PDA

View Full Version : 2008 Draft: What positions are we drafting?


Pages : 1 [2]

derza222
01-05-2008, 11:21 AM
I'm pretty sure somebody's interviewing the Bucs DB coach for either a DC or a HC job. Not sure he has much knowledge of the 3-4, but supposedly he's a bright guy and of up and coming in coaching circles. Other than that if we can't find an experienced DC and we have to hire a positional guy (Rex Ryan would be amazing) I'd assume we look linebackers coach for another 3-4 team.

BroadwayJoe10
01-05-2008, 11:53 AM
I'm pretty sure somebody's interviewing the Bucs DB coach for either a DC or a HC job. Not sure he has much knowledge of the 3-4, but supposedly he's a bright guy and of up and coming in coaching circles. Other than that if we can't find an experienced DC and we have to hire a positional guy (Rex Ryan would be amazing) I'd assume we look linebackers coach for another 3-4 team.

I can see that as a valid possibility, but i really don't know any linebacking coaches to name. Even though this may seem as just blinding optomism, but i'm not really going to write ryan off until we get a new DC. As far as im concerned this is just al davis trying to possibly get a pick or player out of us or just dicking with the media. They did the same public statement last year when they said they weren't going to fire art shell; now i don't see the percentage of us getting him being as high but there definately still is a chance. Right now im gonna worry about our draft, becuase atleast that we have control over.

I don't know if it's just people hyping certain players or not because, lets face it this is a draft board and that is what we do, but i'm worried that gholston may not be there when we pick. Parcells does love him some OLB and has had a great one wherever he's played. I am also worried about that crotchety old man drafting ahead of us taking gholston, becuase of his love for superior athletes. There has also been talk of the rams selecting C.long instead of j.long because they may be switching to a 34 this year.

Depending on combine results and we can't land gholston or c.long i can see teams moving up possibly for ellis and a couple other guys. I don't know all the teams needs, but being in the 6 slot its much easier for us to trade down. If that isn't possible it brings up the question of who do we select when c.long and gholston aren't available.

BroadwayJoe10
01-06-2008, 10:48 PM
A possibility for a veteran to bring in and compete with clemens. This is of course only if penny gets traded.

"Todd Collins indicated after Saturday's playoff loss that he may test the free agent market this offseason.
"I'd like to have an opportunity to play," said the 36-year-old Collins. "I think I can still contribute and help teams win." The Redskins have assured Jason Campbell that he will start in 2008, so if Collins wants to play he'll have to go elsewhere or re-sign and hope Campbell gets hurt again."

Todd collins could be a good security blanket, but there isn't a single veteran including chad that i feel i would be comfortable as our starter, i guess thats why they are backups. I think the role of a backup is to go .500 or win a couple games when the starter goes out with an injury, but i still think clemens is our starter we just need to surround him with a supporting cast. I think keeping chad around just spells disaster.

derza222
01-09-2008, 12:20 PM
Here's a guy I think could be worth a look in the mid-rounds. Name's Aaron Kelly, he declared early, a 6'5 wideout from Clemson with great production (8 catches, 1 yards, 11 TD's), height obviously, and good speed and hands. The catch is he weighs under 200 lbs and probably isn't ready to play in the NFL right now since he'll get jammed pretty easily at the line. I wouldn't mind giving him a look in the 3rd but more realistically it seems like barring some significant improvement or a great 40 time he'll fall into the 4th or 5th round range where if we let him develop and get stronger he could be a great pickup and produce well down the road. Potentially a great deep/red zone threat.

http://sports.aol.com/fanhouse/2008/01/09/2008-nfl-draft-bad-decision-aaron-kelly-wr-clemson-turns-pro/

thetedginnshow
01-09-2008, 12:58 PM
I'm pumped about some of these declarations. There seems to be a good handful of runningbacks for us to choose from, as well as receivers. I especially like to see how many talls WRs there are out there, which is what I think we should be going for. Some of the TEs, like Davis and Bennett, I definitely wouldn't mind (too bad Beckum isn't coming out). In any case, it seems like a good draft to find some offensive playmakers later on, or at least I think so. At our position now though, I'm not quite sure who we'll be able to get in the first...

Crickett
01-09-2008, 01:17 PM
Here's a guy I think could be worth a look in the mid-rounds. Name's Aaron Kelly, he declared early, a 6'5 wideout from Clemson with great production (8 catches, 1 yards, 11 TD's), height obviously, and good speed and hands. The catch is he weighs under 200 lbs and probably isn't ready to play in the NFL right now since he'll get jammed pretty easily at the line. I wouldn't mind giving him a look in the 3rd but more realistically it seems like barring some significant improvement or a great 40 time he'll fall into the 4th or 5th round range where if we let him develop and get stronger he could be a great pickup and produce well down the road. Potentially a great deep/red zone threat.

That's a pretty big catch. Doesn't sound like someone I'd want the Jets to look at prior to the 6th round. And if he lacks great speed as you say, why would he be a great deep threat at all?

derza222
01-09-2008, 02:01 PM
That's a pretty big catch. Doesn't sound like someone I'd want the Jets to look at prior to the 6th round. And if he lacks great speed as you say, why would he be a great deep threat at all?

I dunno if it was a typo or not but if I said he lacks good speed I meant he has good speed.

As for the weight issue it is a big catch but if you think about it wideouts typically don't make a huge impact till their third year in the league. If he hits the weights for a couple of years, puts on around 15, 20 lbs and retains his speed he could pay off big time as a middle of day 2 selection, 4th or 5th round range. Obviously a big risk/reward pick but the payoff could be tremendous there and I think the potential payoff is worth the risk at that point. Height, speed, hands, production, seems like all he lacks is bulk and he could put that on in a couple of years and be a very good starter for us. Worth a look at the very least. And I messed up the stats, 88 catches for 1081 yard and 11 tds.

Crickett
01-09-2008, 02:05 PM
I dunno if it was a typo or not but if I said he lacks good speed I meant he has good speed.

Well, you said he had good speed, but later on, you mentioned that barring a great 40 time, he'd be available in the 4th or 5th which indicated to me that good speed meant low 4.5- high 4.6 range.

Sorry. :o

derza222
01-09-2008, 02:31 PM
Well, you said he had good speed, but later on, you mentioned that barring a great 40 time, he'd be available in the 4th or 5th which indicated to me that good speed meant low 4.5- high 4.6 range.

Sorry. :o

Ah sorry for being inconsistant. I just meant if he runs somewhere near a 4.4 flat or something he could rise up and go somewhere in the third perhaps. I honestly have no timed speed estimations but supposedly his game speed been good. My bad...

Also I was just thinking we drafted Stuckey out of Clemson, so he should be able to give us a bit of an idea on Kelly's work habits and such. Plus we may have noticed him somewhere on tape last year. Anyways just a guy to keep an eye on, thought he was an interesting situation maybe a couple of years away but definitely some tools to work with.

thetedginnshow
01-09-2008, 05:07 PM
For a middle round guy, I'd much rather go after someone like Marcus Monk than this guy, to be honest. Or really, even someone like Adrian Arrington. It's hard to tell who will actually be around in the middle rounds right now for WRs though. In general however, I'd like more physical receivers for the Jets that can get YAC yards, since we don't really have the offense to be throwing the ball 20-25 yards downfield a ton of times.

And does anyone think we'll trade down? In the event the very top prospects we'd be looking at aren't available at 6, I wouldn't think it so bad of an idea to trade down a few spots if possible to pick up some extra pieces.

BroadwayJoe10
01-09-2008, 11:26 PM
For a middle round guy, I'd much rather go after someone like Marcus Monk than this guy, to be honest. Or really, even someone like Adrian Arrington. It's hard to tell who will actually be around in the middle rounds right now for WRs though. In general however, I'd like more physical receivers for the Jets that can get YAC yards, since we don't really have the offense to be throwing the ball 20-25 yards downfield a ton of times.

And does anyone think we'll trade down? In the event the very top prospects we'd be looking at aren't available at 6, I wouldn't think it so bad of an idea to trade down a few spots if possible to pick up some extra pieces.

This class actually seems to be somewhat deep in recievers, not elite recievers, but solid receivers who have the ability to be quite productive in the NFL (or atleast it seems that way). I like monk's height, but when i saw his last couple of games he didn't look like the player i thought he was. He struggled to get separation and didn't look to impressive, but i think he could be a good project. The same thing goes for kelly, i havnt seen him, but it seems his production and measurables fit the bill, the only thing he needs is added weight. I think the speed to get seperation is more important right now than having good size.

Either way i like the height of all the recievers entering this years draft and wouldn't mind coming away with one of em. I also thought i read that Kelly's mom convinced him to not enter the draft??

GET LOOSE
01-09-2008, 11:30 PM
i really think this is going to be a great draft for us because alot of or needs will be filled because it is a deep draft. LBS, WRs, HBs, and DTs are all preaty deep and we could use all of those. ill be watching carfully in the 2nd 3rd and 4th rounds

derza222
01-09-2008, 11:34 PM
Yeah I posted that before he changed his mind. Anyways this draft is pretty good for a lot of the positions we need, I like the OLB talent at the top and I think depth at OT, ILB, and DE are solid. NT could be tough and OG could as well if we don't go in that direction. I also like that there are a ton of big wideouts in this draft which helps since somebody's bound to drop and the corner depth is good enough that we could get a solid #2 later in this draft. RB depth is great but I really don't think we need one to be honest.

BroadwayJoe10
01-09-2008, 11:39 PM
i really think this is going to be a great draft for us because alot of or needs will be filled because it is a deep draft. LBS, WRs, HBs, and DTs are all preaty deep and we could use all of those. ill be watching carfully in the 2nd 3rd and 4th rounds

I would replace HB's with oline. Now i definately agree that RB is deep in this draft, but besides a giant bruiser, which i think we could get in a fullback in Owen Schmitt, i dont want to see RB adressed.

