Sanchez: "Darrell is correct in stating we didn't have a QB. The matter was further compounded by the fact that at critical times in the playoffs, we didn't have a Defense either".
As has been repeated ad infinitum, the Jets had a bad offense overall, but Muck was individually terrible in a vacuum as well. The two aren't mutually exclusive. He was on an Eagles team last year with a very good offense (other then the QB). In the 9 games he played for the Eagles he had 11 ints and 7 fumbles.
Well, fortunately for us next year's OT class appears to be loaded at the moment. Our guards will be medicore this season, but it's easier to find a productive guard than a rock solid LT or center. I guess that's why most are opposed to using top ten picks on guards, but assuming we finish around 9-7 or 8-8 , we should be in position to add youth to the line. I'm hoping Geno can be some what competent this season, allowing us to bolster the line and hopefully find a long term answer at QB in the draft or trade (I have a feeling this will happen more due to the lack of quality Quarterbacks in CFB).
Exactly. Elite receivers are typically not the key piece to Superbowl winning teams. I think the argument can be made that the best receiver in the league in that given year has only really won the Superbowl once in the modern, that player being Jerry Rice. You build a good offense through balance. It's becoming easier and easier to find elite level talent in the mid level rounds of the draft (Antonio Brown, TY Hilton, Jordy Nelson, Golden Tate, Randall Cobb, Alshon Jefferey, Vincent Jackson, Emmanuel Sanders, etc.) The top 10 NFL receivers this year in terms of yardage was split right down the middle at 5 first round picks and 5 being drafted after the first round. That's not to say offensive lineman can't be found later in the draft too but it can become a bit more of a crap shoot when you try to plug and play a 5th round guard versus a 5th round receiver. Receiver can also be assessed more on skillset (i.e. Steelers, Ravens always take burners in the middle of drafts because they have big armed quarterbacks in vertical offenses, or Patriots always target quick little [white] guys to compliment their short passing attack). How many times have the Ravens, Steelers, Patriots and Packers drafted a receiver in the first round over the past decade? 3, Holmes to the Steelers in 2006 and Mark Clayton in 2005/Perriman this year to the Ravens. The Seahawks you ask? 0 in building that elite team. The 9ers have tried twice, one busted and Crabtree is gone and never panned out. Six of the most successful NFL franchises over the past 10 years have a combined 5 first round receivers, 2 of which were terrible busts for those teams, and Perriman is yet to be evaluated. Crabtree was OK so the only true success was Holmes. You draft a mauled and he's going to maul regardless of scheme.
Kerry Jenkins was a very pleasant surprise for us, a converted tackle taken off the Bears practice squad, should have kept him
The OT class looks good with Stanley (Notre Dame) and Tunsil (Ole Miss) leading the position. Our guards have been mediocre for sometime now - we've had chances to upgrade the position, but we didn't. The worst type of pressure is interior pressure. Winters was awful, Colon good for a holding call a game which takes points off the board, and Oday who is also questionable to even start. It's not looking good unless there is improvement. If Geno isn't competent, the Jets will look at a QB, I think. That will potentially rule out a OT in the first round. I see this as the more than likely scenario.
I believe in the best player available philosophy, but also you must consider just a little bit of need in the equation. That will create balance on your football team. My argument for drafting an interior lineman high in the draft is this, defensive coordinators are continuing to put quality pass rushers inside on passing downs, the importance of having interior protection is essential in today's league. I agree, you can wait on weapons until the 2nd / 3rd round - the depth in regards to WRs in the draft is fantastic and I don't see that changing anytime soon. Balance is indeed everything and we had that in 2010. Those counting on Geno to be good this year, I look at the roster and I find it really hard for him to succeed with those guards, that right tackle. I hope Carpenter is good for us. Geno holds onto the football far too long. It's really this season's question, will Geno get rid of the ball faster or will the offensive line improve? We can talk defense all we want, but we need to put up 21 PPG this yr w/ a positive turnover differential.
To do you one better, by my quick count on my phone I came up with 11 out of 40 on the top NFL receivers list in terms of yardage were first round draft picks.
