But I bet there are plenty of GMs who would , taking one team out of the QB hunt. I don't know. I watch football every Thursday Friday Saturday and Sunday, in almost every game I see coaches burn time outs to prevent the 5 yard delay of game penalties but Bowles should let the penalties happen. Give up the 5 yards, possibly kill a drive in a tight game which the have been. But given the fact that this team has such Offensive talent that they are unstoppable, 5 yards is nothing..... Rodgers is actually the DC this year, not Bowles so he deserves credit for the game plan ( for once ). Did Bowles let up in the final 4-5 minutes up by 4 scores? Yes..... I think last night was the first time in league history a team gave up meaningless points at the end of the game...... Did you see Bowles slip on ASJs jersey and drop the on side kick , then put on Roberts Jersey and give up on the TD in the corner of the end zone.... Priceless. He did everything he could to lose that game....... As far as it being a short week for the Bills , correct me if I'm wrong but the Jets had an equally short week. Or are you going to suggest it was due to the Bills having to make that long cross country trip that did them in ? I don't like Bowles , but he is doing a very good job with not very much talent this season , like it or not it's a fact. Or are you in the Bowles is selfish and should be coaching to lose camp?
I'm not sure what stats I'm looking at? From Dallas? What's the point? Elliot is a transformative player? Not in my opinion. Prescott is the transformative player there. Dallas has had many good RB's over the last ten years. Murray, McFadden all had 1000 yd seasons with them, but didn't get the Cowboys to good records. Then look at great RB's such as Peterson, Sanders or even Martin. None of these guys, great as they were, put their teams in Super Bowls. No question Barkley would add a new dimension to the Jets offense, however, I don't think his performance alone, even if great, will get the Jets to the promised land. The reason I feel this way is because I believe it's easier for a defense to neutralize a great runner than a great passer, especially in the playoffs where most teams have top defenses.
Okay then but we could go down the route of great QB's that never won the superbowl and where will that leave us ? The stats you were looking at were the stats of a playing making a huge game transforming moves, he isn't just a normal running back, some of the plays he is pulling off are sheer brilliance tbh, Murray was a powerhouse that would go all day long and he did that for years he was a very special player, McFadden I didn't like as much I think he benefited from the good OL more than his own brilliance but I may be doing him a disservice there ? As for Prescott he is doing what he is asked but on closer inspection he has a lot of games where he has barely thrown, kind of like McCowan last game 14/20 2 pass td's 1 running td etc etc for me that isn't transformative or do you have a different view on transformative than me ? Elliot is somebody that makes a difference to the game, he can transform it in a blink of an eye, he could quite possibly transform this franchise (jets) right around, with a runner like that you can have a different kind of QB at the helm, you wouldn't need a gunslinger so to speak, a nice accurate QB that can do the touch passes and keep the opposition honest and unsure if you are going to run every play or not. edit I forgot to say i don't having either a QB or an RB without each other will lead us to the promised land, hell you only have to look at the Cowboys who seem to have all the required parts but still blow it lol
Sarcasm duly noted. I didn't mean to step all over your new man crush for Bowles. Sure, five yards makes things more difficult, but you can at least make up the lost yardage, you can't "make up" a wasted time out. And my criticism applies to any coach who burn time outs in a non-critical situation. Sure, if you're in scoring territory and want to keep your drive going, or maybe you're backed up in your end zone and don't want to risk things there, calling a t.o. makes sense. But when the Jets called that t.o. - as have many coaches on the league - I thought it might come back to bite them as it has so many times in the past. But yeah, you're right, I'm not a HC or an "expert" so I shouldn't form any opinion on that. And how do you know it was Rodgers's game plan? How do you know that Bowles didn't override him? In any case, I'm pretty sure Bowles had some input on it, so I'll give him credit since I've also criticized him before. And I don't think he let up in "the last 4-5 minutes", it was more like the last 10-12 minutes from my POV. And given their long history, not to mention the last three games, of blowing "comfortable leads", I thought that was risky. Sure the Jets had a short week, but they played at home, in familiar surroundings, and while the Bills didn't have to "travel cross country", it still was something they had to deal with that the Jets didn't. And Bowles would've been smarter to have slipped on ASJ's jersey rather than put him in on the OSK. And no, I'm certainly not rooting AGAINST Bowles - he has enough shit he brings on himself. I hope he and the rest of the team are successful, but given his track record I'm doubtful. Still, if he proves me wrong - as he did this game - I'll give him credit, and hope he actually becomes a SB-caliber coach. But I think we're a little ways from handing him the Lombardi Trophy. Have a nice day.
