I've said numerous times that the Jets should not take another DL in the 1st round and that Jonathan Allen should not even be a consideration. My logic stands true most of the time. Reaching for players is the way to wind up with a lousy team and to get fired. Need has to be strongly considered, and yes a FQB has to be found, but reaching for one and hoping he pans out is not the way to find your QB or to build your team.
The fascination with trading down is something I don't get for a team that's so starved for impact players. A bunch of average to above average players do not make up for the lack of game-breakers, of which the Jets currently have NONE. The Jets "earned" their #6 pick - if only they could've "earned" a little bit better!. Given the Jets track record, what can we expect from maybe two extra picks in the late 2nd or early 3rd rounds? Meanwhile dropping 8 or 10 picks lower in the first and watching as impact player after impact player is taken ahead of them. They need to sit at #6 and hope they can snag Watson or Fournette/Cook, then with their next pick either a stud OL or pass rusher,whichever one is better. Only then should they think about getting "creative" and trading down, of at all.
Watson is hardly a "reach". But aside from that, ALL draft picks are question marks, and you hope they pan out. For argument's sake, I'll grant that Garrett is more of a lock than Watson, but he's not going to be there at #6. And for any other defensive player you mention who MIGHT be more of a lock that Watson, I'll continue to make the argument that "No risk; no reward". Of course I don't want them to "swing and miss", but "contact hitters" don't hit homeruns. And if you're going to risk blowing a #6 pick, would you rather blow it on a LB/DE (?) like Gholston, or a FQB like Watson? And if you're still unsure, how about grabbing Fournette or Cook, both of whom will make a bigger impact than anyone short of the QB on this particular team. Yes, I agree a stud pass rusher is right up there too, but I think there will be guys available with that 2nd pick more so than game-breaking QBs and RBs at that point.
I'm not saying the JETS need to reach for anyone but they sure as HELL better make sure that they draft the two positions that matter the most and there are players in this years draft that can help them with that. The JETS have been a disappointment with drafting in the later rounds but they damn sure need to get it right this draft. The JETS needed to take Beasley when he was available but they didn't and took BPA WIlliams instead. I have already seen guys play on the field in college and after the combine and pro days get done it will only solidify most guys draft stock and other teams will reach for guys with potential and a higher ceiling versus the guys that have proven themselves on the field and shown the intangibles. To me, if LT Cam Robinson puts up 25 plus bench reps and has solid interviews, it only solidifies his position in the draft and if he happens to be there at #6 and the JETS feel comfortable with Hackenberg starting this year or sign another QB then Robinson at #6 would be a no-brainer when the JETS obviously need a franchise LT and taking the #1 guy on the board is not a reach.
We don't know where Watson will be rated. He could be rated a top ten pick of he could be rated lower in the 1st round. If he's rated as a top 10 pick, then he wouldn't be a reach, but if he winds up being rated in the teens or twenties and the Jets took him at the #6 spot, he would definitely be a reach. I disagree with your assertion that Fournette or Cook will definitely make a bigger impact on the team than Garrett, Barnett, Foster, and maybe even Hooker and Adams. If the Jets are able to upgrade the OL, then yes that very well could have a bigger impact, but if the OL doesn't get upgraded, then all bets are off.
Hooker would be a huge upgrade. Haven't had a ballhawk safety who could patrol the deep middle in idk how long.
Watson is a gamer, he came up huge on the big stage against a great defensive team two years in a row. With that being said he may only end up being the third or even fourth best QB in this draft. The transition from college to pro football for quarterbacks is so big they may as well be playing an entirely different sport. Garret on the other hand is a stone cold lead pipe lock to succeed. He is a scary strong and fast physical freak in the mold of LT built to make opposing offensive coordinators wet their pants the night before the game.
