i would be so pissed off if we take olsen. THE JETS DO NOT NEED A TIGHT END AT ALL!!! They really only used baker this past year for blocking. We need defense. DONT DO IT TANGINI!
It's not just that they don't need a tightend, he's not even the whole package. Shockey and Winslow without the blocking is an average player at best. This is the kind of pick that Terry Bradway wouldn't have thought about twice before making. He'd have traded up a few slots to make sure he got him. That's why the Jets are rebuilding.
i love people on this forum don't want Olsen just because the Jets have made some bad 1st round TE picks in prior years and he didn't put up stellar numbers at Miami; ever think that maybe scouts believe his best years are still ahead of him?
If you draft a player who was not a star in college the odds on getting a star in the NFL are even longer than they would be otherwise. D-Rob...
Based off this you're saying we'll talk Olsen? Now let me apply a little humor to prove a point... We've learned our lesson on TE's in RD1.
There's no reason for anyone to believe me, but I do know for a fact that the Jets are not targeting Greg Olsen. Just so you know.
i have posted a few times that their are 2 players, if available at 25 you have to seriously consider taking them..... oolsen and blalock...... i am not enamored with a CB at 25.... Why? well the talent drop off from these first round CB's to the 2nd and 3rd round CB's is not enough for me to be locked in at CB. the other possibility at 25 would be spencer but i think the jets go offense. forget the fact that olsen is a TE..... thats just his position label...if selected AND he adjusts well during camp he will be used as an HB, WR, FB etc etc. if both are there - i take olsen......if neither i will look to trade out into the top of round 2. i am not sure how much better blalock is than the other guards in round 2 like grubbs and beekman. unless the jets envision him as a RT...then hmmm....i can see it for that reason more so. of course, easier said then done... jil jil
its not because the jets have taken bad TE's in the past. The fact of the matter is, he will be so useless to us. The TE is used primarily to block and olsen cant block. baker is fine and makes plays when the jets actually use him. No way the jets get him if he is available. Tangini knows the team and what the needs are. The only time a team takes value over need is when it is a great value, and in this case it is not even a great value. Olsen is purely a one dimensional player, the dimension the jets never use when it comes to TE's
If we need any help on offense, its blocking. We dont need a HB, we have T Jones, we dont need a WR we have LCol, Cotchery and Smith, we dont need a FB we dont use it, we dont need a receiving TE we use it purely for blocking. Blalock fills an immediate need, RT and will add major bulk to this O-Line which will greatly help with run blocking. I understand your point about CB and agree. We can get a guy like Hughes in the second round. But we will not take olsen in the first round.
Although I'm not as against taking Olsen in the first as some here, I wouldn't be too happy. As said above, I don't think he's enough of the complete package to warrant a first round pick. If Mangini likes his potential as a blocker and can teach him how to be effective at that, then he could be very good for us if this happens. I'll trust Tangini on this one if they decide to make the plunge.
We MAY take any number of players or even trade down which wouldn't be so bad. If we did take Olsen and he was the BAP then I guess I would be happy , although as said there are far greater needs.
unless you are Mike T or Eric Mangini, I'm pretty sure you don't know anything about the Jets draft plans as fact..
Why not draft Matt Spaeth in the 5th? He was more productive than Olsen, and the only knock against him is that he had shoulder surgery earlier this year.
And what I'm trying to get across is that is a very vaguecomment which you highlighted very well in the above post. We MAY take Olsen, we MAY also take a hundred other people at 25. All I was doing was finding a humorous way to point out the vagueness of Cimini's statement.
Having seen that highlights clip of Olsen and nothing else, I don't feel that confident commenting - but considering that was a highlights film, he really didn't show that much. And the whole point about the TE position is that they should block as well as catch, so they are a double threat. If they can't block, they'd better catch passes like a wide receiver. If they can't catch, they'd better block like an offensive tackle. Otherwise you might as well bring in an extra wideout or put an extra OL in depending on what you want to run.
