Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 64

Thread: PRIORITIES...

  1. #21
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Orlando from NYC (1998) Las Vegas from Orlando Fl (june 2007)
    Posts
    17,555
    Post Thanks / Like
    :ph34r: this Jets defensive back field is not bad...why are people questioning barrett?? How can u question the man when u never saw him play?

    We still have to take a stud DB like D-Hall or dunta robinson in the 1st.....the fact is that DB is not exactly a glaring need right now.....we got rid of two slow average DB's abd brought in two starters that are an ungrade....again we still have to draft one of the sud db's....as for the O-line...we can upgrade in the later rounds...those extra picks don't look that bad now....the bottom line is that Db is not a glaring need. All 4 currnet db's are legit starters......some of you made it seem like they are not.

  2. #22
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    LI
    Posts
    2,072
    Post Thanks / Like
    it's actually quite simple

    we need some1 who is a stud, a superstar, a monster, some1 who changes the game when he steps on the field, some1 who makes other teams sh*t in their pants evrytime he comes running, a playmaker, a game-changer, a guy who the other team plans against, a franchise guy!

    hmmmmmm . . . . BAP at #12 - Mikey Mike Williams or Vilma at 16-22

  3. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    THE BRONX
    Posts
    3,193
    Post Thanks / Like
    The JETS definately need more playmakers in the back seven of that defense.

    Just watch everygame last season, the Defense with the Linebackers and secondary made absolutely ZERO plays, it was ridiculous after awhile.

    The JETS didn't have one player return an INT for a touchdown and again the JETS were near the bottom of the league at creating turnovers.

  4. #24
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    LI
    Posts
    2,072
    Post Thanks / Like
    the D got much better this offseason, much better!

  5. #25
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,686
    Post Thanks / Like
    First round pick has to be M.Williams or Vilma. I wouldn't let the chance to grab an OG slip too far. Remember Goodwin? Everyone here thought he'd work his way into the starting line-up, and so far he's done jack! Protecting Pennington should be the #1 priority. Our team was helpless without him. We cannot afford to lose our francise QB, especially with Vinny being cut after 6/1.

  6. #26
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    THE BRONX
    Posts
    3,193
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by The Chad[/i]@Apr 4 2004, 03:05 PM
    [b] the D got much better this offseason, much better! [/b][/quote]
    It has improved but in no way do the JETS have enough playmakers.

    But stop kidding yourself, its not that much better.

    Its gone from being rotten to a better then rotten thats it, the JETS need more speed, youth, and playmakers.

    Having Cowart around doesn't help, because he's still very slow and creates zero plays. And no Middle linebacker is not his natural position, he'll get creamed in the middle of the 4-3, the guy can't take on blockers even though he has good size for it.

    The JETS need more playmakers and your wrong to think that the Defense will be very good next season.

  7. #27
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    LI
    Posts
    2,072
    Post Thanks / Like
    thanks for the analysis - here's what I'm not wrong about

    the Jets won 6 games last year, correct?
    Chad, didn't play in the first 4 (3 were losses), correct?
    There were numerous games decided by late drives (pats, eagles), correct?

    That being said, we could have easily, AT WORST gone .500 if chad started all year long

    ok, NOW THIS YEAR!
    - chad will hopefully start the whole season
    - you just said the D did get better, still rotten or not, its still better
    - everyone in the division got noitceably worse
    - our schedule isnt as deadly as it was last year
    - THE DRAFT ISN'T EVEN HERE YET!

    now please explain to me how a D player will help us to get to 10-6 (should b a playoff spot) but a STUD like mike/or roy will help less?

  8. #28
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Naples FL
    Posts
    42,979
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by The Chad[/i]@Apr 4 2004, 03:47 PM
    [b]
    now please explain to me how a D player will help us to get to 10-6 (should b a playoff spot) but a STUD like mike/or roy will help less?[/b][/quote]
    Unless Hermie totally changes the way he views Rookies it
    won't matter who we draft, they wll be riding the pine or maybe
    play ST&#39;s&#33;&#33; <_<

  9. #29
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    THE BRONX
    Posts
    3,193
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by The Chad[/i]@Apr 4 2004, 04:47 PM
    [b] thanks for the analysis - here&#39;s what I&#39;m not wrong about

    the Jets won 6 games last year, correct?
    Chad, didn&#39;t play in the first 4 (3 were losses), correct?
    There were numerous games decided by late drives (pats, eagles), correct?

