I respectfully disagree. I didn't say that you don't consider the money and value. Of course one needs to do that, but when it comes to that being the deciding factor and leaving your team weaker because you think a FA isn't a good value or costs a few $s (relatively speaking) too much when your team has plenty of cap space, then I think it is counter-productive and not very wise.
Actually, it depends upon what style of 3-4 D alignment one uses. In the one the Texans use, obviously the DE is expected to pressure the QB and get sacks. When Rex was here, that was the case. As you correctly pointed out, in the original 3-4 D alignment, the DEs were edge setters and supposed to tie up blockers leaving the OLBs free to make the plays. The problem is that great pass-rushing 3-4 OLBs are very difficult to find and it usually takes them 2-3 years to develop. That's why I hate the alignment and always have. It's much easier to find 250-270 pound DEs (or lighter) who can rush the QB with their hands in the dirt. Even though more colleges are playing the 3-4 alignment now, it hasn't gotten much easier to find good OLBs. You can find edge setters who are good against the run, but not many who excel in pass coverage or in rushing the QB.
The problem the giants and colts had was they couldn’t afford him while paying a qb what a qb gets. A problem we don’t ever seem to have
Someone said yesterday that his agent was tough/demanding. Hopefully, they're still negotiating and will still wind up signing him.
The problem the Giants had was that they couldn't afford to overpay him while also overpaying JPP and Snacks. The problem the Colts had was that paying a guy $30M over 3 years does not mean he will produce $30M of value on the cap. The biggest mistake that bad NFL teams make is paying good players like great players on the assumption that this will raise their level of play. In many cases it instead lowers the urgency of the player to produce and so it makes a good player average or below.
Again, Colts are switching from a 3-4 to a 4-3. Has nothing to do with money or the lack of production.
Hankins could have played the 3T in their 4-3. That's what he did for the Giants from 2014-2016. He had 7 sacks in that role one year. The Colts move from a 3-4 to a 4-3 wouldn't have stopped them from keeping Hankins if they thought he was worth the cap charge. They obviously did not think he was worth the investment. Last year was his first year as a 3-4 DE.
He didn't sign Hankins ...let him walk out of our building with no deal...7 vs 10 million is chickenfeed Does he come back and revisit the Jets ?? Possibly but I doubt it If you notice Macagnan has been not very consistent in successfully signing players ..plus ready to pay Kirk Cousins gazillions but haggles with this guy Mac has to undo his past bad signings like Mo W Fitz Mevis Skrine and host of others and do more Tremain Johnsons for us
They've said he isn't quick enough for their 4-3. Not making this up or diagnosing their D. If it was about money they just would have cut him.
Makes no sense unless you know that Macc wanted to sign Hankins and he left. Guess the possibility that he didn't want to make an offer after the meeting or that he didn't feel he was worth the money is a possibility? Cousins? We made no offer. Rumor was we would out bid others, Macc never met with them and made an offer. Which is it, he offered a bazillion dollars or he haggled with him? Signing with the Vikes had nothing to do with Macc anyway. He went to the team that have him the best chance to win. Nothing Macc could do about that, not a fail on his part. That's not fair. Signing Mo want a bad deal. That's revisionist history. Coming off steady improvement over the years, a pro bowl season what was he going to do. Let him walk? Pure BS. No way of knowing Mo would tank. It's on Mo, not Macc.
Jets were 24th in stopping the run in 2017 and now without Mo, this DL is not looking too healthy. Mac & Bowles have no clue if they let Hankings go.......there is a seat for every butt, so he'll find a suitor. Should be interesting who they take in the 3rd round.
Both sides of your mouth here. Look, Hankins didn't pressure well for the Colts because he was always the double teamed man on a defensive line that was less than scary. On the Giants, he was flanked by players that could all demand double teams. Just chalking that up to a position change is lazy thinking when you take all factors into account. The Jets definitely shouldn't break the bank for him, but he'd be a good signing for a well structured contract.
Who needs a DT and has money to give? I think the Jets are the best situation for him. Not sure why Hankins decided to wait so long to sign. I saw he has been linked to the Redskins and Jets. The Jets would be the no-brainer choice of those 2, but apparently not to him thus far.
