If someone asked me what I would prefer at the beginning of the offseason: an aging Coles or an aging Torry Holt ...I would have said to take Holt then, and I really don't have a problem with the idea of signing Holt and going WR in the 2nd now.
I'd love Holt, he'd be a great mentor for the young WRs. I don't think he's washed up at all, he had 93 catches and 1200 yards in the year before last--last year the Rams QB play was simply dreadful.
I'd take Holt on a one year contract. (Definitely over T.O.) that would enable us to draft WR in round 2. The draft is deep in WRs this year.
Would we even need a 2nd-round WR at that point? I'd be fine with Clowney, Stuckey, Smith/Henry, and Wright as the 3-6 guys.
I would love to sign Holt for something like 2 years and $8.5 million. He's still got something left, I think. Do you think that contract would get it done? Is it too high? I don't know what the going rate for aging 33 year old receivers. Holt Cotchery Clowney Stuckey Smith Thats not a bad WR corp.
8.5M/2 years wouldn't come close to getting it done, IMO. More like 8M/year for two years. Coles got 7M/year from Cincy, and he isn't even as good.
Well, hes 33. Depending on how much confidence you have in Clowney/Stuckey to develop, we'd still need a WR of the future, though we would be able to hold off on that. If we're lucky (may have to move up), I'd rather go with a guy like Ron Brace in the 2nd though should we get Holt. Maybe draft a guy like Ramses Barden or Tiquan Underwood or Jordan Norwood or something on the second day.
Considering Housh got 8M/yr, and TO only got 6.5M/yr, there's no way Holt should be getting more than 6, regardless of what Coles got.
TO is a terrible measuring stick. The guy is poison. Holt is better than Coles and potentially as good as Housh. He will get more than 6M per...I guarantee it.
I like the idea of a Holt signing, but that's pretty much to replace Coles. The only speed in that list is Clowney and he's unproven. The Jets need a deep threat, and having more than one burner on the roster is a good thing. In other words, make a "not bad" corps better with a high pick of a burner wideout.
Why would Holt want to come to the Jets? The QB situation is murky and this team is not expected to air it out this year. I think Holt wants a TV job and is already thinking about his career after football. From that standpoint, playing for the Jets would make sense. Holt seems to be a good guy and he will be good as an NFL analyst, but I don't want him on the team.
There are very few receivers that would have thrived with the Rams last year. Maybe Larry Fitzgerald. I'm surprised Holt did as well as he did stat-wise. I think it may be a good situation to sign Holt because two things are keeping his price tag down, last year's misleading stats and his age. I agree that he may not have a lot of interest in us seeing as our QB situation is murky. I firmly believe that his stats last year were not due to a decline in ability, but a decline in the rest of his team. The guy isn't 40 years old. Lots of guys have had excellent seasons at his age and beyond. I'm not a fan of signing every old fart veteran that ever had a good year, but this guy's consistently good. I don't expect him to be on Fitzgerald's level, he just needs to be good, and he still is. However, I wouldn't sign him if his price tag is unreasonable, and that may be why we wouldn't get him.
Looks like some people out in St louis think we would go after him as well http://www.stltoday.com/blogzone/around-the-horns/around-the-horns/2009/03/could-st-louis-rams-holt-be-jetting-to-ny/
How much money does he make right now? Why not throw St. Louis a 5th rounder for Holt? That way we don't need to risk losing him to another team
I like the idea of picking him up but not at the expense of a draft pick. We prob have the edge with Ellard as our new WR coach.
I don't want him less he takes 2 mil per, essentially giving us a big, big Patriot-esque discount. It's not worth it. He's old.