It's so hard to decide where we are going to go in our draft, besides the first, which should be a no brainer it's chris long or gholston in my mind, but the later rounds i can't say what we'll do until i see our free agent picks.

I am real excited about a lot of the junior DTs declaring, becuase that means theres a good shot one of them or the SRs will fall and could be for us to take. I also don't like to see the rise of Beau Bell on everyones draft board, because he'd be a solid complement to harris inside. And does anyone else think it's funny that Beau Bell's name essentially means "Beautiful Beautiful" just the feminine and masculine version of one another? Not a big deal, just thought it was humorous.

GET LOOSE
01-09-2008, 11:49 PM
well i dont think HB is a big need either but if we could pick up a big back in the 3rd or 4th i would like that

hcbrad08
01-09-2008, 11:50 PM
i dont think is as much of a no brainer as you think...I think considering the immense amount of talent and underclassmen in this draft that they may trade out of the 6th position...remember that is where every exec says the top talent is usually gone or the 2nd tier talent (for the 1st rd is reached for)

I love long (if he can play olb) and gholston but i think we have so many options a trade down is also a distinct possibilty anyone against it is crazy.

looking on it more and more....trade vilma and Drob for Rogers and a pick...it would make our D...I dont care about his motor...get him...should be priority esp if hes on the block.

BroadwayJoe10
01-09-2008, 11:54 PM
i dont think is as much of a no brainer as you think...I think considering the immense amount of talent and underclassmen in this draft that they may trade out of the 6th position...remember that is where every exec says the top talent is usually gone or the 2nd tier talent (for the 1st rd is reached for)

I love long (if he can play olb) and gholston but i think we have so many options a trade down is also a distinct possibilty anyone against it is crazy.

looking on it more and more....trade vilma and Drob for Rogers and a pick...it would make our D...I dont care about his motor...get him...should be priority esp if hes on the block.

Hahah it's about time you got back here...When i said no brainer, I say that barring trading. I never like predicting it because well theyre hard. With the depth we have in this draft we could fill a lot of needs with very good players. That having been said, if C.long is near us i think Mangini would fall in love and not trade down. Your boy Beau Bell is climbing up boards though brady.

hcbrad08
01-10-2008, 02:19 PM
Noticfe scott didn't have him up for the entire season and now he has him as an OLB, but thats not his strength or from what I saw (hes a big thumper but not in thwe anthony schlegel sense). I think hes another david harris. If he can truly play OLB then I want him immensely. "He's a violent tackler" haha, that is the most accurate description of his play....I just doubt that he has a variety of pass rush moves moving from ilb to olb. we'll see...this draft is nuts and sooo deep bc of all the underclassmen...to respond to the other thread i dont want to post in for reasons of principle...YES we most definitely can change around the Jets in one year.

BroadwayJoe10
01-10-2008, 02:24 PM
Noticfe scott didn't have him up for the entire season and now he has him as an OLB, but thats not his strength or from what I saw (hes a big thumper but not in thwe anthony schlegel sense). I think hes another david harris. If he can truly play OLB then I want him immensely. "He's a violent tackler" haha, that is the most accurate description of his play....I just doubt that he has a variety of pass rush moves moving from ilb to olb. we'll see...this draft is nuts and sooo deep bc of all the underclassmen...to respond to the other thread i dont want to post in for reasons of principle...YES we most definitely can change around the Jets in one year.

Haha i tried saying something the last time one was made, but my words fell on deaf ears. Anyways, I am surprised scott has him listed as an OLB, becuase every site i've seen has him listed as an ILB. I think he could be a perfect compliment to harris; we could now have our ILBs called the hitman (harris is called the hitman, so it only makes sense...i can see the marketing already). He really does remind me a lot of harris, however i have no idea about his personality, work ethic etc.

Drob isn't going anywhere it seems and if we are going to have deal with him we should get another ILB inthe middle who can shed tackles (as he'll have plenty on him because of DROB) and get to the runner. I beleive if he is even close to what harris is in the NFL those two could help make up for the defiency of our NT.

derza222
01-10-2008, 05:12 PM
What do you guys think of Erin Henderson as another possible ILB for us? Great athlete, good production, solid bloodlines, and seems pretty versatile.

BroadwayJoe10
01-10-2008, 06:25 PM
I have only seen maryland play a little and never focussed in on him too much. But, i do like his measurables and will have to try to find more gamereals online or something.

Personally, i really don't think finding a 34 ILB is the toughest thing to do in the world. He needs to be able to shed blockers well and stand up the runningbacks, which is a trait that's pretty easy to see in college games. We already have harris who can call all the plays, so we really need a guy who has the ability to shed blockers, stand up runners and hopefully good in coverage.

derza222
01-10-2008, 06:45 PM
I have only seen maryland play a little and never focussed in on him too much. But, i do like his measurables and will have to try to find more gamereals online or something.

Personally, i really don't think finding a 34 ILB is the toughest thing to do in the world. He needs to be able to shed blockers well and stand up the runningbacks, which is a trait that's pretty easy to see in college games. We already have harris who can call all the plays, so we really need a guy who has the ability to shed blockers, stand up runners and hopefully good in coverage.

I definitely think that somebody that's good in coverage is very important, since Harris isn't bad but isn't fantastic either. Henderson I think would be a nice find in the second round. Ultimately I think along with what you mentioned a nice blitzer would be helpful as well since we could really do some interesting things with two nice blitzers in the middle and two pass rushing OLB's on the outside. However we manage to work it I think if we do deal Vilma we have a shot to find a good ILB in this draft or a draft next year if we decide to leave Barton in the middle.

Crickett
01-10-2008, 07:39 PM
I definitely think that somebody that's good in coverage is very important, since Harris isn't bad but isn't fantastic either. Henderson I think would be a nice find in the second round. Ultimately I think along with what you mentioned a nice blitzer would be helpful as well since we could really do some interesting things with two nice blitzers in the middle and two pass rushing OLB's on the outside. However we manage to work it I think if we do deal Vilma we have a shot to find a good ILB in this draft or a draft next year if we decide to leave Barton in the middle.

I would hope that if the Jets trade Vilma, they move Hobson inside and not draft an ILB. After all, in the 3-4, he probably belongs there anyway. Actually, I'd hope they'd trade Hobson and keep Vilma, but I know that's probably not happenin. :(

BroadwayJoe10
01-10-2008, 07:45 PM
I would hope that if the Jets trade Vilma, they move Hobson inside and not draft an ILB. After all, in the 3-4, he probably belongs there anyway. Actually, I'd hope they'd trade Hobson and keep Vilma, but I know that's probably not happenin. :(

Well i beleive vic is a free agent so i'm not sure if we have the ability to trade him. However, i would love to see him on the inside as i think that would suite him much better.

I cannot wait for them to divulge what the exact procedure vilma underwent and what the expected recovery time can be. I wouldn't doubt if we held him and penny all the way through most of the preseason and then traded both or vilma when they knew he was healthy and could go through drills etc.

derza222
01-10-2008, 08:02 PM
Completely agreed I'd love to see Hobson move inside if we trade but he is a UFA. Our best alternative on the roster is probably Barton. I think we'll have to draft somebody at some point this year if we do trade Vilma, but it might be in the late rounds instead as a possible guy to develop and at worst a backup since our depth inside isn't that great as it is.

GET LOOSE
01-10-2008, 09:01 PM
alot of people seem to like this vilma for rodgers trade. i dont like it. i feel we should not trade vilma at all. vilma is to important in a D that is getting a little better with young players. rodgers is already i think 28 or 29 and DTs dont last that long. i dont wanna trade a player who will be our star for 5-6 more years and in return get a dt who is done 2-3 years from now

BroadwayJoe10
01-10-2008, 09:27 PM
alot of people seem to like this vilma for rodgers trade. i dont like it. i feel we should not trade vilma at all. vilma is to important in a D that is getting a little better with young players. rodgers is already i think 28 or 29 and DTs dont last that long. i dont wanna trade a player who will be our star for 5-6 more years and in return get a dt who is done 2-3 years from now

The paradox to this is that in order for vilma to be a star in our system we will need to find a NT that can keep the lineman off of him, which getting rogers would do. However, by getting rogers we would lose vilma so there goes that. I would personally trade vilma for rogers + pick in a heartbeat, because a NT is a key piece to the 34, an additional ILB is a luxury. As for him being our star, we already have a star for the next 3 years in Harris and hopefully for the next decade. Harris will be everything and more than vilma can be in our defense unless we upgrade our defensive line. If we can get rogers with a trade of drob than i am all for keeping vilma, but if not i really don't see how we can keep him.

The bottom line is vilma cannot shed larger blockers and gets driven out of the play. The only way we can make him affective again is to get a solid NT and a bigger DE to play opposite of Kenyon Coleman (who i've grown to like more and more).

Crickett
01-10-2008, 09:31 PM
Well i beleive vic is a free agent so i'm not sure if we have the ability to trade him. However, i would love to see him on the inside as i think that would suite him much better.