I'm glad you weren't advocating reaching. If I misunderstood your intent, I apologize. I wasn't trying to twist your words. You get no argument from me that we need a franchise QB, and I would go so far as to say that it's a desperate need. Still, your bolded words above suggest reaching. What if they have no QB or LT rated that highly, or if they have other players rated much higher, and can't find a partner to trade down? You're saying on one hand not to reach, but on the other, you're saying that they absolutely must draft a QB and an LT. If there aren't any they really like and covet, or if the value isn't there, are they still supposed to go ahead and take him? If so, then that's reaching. If not, then they wind up not drafting those two positions. You obviously think very highly of Robinson and some of the QBs, but I don't think highly of Robinson at all, and the only 2 QBs I like are Watson and Mahomes, yet I'm not sure either would be a good pick. If Watson is drafted, he almost has to start, and with the OL we have, he could quickly wind up on IR and maybe his career ruined. Mahomes is another project. He has play-making ability, mobility, a strong arm that can make all the throws, is accurate in college, but yet throws totally with his arm. His footwork is shoddy at best, and non-existent at worst. Can he read an NFL D? Currently, he's slated to go in round 2. Jets fans would freak if the Jets took yet another project QB with footwork issues in the 2nd round. That doesn't even take into consideration that we really haven't seen what Petty and Hack can do yet. Then there's the issue with our CS. We still have no OC or QB Coach. In all likelihood, Bowles won't find good ones, either since he will probably be gone after the 2017 season. What's the point of drafting a QB in the upcoming draft, have him play in some shit system, and then have to start all over next year in a new system? IMO Mac screwed the pooch in not drafting a LT last year. This year is crap for LTs. The best one is Ramczyk, and he's had one year of starting experience. Robinson is a very good run blocker, but needs a lot of work as a pass blocker. He lunges and gets off balance. We primarily need an LT who excels in pass protection. It's ok if his run blocking is not what it should be. First and foremost, he has to be able to protect the QB. If we drafted Robinson, he probably would wind up starting and would probably wind up getting one or several of out QBs injured. No thanks. The next best LT prospect, Bolles, is older, and I think only had one year of starting at Utah. A successful (good or great) draft requires a lot of homework, eye for talent, knowledge of team needs, knowledge of other teams GMs and how they operate and what their team needs are, and a lot of luck. With all the teams needing QBs and LTs, it will be very difficult for the Jets to wind up with either, much less both positions drafted. Mac may be able to find a rough gem at one or both positions in a lower round, but the odds are against him and that player making it. Even if Mac does find one, he'll probably be a project and require a year or two of development. I could be wrong of course, but I suspect that you will need to prepare yourself for being very angry/frustrated following the draft, because I'll be shocked if the Jets are able to significantly address either position. I wish there were a QB that is a sure thing the Jets could get and a LT. I have a lot of hope that Ramczyk somehow will wind up a Jet, but with his surgery, and where he's likely to be valued (lower 1st round, top of the 2nd round), it's doubtful. The Jets would have to find a team willing to give up a lot to move up to #6 or the Jets would have to give up multiple picks to move up from their slot in the 2nd round to insure they get Ramczyk. I like Watson a lot as a college QB. He's a competitor, rises to the occasion in big games, has great character, is a leader, is mobile and has a pretty good arm. As an NFL QB, at this point I like him a lot less. His arm strength is less than what I'd prefer, as is his accuracy. Even worse, his decision making leaves a lot to be desired, and I have no idea if he'll be able to read NFL defenses. He also is a bit of a streaky player. In many games this year the Clemson offense would come out red hot in the first half, and then go stone cold and not be able to do much at all in the 2nd half of games. In the National Championship game, it was the reverse. He was pretty cold/bad at the start of the game and Clemson wound up in a hole that many teams couldn't have climbed out of. I'd really like like him and believe that he could be our answer at QB, but I just don't.
If Garrett were available at #6, I would say sure, take him because the consensus is that his chances of succeeding are stronger than Watson, but of course he won't be there. As for the others you mention, excellent players, difference-makers, but not MORE of a difference-maker than Watson, Fournette, or Cook The reason I think Fournette/Cook will have a bigger impact is because they will help the QB, whoever that is, the OL, and the defense by keeping them off the field. Especially if we don't get Watson, because Petty, Hack, and whoever else we have as QB are NOT going to be able to carry the team by themselves, like Brady, Rogers, or any SB-caliber QB. And especially if we don't substantially improve the OL. An elite RB can make their own holes, critical with an OL like we presently have. If we focus on upgrading the "D" - which is already decent - and don't improve the offense, we're looking at the same thing we had this year: the defense on the field too long, and being exposed. The first priority for the Jets is to upgrade the ability of the team to score and put pressure on the other team, instead of the other team putting pressure on them.
