Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 21

Thread: One (Small) Glimmer of Optimism On a Dark Unpleasant Day...

  1. #1
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    38,062

    One (Small) Glimmer of Optimism On a Dark Unpleasant Day...

    Harris? Revis?

    Yea, they both are looking like VERY solid picks IMO. Revis has had some bad moments, but you have to expect that from a rookie corner. And HArris is developing nicely.

    Hopefully neither will take the nosedive of a select few other recent picks (anyone see Eric Coleman of late? I know I havn't...), but if they continue their development, they could very easily form part of the "core" of talent we're beuilding alongside Mangold, Brick, Washington and others.

    Hopefully Harris will make the trade of Vilma in the offseason possible. If we stay in the 3-4, Vilma is siply wrong for the system, and it will be better for both US and HIM to part ways.

    But I figured it's only fair to point out a positive along with my usual massive neagative.

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    14,798
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    Harris? Revis?

    Yea, they both are looking like VERY solid picks IMO. Revis has had some bad moments, but you have to expect that from a rookie corner. And HArris is developing nicely.

    Hopefully neither will take the nosedive of a select few other recent picks (anyone see Eric Coleman of late? I know I havn't...), but if they continue their development, they could very easily form part of the "core" of talent we're beuilding alongside Mangold, Brick, Washington and others.

    Hopefully Harris will make the trade of Vilma in the offseason possible. If we stay in the 3-4, Vilma is siply wrong for the system, and it will be better for both US and HIM to part ways.

    But I figured it's only fair to point out a positive along with my usual massive neagative.
    If the 'bad moment' from Revis was the TD, i don't think you can get on him for that... He made a great play on the ball and then was taken out of the play by Elam. Can't blame Elam for trying to make a play and separate Evans from the ball either... To me, it was simply bad luck.

    If the 'bad moment' was the roughing the passer call, well that was a pretty soft call.

  3. #3
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Rockland, New York
    Posts
    5,359
    Vilma's injury is a double edged sword. On one hand, Harris gets a starting job without controversy in the locker room, and he also is making defensive play calls in the place of Vilma instead of Barton getting that task. But the injury to his knee makes the trade value of Vilma take a huge hit.

  4. #4
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    1,793
    Fact is many of Tangini's draft choices have worked out quite well.

    Brick, Mangold, Washington, B. Smith, Revis, and Harris have all been very good.

    The jury's still out on guys like Stuckey, Clemens, and Bender.

    A possible 9-of-14 good selections over 2 years is very good, IMO.

  5. #5
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Board Moderator

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    27,261
    The coaches and players on the sideline were going nuts when Revis had his first career interception. I was out of my seat too, guy's fun to watch. He's got that great closing speed too when receivers run deep patterns he's easily able to keep pace with them.

    And Harris is a straight up BEAST!

  6. #6
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Rockland, New York
    Posts
    5,359
    Quote Originally Posted by EricYellin View Post
    If the 'bad moment' from Revis was the TD, i don't think you can get on him for that... He made a great play on the ball and then was taken out of the play by Elam. Can't blame Elam for trying to make a play and separate Evans from the ball either... To me, it was simply bad luck.

    If the 'bad moment' was the roughing the passer call, well that was a pretty soft call.
    I haven't seen Revis "schooled" this season. He's got great technique and most of the time has great coverage, he has awareness of the ball, and can be used as a pass rushing weapon as we saw today. He's a sure tackler and is good in run support.

    I haven't seen him in many blown coverage situations and I agree with you that the pass interference calls were a little soft.

  7. #7
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    22,031
    Both excellent picks, and I'm kinda proud of myself because about this time last year I was watching college games to evaluate players and Harris stood out for me then. He was always around the ball and flat out punished people, I was elated when we traded up to get him.

    Revis for being a rookie and missing camp has also looked good. Some mistakes but he can cover deep and still be aggresive at times.

  8. #8
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    38,062
    Quote Originally Posted by Beerfish View Post
    Both excellent picks, and I'm kinda proud of myself because about this time last year I was watching college games to evaluate players and Harris stood out for me then. He was always around the ball and flat out punished people, I was elated when we traded up to get him.