Nuts, you're right. :(

BroadwayJoe10
01-10-2008, 09:55 PM
Nuts, you're right. :(

Well there is always hope that no one likes him so he comes back to us for less money??

nvot9
01-14-2008, 07:20 PM
Ok, a week ago, I would have said you were crazy that this would happen, but now, thinking about it, I can totally see both Chris Long AND Vernon Gholston being available. Don't get me wrong, I feel they could just as easily both NOT be there by our pick (although I strongly believe at least one will be). But here's the scenario, both drop to 6, who do we take? Honestly, I'd be hard pressed not to take Vernon Gholston. He seems a bit over hyped, but that aside, I still think he's a tremendous prospect. Watching the Giants/Cowboys last night, it became apparent how important that speed rushing OLB is especially a guy like Ware (someone Gholston's compared to) that being said, what would you do?

derza222
01-14-2008, 08:31 PM
I really think Gholston is more of a Merriman type player. I'll go with Long there because he's got a tremendous work ethic and the tools to be one heck of a player for us. Better value too as Gholston is a tad overhyped. And don't sleep on Harvey to be the top hybrid prospect in the draft. I think when push comes to shove Long and Gholston will battle it out to be the best 4-3 end but Harvey is in the mix as a hybrid because his run stopping deficiencies are masked at LB and he's a tremendous pure pass rusher. Also, what's the scenario you have them both falling to us in? Some mix of Dorsey, J. Long, DMC, Ryan, and Ellis in the top 5? I guess it could happen though I have a hard time seeing Ryan and the two DT's in there with the order as it is now.

BroadwayJoe10
01-14-2008, 10:08 PM
I would have to wait until the combine in order to determine whether or not i'd rather have c.long or gholston. I know the 10 yard is probably better idea of the short burst needed to play OLB, but the 40's for Ware, Merriman and Wimbley were 4.56, 4.64 and 4.61, respectively. If Long can run in the mid to low 4.6s that would be a good indicator of his speed plus his 3 cone time will also play a large part in the decision. I think right now gholston has the measurables that match up better to these 3 and I have read his work ethic and film watching is extremely high as well. So basically if both are there I honestly will be ecstatic because we will be getting a solid player, but I really hope atleast one of them is there.

It really is going to depend on the numbers they run, but I think as of now i would lean towards gholston because he seems faster with more explosion than long.

BroadwayJoe10
01-14-2008, 11:44 PM
I was recently going over our needs and decided that i need to see LG and RT adressed in our free agency and draft, as pretty much we have all been saying for a long time. I truly think our best bet would be to adress LG in FA and RT in the draft, due to the growing depth at tackle. I still would like to get Stacy Andrews because i think he could be an absolute dominant LG, but if not there are still solid guards in this draft.

Tackles in this draft
Jake Long - 6'7 313
Jeff Otah - 6'6 340
Ryan Clady - 6'6 317
Michael Oher - 6'5 325
Sam Baker - 6'5 305
Gosder Cherilus - 6'7 318
Chris Williams - 6'6 320

Tony Hills - 6'6 305
Oneil Cousins - 6'4 305
Carl Nicks - 6'5 330
Barry Richardson - 6'7 330
Heath Benedict - 6'6 320

Obviously i would want a jake long, michael oher or a jeff otah to fall to us in the early second, but that certainly is not going to happen. My top two choices are Chris Williams and Gosder Cherilus, because i can see them falling and possibly even falling lower in the second. Tony Hills, Oneil cousins, Carl Nicksm Barry Richardson and Heath benedict are also all sound prospects at the RT position, who can probably be had in the late 2nd and early 3rd and on. Is everyone ok with the idea of grabbing a RT in the second or would they rather see us address something else?? Personally i feel if we don't adress RT via FA we must grab one of these guys. If we grab a guard in FA he will most certainly be more than OK, which is a huge upgrade over captain turnstile and I would bank on most of them being solid RTs.

thetedginnshow
01-15-2008, 01:32 AM
It's really unfortunate that they won that last game. Haha. I really would be excited if we took Jake Long in the first, though. There's almost no way he's available with the Rams and Chiefs ahead, but that would be nice. As for Chris Long and Gholston, I'd still rather have Long, whether he was at DE or OLB. The motor's just not always there for Gholston, and IMO, I think it's crazy that people are comparing him to Ware and Merriman because they seemed to me to be much better players in college than him. I don't know. I wouldn't hate the pick especially since he's a Buckeye, but if given the choice, I'd rather not take him. Plus, in comparison to Long, I don't think he offers quite as much all-around and isn't as "football smart" as Chris. Not to make it sound like he's terrible compared to Long. It isn't as though he'd be terribly hard to motivate or coach, but I just think Long is better in those aspects. I don't know. We'll see. In all reality, there's a strong chance that it's a moot point as they may both go before our pick.

Crickett
01-15-2008, 01:46 PM
It's really unfortunate that they won that last game. Haha. I really would be excited if we took Jake Long in the first, though. There's almost no way he's available with the Rams and Chiefs ahead, but that would be nice. As for Chris Long and Gholston, I'd still rather have Long, whether he was at DE or OLB. The motor's just not always there for Gholston, and IMO, I think it's crazy that people are comparing him to Ware and Merriman because they seemed to me to be much better players in college than him. I don't know. I wouldn't hate the pick especially since he's a Buckeye, but if given the choice, I'd rather not take him. Plus, in comparison to Long, I don't think he offers quite as much all-around and isn't as "football smart" as Chris. Not to make it sound like he's terrible compared to Long. It isn't as though he'd be terribly hard to motivate or coach, but I just think Long is better in those aspects. I don't know. We'll see. In all reality, there's a strong chance that it's a moot point as they may both go before our pick.


I'm not all that upset about it.
1. Drafting a right tackle is the top three is wayyyyyy too early and IMO, a waste of a pick.
2. Chris Long, I don't see how at 280 that he fits at OLB or DE in the 3-4 and even more, even if he does play at DE, the pass rush in the 3-4 shouldn't be coming from the defensive line. If the Jets do want to get the pass rush from the defensive line, then they need to go ahead and switch back to the 4-3.
3. As for Gholston, I feel he was a bit of a reach in the top five. Which is why I'm glad they won the last game. Because among the guys available at the top of the draft, he seems the most likely to provide a significant upgrade. But as with all things, there are no garuntees in the draft.

thetedginnshow
01-15-2008, 02:25 PM
I'm not all that upset about it.
1. Drafting a right tackle is the top three is wayyyyyy too early and IMO, a waste of a pick.
2. Chris Long, I don't see how at 280 that he fits at OLB or DE in the 3-4 and even more, even if he does play at DE, the pass rush in the 3-4 shouldn't be coming from the defensive line. If the Jets do want to get the pass rush from the defensive line, then they need to go ahead and switch back to the 4-3.
3. As for Gholston, I feel he was a bit of a reach in the top five. Which is why I'm glad they won the last game. Because among the guys available at the top of the draft, he seems the most likely to provide a significant upgrade. But as with all things, there are no garuntees in the draft.

I really think Long could add the weight and be effective, and I'm certain he could lose the weight and be effective at OLB. I don't think we should be looking at his weight so much with a work ethic such as his. In any case, he's not just a pass rush specialist as he can stop the run quite well, so having someone that can rush the QB at DE would only be a bonus, like how it is with someone such as Castillo or Seymour.

But really, while from a monetary standpoint there's a significant difference generally between #3 and #6, considering our cap room, I don't think that's so huge of an issue. In our case, I'd just like for us to get the guy we want, and obviously we have a better chance at that the higher up we are. If in fact Gholston tests through the roof, he'll almost certainly be gone at 6, and if he doesn't, he'd probably still be a substantial reach at that point.

BroadwayJoe10
01-15-2008, 02:27 PM
I would like to have j.long, but not at that high. This stems from my beleive that you don't take interior lineman or RT this high in the draft, especially considering the incredible depth at the OT position this year; we can some OTs that normally would be a first rounder in other years in the 2nd round this year. I beleive chris long is going to enter the combine around 265 and be able to run a better 10, 20 and 40 yard dash, which would allow him to play the OLB position.

I think gholston in the top 5 would be a stretch, but I think taking him at 6 would be a solid pick. Once again it will all determine on the agility drills, times etc.


Bigger NewsThis came from one of those websites i'm on and i just figured i would share this. It doesn't mean it's a definate or even a maybe, but just talks going on in the FO. It could reiterate the Coles and Penny trade, but we'll see..Like i said earlier, i won't believe anything until it's made official.


"As I reported Justin Miller being out for the season with a torn ACL before news was released I again have got some more inside info from a friend who works inside the New York Jets. I hear a lot, but I dont really say much on the board unless it's big or something that is really making noise.

We just had a conversation on the phone and he told me that Chad Johnson is indeed on the Jets radar. I wasn't giving specific names, but there are some people in the organization who want him here and some who don't, but the topic is making a lot of noise inside the front office.

Just thought I would share that......"

thetedginnshow
01-15-2008, 05:33 PM
Well being of my favorite players, I'd probably orgasm if he gave to the Jets. I won't get my hopes up though. If something were to be figured out with Vilma and Coles or something, I'd be down.

Crickett
01-15-2008, 06:14 PM
Well being of my favorite players, I'd probably orgasm if he gave to the Jets. I won't get my hopes up though. If something were to be figured out with Vilma and Coles or something, I'd be down.

If the Jets traded for Ocho Cinco (and it wasn't some stupid Herschel Walker to the Vikings like trade), I'd be the first in line to get a Johnson #85 Jets jersey.
Post 999

nvot9
01-15-2008, 07:46 PM
I'd be all for Chad Johnson as well...

The more and more I read about Gosder Cherilus, the more and more I would love to take him in the second round, or package a second and something else, to move up into the first to take him. I'm not exactly sure why, but Marcus McNeil comes to mind when I think of Cherilus, and that makes me want him all the more...

TimD
01-15-2008, 08:59 PM
I'd be all for Chad Johnson as well...

The more and more I read about Gosder Cherilus, the more and more I would love to take him in the second round, or package a second and something else, to move up into the first to take him. I'm not exactly sure why, but Marcus McNeil comes to mind when I think of Cherilus, and that makes me want him all the more...

He sounds like a crazy run blocker. The kind we can just run over his back all day

BroadwayJoe10
01-15-2008, 09:58 PM
Gosder Cherilus is my ideal second round pick if we do not address OT in free agency, i would still want Stacy Andrews over him, but I would still LOVE Gosder. Once again, if we don't address LG via FA we obviously will address in in the draft and i'm really liking the idea of reuniting D'brick with Branden Albert.

