Jets fans love every average/below average player that walks through the door. Look at all the love for Mark Sanchez
Well, first I did say poor man's version. Second, Chrebet played a lot longer than Kerley so far. And finally, while Chrebet had some shitty QBs at times, he did get to play with Testaverde and Pennington, in some decent passing offenses. Kerley has played his entire career in some of the most anemic passing offenses I've ever seen. Relax, man, I was mostly joking. Although the point does stand. If you add Barry Sanders' athleticism and speed to any shitty RB, they will become something else entirely. Similarly, if you add blazing speed, quickness, and athleticism to Kerley, it won't be Kerley anymore, but a completely different weapon. And Harvin is a deep threat, it's just that because of his unique skill-set, teams often choose to use him differently. If you throw him the ball short, or let him run with it, it's safer than throwing a deep bomb that might get intercepted especially when he is likely to be double teamed and the focus of the D, and he can still often take that short ball far. I don't know the exact stats, but seems to me it's a little unfair to compare his yards per reception to Kerley, when he is always the focus of the opposing defense, whereas Kerley does most of his damage when he is left alone. And then, the most important thing, whenever Kerley is on the field, no one pays attention to him, which is exactly why he is successful. When Harvin is on the field, the entire defense is trying to make sure he doesn't rip a long one on them, which is HUGE for everything from other receivers being more open to less pressure on the QB, to more room for the running game.
That doesn't mean Harvin can't play on the outside and be effective. He was with another strong armed QB in Favre. I think he's physical enough to win on the outside.
Murrel said in this thread " you cant lose guys like Kerley".....like, what would happen if the Jets lost Kerley? Hes not replaceable???????/
If you wanna play the numbers game then... here's plays of 20 yards or more from Harvin in his Minnesota days in comparison to Kerley's career this far: Harvin: 48 from 2009-2012 (54 games played) Kerley: 25 in his career (49 games played) Let's go with 40 yards or more: Harvin: 8 Kerley: 5 (all in one year, 2012) How many of their catches went for first downs? Harvin: 164 Kerley: 91 So are you really trying to still tell me they are the same kind of receiver? Edit: Mike Wallace has a YPC the last three years of 12, 13 and 13. Not a deep threat?
Jim Leonhard....he SUCKED and so many loved him cuz Rex said we should. But who cares about Leonhard now
This is 100% correct. I think everyone that is looking forward to the draft thought we needed a receiver so they started looking towards the college ranks for their guy. They fell in love with the top guys and now won't give it up. The landscape of our team has now changed dramatically. Its time to adjust and look at other top tier talent. The highest we should draft a WR is the fourth, and that's only if its good value. Of coarse you don't pass on Jerry Rice if hes there and no other player is even close in talent but I don't see the draft shaping up like that there are lots of guys at positions of need that are just as good of prospects.
Why must everyone not understand "poor man?" It simply relates playing style while also conceding that the player in question is worse than the player he's being compared to. This is not a difficult concept.
Ypc has long been accepted as the metric for measuring who is or not a deep threat not to mention the fact you won't find too many highlights of Harvin going deep down the sidelines for a pass. Sidney Rice although MUCH slower than Harvin was the deep threat in MIN averaging over 16 ypc during their time together. You can believe that he's a deep threat at heart who hasn't been used correctly throughout his career but you can't say he is a deep threat. I'm not even going to address the Sanders comment.
This is one thing that is so surprising to me. Kerley is a very solid player, not a superstar, but on a team bereft of playmakers it's bizarre that they can't figure out a way to get him more involved on a regular basis...
I odnt know if we cant pick WR before round 4 but I agree there are other needs. I think OL, LB and CB ( as much as I would vomit if we picked one in the 1st rd) are all greater needs at this point UNLESS Harvin smells and hes cut
We're trying to improve the team, not make more holes to fill. Kerley is an good NFL receiver. We seem to have trouble drafting them. If we can fill the roster choc full of WR's better than Kerley then the contract sounds pretty easy to move on from. until then we should probably keep him.
Nothing really. He is definitely replaceable for sure but is a poor mans 3rd receiver on almost any team and even a 4 on some teams. Decent player but can be replaced.
I think he means solid players who are also team guys and cheap. Kerley is replaceable, but there shouldn't be any reason to replace him unless your option is better and/or more cost efficient.
Jeeze people are really criticizing this because they don't think 3 good receivers can all "play to their potential while all on the field". You know, your alternative is having 1 good receiver and the other 2 be shit right? At least that way the best one sticks out! Damn, you can't win with you guys.