    Revis for being a rookie and missing camp has also looked good. Some mistakes but he can cover deep and still be aggresive at times.
    I can understand that my friend. I was a HUGE proponent onf the "Brick then Mangold" picks before they were drafted, and while Brick has been a little slower developing than I would like, Mangold rules and Brick IS developing just fine. It's nice to be right once in a while, isn't it?

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    Harris? Revis?

    Yea, they both are looking like VERY solid picks IMO. Revis has had some bad moments, but you have to expect that from a rookie corner. And HArris is developing nicely.

    Hopefully neither will take the nosedive of a select few other recent picks (anyone see Eric Coleman of late? I know I havn't...), but if they continue their development, they could very easily form part of the "core" of talent we're beuilding alongside Mangold, Brick, Washington and others
    .

    Hopefully Harris will make the trade of Vilma in the offseason possible. If we stay in the 3-4, Vilma is siply wrong for the system, and it will be better for both US and HIM to part ways.

    But I figured it's only fair to point out a positive along with my usual massive neagative.

    They both look solid. After the bye week, look for them to pick it up a notch. Revis and Harris are gonna be impact players for years to come.

    Vima and D'rob should get us draft picks and/or players that will fit our needs. Looks like we'll draft top 5 in every round of draft.

    The off season acquisitions and departures is all we have left to look forward too. Of course, the continuing experience of the young core of players too.

    PLUS KC starting the rest of season. Putting Clemens in the last couple of minutes of the game, was simply throwing in the towel on Chad as the QB. He's done. Now we get to see what KC can do. Get to see how his potential develops from game to game experience.

  10. #10
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Not bababooey and I resent the implication
    Posts
    20,936
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    Harris? Revis?

    Yea, they both are looking like VERY solid picks IMO. Revis has had some bad moments, but you have to expect that from a rookie corner. And HArris is developing nicely.

    Hopefully neither will take the nosedive of a select few other recent picks (anyone see Eric Coleman of late? I know I havn't...), but if they continue their development, they could very easily form part of the "core" of talent we're beuilding alongside Mangold, Brick, Washington and others.

    Hopefully Harris will make the trade of Vilma in the offseason possible. If we stay in the 3-4, Vilma is siply wrong for the system, and it will be better for both US and HIM to part ways.

    But I figured it's only fair to point out a positive along with my usual massive neagative.
    Word..

    imo, it only serves to prove that Mangina is guilty of an often cited Herm criticisms...that he played the vets in favor of the young un's, even when the young un's where better.

    Harris was more noticable today then Vilma has been all season...

  11. #11
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    29,903
    Bottom line is both of those trades looked like they were 100% worth it today. The disparity in talent between Harris and Revis, and who we would have gotten had we stayed pat is showing itself to be that large.

    Loved those trades on draft day and still do. Harris was outstanding today, he made a few All Pro caliber plays.

  12. #12
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    9,940
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish
    Harris? Revis?

    Yea, they both are looking like VERY solid picks IMO. Revis has had some bad moments, but you have to expect that from a rookie corner. And HArris is developing nicely.

    Hopefully neither will take the nosedive of a select few other recent picks (anyone see Eric Coleman of late? I know I havn't...), but if they continue their development, they could very easily form part of the "core" of talent we're beuilding alongside Mangold, Brick, Washington and others.

    Hopefully Harris will make the trade of Vilma in the offseason possible. If we stay in the 3-4, Vilma is siply wrong for the system, and it will be better for both US and HIM to part ways.

    But I figured it's only fair to point out a positive along with my usual massive neagative.
    Above from this thread, Below from last week.

    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish
    We're 1-6.

    In the middle of year 2.

    [B]That is all the proof I need that we have not done a good job building this team so far.

    Anything beyond that is speculation. Nothing more, nothing less. You ASSUME we'll be better in 2008. You ASSUME we'll be competative for the playoffs in 2009. You ASSUME we'll have great drafts, and big offseason aquisitions.

