What is wrong with getting talent that has character? Its not like the Jets are drafting AFL2 players and plugging them into the starting lineup. I think that Tangini are playing this right.
I think in certain cases they are. I like that they're looking for good character guys, but I really don't like them passing up on the best players because they have "character issues." We passed up some guys we really could've used in the draft for good character players, and some of the top FAs we didn't go after when we have a lot of cap room because they're not Mangini type players.
The jets IMO could have had a fenominal draft if they went alittle easier on the charachter issue. Schlegel,E.Smith and B.Smith were all reaches chosen for character.
Normally I would say we are going to far however this team is clearly on a full rebuild with a young untested staff doing the rebuild. They need to build a culture first and once they establish it they can bring in some marginal guys and the team will meld them into the culture. If they bring bad charachter guys in before establishing the locker room and the coaches the team will shatter before it gets a chance to start the rebuilding process.
Buttleman said it best. I just think Mangini is "adding" character to the equation, not making it the all important. If we are looking at two players, say with a talent levels of 95 and 94, don't just grab the 95 guy. Look at character as well. Maybe the 94 talent guy could be a real leader.
Excellent point. If you build a solid culture of winning and character, you can bring so-called "troubled" players into the fold later on, and the culture will change them--not the other way around.
I agree, great point Biggs. I would also say that the Bengals are none too happy that Nicholson and Henry have run amok of the law. Marvin Lewis essentially called them out and said they're an embarassment to the team. And Ricky Williams, while no felon, is a guy who is unreliable and can't be trusted. Maybe there's a fine line here. Highly talented, questionable character guys who don't affect the team chemistry or its ability to perform should be viewed differently than highly talented, questionable character guys who do indeed affect the team. I would think someone like Lawrence Taylor fit the former, and T.O. fits the latter. I'm no Giants lover, but LT came to play on Sunday and wasn't a cancer in the lockeroom. T.O., while obviously a Sunday playmaker, is a cancer. Bottom line: no one wants Boy Scouts who can't play. But guys who are three steps from Rikers a team does not make.
I agree they were reaches(waits for someone to yell at him and question why i thought they were reaches), and i would have like other players to be chosen like Brian Calhoun,Max Jean-Giles and Gabe Watson. But that didnt happen so we just gotta wait and see them play.
I have always been in the talent wins out over character camp. So it surprised me a bit when I voted no in the poll above. Basically I think that if you are adding talented leaders to a team you are probably creating more value than if you make decisions based purely on talent. I see the additions of three or four talented leaders to the Jets over the last offseason. They've added Kimo Von Ohlhoffen, D'Brickashaw Ferguson, Nick Mangold and Kellen Clemens. Those guys have all lead their teams at different levels and there is every expectation that they will be present or future leaders for the Jets. The Jets have also added a number of less talented but productive players who also have played leadership roles. Charles Schlegel co-captained Ohio State, one of the best college football teams. Brad Smith was captain and QB, both leadership positions, of U of Missouri. I see the Jet's additions in this last offseason as addressing a fundamental need that the team had for leadership in the lockerroom. Not the "me-first" performance based leadership of a John Abraham or the "microphone-grabbing" leadership of a Kevin Mawae. The Jets needed solid team first leaders who didn't have to be the center of attention or the media star to shine. So far I'm happy with the direction that the Jets went in trying to create that resource.
Good post! The FO seems to be taking a systematic approach toward rebuilding. They are building a foundation and culture first. Once the culture is established they can afford to take some risks because the foundation can withstand the pressure. I have to admit I like seeing this approach. With bradway I always thought that the wind could change the direction of the team. I don't feel that way with this FO
Hehe. Sorry about that. Not sure why I keep thinking about Charles Schlegel. Maybe it's because he seems a bit Charlie Brown-ish to me right now. Not that there's anything wrong with that...
We dont know what character substitution they made for Talent. We dont know that the guys they chose werent also the most talented guys they still had on the board
Sometimes the most talented individual doesn't necessarily improve the team as much as someone that is less talented but understands teamwork. It's really easy to see in basketball, in the forms of Steve Nash and Jason Kidd vs a guy like Stephon Marbury. Almost everybody would agree that from a pure physical basketball talent standpoint, Marbury is phenomanally gifted...however...I think most people would rather have Nash or Kidd because theyre overall better for your team. In football, you can look at Hines Ward vs. TO. The Steelers pretty much built their team on character and blue chip hard nosed FOOTBALL players. The Patriots and Panthers have done the same thing. It just so happens these teams have been probably the most succesful in the past 5 years as well. I don't see how we're going wrong in building a team of Hines Wards instead of TOs.
I don't know that I would include Carobalcolina in that group, but your point is right. Character is much more important than mere talent in creating a team.
Steve Nash and Jason Kidd are both more talented than Marbury. Vision and anticipation are not character traits they are physical traits.
Schlegel was a reach in the round we took him in. but he has definite talent in between the tackles. Washington was rumored to go as early as the 2nd rd, he was a steal. Brad Smith could be the playmaker this team has lacked, so for rolling the dice in the 4th rd ill take someone who generated over 10,000 yds in their college career. all 3 of these players were team captains. the only "reach" imo is Eric Smith, who was neither a team captain or a standout even on his team. the other 3 were crucially important to their team i guarantee that.
Smith was said to be the leader of the defensive unit at Michigan State, in fact his coach said having him out there was like having another coach on the field. We took him much earlier than draft pundits predicted he would be taken, but that is the difference between what an analyst knows and a what at the scouts/coaches know about the situation.
