How many sacks do you think a hypothetical rookie OL would allow? How many sacks per game? How many pressures? How many penalties?
Where do you get that interpretation of what I said? Jeezus! Color what others say just so you can make your argument stronger at all costs. I know you're not that simple minded, but I'll spell it out for you anyway. ANY player taken at #10 is presumably a "stud", and ANY player, taken at ANY slot can be a bust. Within those parameters we have to make certain assumptions - even GMs have to. WTF are you going to do if the Jets somehow don't take Bowers at #10?
Let's draft less talented players because our coaching staff won't have any use for more talented players. Perfectly sensible. I'ma climb out on a limb here and assume the coaching staff prefers keeping their jobs over losing them. If we're passing on talented players out of concern that the current coaches won't be able to use them, the team has much bigger problems that NO draft pick could never fix.
I think that depends upon several factors. One, would be which rookie OT it would be. I think Alt or Fashanu would struggle much less than Fautanu, Fuaga, Latham or any other OT, especially those who have never played at LT. Second, when in the season will they have to play? If it's early in their rookie season, their stats would almost certainly be worse than if it was in the middle or end of the season. It could also depend upon whom the opponents were that week and how many games they had to play. The most important factors obviously would be if they kept Rodgers healthy and the offense was able to still function at a pretty high level. If they did that, then their individual stats would not be that important in the overall scheme of things. The overarching positives of adding that rookie OT would be that he would get some experience this season, have time to get acclimated to the speed of the NFL, to learn from Smith, Moses and Carter as well as the other veteran OL, then next season would be ready to play at a higher level than any rookie drafted next year. He would also have time to develop chemistry and timing with Simpson, Tippman and AVT, and provide additional continuity and stability for 2025 which shouldn't be underestimated since the Jets are going to have 11 starters become FAs (Reddick, Reed, Williams, Conklin, Smith, Moses, AVT, Kinlaw, Clark, MC II and Adams), 9 key backups become FAs, (A. Davis, Echols, S. Thomas, Schweitzer, Hanson, Sherwood, Surratt, Charles, McCrary-Ball, at least 4 other depth players become FAs (Oliver, Fotu, Yeboah, and Hayes) as well as a number of PS and bottom of the roster players, need to extend Sauce, Breece, G. Wilson, JJ and AVT, and have a tight cap. There will be enough turnover and turmoil next offseason, especially if a new regime comes in and schemes start changing.
Two things: 1. You just made your initial post even dumber. Or you outed yourself as being extremely biased towards OT. You called the tackle we would take at 10 a stud because he’s the 10th pick, but then said we need to worry about Bowers being a bust if we take him at 10. But everyone taken at 10 is supposed to be a stud I thought? 2. I’ve said in this literal thread that I am perfectly fine going OT at 10 so it’s extra funny that you are asking me about how I interpreted some thing and then embellished it from my own purposes.
I didn't say anything about drafting less talented players, so don't twist my words to try to make your point. I don't think Alt, Fashanu or even Odunze are less talented than Bowers, but even if they are a little less talented, they play premium positions which evens things out. I know that you and other who salivate over drafting Bowers keep referring to him as a weapon, but "weapon" isn't a position. Bowers is a "tweener" and "tweeners" don't usually get drafted in the top 10. You all seem to forget that Bowers great production was in an offense that was totally designed around and focused on him. He won't have that with the Jets. It's one thing to throw a lot of passes to a WR behind the LOS who is extremely fast and elusive. It's another to throw them to a "tweener" with 4.56 40 speed. Yes, in the film Bowers looks great vs college competition, but I'm not convinced that he will be as great vs NFL talent, especially in a scheme that isn't designed around him. They're more likely to lose their jobs if after Smith goes down, there isn't a quality replacement at LT and then Rodgers goes down with a major injury again. JD may not even make it to the end of the season if that happens. He'd be a whole mor likely to lose his job over that, than he would be because he didn't draft Bowers. The Jets wouldn't be passing on all talented players, so don't exaggerate. They'd just be passing on the talented player that you covet. You guys are totally out of your minds with your Bowers love and are blind to reality.