    [B]And your proof? Brick, Mangold, Washington, Clemens, Revis and Harris. Most still 100% unproven today, with only Mangold a true solid full time starter
    http://jetsinsider.com/forums/showthread.php?t=155065

    Good to see you coming around Fish.
    Last edited by KR; 10-29-2007 at 12:13 AM.

  13. #13
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    38,062
    Quote Originally Posted by Kerry Rhodes View Post
    Above from this thread, Below from last week.

    We're 1-6.

    In the middle of year 2.

    [b]That is all the proof I need that we have not done a good job building this team so far.

    Anything beyond that is speculation. Nothing more, nothing less. You ASSUME we'll be better in 2008. You ASSUME we'll be competative for the playoffs in 2009. You ASSUME we'll have great drafts, and big offseason aquisitions.

    [b]And your proof? Brick, Mangold, Washington, Clemens, Revis and Harris. Most still 100% unproven today, with only Mangold a true solid full time starter
    Good to see you coming around Fish.
    I never lie, and I love being wrong. Harris played excellently today, although with that D it's an uphill battle every down to play well. Revis is developing, like Brick. Neither are "there" yet, but both could potentially be there, no doubts.

    Now, if we're being honest, Waashington is exciting, but he is really just a return guy/3rd down-scat back. Thats great, but it isn't drafting TO in the third either. Clemens is still a complete unkown today (and my lord am I praying for him to not bust). Mangold, well I have a man crush on our mangold. He's a stud IMO.

    I am happy to admit, that group looks good. Hell, even the Boar Hunter looks decent today, if not for us.....

    But still, there not all roses either. Really though, thats besides the point....these drafts are better than usual, no doubt at all so far. But to me, that does not change Mangini's failure in 2007, and I still cannot buy into your "it's all a master plan, trust Mangini, Mangini will be fine" belief. To me, it's giving a free pass when one has not truly been earned.

    And the decision not to go on 4th today? Not impressive, all things considered. But I admire your faith my friend, and while I don't agree, one cannot in any form question that your opinion is based on your vast knowledge and understanding of NFL football. Of THAT fact, I have NO doubts. /bow

  14. #14
    If Harris was calling signals at the line, he also did a dang good job at that (for a rook).

  15. #15
    There's a number of bad things that could be said about Tannenbaum / Mangini. But drafting poorly is not one of them.

    From 2006 they have DBrick, Mangold, Clemens (likely) as starters. Washington, Brad Smith, Eric Smith and Coleman have all started at some time and play often. Jason Pociask plays sometimes. Only whiffs were Titus Adams (7th rounder stole off of the practice squad by the Giants) and Schlegel.

    For 2007 the 1st and 2nd rounders are starting. The two other players drafted are in development and could challenge for starting roles next year. And one UDFA made the team.

    That's a very, very good haul from the draft. I'd guess that we've got more starters / regulars in the last 2 years from the draft (10) than any other team in the NFL. And that's all due to great talent evaluation.
    Last edited by lageman4ever; 10-29-2007 at 02:31 AM.

  16. #16
    All League
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    4,203
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    Harris? Revis?

    Yea, they both are looking like VERY solid picks IMO. Revis has had some bad moments, but you have to expect that from a rookie corner. And HArris is developing nicely.

    Hopefully neither will take the nosedive of a select few other recent picks (anyone see Eric Coleman of late? I know I havn't...), but if they continue their development, they could very easily form part of the "core" of talent we're beuilding alongside Mangold, Brick, Washington and others.

    Hopefully Harris will make the trade of Vilma in the offseason possible. If we stay in the 3-4, Vilma is siply wrong for the system, and it will be better for both US and HIM to part ways.

    But I figured it's only fair to point out a positive along with my usual massive neagative.


    There was much more to be optimistic about in today's game:

    1. The end of the Chad era (hopefully) Most of our problems are directly related to him or made worse by him.

    2. Abram Elam Yeah, the play on the TD pass turned out bad, but he has really flashed some talent and ability to be around the ball (which is somewhat uncoachable) When he calms down a little, and gets more experienced he might really become an impact nickel/safety for us.