I understand your reasoning, but I think you're way overestimating the success or impact that Fournette or Cook would have if our OL doesn't get upgraded. Yes, they would help ease the burden/load on Petty, Hack or whomever our starting QB is. Would they help our OL? Perhaps Fournette would, if he could stay healthy, but I don't think Cook would. He isn't the same type of runner that Fournette is. I think there is a better than even chance, that without our OL being upgraded, Fournette could stay nicked up and injured just as he has in college. He could stay that way even if we DO fix upgrade our OL or wound up with an OL like Dallas. Then again, he could stay healthy, but not be very effective because he is always getting hit in the backfield before he can build up a head of steam. Your reasoning is a bit flawed. Just because we take a D player in round 1 doesn't mean the offense wouldn't be improved. If we sign an LT that can protect our QB's blind side, add a RB and a TE in the middle rounds of the draft, the offense could be better. Conversely, we could add that LT in FA, draft Fournette and a TE, and the offense could remain the same because our OC (if we ever get one) may not be worth a darn, or because Bowles and his CS still don't have the team prepared to play each and every week. In that sense, it may not matter a tinker's damn next seasons who we draft and/or what position they play One thing adding a stud pass rushing OLB or FS would do would help stop the long TD passes that we've been giving up. They would also help the D get off the field on 3rd downs, and help stop the long drives by opposing offenses. Adding a stud player like Garrett, Barnett, Hooker, Foster or Adams could totally change the play of the D. They would make the other players around them better, and at least a couple of them are said to be leaders.
I can't say your reasoning is way off base. In fact, you might be correct...or not. You have no problem shooting holes in my reasoning, but neglect to do the same in your own. With the exception of Garrett, whom I've already granted is as close to a "lock" as a college player can be, the others may also come up short. Look at Gholston for one glaring example - he was highly rated and yet what happened? Or Dee Milliner for another. Honestly I don't think Barnett, Hooker, Foster, or Adams will fall short like those two, but they're not "sure bets" either. Not to mention - as you did with regards the offense - much depends on coaching and the Jets coaching sucks, so the same risk applies to these guys too. Of course Watson's physical skill set may not transfer to the pros, but his intangible skill set will, and to me that's more important. If people are willing to give Hackenberg the chance to correct his physical flaws, they should be willing live with Watson's which are less numerous. I lean towards Fournette as the more impactful, but Cook is elite also, and I maintain that both can operate with a less than adequate OL, but I also believe the Jets will improve the OL one way or the other via the draft, FA, and/or trades, so their impact will be that much greater. But it's not so much that I disagree with your defensive picks, it's more that I feel the offense is a higher priority, AND it will be easier getting those blue chip "O" guys earlier in the draft, and getting good "D" players later. Again, I think the defense - with as many problems as they had with pass defense - is way ahead of the offense, and therefore, it will take less to upgrade the "D" than it will the "O", that's why I say concentrate on "O" in the first couple of rounds. The caveat I'll through in there on this is that as each pick comes up, if there is no strong "O" player available, then of course grab the best "D" player. But if the margin between the "D" player you're considering and the "O" player you're considering is small, I would take the "O" player. OTOH, if that margin is wide, then go "D". Something else to consider: Skill positions on offense, given their fundamental attribute as creators, are much harder to evaluate and determine if they can create at the pro level. In contrast, defensive players are destroyers, and it's easier to determine if they can destroy at the pro level. That's a subjective judgment, but really all of our opinions here are. In the end we're probably going to have to agree to disagree, but I appreciate your insights.
One can't even begin to compare Gholston with Barnett, Hooker, Foster or Adams. Gholston was a workout warrior, an amazing physical specimen, who had little or no instincts partly because he didn't start playing football until high school, and partly because he really didn't love the game and live for it. His collegiate production was very inconsistent and spotty. Adams and Foster are leaders. They love football, they make the players around them better, and their instincts and motors are off the charts. Hooker could easily be the #1 pick in this draft. He's that talented and that good. Barnett has years of solid production and isn't just a workout warrior or johnny come lately. I don't think the same risks apply to these guys like they do Watson. Watson has great intangibles, but his decision making and reading of Ds needs a lot of work, and he needs to adjust to the pro game. Coaching will be crucial for him. I could be wrong, but based on what I've seen of and read about Barnett, Garrett, Hooker, Foster and Adams, the all are already pretty much complete players. Sure they can always improve a little and tweak some things, and get stronger, but I believe that once they learn the D system of the team that drafts them that any of them could step on the field and produce at a pretty high level immediately, with little or no coaching. I think the same thing probably applies to Fournette and maybe even Mike Williams. Williams needs to learn the route tree, but he may be more like Brandon Marshall, where due to his size, ability to use his body to fend off defenders, great hands, and his ability to high point the ball, he can be successful and not run all the routes or be as sharp as others in running them. I don't think the D is as far ahead of