I would like ocho, but i still won't beleive anything until i see it's made official. (I know i brought it up, but i figured most news is good to atleast see during a lack of news phase")

GET LOOSE
01-16-2008, 11:19 PM
if we were able to get the ocho cinco trade done w/o putting vilma i would be real happy...coles and penny would be enough to because the bengals now have housyamama and chris henry...wr is not a big prob for them...VILMA GOES I GO...sort of lol

BroadwayJoe10
01-17-2008, 12:10 AM
if we were able to get the ocho cinco trade done w/o putting vilma i would be real happy...coles and penny would be enough to because the bengals now have housyamama and chris henry...wr is not a big prob for them...VILMA GOES I GO...sort of lol

This is the problem with getting too attached to a player, you are unable to see his weaknesses and the fact that he would be better suited somewheres else. I love penny, but I understand that he would better be with a different team and I will still be a fan of his. As a jets fan you have to realize what is best for the team and I am afraid that if he has a poor year he obviously isn't going to be resigned and than we get nothing and he ends up on a different team anyways. We'll see what happens, but if he doesn't come back muscled up I don't see him having a good year.

bigbluedefense
01-17-2008, 05:43 PM
If you guys pass up on both Long and Gholston, i'll be pissed off for you. I have a feeling Gholston is going to murder the combine, and BP will take him #1 overall. Just a hunch.

But if he falls to you, you gotta take him. Ppl call him Shawne Merriman, and if thats true, you don't even think twice in getting him. Merriman is to me, the best pass rusher in the league. And we all know you can use that right now.

Thoughts on Trevor Laws? Sounds like a guy who would fit in real well with what the Jets are trying to accomplish both on and off the field.

derza222
01-17-2008, 05:59 PM
If you guys pass up on both Long and Gholston, i'll be pissed off for you. I have a feeling Gholston is going to murder the combine, and BP will take him #1 overall. Just a hunch.

But if he falls to you, you gotta take him. Ppl call him Shawne Merriman, and if thats true, you don't even think twice in getting him. Merriman is to me, the best pass rusher in the league. And we all know you can use that right now.

Thoughts on Trevor Laws? Sounds like a guy who would fit in real well with what the Jets are trying to accomplish both on and off the field.

For some reason I wonder what happens if Harvey blows up the combine. Seems to me that Harvey has more Ware in him and Gholston has more Merriman in him. A lot of drafting comes down to preference, and if I'm correct Parcells had the choice between the two and took Ware. Granted Merriman may have had some character issues but if that's the kind of player he wanted he may go Harvey at the top if they're about even which some (toonster comes to mind) think they are.

That said, if Gholston is there it's tough to pass on him. I have a hunch that given a choice between the two we take Chris Long (I also have a hunch that Chris Long goes #1 to the Phins so I doubt it happens) but I think between Long, Harvey, and Gholston we will have a solid piece to add to our defense. Don't know if there's really any other direction we can go in, I don't see Dorsey. I also don't see CB given we'd be paying them more money than we would be paying Revis and he seems like he's going to be a #1. A little high for a RT or G and we're solid enough at RB that I don't think we take DMC if available, trade down seems more likely as the OL seems to be the problem moreso than the backs. No wideouts worth the pick and we like Clemens so I don't see QB either. So it pretty much comes down to the 3 pass rushers or maybe Kenny Phillips I think he's a great compliment to Rhodes, but don't like the value there.

As far as Laws I definitely like him. Not sure if I like him as an end since he's a little short and might get englufed at the POA by bigger tackles but if he could put on some weight and play the nose that would be fantastic for us. Think he's definitely worth a look. What do you think he'd play in the 3-4?

TimD
01-17-2008, 07:28 PM
If DMac is available, we should definitely trade down.

Crickett
01-17-2008, 08:20 PM
You know, the more I look at it, the more I wonder, should the Jets just trade #6 away? I don't mean trade down, I mean just trade the pick away. Looking at the top of this year's draft, how many of these guys would even be top five or top ten last year? I mean, Levi Brown was taken fifth last year and IIRC, is a right tackle. But Levi Brown by no means the top five lock Jake Long is. Would any of the QB's this year be taken ahead of Brady Quinn at #22? Vernon Gholston is the guy I most want the Jets to take at #6, but is based 100% of need. I question if he is even worth such a high pick and if he really is the next DeMarcus Ware/Shawne Merriman.


The Lions are looking to trade Roy Williams and/or Shaun Rogers. Trading #6 to the Lions for these two (and something extra like a second or a future second) provided long term extensions can be agreed upon seems like it could solve a lot of the Jets problems. Sure it would push Jerricho Cotchery back into the #3 spot, but only for a year or two until Coles decides its time to call it quits or his body decides for him.

nvot9
01-17-2008, 08:40 PM
I've just been doing some research on some possible later rounds (3-7) defensive players that we could potentially draft, and I've noticed something about Red Bryant.

Doest anyone else see him similar to Sean Rogers in every way imaginable?

bigbluedefense
01-17-2008, 08:43 PM
For some reason I wonder what happens if Harvey blows up the combine. Seems to me that Harvey has more Ware in him and Gholston has more Merriman in him. A lot of drafting comes down to preference, and if I'm correct Parcells had the choice between the two and took Ware. Granted Merriman may have had some character issues but if that's the kind of player he wanted he may go Harvey at the top if they're about even which some (toonster comes to mind) think they are.

That said, if Gholston is there it's tough to pass on him. I have a hunch that given a choice between the two we take Chris Long (I also have a hunch that Chris Long goes #1 to the Phins so I doubt it happens) but I think between Long, Harvey, and Gholston we will have a solid piece to add to our defense. Don't know if there's really any other direction we can go in, I don't see Dorsey. I also don't see CB given we'd be paying them more money than we would be paying Revis and he seems like he's going to be a #1. A little high for a RT or G and we're solid enough at RB that I don't think we take DMC if available, trade down seems more likely as the OL seems to be the problem moreso than the backs. No wideouts worth the pick and we like Clemens so I don't see QB either. So it pretty much comes down to the 3 pass rushers or maybe Kenny Phillips I think he's a great compliment to Rhodes, but don't like the value there.

As far as Laws I definitely like him. Not sure if I like him as an end since he's a little short and might get englufed at the POA by bigger tackles but if he could put on some weight and play the nose that would be fantastic for us. Think he's definitely worth a look. What do you think he'd play in the 3-4?

At 6-1, I don't know if he can pack on anymore weight. So Im guessing he has to play End. He'll drop to day 2 im guessing, and at that point in the draft, I think its great value.

Another guy to look at is Dre Moore. But some question his ability to rush the passer.

As for Gholston, I just have a feeling he's gonna wow everyone at the combine the way Mario Williams did. Either way, if him or Long is available to you guys (doubt both will be up for grabs once you pick) i think the pick has to be made for either one.

Ideally, you'd like a playmaker on the dline, but theres no 3-4 Ends worth it in this draft, especially at that pick. Theres no legit NT types either. So I guess the next best thing is to bolster that pass rush with either Gholston, Long, or Harvey. Id prefer Gholston or Long over Harvey at the moment though.

Or trading back is always an option. But its not easy finding a buyer.

Crickett
01-17-2008, 09:06 PM
I've just been doing some research on some possible later rounds (3-7) defensive players that we could potentially draft, and I've noticed something about Red Bryant.

Doest anyone else see him similar to Sean Rogers in every way imaginable?

Except Shaun Rogers is a two time pro bowler and has proven himself at the NFL level. And has about 15 pounds according to their listed weight which I'm sure in the case of Rogers is as accurate as a.... I can't think of an analogy that isn't completely ******** at the moment. The point is, I'm sure Rogers is well north of 340.

thetedginnshow
01-17-2008, 09:16 PM
I don't really see the comparison between the two, but I think Bryant could be a hell of a player.

As for trading away the pick entirely, probably the only possibility would be the Lions, and just about the only way that'd happen would be if they really wanted to get rid of those players and fell in love with McFadden who happened to still be available. I don't really see them doing that, but that'd be a hell of a trade if we could manage it.

I do think, however, that Gholston and Long will go before our pick, and so we should at the very least trade down. Even if say, Gholston, was available at the pick, I wouldn't entirely be opposed to trading down. I just don't think Harvey is on the same level, despite people feeling he's on the same level as Gholston. I don't know. Since I don't think Gholston is quite at Merriman or Ware's level, I don't feel as though Harvey would be all too terribly special at all. Not that either wouldn't be effective, but I hope the point is getting across. Oh well. There's a long way until the draft, so a lot of stuff could happen.

josh07039
01-17-2008, 09:27 PM
I know I'm going to start sounding like a broken record by constantly talking about Rutgers guys, but in terms of later round defense guys with potential for us, Eric Foster comes to mind. He could be an OLB if he gains some muscle while also maintaining or even gaining his speed. If he loses a little weight he could be a good Ilb because he would have no problem getting through bigger blockers because he often had to go up against 2 guys that were much bigger that he is as a tackle in college. At the very least I could see him as a good energy, special teams guys that can also come in in special situations either as a run stuffer at ilb or a pass rushed at olb depending upon where we would want him. As a 3-4 team, we can always use linebackers with versatility. Sorry to keep writing, but additionally, Foster has great character and enthusiasm who could be the type of guy that is a great locker room influence .

derza222
01-17-2008, 09:34 PM
At 6-1, I don't know if he can pack on anymore weight. So Im guessing he has to play End. He'll drop to day 2 im guessing, and at that point in the draft, I think its great value.

Another guy to look at is Dre Moore. But some question his ability to rush the passer.