    3. Related to Harris, but we do not need Vilma. He was not going to be a Jet next year anyway, but today we could see that we do not really need him

    4.Improved play from Brad Smith at #3 WR.

    The Jets WILL BE a playoff team in 2008 unquestionably.

  17. #17
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    14,691
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    Harris? Revis?

    Yea, they both are looking like VERY solid picks IMO. Revis has had some bad moments, but you have to expect that from a rookie corner. And HArris is developing nicely.

    Hopefully neither will take the nosedive of a select few other recent picks (anyone see Eric Coleman of late? I know I havn't...), but if they continue their development, they could very easily form part of the "core" of talent we're beuilding alongside Mangold, Brick, Washington and others.

    Hopefully Harris will make the trade of Vilma in the offseason possible. If we stay in the 3-4, Vilma is siply wrong for the system, and it will be better for both US and HIM to part ways.

    But I figured it's only fair to point out a positive along with my usual massive neagative.
    Yeah, sure Revis and Harris have been good picks, but at WHAT COST to the rest of the team?? What players could they have gotten if they had stayed where they were? And don't speculate like many here do, NO ONE knows what we could have had, especially when you consider how Grand Canyon obvious those holes on this team are.

    If they were going to do that, then WHY didn't they become more active in free agency?

    My point is, this team had WAY more areas of concern than just LB and CB. If they had at least planned on showing up for the games, they should have done MORE in free agency (stop gaps) to allow this team to be more competitive.

    Now if you want to sit there and say, Revis and Harris are studs. Well, you would be right. But it's also about 10% of the truth about this team.

    A lot of people want to condone this season, like winning 2 or 3 games is OK, so long as you get TWO great players out of your draft. I DON'T.

    It sickens me to think that some people are simply incapable of assigning blame where it belongs..........

  18. #18
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    14,534
    Quote Originally Posted by Mainejet View Post
    Yeah, sure Revis and Harris have been good picks, but at WHAT COST to the rest of the team?? What players could they have gotten if they had stayed where they were? And don't speculate like many here do, NO ONE knows what we could have had, especially when you consider how Grand Canyon obvious those holes on this team are.
    Actually, it's pretty damn easy to answer that question - just look at the players drafted around the slots we would have been in, and tell me which one the Jets could/should have taken.

    In the first, they could have gone with OG Ben Grubbs in the 20s . . . leaving us with Barrett and Dyson as our starting CBs . . . but at least Grubbs would have been a good pick. But truth is, I'll take Revis over Grubbs any day, so if that's the only guy you can come up with, the trade was a good one. So who else would/could/should we have taken?

    Here's a link to the full draft. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_NFL_Draft For our first pick, you can take any player in the draft you want not selected before 25. For the rest, pick a guy within ten of the selection. Here are your options:

    pick 59 (to CAR for Revis):
    C Ryan Kalil
    C Samson Satele
    S Gerald Alexander
    DE Dan Bazuin
    RB Brandon Jackson (pick 63, to GB for Harris, so I'll run it out 9 more):
    S Sabby Piscitelli
    DE Quentin Moses
    CB Usaama Young
    OT James Marten
    LB Quincy Black
    LB Buster Davis
    OT Ryan Harris
    RB Lorenzo Booker
    CB Marcus McCauley

    pick 89 (to GB for Harris):
    S Aaron Rouse
    RB Tony Hunt
    QB Trent Edwards
    RB Garrett Wolfe
    LB Michael Okwo
    CB Daymieone Hughes
    LB Anthony Waters
    DE Ray McDonald
    DT Quinn Pitcock

    Pick 164 (to CAR for Revis):
    LB Tim Shaw
    S Eric Frampton
    DT Derek Landri
    S Kevin Payne
    CB Corey Graham
    WR Roy Hall
    CB William Gay
    OT Clint Oldenberg
    WR Legedu Naanee
    CB Michael Coe

    Pick 191 (to GB for Harris):
    LB Korey Hall
    LB Desmond Bishop
    K Mason Crosby
    CB David Irons
    FB Deon Anderson
    OT Herbert Taylor
    WR Courtney Taylor
    C Doug Datish
    C Drew Mormino
    DE Melila Purcell.