the offense as you. Look at how awful our secondary was. Look at our continued inability to cover TEs and RBs over the middle and our inability to generate consistent pressure on opposing QBs. That said, I agree that the offense is a higher priority if for no other reason than we have used our first round pick on D players for the last 8 years. Just because it's a higher priority, doesn't mean the players are there however, or that it's the wisest picks to make. You may be surprised, but I really wish there were several offensive players who were head and shoulders above or better than the defensive players at the top of the draft. I'm tired of seeing all the #1 picks going to the D, but when one considers the fact that we've had one defensive coach after another become our HC, and for some reason, there just haven't seemed to be as many offensive players rated as highly as the defensive players over the last several years, at least not where we have been drafting, or we had idiots running the draft, and there's little wonder why our offense has been so ignored. Idzik could have taken either Carr or Bridgewater and passed. Mac could have taken a LT last year. Both Tanny and Mac could have taken WRs and OL and passed on them. I'm just trying to be realistic with whom I think are the best players in the upcoming draft, and who will present the best value for the Jets at the #6 pick. If that player winds up being Watson and he becomes a Franchise QB, no one will be happier than I will be. Right now, I just don't see him as being that player who will be the BPA or a great value. I know you love Fournette (as do I), but the reality is that most GMs and HCs don't really value RBs that much any more, so they're not a good value at the top of the 1st round. In addition, I don't think he would fare as well as you without an upgraded OL. I think his production and impact is totally related to the play of the OL, whereas since we already have a strong DL, the production and impact of the defensive players shouldn't be impacted negatively by the DL, and they should be able to have a bigger impact. I agree that it is more difficult to evaluate offensive playmakers than it is defensive players. I think your position that if an offensive player and a defensive player are closely rated, then go with the offensive player is fair, and with the way our offense has been ignored over the years, I would agree with that. The problem is that right now at least, I just don't see it as being close. Keep posting your thoughts, however, because it's a long way to the draft and you could change my mind. It ultimately doesn't matter to me if we agree or not. I enjoy the thoughtful, respectful conversations/discussions we have.
With hindsight you can say that Gholston and the others don't compare, but at the time Gholston was talked up quite a bit. It was only after he flopped so miserably and repeatedly that his real ability was revealed. And again, I'm not saying that your guys are likely to be a miss, but the possibility exists as it does for any player. As for the defense being ahead of the offense, let me put ti this way: with the addition of one elite player the defense could be elevated to at least Very Good, if not excellent, but with the exception of getting an elite QB, the same can't be said of the offense - even if that one elite player was Fournette. While adding him would make a HUGE improvement, if they don't improve the QB and OL it will be a mediocre offense at best. And so that's why I say they need to focus on drafting offense, and they can probably find that difference-maker on "D" as late as the 3rd round. Finally - for now - the reason I think it's harder to evaluate offensive talent than defensive talent is that breaking up a play is easier than completing one. Now I can almost hear the howls of protest from all the "D" lovers here, but let me try to explain. To complete a pass, the QB has to handle the ball cleanly, set up for several seconds, find the best option to throw to, then deliver a pass on target, while the receiver has to run a route known by his QB (in other words he can't just go out there and run around however he pleases), separate from the defender/defenders, and then catch and hold onto the ball and keep both feet in bounds. In contrast, a defender only needs to react to what he sees, and then somehow interrupt any of those defined pieces of the offensive play to be successful. I'm not saying that defense is easy, just that it's easier than offense. I know I'm over-simplifying, and even biased, but that's my observation. And again, I appreciate the thoughtful responses.
Sorry, but I disagree that views on Gholston were all hindsight. We knew before the draft that he had only been playing football for 3-4 years. We knew that his production was inconsistent, and that it was mostly his size, strength, and speed (workout numbers) that had some falling in love with him. I could understand why the Jets rolled the dice on him, but even as much as we needed a pass rusher, I was afraid of him, and wouldn't have taken him We also disagree about the D. I don't think the D is one elite player away from being very good. Let's say that elite player is a DB. It doesn't matter how well that one player can cover his man, there will always be other open receivers, and if the Jets can't produce a consistent pass rush, the opposing QB can pick them apart. The same kind of thing applies if that elite player is Foster. It would help with coverage of TEs and RBs over the middle, and help shut down opposing rushing attacks, but again, without a consistent pass rush, opposing QBs could just pick us apart downfield. Even with an elite pass rusher, more than likely the opposing QB is still going to be able to complete enough passes against our crappy secondary, and with the shoddy attempts at tackling, the taking of bad angles and lack of footspeed, will still result in a number of long pass plays and TDs. At a minimum, I think our D needs an elite pass rusher, an elite CB, and a very good FS. THEN they need better coaching and discipline. Will they get that with Bowles and company? Not bloody likely.