As for Gholston, I just have a feeling he's gonna wow everyone at the combine the way Mario Williams did. Either way, if him or Long is available to you guys (doubt both will be up for grabs once you pick) i think the pick has to be made for either one.

Ideally, you'd like a playmaker on the dline, but theres no 3-4 Ends worth it in this draft, especially at that pick. Theres no legit NT types either. So I guess the next best thing is to bolster that pass rush with either Gholston, Long, or Harvey. Id prefer Gholston or Long over Harvey at the moment though.

Or trading back is always an option. But its not easy finding a buyer.


Only thing to question about him playing end is whether or not he'll get engulfed at the POA by taller tackles with longer arms. It'll really depend on the combine, if he's got some length or a bit of a frame to put on a few pounds then the pick would make sense. Regardless from a personality standpoint it couldn't hurt day 2. If he plays with good leverage and can bring his weight up to around 310 he could be effective like a Gregg. And he did play end in college so maybe it'll work out. He'd definitely be worth a shot day 2.

Moore's a guy to look at but he has motor questions. I'm not overly concerned about the pass rush issues though because I think we really need some guys that can take up blockers and free the linebackers up, we are very undersized on the DL and I think that really hurts us. Pat Sims could be worth a shot, as could Kendall Langford later. Ahtyaba Rubin seems to be rising up draft boards as a true 3-4 NT so we'll see what happens there. All in all I'm not that optimistic about finding qualith DL talent in this draft, though I think we can improve greatly on the OL this offseason via FA and the draft.

With Gholston I agree he'll blow up but I still think he's a tad overhyped at the moment. He should be worth it at #6 come draft day but the #1 or #2 talk seems a little excessive to me, especially at this point. I like Long a lot and if he can do some things at the combine in agility drills and LB drills I'd be very intrigued by his potential as an OLB. At this point it's probably a toss up but I think I might go with the more polished Long even though he's switching positions as well, just seems like better value. Harvey isn't in that #6 range right now but I think if Gholston/Long are gone and we don't have a buyer on a trade up he becomes somebody worth considering. I don't think we'll have an easy time trying to find a trade down partner since the most likely guy people will want that would be on the board is DMC and they could have the mentality that they could just get a back later. If those Gholston/Long are off the board it really gets tricky, I hope it doesn't happen but it'll be interesting to see what the FO does from there.

BroadwayJoe10
01-17-2008, 09:46 PM
If you guys pass up on both Long and Gholston, i'll be pissed off for you. I have a feeling Gholston is going to murder the combine, and BP will take him #1 overall. Just a hunch.

But if he falls to you, you gotta take him. Ppl call him Shawne Merriman, and if thats true, you don't even think twice in getting him. Merriman is to me, the best pass rusher in the league. And we all know you can use that right now.

Thoughts on Trevor Laws? Sounds like a guy who would fit in real well with what the Jets are trying to accomplish both on and off the field.

Definately agree that merriman is the best pass rusher in the league right now and i definately do see him in gholston, but i also like harvey quite a bit. The 34 will mask his flaws in the running game and is a better pure pass rusher than gholston, according to some. Who do you think is going to have a bigger impact, gholston or harvey? I think harvey would if he's on our defense compared to gholston on the fins because i beleive our team is closer to being a unit than the fins...i also feel that gholston would have more of an impact on the jets than harvey on fins. Basically, do you feel gholstons impact would be that much greater on the defense as a whole compared to harveys???

Also, how do you feel about jonathan goff as a 34 ILB, I've got him as a low 4th rounder at best right now? He a good fit and is that good value for him?

derza222
01-17-2008, 10:09 PM
I'm definitely a fan of Goff as an ILB. I've seen some 2nd/3rd talk for him but it seems that's died down. If we could get him in the 4th or 5th somehow I think it'd be a fantastic pick, I'd be all for it.

josh07039
01-17-2008, 10:09 PM
I think that Gholston and harvey could have comparable impact to our defense, however, at this moment, harvey is not good value at 6. This could all change with the combine of course. What really sold me on Gholston is his performances against top O-lnema. Additionally, arent there questions about harvey's motor? i have never watched harvey specifically so I don't know.

GET LOOSE
01-17-2008, 10:11 PM
This is the problem with getting too attached to a player, you are unable to see his weaknesses and the fact that he would be better suited somewheres else. I love penny, but I understand that he would better be with a different team and I will still be a fan of his. As a jets fan you have to realize what is best for the team and I am afraid that if he has a poor year he obviously isn't going to be resigned and than we get nothing and he ends up on a different team anyways. We'll see what happens, but if he doesn't come back muscled up I don't see him having a good year.

i see what your saying but Vilma is not only my favorite player because he is on the jets..he has been my favorite player scince college and when he was drafted to my favorite team i was in shock..but anyway he can be a monster Lb in the 3-4 if we can just get a big NT...thats why i think we are giving up to easily on vilma...our defensive leader just needs one more player to become dominate again but we basicly just say owell forget him...Vilma will be his old self again if we can get that 1 NT

BroadwayJoe10
01-17-2008, 10:24 PM
i see what your saying but Vilma is not only my favorite player because he is on the jets..he has been my favorite player scince college and when he was drafted to my favorite team i was in shock..but anyway he can be a monster Lb in the 3-4 if we can just get a big NT...thats why i think we are giving up to easily on vilma...our defensive leader just needs one more player to become dominate again but we basicly just say owell forget him...Vilma will be his old self again if we can get that 1 NT

But that one NT is so extremely hard to find, if we can get Shaun Rogers than i'm all for keeping him, but i just feel that if he plays this year and struggles he is going to be gone on his own and then we get nothing in return.

GET LOOSE
01-17-2008, 10:33 PM
but he has never really struggled...sure in 06 his tackles were not as high but still was the team leader in tackles with 115....and i think we can find a NT in many places...pat williams for coles and penny would be a great trade...viks need a wr and a qb and they have kevin williams at dt so i think they would be willing to give him up if we made that offer..just something to think about...i would love that trade

Crickett
01-17-2008, 10:41 PM
but he has never really struggled...sure in 06 his tackles were not as high but still was the team leader in tackles with 115....and i think we can find a NT in many places...pat williams for coles and penny would be a great trade...viks need a wr and a qb and they have kevin williams at dt so i think they would be willing to give him up if we made that offer..just something to think about...i would love that trade


I disagree. It would close one huge hole the Jets have for a year, two at the most while opening another one at wide receiver. Take it from someone who selected Pat Williams in an all time mock draft, trading your team's #1 WR for a 35 year old defensive tackle is never a good idea.

GET LOOSE
01-17-2008, 10:52 PM
well its the same with coles though...1 more year and his done so it really does make sense

BroadwayJoe10
01-17-2008, 10:55 PM
but he has never really struggled...sure in 06 his tackles were not as high but still was the team leader in tackles with 115....and i think we can find a NT in many places...pat williams for coles and penny would be a great trade...viks need a wr and a qb and they have kevin williams at dt so i think they would be willing to give him up if we made that offer..just something to think about...i would love that trade

But the 116 tackles could mean that he's getting pushed back by the interior lineman and bringing the ball carrier down past the first down marker. I watched his play and it dramatically dropped off when he was playing in the 34; hell vilma is too small to play in the 43 as a mlb but he can do so well because of his athleticism and speed. He is just flat out too small and weak to play in the 34 and it sucks, but it's the truth.

I will admit that if we can somehow work a trade for Shaun Rogers than he is worth giving another chance, but if not than i think he is just wasting his talent in this system and he'll be gone next year anyways.

Crickett
01-17-2008, 10:56 PM
well its the same with coles though...1 more year and his done so it really does make sense

But at the end of the day, you're left with the same problem, only at a different position. So to me, it doesn't make sense to ship Coles out.

GET LOOSE
01-17-2008, 11:00 PM
i understand what you mean but NT is a bigger need because atleast we still will have Cotchery and some other guys like brade smith and stucki who can make plays...i feel that NT is one of the biggest resons we are losing so much..not the only one but its huge...but no matter what we do i think it will be 2-3 more years until we are a great team again

BroadwayJoe10
01-17-2008, 11:07 PM
i understand what you mean but NT is a bigger need because atleast we still will have Cotchery and some other guys like brade smith and stucki who can make plays...i feel that NT is one of the biggest resons we are losing so much..not the only one but its huge...but no matter what we do i think it will be 2-3 more years until we are a great team again

NT is most definately the biggest need, but the problem is there isn't anyone we can really grab who can have that type of impact this year, especially a big enough impact to warrant keeping vilma, in my opinion. I think the shaun rogers trade is definately realistic, becuase he has been rumored to be on the outs with millen, but i dont see it happening because it seems to make too sense.

thetedginnshow
01-17-2008, 11:08 PM
In essence, we have several holes that cannot be satisfied with the few picks we currently have. So, hopefully we'll be doing some talking.

GET LOOSE
01-17-2008, 11:14 PM
a NT and a pass rusher would make us a top 10 D....and if clemens get protection our offense will be very good as well..i think we are a couple of playmakers away from being SB contenders

Crickett
01-17-2008, 11:17 PM
i understand what you mean but NT is a bigger need because atleast we still will have Cotchery and some other guys like brade smith and stucki who can make plays...i feel that NT is one of the biggest resons we are losing so much..not the only one but its huge...but no matter what we do i think it will be 2-3 more years until we are a great team again

I'm not sure NT is a bigger need than WR would be without Coles. Sure the Jets would have Cotchery, but Cotchery floundered this year when Coles was out IMO and I'm not sure Brad Smith has a future at the WR position in the NFL. He seemed to drop passes thrown his way just as often as McCareins. At NT, the Jets have Pouha. Yeah, I don't think he's the answer at NT, but I don't think Cotchery is a #1 and I think if the Jets traded Coles without a high quality replacement, the Jets WR corps could be the worst in the NFL next year talent wise.

thetedginnshow
01-18-2008, 04:48 PM
Alright. Here's my mock. Without doing anything in FA, I'd feel as though we'd need to trade some picks. Also, I still feel there's a very strong chance both Long and Gholston will be gone, alongside the fact that I'm not as high on Harvey as many people here (and on other Jets forums) are. So I'd have us trading our first for the Cardinals' first and second, giving us adequate compensation and putting us at a solid spot at 16, while allowing the Cards to get a top-notch player they need (at DB, LB, or possibly even Run DMC).