    There you go - a full listing of players, available to you with the benefit of hindsight both in knowing that they will be available to you for the pick plus in knowing whatever new information about them you can gather after 8 NFL games (or less for the large portion who were cut out of training camp by the teams that picked them)

    So, put together a package of players that you think would provide more value than Revis from the group available at picks 23, 59 and 164 (go ahead and ignore that the deal was actually for Revis and pick 191 - lets run it straight up against Revis).

    And put together a package of players that you think would provide more value than Harris from the group available at picks 63, 89 and 191 (and, again, ignore that we got the pick we used on Chansi Stuckey from GB in the deal - run it just against Harris.

    Taking the BPA at each pick, I don't see a group that I wouldn't trade straight up for Revis/Harris at those spots. (The best possible group would be Grubbs/Spencer at 23, Samson Satele (a center we'd have no use for) at 59 and I guess Tim Shaw at 164. And I'd trade all 3 for Revis in a heartbeat today). Unless you do, stop complaining about what you imagine the Jets might have been able to do with the quantity of picks they traded away in some other, deeper, more talented draft.

  19. #19
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    9,940
    Quote Originally Posted by doggin94it View Post
    Actually, it's pretty damn easy to answer that question - just look at the players drafted around the slots we would have been in, and tell me which one the Jets could/should have taken.

    In the first, they could have gone with OG Ben Grubbs in the 20s . . . leaving us with Barrett and Dyson as our starting CBs . . . but at least Grubbs would have been a good pick. But truth is, I'll take Revis over Grubbs any day, so if that's the only guy you can come up with, the trade was a good one. So who else would/could/should we have taken?

    Here's a link to the full draft. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_NFL_Draft For our first pick, you can take any player in the draft you want not selected before 25. For the rest, pick a guy within ten of the selection. Here are your options:

    pick 59 (to CAR for Revis):
    C Ryan Kalil
    C Samson Satele
    S Gerald Alexander
    DE Dan Bazuin
    RB Brandon Jackson (pick 63, to GB for Harris, so I'll run it out 9 more):
    S Sabby Piscitelli
    DE Quentin Moses
    CB Usaama Young
    OT James Marten
    LB Quincy Black
    LB Buster Davis
    OT Ryan Harris
    RB Lorenzo Booker
    CB Marcus McCauley

    pick 89 (to GB for Harris):
    S Aaron Rouse
    RB Tony Hunt
    QB Trent Edwards
    RB Garrett Wolfe
    LB Michael Okwo
    CB Daymieone Hughes
    LB Anthony Waters
    DE Ray McDonald
    DT Quinn Pitcock

    Pick 164 (to CAR for Revis):
    LB Tim Shaw
    S Eric Frampton
    DT Derek Landri
    S Kevin Payne
    CB Corey Graham
    WR Roy Hall
    CB William Gay
    OT Clint Oldenberg
    WR Legedu Naanee
    CB Michael Coe

    Pick 191 (to GB for Harris):
    LB Korey Hall
    LB Desmond Bishop
    K Mason Crosby
    CB David Irons
    FB Deon Anderson
    OT Herbert Taylor
    WR Courtney Taylor
    C Doug Datish
    C Drew Mormino
    DE Melila Purcell.

    There you go - a full listing of players, available to you with the benefit of hindsight both in knowing that they will be available to you for the pick plus in knowing whatever new information about them you can gather after 8 NFL games (or less for the large portion who were cut out of training camp by the teams that picked them)

    So, put together a package of players that you think would provide more value than Revis from the group available at picks 23, 59 and 164 (go ahead and ignore that the deal was actually for Revis and pick 191 - lets run it straight up against Revis).