Jim Brown was a "transformative player", and while its obviously way too early to say Barkley is a "Jim Brown", he's potentially in that class, and if so, would be a transformative player. And Frank Ryan was NOT Johnny Unitas or YA Tittle or Joe Namath, but with Brown he didn't need to be. THAT'S what a transformative RB can give you. I still hope they can Rosen, or Darnold or Jackson - or if some QB rises up to the level of "can't miss", then him - but failing that, if they got Barkley that would make things a lot easier. That said, I don't think that Barkley will still be there when they pick - he may well go in the top 3.
Most SB champions have a balance between having an effective ground and air game. A rb can be a game changer. Powell shows flashes but doesnt have break away speed. We know Forte is near the end and McGuire has to get stronger. There are cuts, broken tackles, shakes, that these guys dont make at times of the game that can make an impact on the outcome. I think if we had Hunt or a game changing Rb like him with the offensive production weve had this season...we would only have lost 1 or 2 games so far. Next draft... edge rusher with a non stop motor...rb...qb(any round)and corner backs(we need cb's that can deflect and intercept). Our wr's are solid, especially if Enunwa returns, oline is suprisingly solid.
I feel the same way.Ive ran the scenario of the Jets drafting a Defensive player round 1 at any position in my mind many times over & all it gives me is a sick stomach & a feeling of rage. It’s a damn scoring league..it’s time to show that notion some respect.If not a QB it better be one of the several high potential OT prospects or a dynamic skill talent.
Plus 1000 Kurt I see you've been posting since 2002..Congrats on standing up to the defensive yahoo mindset so many posters have had here Hopefully the tide starts turning next draft, maybe Morton tells Bowles he needs an OL and this QB is running out of battery life or we will stop scoring points Cheers!
For me, transformative means a guy whose production consistently puts his team in contention every year. QB's like Favre, Manning, Brady, Rodgers, Roethlisberger are transformative. I may be a little premature by mentioning Prescott as transformative, but I think it's his play that will be the determining factor in turning Dallas into a consistent winner for many years like Aikman did. I don't know of any RB's who have delivered the consistent results as the QB's I mentioned.
But Brown only put his team in contention for a championship in 4 of the 9 years he played. But yes, I would still consider Brown tranformative, but only in the sense that if the Browns didn't have him, they would not be a good team. Nevertheless, that was in a different era when running the ball was a more prominent strategy. Today, with the emphasis on throwing, I don't think there are any RB's who can transform a team from a loser to a consistent winner year after year. That is not to say they aren't important, they definitely are. But I don't think, a guy like Barkley is going to put the Jets in the playoffs year after year like a top QB can.
If giving credit for a job well done equates to a man crush , I'll go ahead an make an entry in my diary about dreamy Todd. You have every right to form any opinion on any topic , including TOs, as do I ,and that's what's great about this forum. It gives us a place to discuss those opinions. We tend to agree on a lot of things so this is one we will just have to agree to disagree on. I will say I'd like to see Bowles get pissed when he is forced to burn one, hell I'd like to see any emotion from him. As far as Rodgers, since Bowled said he was turning the D over to him and letting him take responsibility for the D, I assume Rodgers is actually acting as the DC and not as a gopher as in the past. Obviously , none of us known who is actually doing what. All we can go on is what we hear from the FO and Coaches . ASJ has one of the best set of hands on the roster so I don't have a problem with him being on the "hands" team. I will disagree about being a little ways from handing Bowled the Lombardi trophy though. In my opinion were a very long way from handing him the trophy ..... Thank you and enjoy your Sunday
You make good points. It will be interesting to see how Dallas does if Elliot ever serves his suspension. That will go a long way in telling us whether it's Elliot or Prescott as the transformative player.
To tell you the truth I hope that scenario is next season, he is in two of my fantasy football teams, thank you very much
Jim Brown played in the 1950s and 60s. The NFL was a completely different game back then. If you have to go back 60 years to give an example of a transformative RB I'm not buying it.
Really, I could only see them going CB or pass rusher round 1. We already have the d-line and safeties. Non- pass rushing linebackers aren't worth a 1st rounder unless its the second coming of Ray Lewis so our options on D will be limited. Do I expect them to draft defense round 1 despite that? I'd say odds will be 66% in favor of it.
If you think there are 6-7 potential first round QB's out there your not watching much NCAA football. There is a lot of over hyped mediocre talent, a lot of 2nd and 3rd round guys, not a lot of QB's worth spending very high picks on.
I see three. Jackson, Rosen and Darnold have shown the ability to be franchise QBs. But Rosen is a bit of a headcase and Darnold needs another year of college play. Frankly, he's not ready for the pros yet.