Round One - Gosder Cherilus, OT, Boston College - It might be a significant reach, but I don't think it matters so long as you're getting your guy. Beyond Long and possibly Otah, he's the only OT I like in the class. He just isn't built to be a LT, but he's a franchise RT. He's been talked up enough on here so I probably don't have to say much, but I think he'd be a perfect fit for this offense.
Round Two - Shawn Crable, OLB, Michigan - I'm not sure if he's been talked about at all, but next to Gholston, I think he's the next best option at OLB. He, unlike most other prospects for the position, actually played LB in college, and definitely has the lateral movement and the hips to do just fine in coverage. Beyond that, he's a fantastic pass rusher, and this is a position that was absolutely made for him. He, along with Cherilus, has a mean streak that I've come to love in a player.
Round Two - Ahtyba Rubin, NT, Iowa State - Word is he's quickly rising up draft boards as a stud pure NT prospect. Unlike Okam or Bryant who may be too tall and play too high for the position, Rubin's a comfortable 6'3" (probably shorter) and somewhere around 330 lbs. He's a converted O-lineman, so he is raw for the position. However, he definitely has the size and talent, as well as the motor, to excel quite nicely in our scheme.
Round Three - Branden Albert, OG, Virginia - To me, unless you count Clady, he's the only Guard prospect really worth anything. Though they only played together for a year, lining him up next to D'Brick could do wonders for the both of them. At the very least, he'd be a young upgrade over what we currently have.
Round Four - Jermichael Finley, TE, Texas - From what I've been told, unless you're some kind of athlete and were highly productive on the field, Redshirt Sophomores don't go that high. So, with the talented TE class coming in, I think he'll be the last of the top prospects to be taken, and as I can't imagine a giant rush for them, I think he could get down here. Not much of a blocker, but the man is a talented pass-catcher that could really stretch the field. Plus, I think a receiving TE is a young QB's best friend, so this would be a good way to go.
Round Five - Jason Rivers, WR, Hawaii - He probably won't go this low if he impresses enough at the Shrine Game, but he may. That might have been the Hula Bowl, but I remember Colston tearing it up and he still went in the 7th. Rivers has deceptive speed, he's decently sized, and is very physical. He basically has everything I'd like in a receiver for us, so I think he'd be a good addition to the corp. I would have put Bess here, but I think we need some taller receivers on the team.
Round Six - Eric Wicks, S, West Virginia - Extremely versatile, and I think he could actually start next to Rhodes. He does a little of everything, and if we gave him the freedom to roam around, I think he could be real successful.
Round Seven - De'Cody Fa*gg, WR, Florida State - Unfortunately for him he had to deal with horrible QB play, but he's a talented receiver. A poor man's Anquan Boldin that, again, would be the sort of receiver I'd like for us to bring in.

Probably the least sexy draft in a while, but I think it'd really help. Tell me what you think.

Crickett
01-18-2008, 08:30 PM
Alright. Here's my mock. Without doing anything in FA, I'd feel as though we'd need to trade some picks. Also, I still feel there's a very strong chance both Long and Gholston will be gone, alongside the fact that I'm not as high on Harvey as many people here (and on other Jets forums) are. So I'd have us trading our first for the Cardinals' first and second, giving us adequate compensation and putting us at a solid spot at 16, while allowing the Cards to get a top-notch player they need (at DB, LB, or possibly even Run DMC).

I don't figure the Cardinals are going to be looking to trade up. Sure they need secondary help, but I think they are going to be looking to target an offensive tackle in the second round to play across from Levi Brown.


Round Two - Ahtyba Rubin, NT, Iowa State - Word is he's quickly rising up draft boards as a stud pure NT prospect. Unlike Okam or Bryant who may be too tall and play too high for the position, Rubin's a comfortable 6'3" (probably shorter) and somewhere around 330 lbs. He's a converted O-lineman, so he is raw for the position. However, he definitely has the size and talent, as well as the motor, to excel quite nicely in our scheme.

The way you're talking about him, I'm not convinced he's a good fit or a good value in the second round. The Jets can't afford to draft a guy in the second round who might develop into a starter somewhere along the line. Thats what day two is for.

thetedginnshow
01-18-2008, 08:36 PM
I don't figure the Cardinals are going to be looking to trade up. Sure they need secondary help, but I think they are going to be looking to target an offensive tackle in the second round to play across from Levi Brown.

Well I wouldn't rule it out, but I was just trading our pick with a team in the range where, according to that draft pick value chart, it'd be fair to ask for a first and second rounder.

The way you're talking about him, I'm not convinced he's a good fit or a good value in the second round. The Jets can't afford to draft a guy in the second round who might develop into a starter somewhere along the line. Thats what day two is for.

I should have added the rest of what I was going to say then, it seems. I'd say he's raw for the position like, say, Tamba Hali was at DE. He did quite well this past season and could certainly be a starter from day one. The point was just that he had room to grow as he hasn't reached his potential yet.

GET LOOSE
01-18-2008, 10:06 PM
i love Ruben and think the jets should definitly get him...but about your draft i would be sort of happy if this happened...i dont feel Cherilus is a 1st rounder more of a 2nd and i really think that draft would not would give us any star player...solid players yes but i think we need a star in this draft...like Revis last year

nvot9
01-22-2008, 02:35 PM
Ok, here are just a few of my opinions about the Jets draft based on the senior bowl thus far, some things I've read and observed, and just personal opinion...take it all with a grain of salt though...

First off, I really see this draft as being used to shore up our defense and the offensive line. I think the FO is gunna draft players they fall in love with and feel fit the need rather than worry about value and whether it's a reach or not, I truly believe that if they like a guy, they'll draft him. And also we've seen their ability and willingness to make trades, so even though that kinda contradicts what I just said, look out for mid round trades as well.

That being said, I think our number one pick is clearly Vernon Gholston. It's my honest opinion that it won't matter what trades are open, who's available, anything else, I think he's the guy our FO covets most. We could have the number 1 overall pick and still take Gholston, I truly believe that. In addition, depending on how he times, I think Chris Long might be off our radar a little bit. I think the combine will make or break him as a Jet (assuming he's available by our pick, which I don't think he will be). I think if he shows that he's athletic enough, the Jets would look at him as an Adalius Thomas like player, moving him outside to rush and inside to stuff the run.....as a LB that is, not a 3-4 DE. However, if he doesn't show he's athletic enough to do so, and Gholston's gone, I can see them just straight up taking Harvey...not even trading down.

As far as the other rounds go, I feel there's a few guys the Jets might target. I think Trevor Laws is a huge guy who should be on our radar. With such a good weigh in that he had and the way he's playing, I think he easily slips into the late end of the second round right now (probably higher at this point), but don't be surprised if they nab him with our early second round pick, he's a kinda guy coaches fall in love with, he's got top notch intangibles and I can see him shooting up draft boards for 3-4 teams. I don't see them addressing the NT position as much, considering the A) lack of talent, and B) emergence of Pouha. The way Mangini's been raving about him, I think he values him over any potential 3-4 NT prospect we could pick up in the draft (which I agree with) and might not wanna waste a pick on that. I also think they're going to do all they can to get Gosder (depending on how FA goes), but I think his stock (at this point) might be too high and might require too much, maybe entailing a trade up into the first round which they might not be willing to do.

And now for my rough mock...

First Round
1) Chris Long
2) Sedrick Ellis
3) Matt Ryan
4) Glenn Dorsey
5) Jake Long
6) We forgo the opportunity to trade with a team coveting Dmac, and take VERNON GHOLSTON

Second Round
36) Carl Nicks - I could see him not being here to be honest, and I can see Jeff Otah being here instead come draft day, but at this point at least that's not likely.

TRADE - Bengals receive Jonathan Vilma and Jets receive 2nd round, 46th overall pick + Domata Peko

46) Trevor Laws

That's it for now...

thetedginnshow
01-22-2008, 05:58 PM
This emergence of Ellis might be the best thing that could happen to us. Obviously we'd need the two DTs to go before our pick, but I could easily see that happening. Of course, in the event that that doesn't happen and Gholston is taken before our pick along with the Long's and we couldn't trade down, would anyone be opposed to taking Cherilus? His stock is rising at a ridiculous rate through two days of practice, and if he ends up continuing to destroy people, he very well might be taken as the first OT off the board, or at least be in contention. So what would people think about that?

As for Gholston, I'd pretty much never want to move him inside as 1) he's not that great against the run, and 2) that'd be a complete waste. I know it'd be a sub-package thing, but that doesn't seem to make sense ever. But I wouldn't be opposed to grabbing Gholston at all. Of course, while I think some here may overrate some of his characteristics a tad, I think he's far superior to Harvey. People seem to view them as 1a and 1b in a way, and I just don't see as much ability in Harvey. He'd have to show me something at some point that would put him in Gholston's category, and more than just numbers. Right now, I see Harvey as a worse than Kamerion Wimbley and better than Jarvis Moss, and Gholston around the range of Wimbley. But we'll see.

As for Laws, I might have misread, but didn't he come to the Senior Bowl weighing around 300 lbs.? Because, at least in my book, that's not that good.

gio
01-22-2008, 07:50 PM
This emergence of Ellis might be the best thing that could happen to us. Obviously we'd need the two DTs to go before our pick, but I could easily see that happening. Of course, in the event that that doesn't happen and Gholston is taken before our pick along with the Long's and we couldn't trade down, would anyone be opposed to taking Cherilus? His stock is rising at a ridiculous rate through two days of practice, and if he ends up continuing to destroy people, he very well might be taken as the first OT off the board, or at least be in contention. So what would people think about that?