    That being said, we could have easily, AT WORST gone .500 if chad started all year long

    ok, NOW THIS YEAR&#33;
    - chad will hopefully start the whole season
    - you just said the D did get better, still rotten or not, its still better
    - everyone in the division got noitceably worse
    - our schedule isnt as deadly as it was last year
    - THE DRAFT ISN&#39;T EVEN HERE YET&#33;

    now please explain to me how a D player will help us to get to 10-6 (should b a playoff spot) but a STUD like mike/or roy will help less? [/b][/quote]
    THEY HAVE FILLED WIDE RECIEVER, IT IS NO LONGER A F*CKING POSITION OF NEED, GET IT THROUGH YOUR HEAD. McCariens has filled what the JETS needed at widereciever, stop being stupid about this.

    Did you watch any JETS games, ANY?, the defense was the problems about 90% of the time.

    The JETS need to build that defense, they need to, because its a problem area, big time.

    Savage,

    Herm has come out and said many times this offseason he is looking for a starter possibly even 2 out of this draft. This saids to me that he has grown as a coach, & has a more of a win now mentality.

    Tony Dungy is like Herms mentor, last season Dungy started about 4 rookies, he never starts that many in his career, and he took the Colts to the AFC championship game. I think Herm looks at that, and saids its ok to start rookies if they perform well, I am positive he has learned he can start rookies.

  10. #30
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,686
    Post Thanks / Like
    We need 2 starters out of this draft. One of them HAS to be a OG. I don&#39;t care (too much) what round.

  11. #31
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    THE BRONX
    Posts
    3,193
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by JETSET47[/i]@Apr 4 2004, 05:57 PM
    [b] We need 2 starters out of this draft. One of them HAS to be a OG. I don&#39;t care (too much) what round. [/b][/quote]
    I really think the JETS can get a starter at Guard in rounds 3-5, Guard isn&#39;t the hardest position to make the transition to from college to pro.

  12. #32
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,611
    Post Thanks / Like
    [u]Our PRIORITY in Round #1 is to get the best player available, because in the 2004 NFL draft there WILL be some GAMEBREAKERS available at #12:[/u]

    This means Mike Williams, Roy Williams, DeAngelo Hall or Kellen Winslow Jr. ONE of these four will likely be available at #12 and MUST be taken if they are. Period.

    Needs are one thing, but playmaking gamebreakers are few and far between, and these four are the only potential players with THAT level of talent likely available at #12. Gamble, Vilma and many others ARE NOT potential gamebreakers, although they may be solid future NFL starters.

    [u]Our PRIORITY in Rounds #2 thru #4 is to fill MAJOR NEEDS with POTENTIAL STARTERS:[/u]

    That means we must, with our 3 picks in these rounds (#3, #4, #4 Supplimental), obtain the following positions (best available players at each) -- Cornerback, Linebacker, O-Line. These positions are our most pressing NEEDS right now. Filling Dpeth holes with potential starters at these positions is a MUST in these mid rounds.

    [u]Our PRIORITY in Rounds #5 thru #7 is to fill DEPTH issues at a number of positions with B.A.P.&#39;s:[/u]

    This includes (depending on earlier picks) Backup Safety, #4 Cornerback, Backup TE, Backup RB, WR and O-Line Depth. We have 6 picks in these bottom rounds (including Supplimental) and we can drat ALOT of Depth/B.A.P.&#39;s in this spots, especially Rounds #5 and #6. Even if only 1 or 2 pan out, these are BONUS because all of our final holes will be plugged in the early rounds.

  13. #33
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    THE BRONX
    Posts
    3,193
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Warfish[/i]@Apr 4 2004, 07:07 PM
    [b] [u]Our PRIORITY in Round #1 is to get the best player available, because in the 2004 NFL draft there WILL be some GAMEBREAKERS available at #12:[/u]

    This means Mike Williams, Roy Williams, DeAngelo Hall or Kellen Winslow Jr. ONE of these four will likely be available at #12 and MUST be taken if they are. Period.

    Needs are one thing, but playmaking gamebreakers are few and far between, and these four are the only potential players with THAT level of talent likely available at #12. Gamble, Vilma and many others ARE NOT potential gamebreakers, although they may be solid future NFL starters.

