the Packers see Jones as a replacement for him once he retires.

  16. #16
    All League
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    The Bronx, USA
    Posts
    4,793
    Quote Originally Posted by patman View Post
    Seymour is more valuable than Mankins, But I think DeCastro is a lot closer to Mankins than Coples is to Seymour. The jets had a good D, they needed oline help a hell of a lot more. While you can argue that Coples may perform at a high level and plays a position of greater impact, his potential to bust, is also higher than Decastro.

    As far as a taking the higher ranked player, I can see it if you have one player ranked/graded much higher than the other. Everybody's board is different but these two must have been close on most boards. If the players are close i rather have a team take the player at the greater position of need.

    The jets addressed the long term need at wr in Hill for sure. But I think due to his background in the option type offense and only catching 50 balls in 3 years and running #9 routes, his effectiveness this year I think will be very limited. But I would have taken him there.

    Coples was Man among Boys last week. There is a reason he would've been the top defensive player picked if he came out last year. By the middle of next year this kid will be a beast.

  17. #17
    like chad johnson troll boy? the point about putting a rookie at tackle is valid. it's a big jump. i don't see any of the recent patsie tackles starting from day one. as for sanchez, it's new york. sanchez is more than adequate. he has more than enough fire to be the qb. he may not be the de facto leader on offense yet. and tebow brings a totally different talent for the offense. he's not there to supplant sanchez but supplement him.

    Quote Originally Posted by patman View Post
    1- why was the answer to pick up a troubled WR in the first place? Why would that ever be a consideration, why not pick up a good teammate WR?

    2. DeCastro looking bad? based on what? a comment to the media that the nfl was even more physical than he thought it would be? He was named the starter and looked great against the eagles. I wanted the pats to pick him myself and wished they had.

    3. You don't need to bring in the most popular and charismatic player in the NFL to light a fire under Mark, Campbell, Garrard, or any other qb with starting NFL exp, could have done that. Instead Mark is constantly publicly questioned on him being the qb of the jets and what's Tebow's effect on him.
    Remember this is after the public pursuit of Manning. Of course they want Sanchez to succeed, They have 50 mill reason for them to do so.

  18. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by sameoldjets View Post
    like chad johnson troll boy? the point about putting a rookie at tackle is valid. it's a big jump. i don't see any of the recent patsie tackles starting from day one. as for sanchez, it's new york. sanchez is more than adequate. he has more than enough fire to be the qb. he may not be the de facto leader on offense yet. and tebow brings a totally different talent for the offense. he's not there to supplant sanchez but supplement him.
    Vollmer started as a rookie, Light made the probowl last year, was Solder supposed to beat him out?

    What does Chad Johnson who is and was another troubled WR have to do with it? Meechem at 5 mill, Lloyd at 4 mill, Gaffney at 2mill, Manningham 3.5 mill are all guys who don't have issues and get paid pennies on the dollar compared to Holmes.

    I never said Sanchez was not adequate, Rex and Tanny pursued Manning, signed Stanton, signed Tebow, traded Stanton after taking a 500,000 cap hit for doing so the same week that they signed him. They showed less faith in him than I did. I have always Sanchez can be effective but that he needs to be surrounded by top talent to do so. Search any post I have if you can find a contradictory post.

    Tebow was brought it for publicity and Rex and Sparano are trying thier best to work him in to the offense.

    Troll boy! ow- you hurt my feelings.

  19. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by BRONX JET View Post
    Coples was Man among Boys last week. There is a reason he would've been the top defensive player picked if he came out last year. By the middle of next year this kid will be a beast.
    Coples can very well turnout to be a very good DE and I never said he wouldn't.

    As far as "man among boys", you understand the hidden truth in that statement in that 1/2 the guys that lined up against him are going to be gym teachers and McDonalds managers in a month.

    And if you think Coples would have been picked before, Dareus, Miller, Peterson, JJ Watt and Aldon Smith, your are delusional. He might have even went after Quinn and Fairley too.
    Last edited by patman; 08-18-2012 at 01:43 PM.

  20. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by patman View Post
    Coples can very well turnout to be a very good DE and I never said he wouldn't.

    As far as "man among boys", you understand the hidden truth in that statement in that 1/2 the guys that lined up against him are going to be gym teachers and McDonalds managers in a month.

    And if you think Coples would have been picked before, Dareus, Miller, Peterson, JJ Watt and Aldon Smith, your are delusional. He might have even went after Quinn and Fairley too.
    Coples was a top 3 pick before his stunt in his senior year at UNC. His slide is not about whether those aforementioned players were/are better, but rather his attitude and perceived work ethic, and the surrounding situation at North Carolina.

    Had he not tanked his senior year, he would be on St Louis or one of the early drafters. He's a great talent. Whether he lives up to his talent is another story.

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