As for Gholston, I'd pretty much never want to move him inside as 1) he's not that great against the run, and 2) that'd be a complete waste. I know it'd be a sub-package thing, but that doesn't seem to make sense ever. But I wouldn't be opposed to grabbing Gholston at all. Of course, while I think some here may overrate some of his characteristics a tad, I think he's far superior to Harvey. People seem to view them as 1a and 1b in a way, and I just don't see as much ability in Harvey. He'd have to show me something at some point that would put him in Gholston's category, and more than just numbers. Right now, I see Harvey as a worse than Kamerion Wimbley and better than Jarvis Moss, and Gholston around the range of Wimbley. But we'll see.

As for Laws, I might have misread, but didn't he come to the Senior Bowl weighing around 300 lbs.? Because, at least in my book, that's not that good.

if gholston, long, and long are gone, then we should def. trade our pick with a player or 2nd or 3rd attached, and go for sweed. i said it before and i think coles is nearing the end, either with the team or his career in general..he is def. above average, but he gets his ass kicked every week-not his fault of course, just had a qb who would hang him up to dry for d-backs. cotchery isnt good enough by himself for a team to respect a passing game. hey maybe we can pull something off with detroit..give us thier pick and rodgers and take our 6..OR to hell with drafting a WR..rumor has it roy williams wants out..take our 6 and vilma, give us your 15 and williams..not a bad idea.

BroadwayJoe10
01-22-2008, 07:56 PM
I think you might be jumping the gun here on Gosder Cherilus; yes he is having a good senior bowl so far but he is still viewed primarily as a RT and if he is going to be considered as a LT he will still be far behind Long, Clady and Otah in my opinion. I've watched him on the nfl network last couple days and he has dominated in drills, but i still dont see him being taken as the first OT and if he is than that means one of the other guys will fall. THe bottom line is we are drafting a RT not a LT and i just don't like the value of a RT at 6th overall especially when theres guys like richardson, williams, nicks and such later. I know your scenario that you brought up earlier about if long, long, mcfadden, gholston and ryan were gone who would we take? But i think the play of ellis may warrant him being taken before us, which will benefit us, but i really don't see us going OT with our pick.

derza222
01-23-2008, 11:42 AM
Just checked out the Player/Team observations from yesterday and it looks like we were talking to Matt Forte, DeJuan Tribble, and Gosder Cherilus. It's almost too bad Cherilus has been so dominant at RT or he would have been a great pick for us in the second. Tribble doesn't have great speed, I think he'd be good in a zone but I'm not sure I like him in man and with Revis we almost have to run man. However he does have good ball skills so if teams try to pick on him he could make some big plays, maybe we like him as a #2 or #3. Forte I think would've been a great pick prior to this week in the 4th or 5th if he was there because he's a big back and we could use one but it seems like he's flying up boards and will probably go earlier than we'll take him.

Also Rubin has been added to one of the squads so his progress should be interesting.

Finally it will be interesting to see if we believe Sed Ellis can play NT for us, I think with his strength and technique he could pull it off if he put on around 15 lbs but I'm not sure he has the frame to do so and I also don't think he'd have the same value at NT as he would at three technique where he could rush the passer so I don't know if we'd take him top 10. Certainly is a big need though and he isn't too tall and has a great motor so it's worth considering at the very least, it'll be interesting to see what the team thinks. That said, he may be off the board by the time we pick.

BroadwayJoe10
01-23-2008, 12:46 PM
I was happy to see us looking at cherilus, but i really just don't see him being there for us in the top of the second anymore.

I did just read that the lions will shop rogers and if they can't find anything for him that he could possibly be released. I know he doesn't have the greatest character etc. etc. but I would like the jets to atleast look at him. I know getting him is proably not going to happen, becuase im sure other teams will want him to, but it just seems he would be a great fit on our team. I think rogers could play the running downs and if he still can't play 3 downs, than i do like pouhas play and he could be in on passing downs possibly, who knows. I would love the platoon of rogers and pouha.

St. Petersburg Times writer Rick Stroud reported on ESPN's First Take that the Lions will look to trade Shaun Rogers. The Detroit Free Press has confirmed via a source that Rogers will not be brought back in 2008.
Rogers can be a dominant force inside, but the Lions are clearly frustrated by his failure to stay consistently productive and in shape. If the Lions can't deal him, Rogers is expected to be released. Detroit should be able to get a first-day pick for the 28-year-old, but probably not a first-rounder. Jan. 23 - 11:06 am et

Crickett
01-23-2008, 01:19 PM
I was happy to see us looking at cherilus, but i really just don't see him being there for us in the top of the second anymore.

I did just read that the lions will shop rogers and if they can't find anything for him that he could possibly be released. I know he doesn't have the greatest character etc. etc. but I would like the jets to atleast look at him. I know getting him is proably not going to happen, becuase im sure other teams will want him to, but it just seems he would be a great fit on our team. I think rogers could play the running downs and if he still can't play 3 downs, than i do like pouhas play and he could be in on passing downs possibly, who knows. I would love the platoon of rogers and pouha.

St. Petersburg Times writer Rick Stroud reported on ESPN's First Take that the Lions will look to trade Shaun Rogers. The Detroit Free Press has confirmed via a source that Rogers will not be brought back in 2008.
Rogers can be a dominant force inside, but the Lions are clearly frustrated by his failure to stay consistently productive and in shape. If the Lions can't deal him, Rogers is expected to be released. Detroit should be able to get a first-day pick for the 28-year-old, but probably not a first-rounder. Jan. 23 - 11:06 am et


I would love to see a platoon of Rogers and Pouha too. And remember why the Patriots got 375 lb overweight, out of shape, lazy, over the hill nose tackle by the name of Ted Washington for a fourth rounder in 2003. In the 3-4, he was a presence and a big (no pun intended) reason the Pats got their second SB ring. And IMO, Shaun Rogers would be that presence for the Jets. If he could be had cheap as they are saying, a trade for Rogers is an absolute must.

thetedginnshow
01-23-2008, 05:22 PM
I think you might be jumping the gun here on Gosder Cherilus; yes he is having a good senior bowl so far but he is still viewed primarily as a RT and if he is going to be considered as a LT he will still be far behind Long, Clady and Otah in my opinion. I've watched him on the nfl network last couple days and he has dominated in drills, but i still dont see him being taken as the first OT and if he is than that means one of the other guys will fall. THe bottom line is we are drafting a RT not a LT and i just don't like the value of a RT at 6th overall especially when theres guys like richardson, williams, nicks and such later. I know your scenario that you brought up earlier about if long, long, mcfadden, gholston and ryan were gone who would we take? But i think the play of ellis may warrant him being taken before us, which will benefit us, but i really don't see us going OT with our pick.

Well, if Cherilus were to continue this all week and then continue to put up impressive numbers at the combine, I wouldn't see any reason why his stock wouldn't rise tremendously, no matter what he's being viewed at. It was all hypothetical, but Long's the only draft-eligible Tackle I've seen this year that's more impressive. And I know you were just throwing names out there, but I'd be awfully sad if we drafted Richardson in the first three rounds.

The development of Ellis will be interesting though. If he can put on a solid fifteen more pounds, he could be ideal for us. Of course, if that were to happen, he'd probably be taken over Dorsey and we'd still be in that predicament.

And Rogers doesn't really have character issues. He just has issues staying in shape, and I'm sure Mangini could remedy that. If we could get a bargain on him, that'd be a hell of a pick-up.

nvot9
01-23-2008, 05:37 PM
Well, if Cherilus were to continue this all week and then continue to put up impressive numbers at the combine, I wouldn't see any reason why his stock wouldn't rise tremendously, no matter what he's being viewed at. It was all hypothetical, but Long's the only draft-eligible Tackle I've seen this year that's more impressive. And I know you were just throwing names out there, but I'd be awfully sad if we drafted Richardson in the first three rounds.

The development of Ellis will be interesting though. If he can put on a solid fifteen more pounds, he could be ideal for us. Of course, if that were to happen, he'd probably be taken over Dorsey and we'd still be in that predicament.

And Rogers doesn't really have character issues. He just has issues staying in shape, and I'm sure Mangini could remedy that. If we could get a bargain on him, that'd be a hell of a pick-up.

Big NO to Cherlius at 6 overall. That's just absurd. I would not even take Jake Long at 6 overall, I'm shocked to see GC ranked there by you. No offensive linemen for the Jets round 1 unless they get an additional pick. First round OT's do not have a tendency to pan out accordingly.

No Ellis either. Despite his size, he's still a prototypical 3 technique DT, NOT, absolutely NOT an NT, regardless of his weight.

Lets talk coaches for a minute though, any idea what's gunna happen with Sutton? I hear he may be retiring. Who are we looking at/who's availible to replace him? Do we have a realistic shot in hell to get Rex Ryan, I kinda doubt it..? Also, who's gunna be our ST coach?

BroadwayJoe10
01-23-2008, 05:47 PM
The character concerns with rogers i was referring to was his suspension due to roids/dietary suplement, another offense and he gets 8 games.

Anyways, cherilus has a bit of concerns as well; he had problems with controlling his anger through college and he was the one who got in a fight today during the pit drill. He actually took a swing at sed ellis too who was trying to break up the fight. I happen to actually like that in a player, but i dont like that its a recurring thing with him. He also struggled a bit in his workouts today.

Barry richardson looked a lot better today in workouts and right now i would take him easily in the third round, he has all the tools and if he could tap into his potential at all the sky is the limit.