    [u]Our PRIORITY in Rounds #2 thru #4 is to fill MAJOR NEEDS with POTENTIAL STARTERS:[/u]

    That means we must, with our 3 picks in these rounds (#3, #4, #4 Supplimental), obtain the following positions (best available players at each) -- Cornerback, Linebacker, O-Line. These positions are our most pressing NEEDS right now. Filling Dpeth holes with potential starters at these positions is a MUST in these mid rounds.

    [u]Our PRIORITY in Rounds #5 thru #7 is to fill DEPTH issues at a number of positions with B.A.P.&#39;s:[/u]

    This includes (depending on earlier picks) Backup Safety, #4 Cornerback, Backup TE, Backup RB, WR and O-Line Depth. We have 6 picks in these bottom rounds (including Supplimental) and we can drat ALOT of Depth/B.A.P.&#39;s in this spots, especially Rounds #5 and #6. Even if only 1 or 2 pan out, these are BONUS because all of our final holes will be plugged in the early rounds. [/b][/quote]
    Wrong. In round one the JETS need to pick a defensive player and most likely will.

    Sorry to burst your bubble, the JETS aren&#39;t drafting a wide reciever, becuase its not a god damn pressing need like the defense is.

    Playmakers on defense is a pressing need.

    I know some of you people with your fantasies think the JETS actually have the luxury of drafting the best available player, but thats completely not true.

  14. #34
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,611
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][b]Wrong. In round one the JETS need to pick a defensive player and most likely will.

    Sorry to burst your bubble, the JETS aren&#39;t drafting a wide reciever, becuase its not a god damn pressing need like the defense is.
    [/b][/quote]

    What a shock, a guy names "Jets D..." wants to pick a defensive player.......shocker (LOL, just kidding D.)

    You MAY be right (although I don&#39;t think it&#39;s the "in the bag" choice you seem to assume it is). However, picking a future solid, if unspectacular D-Player over a potential GAMEBREAKER like M.Harrison or J.Rice or T.Gonzales is a mistake, no matter how you slice it.

    I think it&#39;s a common misconception that our D sucked but our O rocked in 2003. Not true. the D actually let up very few points all considered (and considering their difficulties with the run). However, our O NEVER SCORED&#33;&#33;&#33;

    We were, if I recall, like 28th in Points Scored while we were 18th in Points Allowed. That tells me our O needs JUST as much of an upgrade as our D did. So far we fixed or upgraded LB, CB & SAFETY on D while adding only McCareins on O (a solid but completely unproven #3 WR, one without the potential to be J.Rice to be sure).

    I suppose my point is this: You do NOT skip a GAMEBREAKER in Round #1 just to fill a potential need. CB (other than Hall, who IS worthy of #12), Safety, LB are all positionsthat need Depth, not starters. NO PLAYER likely available at #12 would be a starter on the 2004 JETS at those positions, I guarantee it.

    So if it comes down to a backup LB, CB or Safety Vs. A #3 WR or Stud Backup TE with HUIGE GAMEBREAKER potential, then I take the O player myself.

  15. #35
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Miami, Florida
    Posts
    3,165
    Post Thanks / Like
    1) Corner back
    2) Offensive Line

  16. #36
    TomShane
    Guest
    1) Guard
    1a) WR
    2) LB
    3) S
    4) CB
    5) TE
    6) DE
    7) T

  17. #37
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    THE BRONX
    Posts
    3,193
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Warfish[/i]@Apr 4 2004, 07:23 PM
    [b] [quote][b]Wrong. In round one the JETS need to pick a defensive player and most likely will.

    Sorry to burst your bubble, the JETS aren&#39;t drafting a wide reciever, becuase its not a god damn pressing need like the defense is.
    [/b][/quote]

    What a shock, a guy names "Jets D..." wants to pick a defensive player.......shocker (LOL, just kidding D.)

    You MAY be right (although I don&#39;t think it&#39;s the "in the bag" choice you seem to assume it is). However, picking a future solid, if unspectacular D-Player over a potential GAMEBREAKER like M.Harrison or J.Rice or T.Gonzales is a mistake, no matter how you slice it.

