I'm saying that we should have been drafting more O-linemen 3-4 years ago to be starters now...and we should've drafted more quality O-linemen this past year for better depth
You can only draft them if they are there to be drafted. When you start reaching for positions you get inferior players. We did that back in the 80s after Ken O'Brien got sacked 62 times in 1985. The first two picks in 1986 were O linemen, the #1 guy was a bust and the #2 guy didn't even make the team.
Well, they were there to be drafted this year. The draft was deep at OL especially guard. As a matter of fact, we could have traded down to get Blaylock while accumulating more picks, instead of giving them away.
Many including myself wanted that. We could've traded down and taken either Blalock or Grubbs. I'm not upset about getting Revis as I think he's a future all pro..but at the same time...it's ridiculous that we waited till the 6th round to address the OL depth.
We did use two #1s on the O-line last year. There are other areas to be addressed. Hard to base it on one pre-season game, but Revis with one week of work under his belt looks pretty hard to argue with. The #2 pick, #52 (name escaping me) also looks like a keeper. Our D needed help, especially with Brady in our division.
I like having revis and it seems he will be good, but my opinion what that he was a luxury. We have a decent stable of CBs. I felt the same about taking harris. Our OL was below average in most measures and thin in depth. Top it off that the FO already knew that Kendall was unhappy and that he had history of being a boisterous trouble maker. Kendall was able to take advantage of us bc he knew we were compromised at the position. When you take this all into consideration it was really dumb not address the OL in a meaningful way.
Did you not see our season end with Brady and New England going on an 8-minute TD drive to ice the playoff game? Our D needed help, especially at the corner. We had Hank Poteat starting by the end of the season.
Gonna fix this for you: "When you start reaching for players at other positions your offensive line becomes inferior over time." There.
The easiest situation was just to pay Kendall, don't let principles get in the way of what's good for the team, we have plenty of cap room, use it...
Both of our starting corners were injured, and we were playing a better team with arguably the best QB in the league. What did you expect? On the whole our pass defense was respectable last year despite the injuries. On the other hand, our rush offense and rush defense were both poor with no injury on either line.
I?m not saying the Guards who made bank this season were undeserving; I?m saying that it makes it increasingly difficult to sign interior linemen. Regardless of our current position, Offensive Guard was pretty low on the totem pole around draft time. I think an argument could be made that we had bigger needs at RB, CB, DT, DE and OLB making Guard a much lower priority. While the big names like Eric Steinbach were making $50 million for seven years, even the slightly above average guys were making similar money. Although now it seems Guard, or OL in general, is our biggest need, the market is too thin to just sign someone. Hindsight is certainly 20-20 and a move should have been made, but I think our FO balked, right or wrong, at what other teams were giving OG and thought that it was too much and that they could more easily develop players than spend cap room. Time will tell if that money was well spent or what teams were right in their evaluation of the worth of their Free Agents but right now the jury is still out.
I agree that in the past we should have drafted more Linemen, this year I personally didn?t want to spend a high pick on a linemen due to the fact that, as I previously alluded to, the OL was lower on the list of priorities. Also, because we spend two first rounders the previous year, we should address other areas first.
I would have liked at least one more early pick spent on a lineman, but the coaching problem is more worrisome to me. I like most of our staff, but Wise's recent history is nothing to write home about.
Forget the draft....Jets' coulda signed a free-agent OL-man this off season & it woulda cost them only cash. :up:
It also makes no sense to have to trade for another OG, when u just traded your OG to another team. Then it shows that Tangini was just being spiteful. This is a very poor stance to have taken. Jets' better have an upgrade at OG at Kendall's spot. If the Jets' have to spend a draft pick on a OG, after just acquiring a draft pick for Kendall.....Would look very bad. Especially if Jets' have to give up a 4th round pick or higher. :hackett:
You can't count on poteat long term but our corners played really well last year. The DBs were the best unit on our D, our problems were stooping the run and getting pressure on the QB and those still appear to be our problems. Sure it makes sense to deal for another G. They let go of pete b/c they did't think he was a long term answer anddidn't wnat to set a precedent w/ him so others then started whining about their deals thinking that ould get them a new deal. I will be shokced if our starting LG is currently on the Jets roster.
That would have been alright with me. Originally Posted by Zach Draft aside, is there anyone that's uncomfortable with Tony Wise? He sure had his days, but that's long gone, and his latest employment before the Jets was an utter failure. He's supposed to coach up the O line, but from what I see, he has done an absolutely poor job with D'Brick. --------------------------------- Mangold's done well, but it's a talent issue. Clement and Moore are nothing to write home about (but Wise has done alright with them), and Brickasack is overrated.