Well now you're revealing why I'm not a fan of taking anyone but Garrett, or someone nearly as good, as a pass rusher with their first pick. All the other "D" guys you mention won't have the same impact, as you acknowledge. As I've said in other posts, Adams, or any of the other elite DBs mentioned, while certainly making a difference, will not make as big a difference as a pass rusher for exactly the reason you state: They can only cover ONE guy, whereas a pass rusher hurries/sacks the QB disrupting a whole bunch of guys. Add one elite pass rusher and the defense becomes respectable, if not above average. And of course the Jets aren;t going to only add one guy on defense, so it will be improved. Meanwhile, the offense MUST be dramatically improved. Ideally that means getting their FQB, but it would be greatly improved by adding a game-breaking RB like Fournette or Cook too, and that's got to be the priority for this team. If they fail to land Watson - I believe he'll be gone by #6 anyway - I would have them grab Fournette or Cook. I would then see if there is an elite pass rusher available with their 2nd pick or a stud OL and I would take the better of the two. On pick 3 I would try to fill whichever position I didn't fill with the 2nd pick. With the 4th pick I would look for secondary/LB/TE, whichever is the BPA. Aside from the draft, I would be looking to cut as much deadwood as possible and free up cap space to fill in the other holes. With this result I would go with Petty/Hack, and a cheap vet backup, maybe Geno, and hope that in 2019 the Jets could either "earn" a high draft pick to enable them to draft their FQB, or be able to have the goods to trade up to get one.
You misread my post. I didn't acknowledge any such thing. In fact, I said the opposite. I said that they'd ALL have a bigger impact than Fournette or Watson because of the differences between the OL and the DL. By virtue of the DL's strength, each of those defensive players could have their full impact and wouldn't have to worry about blockers so much, whereas the value or impact of Watson, Fournette and Cook will all be diminished because of the lack of strength of the OL. The reality is that they're probably not going to be able to upgrade their OL very much, if any. While I hope they can sign either Whitworth, Reiff, or Okung, I'll be surprised if they're able to. I'll also be surprised if the Jets are able to get any of the top 4 LT prospects (Ramczyk, Robinson, Bolles or the kid from Troy St. whose name escapes me at the moment). I think we'll probably be stuck with Ijalana at LT. I'll also be surprised, maybe even shocked if they release Mangold or sign a top name FA OG. That will mean that our OL will remain Ijalana,Carpenter, Mangold, Winters and Shell. Shell may be an upgrade from Qvale and Ijalana, but he could also be a downgrade. Remember that Wayne Hunter looked good at the end of a season, then the next season was flat out awful. Would you really want to risk Watson's or Fournette's health and careers behind that OL? I sure as heck wouldn't. We can't afford to burn high picks on players where there is a pretty good chance they're going to take a beating. At a minimum, it will make them less effective and could shorten their careers. At worst, it could end their careers before they really get started. Look at what happened to Chad Pennington. DBs aren't as important as pass rushers, but that doesn't they aren't important or won't have an impact. Garrett will likely be gone by the time the Jets pick. If they don't have Barnett rated as highly as Foster, Adams or Hooker, then unless the difference between them is very small, they'd be better off taking one of those three rather than a pass rusher. In addition, imo they'd be much better off taking one of them and then taking a RB somewhere between the 3rd-5th rounds, than taking Fournette or Cook at #6 and then taking a DB somewhere in rounds 2-5. Where we agree is cutting the dead wood (older vets and players who haven't shown much), and going with Petty, Hack and a cheap vet.
Of course if you added ALL those defensive players they would have a bigger impact than Watson, Fournette, Cook, but just adding ONE of them (with the exception of maybe Garrett) you would not have a bigger impact than Watson, Fournette, or Cook will have by themselves. And I'm pretty sure that you acknowledged that even the greatest DB in the world can only cover ONE guy. Maybe I did extrapolate and draw the conclusion that you also acknowledged that an elite pass rusher who could disrupt so many players on the same play would obviously have a bigger impact than a DB., if so I apologize for the wrong assumption. But I do still hold to that belief, so I would favor the pass rusher over any DB. And I completely disagree that ANY defensive player would have a bigger impact than an Adrian Petersen-type RB, especially if the Jets don't have a FQB. An elite RB will take tremendous pressure off Petty/Hack/Whoever, and therefore has to take priority. All that said, I think the Jets will draft "D" heavily again this year, so that Macc can give Bowles every chance to succeed, and so when he inevitably has to fire him, prospective HCs will not look at the Jets as a graveyard. And I don't think he'll draft Watson, and instead wait until next year when the QB class is supposedly deeper, and his new HC can have a say in who their "FQB" will be. And I will continue to gnash my teeth at their ineptitude.
