Spot on, but the guys who are in love with Bowers can't see reason for the stars in their eyes. We just have to pray that JD gets it right.
You calling someone else condescending is hilarious. I guess you don’t know that three wide receivers start on most teams, and right now the jets have two and a possible. The jets could just as easily draft an OT in the second or third round, and OTs have a high bust rate too.
At least 4 QB’s are going Top 10, right? So the 10th overall pick is really like the 6th overall pick for the Jets. I just get the feeling JD is going to try to trade down and get back that 2nd round pick he lost on Rodgers. We will see.
Yeah and OL in rounds 2+ work out at higher rates than any other non-kicking position. The value in drafting OL is in the mid rounds.
Given the injury history of our current LT, combined with the MetLife turf, and just our overall good luck, any O-lineman we draft will most likely see a significant amount of playing time.
I’m with it but the Jets and this GM in particular is awful at evaluating offensive line talent be it mid-market free agents or lower round draft picks. Sometimes you have to overcorrect to fix a mistake and get a 10 year starter at tackle in the first round.
Is this true for tackles? Makes sense to me for guards and centers, but based on no evidence whatsoever i had the feeling that teams so overvalued tackles in the first that the later rounds had no good tackles left.
In this case though, a WR should be a massive preference: We have Lazard/Gipson starting the way the team is now and Mike will need to ramp up, will not be ready for training camp. I am not so sure Bowers in year 1 is starting over Conk at all, and even if he is I doubt there will be a massive upgrade. So, given your own argument, a WR and not TE should be an option. As far as OT, the argument is slightly different. It's true that OT draftee might not start the year, but there is overwhelming likelihood he will have to play significant amount. And given what happened last year, not protecting Rodgers might get him hurt effectively ending the entire season for everyone. So, the argument is that while an OT pick likely will play less than a WR, the importance of these reps protecting Rodgers is too critical in 2024. Plus he will start after that. Where I still cannot see a point is a TE. If you are not sold with OT argument, than WR is far and away better weapon option, and it is not even close. The only possible way I can see this is that people are absolutely certain he is Kelce/Kittle/Gronk generational type can't miss prospect. And I simply am not buying it.
I agree here 100% I want no part of a TE at 10…too many of them bust…he’d have to be the second coming of Kelce/Kittle/Gronk and I’m not buying it either…and by the way, none of those guys were top ten picks. And I don’t have anything against the player per se…but for THIS team, at THIS time, I just don’t think it makes a lot of sense. There are only a couple of TE’s who are difference makers, and the chances of Bowers becoming one of them to me are not a slam dunk. I’d rather solidify the OT spot or the WR spot for all those reasons you mentioned. We’ll see what JD does, but I hope he sees it the same way
I was under the impression that this class is top heavy with the tackles, but I could be wrong. Interior oline in round 2 has potential for sure.
I just ran across some very interesting statistics on the top WRs in this draft class. After seeing Lazard, Hardman, Davis and other Jets WRs drop so many passes over the last 5 years, why in the world would they or you want to draft a "top" WR with such a high drop rate? Unless there were some extenuating circumstances, such as a very wild, inaccurate QB that caused them to have to frequently attempt to make circus-type catches, imo no top WR should have a drop rate above 5%, and even that is high for a WR who will be seeing a lot of targets. IMO this is all the more reason why the Jets 1st round pick has to be an OT, and preferably an LT. Marvin Harrison Jr - 6.1% on 248 targets Rome Odunze - 6.6% on 328 targets Malik Nabers - 7.3% on 275 targets Brian Thomas Jr - 9.3% on 176 targets Roman Wilson - 6.1% on 157 targets Ladd McConkey - 7.8% on 158 targets Bowers drop rate was 5.1% which is better that the WRs above, but still seems a little too high, and his contested catch rate was only 22.2% (25th percentile). Here's an interesting article on Bowers: https://www.ganggreennation.com/202...ht-end-brock-bowers-georgia-new-york-jets-pff It's written by a fan, who seems to be pretty knowledgeable, and he did his homework with stats to back up his opinions. IMO this is the most important part of the article:
There was something else that Pats and Cheifs had that had something to do with these SBs: Brady and Mahomes. These guys won with great WRs too, like Brady with the Bucks for example, where Gronk was also there, but played a much smaller role. Mahomes won with Hill too. They didn't win because of these TEs. I am not saying if we have a great TE like Gronk or Kelce it won't help. But I am not sure Bowers it, and there is a much higher hit rate at WR, with 23 best pass catchers in NFL being WRs, not a single TE until #24. And these QBs had a decent protection too when they won, particularly Brady with TB, which is kinda what we are trying to do now with Rodgers.
No, they aren't. The rookie WR will be the #3. He will definitely not be a starter. Bowers isn't likely to start, either.
have you ever watched an NFL game? It’s crazy, teams often line up with 3 receivers or 2 tight ends a lot. It’s almost like who starts on the very first snap doesn’t matter for the other ~60
To be clear, I'm not saying Bowers will be a great TE either --- i know my limitations. What I am saying is that we shouldn't so quickly dismiss the idea of drafting TE IF the front office thinks he's the real deal. Smarter people than I have explained how he can be used to really screw up a defense.
I think that most posters believe that Bowers can screw up a defense if he's in the right system on the right team. That's the key to the matter. Do you really think that Hackett is capable or even willing to re-design his offense to focus on the TE and utilize Bowers the way he should be? He has certainly underutilized Conklin and Ruckert in his offenses, and it's a fact that Rodgers doesn't like throwing to the middle of the field, which is where Bowers does his damage. The only time that Rodgers uses his TEs consistently is in the Red Zone, and with Bowers' poor contested catch rates, it doesn't seem like that he would be particularly effective in the Red Zone. So if the Jets were to take him, I think he would be underutilized, be in the wrong scheme, and would either be only marginally better than Conklin or maybe even come close to busting. Hackett couldn't even be bothered to adjust his offense last season after Rodgers went down, and he didn't scheme WRs open. If Bowers goes to the right team he could become a star and a generational player, but that team isn't the Jets, at least as presently coached and staffed.
No GM is going to select talent based on the incapablity of the OC, that's nuts. Whoever is picked, whether Bowers, WR, or tackle, is likely to outlast this entire coaching staff.
At this point I'm not sure that the GM has an issue with evaluating o-line talent. Our offensive coaching is so bad it's hard to say which is the main culprit or a combination of both. Considering other o-linemen have gone on to other teams and had, at the very least, decent productivity, one could make the snap judgement that it's mostly on the coaching. Seriously, could JD actually be this BAD at finding o-line talent across the board? I wish I had that answer.
Hence why, with my comment, I referenced the Jets, as a historical organization, has soundly FAILED at the TE spot. We've had some GREAT blocking TE's but this team has never seen nor groomed anything the likes of Kelce, Kittle, Hooper, Gonzalez et. al.
