Jump to content
jetskid007

2020 NFL Free Agency: Rumors and Reports

Recommended Posts

Now do we talk about Bills.   Did they upgrade WR before OL?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Bobby816 said:

Sams not even arguably good yet. Never mind great. I think he will be a franchise QB “IF” we get him talent. We haven’t done that. So it’s still hard to say. And yes I think early in a players career if you don’t give them weapons to work with it can make or break them. We saw that as jets fans with Sanchez. We thought he was legit and got rid of everyone around him and watched him sink. We have to get Darnold weapons to last with him.

Baker Mayfield

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
27 minutes ago, JetsandI said:

Now do we talk about Bills.   Did they upgrade WR before OL?

Buffalo upgraded both last off-season adding Morse, Feliciano, Spain, Nsekhe and Ford to the o-line and acquiring Brown and Beasley for the WR core. The o-line is still a work in progress, but WRs are set since adding Diggs. Buffalo's done a pretty good job adding talent around Josh Allen, but it did take time. No one expected him to start his rookie season. Starting Peterman was one of the bigger blunders made by Brandon Beane. 

Edited by WizeGuy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Bobby816 said:

Sams not even arguably good yet. Never mind great. I think he will be a franchise QB “IF” we get him talent. We haven’t done that. So it’s still hard to say. And yes I think early in a players career if you don’t give them weapons to work with it can make or break them. We saw that as jets fans with Sanchez. We thought he was legit and got rid of everyone around him and watched him sink. We have to get Darnold weapons to last with him.

Sam is either good or bad. He’s not really an in between player yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, jetskid007 said:

Baker Mayfield

Baker had weapons galore but no OL and struggled a ton. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, jetskid007 said:

Baker Mayfield

Never said OL wasn’t important. I’ve said all offseason OL should be the biggest thing addressed. And we did a decent job of that in FA. I think we downgraded at WR and that group was already bad. So to use mayfield as a response to what I said makes no sense. Please show me when I’ve said we don’t need an OL just give Darnold weapons? Like I’ve stated the combo of a WR at 11 and OL at 48 I think helps this team more than OL at 11 and WR at 48.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, KingOfTheDot said:

Baker had weapons galore but no OL and struggled a ton. 

If he had a shorter garbage Oline he’d have probably had an easier time... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How big of a gap duo you guys believe it’s is for the Tier 1OT(Wills/Wirfs/Thomas/Jones/Becton) vs the tier 2OT(Jackson/Cleveland/Wilson/Peart,ect ) against the gap of the tier 1 WRs(Ruggs/Lamb/Jeudy) vs Tier 2(Aiyuk/Mims/Jefferson/Higgins/Raegor/DPJ,ect)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sam has arguably made guys better when he plays.  There was a stark difference between when he was on the field and off, when hes on the field our offense wasn't historically bad. 

We had the worst OL in football, absolutely no run game and under pressure constantly. Not to mention we had tons of injuries limited skill at WR. 

Sam has the tools to be great, but its on the Jets to provide him the environment to be great.  He has been put in nothing but bad situations.

Give Sam what Allen had, Jackson Had, or even what Baker had. 

He had none of it, nothing but adversity and bad players around him.  His maturity and ability to hold it together no matter how bad things were was impressive for a young man. 

But this team is failing Sam badly and we won't see the big jump to a possible top 10 QB without them helping him.   This draft has to get him players to help him succeed. We need Douglas to not draft busts and to hit on guys that help this team. 

If we hit on that OT and land a good starter, and if they are right about George Fant being a upgrade over Beachum (Beachum was trash, his run blocking was pathetic and he wasn't a liability in pass protection so that got him points). Theres a reason no one wants Beachum, hes not good.  And maybe Edoga gets better, lots of linemen struggle as rookies. His technique needs to get better, he has the raw tools to play but needs to get much better than he was.

 

We need to land a good starting WR , someone who can make plays and bail out Sam at times. Its a luxury to have a WR who can bail a QB out, plenty of WRs can be productive with good QB play, few can make a QB better and help them out. 

We need a edge rusher and arguably another CB. 

But this draft has to hit on OT and WR, also adding another RB is important as well. 

1-OT or WR

2-OT or WR

3-Edge, WR, RB, CB

3-Edge WR, RB, CB.

This draft is huge. 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right now the Dolphins passed us. They have a better team. We have the worst team in the AFC East. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, NYJets4716 said:

Right now the Dolphins passed us. They have a better team. We have the worst team in the AFC East. 