That's my point. It's impossible to project stats with any degree of accuracy, so trying to say doing so is a prerequisite for preferring one guy over another makes no sense. The post I was replying to was basically saying "If you can't tell me what Bowers' stats will be then you shouldn't be advocating taking him."
See, this is my issue. The argument for an OL is based on stacking two separate hypotheticals - that an OL will get hurt and Rodgers will get hurt as a result. You do not spend a #10 overall pick based on two hypotheticals playing out. It is a massive waste of resources. Believe it or not, QBs don't usually suffer season ending injuries.
I could give you the same general answer it appears NCJetsFan already has (and probably did a better overall presentation job of doing then I would), but your choice to yet again completely duck the inquiry has made it pretty clear at this point that you simply have no real interest in putting any real thought into your opinion stance here. Being the "a jaccuzi in the back yard sounds awesome!" guy isn't enough. If you are going to help sell me on Bowers being the the right pick i personally need more then that, and something that at least is trying to acknowledge that he's being drafted to *this* NYJ team and offense. You sir are not.
You're reading draft publications written from other draft publications. That bold part up there? Nowhere close to true. UGA certainly had a handful of unique packages that took advantage of his size and speed, but by no means did they design an offense centered around Brock Bowers. He wasn't the only example of players shuffling around the formation. Here's a freebie, good for one last week of draft debate: you can fairly say that UGA has been loading up on top-end TE talent over the last several years, and made that position a bigger part of its offense. UGA was still, and always will be, a run-first team.
Yeah seriously. Georgia’s offense was designed to run the ball behind their offensive line that is usually bigger and stronger than anyone sans Alabama they play.
Exactly. Deeply rooted in program history. It's one of the reasons why Georgia has had a tough-ish time recruiting (and keeping) top-end WR talent like AD Mitchell and Jermaine Burton.
My point is that stats are impossible to predict, so to act like they're a prerequisite for preferring one guy over another doesn't make sense. Why are you trying to convince me we should go OL if you can't predict how many sacks or pressures he'll allow?
Sitting here watching the presser from earlier today where Joe D is claiming extreme flexibility and saying things like "We love our TE room where it's at" blah blah blah isn't giving me the warm fuzzies lol
I mean I've made my context argument on that, and without even having the much more luxury stance you should/would have here since I don't even know exactly who my guy is or how many games he'll actually end up starting. I even made it a point to offer up exactly what I'm asking out of you here. Heck, in essence and without any direct application context here you aren't even really making a Jets based argument here. You are are basically just left telling me how cool it would be to see Brock Bowers' success in college translate over to the NFL. As if it just doesn't even matter where he gets drafted to. Again, that kind of shallow and purposely non committal stance isn't going to convince me off the Jets needing to draft OL here. Maybe somebody out there making the same argument you'd like to make can do better a job of that without running away from the direct application part though. I know I'd be open to hear and consider it.
The fact you would reply with that type of response instead of one making the attempt to actually engage in direct counter debate just drives my point home even more imo. I'm not asking him or anybody else to do something I wasn't personally willing to do and did go on to do myself here. If you feel that strongly on Bowers why are you seemingly so afraid to go on record here with a simple ballpark production projection? There is only one way to make any real sense of that, and it's not very flattering to that opinion stance.
his rookie year he probably plays similar to Dalton Kincaid in Buffalo, I think he had like 70 catches for around 600 yards. That might be a stretch, he probably comes in under that, but I’ll take it for sure cause rookie TEs usually need a year now how many sacks do you project Fuaga will give up
Finally, and thanks. As noted earlier in NC's response it's not as straight forward there on the OT as it can be on a guy like Bowers. How many starts are we talking there, and when do they take place? I will state ahead of time though that my my day 1 optimism on that wouldn't be as high in the event those starts (hopefully) come in the second half of the regular season. Fuaga might be a little tougher on me too since I'm still kinda undecided where I am on him as a #10 pick.