Sorry, but that's why you'd make a lousy GM, my friend. I love you, but the best GMs NEVER take interior OL early. Drafting an OG or C with a top 10 pick is dumb for reasons of talent, and for cap reasons! One can build a very good OL that can protect the QB without spending high draft picks on them. Drafting an interior OL high out of fear is akin to drafting a kicker in the 2nd round because your previous kicker missed a couple of kicks in a playoff game that caused you to lose. High draft picks are for play makers on both sides of the ball. Those types ALWAYS go early. Having #1 picks on your OL (aside from LT) throws a team's salary structure out of whack. They wind up paying more for the OL than they should have, and then they don't have the money to pay a play maker. In addition, those few GMs who do draft them early, tend to think if one high interior OL is good, then two is even better. Look at what Tanny did. At one time, he had what, 3-4 former 1st round picks on the OL, and then the team didn't have the money to pay play makers. That's a recipe for mediocrity. You say that you are talking specifically about that draft, but then mention players who weren't on the team at the time of that draft. At the time of that draft, we didn't have Ridley, Smith or Amaro or any play makers on the either side of the ball. We had a desperate need at CB and Milliner was a top ten-rated player. You also don't know that the OL is durable. Just because they were injury-free in college doesn't mean squat. Lots of players are never injured in college and suffer devastating injuries or are frequently nicked up in the NFL. Some players suffer frequent injuries or severe injuries in college, then come to the NFL and never have a real problem with injuries again. You can't just generalize. You have to look at each player individually. What type of training program and trainers did he have in college? Was he just an athlete who was naturally bigger and stronger than everyone else, but not in particularly great shape? Yes, Milliner had some injuries in college but missed only 1-2 games I believe. You might as well just give the pick to another team. The only time I think that one could reasonably rationalize it is if your team had a great RB who was not able to be as effective as he could/should be because of the blocking in front of him, and one thinks that getting an elite blocker would enable that RB to elevate his game to another level which would then carry the team to the SB. The OL is important, but not more important than having play makers on both sides of the ball, or having an elite DL or secondary. History has proven time and again that excellent OLs can be built without a bunch of high draft picks. Face it...your logic is totally off base.
Look at the crappy offensive line we've been developing with mid round picks over the past 5 years. We have Aboushi, who we will hope to be an average player, and we don't even know if he will definitely be the starter. The rest of your post is fluff. Speculating any players injuries moving forward when they have no injury history is nonsensical and you can do it for any player that ever has or ever will play the game. If this were the case runningbacks would always be UDFA. The fact that you think receivers are more important than the offensive line is silly. No one is saying to take a 2nd round graded center with the #8 pick in the draft. They are saying that if there's a stud tackle in the top 15 or a can't miss guard/center in the top 30, you take him. We took Brick and Mangold and they became cornerstones of our franchise for a decade. Stop fluffing your posts with tons of speculation. Just because you type out a lot of sentences doesn't make it correct nor informative. It's littered with nonsense. Provide facts or don't bother arguing a different point.
its apparently easier for everyone else to get find talented receivers in the mid rounds except our Jets..... why is that? well- all the teams you mention have great QBs. When you have great QBs you can find talented receivers in the later rounds but when your QB sucks you have to get talented playmakers early in the draft
The sky is falling, the sky is falling! Come on, guy, you're MUCH better than this. You're one of my favorite posters on here. Why are you panicking so? I can understand why you think it's a little scary, but a "recipe for disaster" is a gross over statement imo. Did I miss something, or is this team the odds-on favorite to win the SB? If Geno was to get injured vs Buffalo or Miami, would we lose our franchise QB and all hope for the season? No. The odds are that this team is going nowhere this season anyway. We might sneak into the playoffs, but anyone expecting the team to make a run at this point is a blind homer. This team had a lot of holes and anyway you look at it, this is a rebuilding year, it isn't about wins and losses. There are a TON of new players that have to get used to playing with each other. There are new offensive and defensive systems to learn. All we can hope for is improvement and for some of our young players to prove that they belong. We want to see the D create more TOs and demonstrate the ability to consistently get off the field on 3rd downs. We want to see if the new and/or young players on the D pan out (Gilchrist, Milliner, McDougle, Williams, Pryor, Marcus Williams). On offense we want to see if Geno can develop consistency and cut way down on his TOs. If not, we'll turn to Fitz as the stop gap and hope that Petty is the answer and will be ready next season. We hope that Marshall still has plenty in his tank and can stay in control. We hope that Amaro will step up and at least show signs of becoming an elite TE. We hope that one of the young WRs can step up and contribute on STs in a significant way. We hope that Devin Smith can contribute and show signs of developing into a quality WR. There's no way Macagnan could fix every hole this year. He tried to upgrade the OG positions, but was rebuffed by players who wanted to stay on the West Coast. What was he supposed to do, trade away the future for some team's backups just to try to win an extra game or two this season? Get real. Step back and take a deep breath. This season will be what it will be. He did the best he could to fix the OL, and then turned to addressing other areas of weakness. What he did in this offseason was nothing short of amazing, and he should get NFL Executive of the Year. Geno has a real receiving corps he can throw to now. He has a D that should be able to get off the field on 3rd down, create some TOs, and keep the other team's score down. Geno needs to step up, cut down on his TOs, make quicker, better decisions and get rid of the ball sooner. The OL should be better. Barring injuries, I don't see any way it can possibly be worse. The team has an OC that tailors his offense to suit the talents of his players, and if opposing DL are getting too much internal pressure and penetration, he should adapt and call more screens, draw plays, traps, and quick hitters to counter. Gailey is no Mornhinweg married to an offensive system that doesn't fit his players' talents, nor is he a Schotty who has no idea how to set other teams up and just pulls plays out of a hat. I agree that the OL should see a major overhaul over the next 2-3 seasons, and I think it will. I think they'll find Brick's replacement and Giacomini's. If Carpenter and Aboushi (or Winters or Dozier) don't prove adequate, I think they'll draft or sign some young OGs. If none of the kids prove they can adequately back up Mangold, I think they'll even look for a player that can back him up, play some OG if necessary, and be his eventual replacement.
