2023 Off-season Talk

[NYRaider]

5 hours ago, Bobby816 said:

It wouldn’t surprise me if he’s back has told GB his plans and if it’s a trade for them to be quiet on it. And try and make a trade happen asap. I’m sure both GB and Rodgers want this move to be swift. So wouldn’t surprise me if we hear about him leaving via trade. And the news is exactly that. That he told GB today he would like to move on on GB spent these next few days getting the best offer they could. And then the whole thing being announced.

Most of the recent chatter makes it sound like he's going to be back with the Packers. 

[Bobby816]

11 minutes ago, NYRaider said:

Most of the recent chatter makes it sound like he's going to be back with the Packers. 

Except Rodgers himself has said there’s 0 leaks on his end. So any report I hear until it’s him. Is BS to me. Way too many journalist care about click bait and trying to be 1st than actually reporting facts. 

[NYRaider]

Just now, Bobby816 said:

Except Rodgers himself has said there’s 0 leaks on his end. So any report I hear until it’s him. Is BS to me. Way too many journalist care about click bait and trying to be 1st than actually reporting facts. 

Not on Rodgers end, it sounds like the Packers want him to come back if he's committed to playing.

[doumeyer]

I am still worried that this QB business, it could turn horribly wrong. I think the longer this goes on the more options these other team have. One of these other teams is going to panic and give away the store. This is one time I hope I am wrong.

[Bobby816]

54 minutes ago, NYRaider said:

Not on Rodgers end, it sounds like the Packers want him to come back if he's committed to playing.

Well it’s not really the Packers choice.

[xrade]

2 hours ago, KingOfNewYork said:

Trumaine Johnson was both awful and led us in interceptions the first year of his contract. 

Yeah, with 4. Just shows how pathetic the Jets D was. 

[Bobby816]

6 minutes ago, xrade said:

Yeah, with 4. Just shows how pathetic the Jets D was. 

I mean we had a top D last year and Joyner our worst starting defenders led the team in INTs. With just 3.

 

Goes to show how great we were. We need to create more turnovers 

[xrade]

30 minutes ago, Bobby816 said:

I mean we had a top D last year and Joyner our worst starting defenders led the team in INTs. With just 3.

 

Goes to show how great we were. We need to create more turnovers 

Turnovers are great but I believe it is more important to keep the opposing O out of the end zone. The Jets were excellent at that last year. I’d rather have three Revis’ as opposed to three Trevon Diggs. 

[Bobby816]

22 minutes ago, xrade said:

Turnovers are great but I believe it is more important to keep the opposing O out of the end zone. The Jets were excellent at that last year. I’d rather have three Revis’ as opposed to three Trevon Diggs. 

Oh absolutely. But creating turnovers is never bad. A thing that I think we can big time improve on with a legit offense. What we lacked was an offense that can put up points where the opposing offense has to try and keep up and force things. Which generally results in mistakes. We have a scoring offense and I expect our turnover numbers to go up quite a bit on defense.

[jetsfan4life51]

Some of those Patriots defenses gave up a ton of yards but would get interceptions and keep teams out of the end zone. 
 

TOs are huge for momentum. 

[xrade]

10 minutes ago, Bobby816 said:

But creating turnovers is never bad

Agreed. I’m just not sure Int’s will come from our shutdown CB’s. I have always said I like man coverage as opposed to zone because a good man CB like Sauce and Reed will erase the opposing boundary WR’s. Zone coverage results in more TO’s but allows more completions. Int’s will have to come from the interior pass defenders like S and LB which I hope we upgrade. Wagner is available now. Wonder what his asking price will be. 

[xrade]

3 minutes ago, jetsfan4life51 said:

Some of those Patriots defenses gave up a ton of yards but would get interceptions and keep teams out of the end zone. 
 

TOs are huge for momentum. 

That is because they played the Jets twice a year. A lot of Int’s were thrown by Jet QB’s seeing ghosts.

But seriously, it is all matter of preference. Shut down the opposing O or give up yards but get TO’s. Outside of the Ed Reed era Ravens, not sure there is a team that can do both. Just a guess on my part. 

[doumeyer]

The NFL combines. Start in four days, and I don't care how many of one hand pull ups a guy can do or how high he can jump & how far he can throw the ball, all I care about can a player complete a pass. All I heard in the combines and training camp how great Zach Wilson is. Well we all found out how bad he is.

SORRY BUT ANGRY DOUMEYER IS BACK AGAIN.

[Bobby816]

1 hour ago, doumeyer said:

The NFL combines. Start in four days, and I don't care how many of one hand pull ups a guy can do or how high he can jump & how far he can throw the ball, all I care about can a player complete a pass. All I heard in the combines and training camp how great Zach Wilson is. Well we all found out how bad he is.

SORRY BUT ANGRY DOUMEYER IS BACK AGAIN.

We’re not drafting a QB with our 1st fee picks or even at all. So I wouldn’t worry. If we do it’d be a developmental guy. 

[xrade]

22 hours ago, jetfuel34 said:

I think the cap thing is a joke. It use to be a problem years ago but now teams have so many loop holes to get under it I NEVER worry about it. Even when a team goes into "Cap Hell" it is only for a season and that next season they have 100 mill of free cap. The old days you would see 3 years or so. 

My question to you all is WHEN WAS THE LAST TEAM IN CAP HELL AND HOW LONG DID IT LAST??? 

The Rams had to cut Bobby Wagner to save some $.  He was with them only a year and is still playing at a high level.  The cap is real.  It can be manipulated to a point, but in the end, payment comes due.  It is like buying on credit.