    And put together a package of players that you think would provide more value than Harris from the group available at picks 63, 89 and 191 (and, again, ignore that we got the pick we used on Chansi Stuckey from GB in the deal - run it just against Harris.
    [B]
    Taking the BPA at each pick, I don't see a group that I wouldn't trade straight up for Revis/Harris at those spots. (The best possible group would be Grubbs/Spencer at 23, Samson Satele (a center we'd have no use for) at 59 and I guess Tim Shaw at 164. And I'd trade all 3 for Revis in a heartbeat today). Unless you do, stop complaining about what you imagine the Jets might have been able to do with the quantity of picks they traded away in some other, deeper, more talented draft.
    GREAT POST DOGGIN

  20. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    22,746
    Quote Originally Posted by doggin94it View Post
    Actually, it's pretty damn easy to answer that question - just look at the players drafted around the slots we would have been in, and tell me which one the Jets could/should have taken.

    In the first, they could have gone with OG Ben Grubbs in the 20s . . . leaving us with Barrett and Dyson as our starting CBs . . . but at least Grubbs would have been a good pick. But truth is, I'll take Revis over Grubbs any day, so if that's the only guy you can come up with, the trade was a good one. So who else would/could/should we have taken?

    Here's a link to the full draft. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_NFL_Draft For our first pick, you can take any player in the draft you want not selected before 25. For the rest, pick a guy within ten of the selection. Here are your options:

    pick 59 (to CAR for Revis):
    C Ryan Kalil
    C Samson Satele
    S Gerald Alexander
    DE Dan Bazuin
    RB Brandon Jackson (pick 63, to GB for Harris, so I'll run it out 9 more):
    S Sabby Piscitelli
    DE Quentin Moses
    CB Usaama Young
    OT James Marten
    LB Quincy Black
    LB Buster Davis
    OT Ryan Harris
    RB Lorenzo Booker
    CB Marcus McCauley

    pick 89 (to GB for Harris):
    S Aaron Rouse
    RB Tony Hunt
    QB Trent Edwards
    RB Garrett Wolfe
    LB Michael Okwo
    CB Daymieone Hughes
    LB Anthony Waters
    DE Ray McDonald
    DT Quinn Pitcock

    Pick 164 (to CAR for Revis):
    LB Tim Shaw
    S Eric Frampton
    DT Derek Landri
    S Kevin Payne
    CB Corey Graham
    WR Roy Hall
    CB William Gay
    OT Clint Oldenberg
    WR Legedu Naanee
    CB Michael Coe

    Pick 191 (to GB for Harris):
    LB Korey Hall
    LB Desmond Bishop
    K Mason Crosby
    CB David Irons
    FB Deon Anderson
    OT Herbert Taylor
    WR Courtney Taylor
    C Doug Datish
    C Drew Mormino
    DE Melila Purcell.

    There you go - a full listing of players, available to you with the benefit of hindsight both in knowing that they will be available to you for the pick plus in knowing whatever new information about them you can gather after 8 NFL games (or less for the large portion who were cut out of training camp by the teams that picked them)

    So, put together a package of players that you think would provide more value than Revis from the group available at picks 23, 59 and 164 (go ahead and ignore that the deal was actually for Revis and pick 191 - lets run it straight up against Revis).

    And put together a package of players that you think would provide more value than Harris from the group available at picks 63, 89 and 191 (and, again, ignore that we got the pick we used on Chansi Stuckey from GB in the deal - run it just against Harris.

    Taking the BPA at each pick, I don't see a group that I wouldn't trade straight up for Revis/Harris at those spots. (The best possible group would be Grubbs/Spencer at 23, Samson Satele (a center we'd have no use for) at 59 and I guess Tim Shaw at 164. And I'd trade all 3 for Revis in a heartbeat today). Unless you do, stop complaining about what you imagine the Jets might have been able to do with the quantity of picks they traded away in some other, deeper, more talented draft.
    Great stuff Akiva!

    This was an historically weak draft. The Jets approached it the right way - quality over quantity.

    Look at how many mid-round picks failed to make NFL rosters. Picking up a bunch of bodies over getting two quality impact players would have been a huge mistake.

    BTW - the Jets and Broncos (who approached the draft the same way, only four picks) were two of the few teams to receive A draft grades from most experts.

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