That's a fair point but I think it's safe to say whether you draft them high or low it all depends on the quarterback. Alshon Jeffery, Desean Jackson, Vincent Jackson, Decker, Golden Tate, and Reuben Randle all played with less than stellar quarterbacks, mostly below par players and they still rank in the top 32 in receiving. You can add Kenny Stills, and Colston(right outside top 32) considering Brees had a shit year. Add in Mike Wallace and Jordan Mathews in the mid 30s that did not play with elite level talent. It's interesting to note that Seattle did not have a receiver in the top 40 in receiving yet went to the Superbowl.
Considering, I like my QB to be protected from interior and outside pressure, I more than likely would be a pretty decent GM compared to what philopshopy you have here. The best GMs don't listen to other GMs; they have their own blue-print. Sometimes, you have to spend a high draft pick to fix issues on the offensive line, that's just how it is. If the player is talented enough, you take him simple as that. I go back to the Dee Milliner draft where Warmack was on the board. In that instance, I am taking the talented G because the CB was not only injury prone that frankly isn't all that great to begin with. Interior pressure is the new thing nowadays, you can't have trash guards trying to protect the QB, that's how you get QBs killed. We are sitting here 3 years later complaining about our guards when it could've been solved with 1 pick. Who the hell cares about the cap when it comes to rookie contracts? That makes no sense at all. We would be paying around the same amount as Breno or Carptender, 2 seattle castoffs. It's no coincidence that when we draft Mangold and Brick, we started to become a great offensive line and that led to our great rushing attacks and success down the line. Jets had no issues paying Holmes a large amount of cash. OK, specifically about that draft - I was never a fan of Dee Milliner to begin with. Too many practice reps at Alabama, too many injuries. He couldn't stay healthy, I wasn't ready to take a player like that high in the draft. There was plenty of depth at the CB position that year. I was hoping the Jets would try and solidify the offensive line a little bit more. Warmack was also a top 10 rated player in the draft. Milliner was ALWAYS hurt in college. http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/04/23/dee-milliner-has-had-five-surgeries/ 5 surgeries dude. you can't tell me about Milliner and his injuries. You just can't Man, I ain't picking another team. Like I said before, look at the pass-rushers in this league, look at how they can create interior pressure and tell me, you shouldn't address upgrading the interior offensive line? I guess you will find out this season.
I want to see the Jets in the playoffs this yr and I believe it's attainable. I guess again - when you see Suh / Dareus / etc raping whomever we have at guard, you will start paying attention. I just wish the Jets gave the offensive line some more love because, it's been neglected. That's no knock on Mac, but how we've been addressing this issue as a whole since Brick / Mangold were drafted.
A strawman argument is what you come back with? Show me where I said the best GMs listen to other GMs. It IS proven wisdom however, that you don't draft OGs high. I'm sorry that you can't grasp that fact because you're letting your fears run amok. When thinking of the salary cap, you just don't look at the present year. You have to look down the road as a GM. Again, this shows your lack of depth of thinking and understanding. Even with those injuries, how many games did Milliner miss in college? That said, I was not a big fan of Milliner, but I can understand why they took him. You're in such a tizzy that you aren't even reading accurately. I didn't say that you should pick another team. I would never say that to you. I said that you might as well give the high draft pick where you would take an OG to another team (because you'd be wasting it). I didn't say the interior of the OL shouldn't be addressed. Macagnan tried very hard to upgrade the interior of the OL, but he can't make players sign here that prefer playing on the west coast. You're being ridiculous. You're acting like frightened child, like if we only had topflight OGs we be Lombardi Trophy winners this year, and that's ridiculous.
I agree with this for the most part. If I have a Quarterback like Russell Wilson, I'm most likely not going to value guards highly, due to his ability to extend and make plays consistently outside of the pocket. Seattle doesn't seem to value high guard play or offensive line play in general (for pass protection at least) as seen by their trade for Jimmy Graham. However if my, Quarterback is Matt Ryan- a player who doesn't play well in constricted pockets, I'd be willing to take a guard in the top ten. Although our offensive line isn't a talented group, I think part the of the reason they've been terrible in the past were due to Vick and Geno's poor pocket presence. Whether that improves or not , remains to be seen, but I do believe Quarterbacks have quite a bit to do with offensive play. When I see a player , such as Evan Mathis, still avaliable, it makes me wonder how much the NFL really values guard play. I realize he's thirty -three, but he's still a very productive player who can basically play in any run scheme.
