Without doubt, it was Fitz turning to crap. One of his "strengths" was making quick decisions and getting the ball out quickly, which helped the OL. Brick's play had fallen off considerably. Even if he had played at his highest level and Mangold had as well, with Fitz playing like crap, the Jets would still have wound up with the same crappy record. Fitz would have still forced the ball into double and triple coverage. He still would have thrown the same wounded, inaccurate ducks. While he was starting last season, the OL was still playing at a pretty high level. The OL play didn't turn to total crap until Petty began starting, and most of the team had quit on the season.
I sure remember Alan Faneca looking like he was beating the Seahawks in the super bowl by himself. I also seem to remember a couple of years where we had great guards and no QB and almost got into the super bowl....
I see your point about how to distribute a salary cap across a roster. My point is that drafting a guard who has a first round grade is much more likely to give a team a very good or great guard as opposed to the likelihood that QB who has a first round grade will give a team a very good or great QB. Convince me that picking Mark Sanchez or Johnny Football or JaMarcus Russell was a better use of that pick than picking the first guard taken after each player would have been.
Doesn't matter when you draft the guard [first round or last round], but if you don't have good interior pass protection, you'll end up like Mark Sanchez in 2011 when Ngata effectively ended any shot of Mark becoming a good QB. Redskins drafted a guard after we took Leonard Williams and their offensive line is in good shape. Yes, they "reached" but it was worth it.
Anyone that says drafting a guard in the first round is a bad idea should be forced to watch the butt fumble play repeatedly for 24 hours straight.
And anyone who says that drafting a guard in the first round is a good idea should be forced to watch the Jets of a number of seasons ago where they had a very good, if not great OL with something like 4 former 1st round picks, but had zero playmakers.
I think it is part of the cost of doing business at the championship level in the NFL. You have to take QB's worthy of being taken on one of the first 36 picks in the draft or you need to get ridiculously lucky in the draft. If you have a top 10 pick and a QB worthy of the pick is there and you don't know who your QB of the next 5 years is already you have to take that guy and hope he's the 50% success and not Sanchez, Manziel or Russell. If a guy worthy of the pick is there it doesn't matter if the greatest guard of all-time is also there, you have to take the shot at the QB because if you hit on him the value will be 5x what the GOAT guard of all time is worth to you in terms of wins.
Convince me that picking Ryan Tannehill, Ben Roethlisberger, Joe Flacco, Marcus Mariota, Andrew Luck, Alex Smith, Phillip Rivers, Eli Manning, Carson Wentz, Aaron Rodgers, Matthew Stafford, Matt Ryan, Cam Newton, Jameis Winston, or Carson Palmer was a worse use of a first round pick than some random guard.
When we made the AFC Championship two years in a row. That is the time frame you are referring to right?
I didn't forget Russell, he was in the post I quoted. If you want to dispute my post, first get the list of busts up to 16. Then prove that guards have a higher success rate than QBs. And finally, show how any of the top guards are more valuable than my list of QBs.
If a guy like an Alan Faneca is coming out in the draft? I have no problem taking him in the first round, even top 5 is that is what it's going to take to get the guy. That's a guy you can build your OL around. That makes sense. I do understand the argument of "you can get any guy off the street to play Guard", but that's only when you have legitimate talent at Tackle. The Jets don't. This OL is empty sheet of paper, really? Besides Winters and Carpenter, this OL could be in need of 2 Tackles and a Center. Who knows, may be Mangold retires? Clady is as good as gone and Giacomini sucks. So Tackle is certainly the NEED, but if you have a truly great Guard coming into the draft, you take him. It's that simple. That's taking the Best Available Player. Make Carpenter and Winters WORK to keep their jobs. The NFL is about competition anyway, competition among teams and competition within their roster...
Newton was a great player, but he wasn't the reason the Cowboys won SBs. A QB is much more valuable than a guard regardless of whether the guard was lucky enough to play for a winning team.
Seriously? Are you really trying to make the case that OGs are more important/valuable than QBs? Did your mother play OG or something?
If you want a QB in the worst way that is exactly what you will get. Sure I would take a pro bowl QB over a pro bowl OG. With that being said, how often has that pro bowl QB been not only available but clearly identified as a pro bowl QB (Brady and Wilson do not count as every team passed on them at least twice)? How many times have we been in position to take the first guard in the entire draft with our pick? We have passed up far many more pro bowl guards than pro bowl QBs. While you should never pass up a pro bowl QB (unless maybe if you already have one) in most instances it would also be a mistake to pass up a pro bowl guard in the absence of a pro bowler at another position being available. Do you really take an average / below average tackle, QB or pass rusher over a pro bowl talent at any position (aside from kicker)? If so, how do you expect to beat the team drafting later that gets that pro bowl guard even lower in the draft?
Your response makes no sense, bro. You're speaking as if someone is reaching or advocating reaching instead of taking that OG. That is not the case.
If you never take an OG in the first round then you are reaching for something else when that OG is BPA.