Stop it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
22 minutes ago, NYJets4716 said:

Right now the Dolphins passed us. They have a better team. We have the worst team in the AFC East. 

Who's the Dolphins quarterback? How about the Patriots? How exactly do you reach these conclusions..

Let's not overreact to a couple FA signings, you might have a more compelling argument after the draft but not right now.

Edited by NJC33

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
48 minutes ago, Bobby816 said:

Never said OL wasn’t important. I’ve said all offseason OL should be the biggest thing addressed. And we did a decent job of that in FA. I think we downgraded at WR and that group was already bad. So to use mayfield as a response to what I said makes no sense. Please show me when I’ve said we don’t need an OL just give Darnold weapons? Like I’ve stated the combo of a WR at 11 and OL at 48 I think helps this team more than OL at 11 and WR at 48.

Again, I will break it down for you in chunks. 

  1. It is of my opinion that the top tackles are better players than the top receivers by in large. That has always been my stance. If you disagree with that, fine, matter of preference. But to say one day you have a higher grade on a player, than the next change it simply because of need tells me you really aren't stacking you're "board" based on talent. You're basing it purely on need... so unless you go out and grade the players quantitatively and stick with that grade, I don't really put much credit into said "board", but again, it's just my opinion versus yours, which you're entitled to, but I'm just calling you out for flip flopping based on need. 
  2. Using Mayfield as a response is a direct correlation with your opinion, which you said, "And yes I think early in a players career if you don't give them weapons to work with it can make or break them." I responded with an example in Baker Mayfield. He was given Odell Beckham and Kareem Hunt in 2019 to add with existing "significantly invested in weapons" in Jarvis Landry, David Njoku, and Nick Chubb... yet he got worse. I'm not saying that your premise is incorrect, I'm saying that it's flawed. Getting a player "top notch talent" does not mean they will end up any better or any worse than they would've been without that top notch talent. Using Mark Sanchez as an example is also flawed. The coaches ruined him, not the lack of talent. He was rushed into the lineup before he was ready, and they literally made him play with training wheels on for a few years without truly challenging him to be a better player. He was bad with weapons and it only looked worse without top notch weapons. The Jets never failed him on a weapons standpoint- they simply never developed him. That's on the coaches, not the players.
  3. I recognize you view adding to the OL as important. I have no issue with people who want a WR at 11- it's your thought process getting there. Instead of trying to justify your decision to make it sound like you have a legitimate basis- just admit that you want a star receiver that you can adore as a flashy player. Don't try and manufacture some frankenstein of an answer to make it seem like you're making an informed response based on data, facts, or logical basis. Example: just admit that you want ice cream in the morning instead of multi-vitamin because it's more exciting and tastes better than multi-vitamin, even though every factual study shows that multi-vitamin is the more healthy and sustainable option in the morning. Another example: some people like banging escorts. Those people are entitled to like to do that or prefer to do that. It's exciting, it's thrilling, hell it can be amazing, but it's not smart. The smarter option by every single measure of logic? Find a long-term girlfriend/wife because it's more sustainable than the escort. 
  4. My issue with WR at 11 is not a matter of what happens at 48. I don't think that way. I think in terms of value. The greatest value for tackles is in round 1. The greatest value for WRs/RBs are between rounds 2-4 in this draft. The greatest value for TEs is in round 5-6. The greatest value for DEs is in round 2. The greatest value for CBs is in round 1-2. For me (as well as many who are in the industry) it's all about taking advantage of value. Chances are 48 is going to be a wasteland for tackles. In fact, if we go WR 11 I'm probably rooting for the Jets to take a EDGE or CB at 48 because the value will be there, whereas the value won't be there at tackle. Reaching for a player is a mistake- period. Why take that risk when you have 3-5 top 15 prospects available at tackle at 11 with very little talent at T in rounds 2-3, versus the deepest wide receiver class ever? It makes categorically no sense. The dropoff from WR1 to WR20 isn't even close to the drop off from OT1/2/3/4/5 to OT8. 

 

Here is my pitch: if you emotionally just want a WR that you can say is a 1st round pick (i.e. Drafting Metcalf at #3) that's fine! That's what you want because that's what you like and that's your preference and I can't argue with that. But to try and argue that it's logical without providing data, study, or evidence in the face of every single statistic that suggests the right move is taking a top tackle over a top wide receiver by every quantifiable measure is simply nonsensical. We all have the right not to make sense and to make poor decisions, but at least acknowledge it is my plea. 

Edited by jetskid007

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a lot of words that I’m going to have to read

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×