    I think it&#39;s a common misconception that our D sucked but our O rocked in 2003. Not true. the D actually let up very few points all considered (and considering their difficulties with the run). However, our O NEVER SCORED&#33;&#33;&#33;

    We were, if I recall, like 28th in Points Scored while we were 18th in Points Allowed. That tells me our O needs JUST as much of an upgrade as our D did. So far we fixed or upgraded LB, CB & SAFETY on D while adding only McCareins on O (a solid but completely unproven #3 WR, one without the potential to be J.Rice to be sure).

    I suppose my point is this: You do NOT skip a GAMEBREAKER in Round #1 just to fill a potential need. CB (other than Hall, who IS worthy of #12), Safety, LB are all positionsthat need Depth, not starters. NO PLAYER likely available at #12 would be a starter on the 2004 JETS at those positions, I guarantee it.

    So if it comes down to a backup LB, CB or Safety Vs. A #3 WR or Stud Backup TE with HUIGE GAMEBREAKER potential, then I take the O player myself. [/b][/quote]
    In no way did the Offense rock, it was missing a solid guard and a Wide Reciever to compliment Santana.

    The JETS have a gamebreaker in Santana Moss, he is a number one receiever, stop disrespecting this guy.

    Also, Kellen Winslow is not falling to 12, his stock is way too high.

    The Defense needs playmakers more then anything.

  18. #38
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    LI
    Posts
    2,072
    Post Thanks / Like
    JetsD, you are just completely wrong on this as humanly possible. Warfish made the best point - our D was not that bad and our O was not that good. They both need improvment&#33;

    I will only give you one thing - the jets need more help in D then they do in O. but you are 100% wrong to think that it&#39;s the right move to pass up on an O player at #12 to reach for a D player (the only guys who are not reaches at 12 are Hall and Wilfork). Not only is it idiotic to pass up on a potential superstar for a guy who fills a hole on D, but if we pass up on a stud guess who gets him . . . BUFFALO&#33; any WR or TE the jets leave behind will just be scooped up by the Bill so he can run over our asses two times next year. All i know is the 3 offensive players in discussion (MW, RW, KW) are def. top 10 picks and if the jets don&#39;t take them at #12 its a bigtime mistake for the future.

    I just want to see what you say if we pass up on one of these guys and they become Pro-Bowlers in the future while were the FORCED to pay Moss some huge money b/c we didnt have that recieving threat. Last time i checked, our Franchise Player in on offense - BUILD THE TEAM AROUND HIM&#33;

  19. #39
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    central jersey
    Posts
    4,047
    Post Thanks / Like
    cornerback and we shouldnt draft one trade for one

  20. #40
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,611
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][b]The JETS have a gamebreaker in Santana Moss, he is a number one receiever, stop disrespecting this guy.[/b][/quote]

    I disagree whole heartedly. I think he is a very fast wideout who had one good year and two injury plagues years. He is short, doesn&#39;t catch well in traffic very often and is EASILY stopped when double teamed. He wants Top 5 WR cash NOW and is simply not the equal, talent wise, to Mike Williams or Roy Willimas IMO.

    I certainly could be wrong, but Moss is not the gamebreaker you claim. He did not break open many games in 2003 if I recall. He had good games, but NEVER dominated a game, like a Harrison, Hines Ward, J.Rice or R.Moss can. Williams and Williams (and Winslow too) have THAT kind of talent. Moss does not.

    I won&#39;t complain if the Jets grab DT Wilfork or CB Hall at #12. Perhaps even one or two other D-Player MAY be worthy of #12. But beyond Hall, I don;t think we can get a D Gamebreaker of the quality of the O Gamebreakers at #12. So if we go D, and hall is gone, we damn sure better trade down and get another 2nd rounder in the bargain. Then we can take any of the IMO 2nd tier D Players available in the low first round (Perhaps P.Boulware, I like him and he has a god family history).

    I still maintain that only Hall (or perhaps Wilfork) would actually EARN a starting spot on the D of the 2004 Jets. Knowing Herm&#39;s mentallity on Rook&#39;s and our current Roster, I do not see ANY other D Players available at #12 breaking into the lineup. However, Winslow IS a starter from Day 1, and Willimas/Willimas would both Press Moss for the #1 Spot or at least McCareins for #2 without a doubt, and IN 2004.

    We shall see I suppose. The 2004 Draft WILL be an interesting one&#33;

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