I think the chances of us getting ryan is actually decent. A lot of the head coaching jobs are getting filled up and i dont see him going back to the ravens. He was fired, so he isn't under contract encase that was anyones question. Also, i have been tired of hearing that there aren't any connections with him and mangini so it won't happen; i am very tired of teams limiting themselves to only coaches they know. Mangini showed he needed someone to help the oline and went out and got one of the best guys for the job even though he didn't know him. I will say that he is a great DC, but i don't know how i feel about having a DC for one year and then leaving again for a head coaching job.

BroadwayJoe10
01-23-2008, 11:50 PM
I wish there was a way that we could go back and see the players that we interviewed/looked at last seniorbowl..It seems we are the only team that has looked at Rubin so far, which i like to see. That could lead to the possiblity of drob getting moved but who knows.

I also like us looking at D.R Cromartie, but his value seems to be skyrocketing.


Edit: From what scott said it was eric mangini who was there, so I have a feeling he was the one talking to the players, which i get the feeling of the seniors we like the NT, CB and OL positions. There were other players, but besides a running back im not sure who Mike Ruckerer was or if that was just a typo.

hcbrad08
01-24-2008, 09:00 AM
I wish we could use that as a barometer too... so we can see how much to read into these contacts.

My family friend who is a scout for an NFL team at the senior bowl (he told me not to talk about this but if I do i shouldn't mention which team specifically... it's in the NFC anyway) works directly under the director of NFL scouting and said Matt Forte is gonna jump up a lot of boards and could be a similar steal like Frank Gore (no guarantees on 45% of a teams offense but similar in production 1000+ dependability) He said if he runs well and his physicals come back okay he could be a 2nd rd. (i think late) but considering Wright had the Jets looking at him I think it's a good sign...even if we don't take him it shows Mangini and our FO can identify talent.

I wish I could call this guy every day...apparently this is the busiest time of the year for him....I wonder why hmmmmm OH YEA...Draft time baby. I love it.

derza222
01-24-2008, 11:18 AM
I checked out the rosters and the only Rucker on either was Martin Rucker the tight end, so maybe that's who we're looking at. Regardless glad we spoke with Rubin and Rodgers-Cromartie. Rubin's definitely worth a look and Rodgers-Cromartie is talented but if he's somehow there early second could be worth a look. I think talking to some of these guys that could go in the first points to a possible trade down, but maybe thats just me. Regardless I'm psyched for the draft.

BroadwayJoe10
01-24-2008, 02:10 PM
I wish we could use that as a barometer too... so we can see how much to read into these contacts.

My family friend who is a scout for an NFL team at the senior bowl (he told me not to talk about this but if I do i shouldn't mention which team specifically... it's in the NFC anyway) works directly under the director of NFL scouting and said Matt Forte is gonna jump up a lot of boards and could be a similar steal like Frank Gore (no guarantees on 45% of a teams offense but similar in production 1000+ dependability) He said if he runs well and his physicals come back okay he could be a 2nd rd. (i think late) but considering Wright had the Jets looking at him I think it's a good sign...even if we don't take him it shows Mangini and our FO can identify talent.

I wish I could call this guy every day...apparently this is the busiest time of the year for him....I wonder why hmmmmm OH YEA...Draft time baby. I love it.



It would be a good barometer, oh well. Anyways, with Forte, D.R Cromartie, Cherilus etc. it does seem that mangini and the rest are good at scouting talent and knowing what they want. I am real excited about this years draft and all of the possibilities that we have.

thetedginnshow
01-24-2008, 04:08 PM
Going back to the Rogers thing, I hope we aren't counting his past suspension against him beyond the fact that there would be a possibility of him getting suspended in the future for something (though seemingly unlikely), considering what he got suspended for.

But this draft is going to be a crazy one. They definitely haven't made it easy on themselves, but I'm sure they'll make something out of it. Work in free agency will be absolutely crucial though, unless they're going to master the draft. And of course, getting Ryan wouldn't hurt, though that'd be near impossible unless he has ties here considering the Redskins are interested in him.

GET LOOSE
01-24-2008, 11:58 PM
To me Ruben is a must have...if we can get him in the 3rd or 4th then we better take him...D.R. Cromartie will be a good CB in the nfl and i like the fact that we looked at him as well because besides from Revis our CBs suck...cheralius in the 2nd would be a great pick and if we get an additional pick in the late 1st it will also be good but as for trading down i would rather stay were we are if guys like Gholston or Long are still their.....and as for Suan Rodgers i heard the same thing that the Lions will deal him or release him so if we can get him in the FA that would be AMAZING...but as far as trade i dont want to give them to much for a guy who we dont know what were getting

TimD
01-25-2008, 09:11 AM
Here is how I'm hoping this off season goes down.

Hopefully we can pick up Rogers in FA. We should also address the LG in FA, because I think it'd be better to put a veteran between Mangold and D'Brick then a rookie. With those two positions secured, we should all have our fingers crossed for Gholston with the first. Then with the second Cheralius would be awesome. In the rest of the draft we'd need to focus on DB, WR, FB, and more OL.

GET LOOSE
01-25-2008, 07:47 PM
Here is how I'm hoping this off season goes down.

Hopefully we can pick up Rogers in FA. We should also address the LG in FA, because I think it'd be better to put a veteran between Mangold and D'Brick then a rookie. With those two positions secured, we should all have our fingers crossed for Gholston with the first. Then with the second Cheralius would be awesome. In the rest of the draft we'd need to focus on DB, WR, FB, and more OL.

yea i would rather get vetarens on the o-line to make D'Brick and Mangold better...as far as other moves we can make Rodgers is a guy we definitly should attempt to get...another WR would definitly help out Clemens and make our offense alot better...so NT, WR, CB, and OLB are the positions we must go after in FA and the draft

derza222
01-27-2008, 11:17 AM
Got bored and wanted to get some talk going, so I dunno if this is going to work but I still wanted to throw it out there and see what happened. Who are two, maybe three of your favorite non-first round prospects for us at each position? I figure we can eliminate center and though lots of other positions may not be big needs it's worth discussing anyway. Here's mine:

QB- Josh Johnson (San Diego), Dennis Dixon (Oregon)

RB- Matt Forte (Tulane), Cory Boyd (South Carolina)

FB- Owen Schmitt (West Virginia), Peyton Hillis (Arkansas)

WR- Donnie Avery (Houston), James Hardy (Indiana), Adarius Bowman (Oklahoma State)

TE- Jermichael Finley (Texas), Brat Cottam (Tennessee)

OT- Carl Nicks (Nebraska), Chris Williams (Vanderbilt), Heath Benedict (Newberry)

OG- Branden Albert (Virginia), Roy Scheuning (Oregon State)

NT- Ahtyba Rubin (Iowa State), Frank Morton (Tulane)

DE- Pat Sims (Auburn), Dre Moore (Maryland), Maurice Murray (New Mexico)

ILB- Ezra Butler (Nevada), Erin Henderson (Maryland), Beau Bell (UNLV)

OLB- Shawn Crable (Michigan), Chris Ellis (Virginia Tech), Ezra Butler (Nevada)

CB- Antoine Cason (Arizona), Trae Williams (South Florida), DeJuan Tribble (Boston College)

S- DJ Wolfe (Oklahoma), DaJuan Morgan (NC State)

I have some borderline round 1 guys I know.

First rounders I think would fit well: Vernon Gholston (Ohio State), Derrick Harvey (Florida), Sedrick Ellis (USC), Jeff Otah (Pittsburgh), Gosder Cherilus (Boston College), Kenny Phillips (Miami) (not a guy I really want to pick based on other needs but I think a solid guy who is good in coverage and a sure tackler would be great next to Rhodes to let him roam so he'd be a good fit), Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie (Tennessee State), Aqib Talib (Kansas) (I know he's borderline but a consensus first rounder), Jonathan Stewart (Oregon) (similar deal to Phillips, nice fit but not a big need), Jake Long (Michigan) (great fit, too high), and Malcom Kelly (Oklahoma).

GET LOOSE
01-27-2008, 11:52 AM
ummm ok let me see

QB...Colt Brennen, Josh Johnson
HB...Felix Jones, Kevin Smith
WR..Adarius Bowman, James Hardy, Earl Bennett, Marcus Smith or Adrian Arrington
TE...i really like baker and think he could be better if we use him more but i like Martin Rucker and Jermichael Finley

im gonna skip o-line because i dont really want to draft a rookie i would rather go their in FA

DE..Quentin Groves, Phillip Merling, Kendall Langford and Marcus Dixon
NT...one name AHTYBA RUBIN..hes a must get
OLB..Shawn Crabel, Tavares Gooden, Beau Bell, and Philip Wheeler
ILB... if we draft an ILB i will be very mad cause we def dont need one but J Leman looks good
CB...Jack Ikegwuonu, Tracy Proter and ofcourse D.R. Cromartie who we def sould try and get
S...were preatty solid at safty but Dominique Barber and Joe feilds are guys i think will be going 6th or 7th round or might go undrafted and i really like these guys

guys would think we really must get....Ahtyba Rubin...D.R. Cromartie, Adarius Bowman and Kendall Langford

BroadwayJoe10
01-27-2008, 12:51 PM
ummm ok let me see

QB...Colt Brennen, Josh Johnson
HB...Felix Jones, Kevin Smith
WR..Adarius Bowman, James Hardy, Earl Bennett, Marcus Smith or Adrian Arrington
TE...i really like baker and think he could be better if we use him more but i like Martin Rucker and Jermichael Finley

im gonna skip o-line because i dont really want to draft a rookie i would rather go their in FA

DE..Quentin Groves, Phillip Merling, Kendall Langford and Marcus Dixon
NT...one name AHTYBA RUBIN..hes a must get
OLB..Shawn Crabel, Tavares Gooden, Beau Bell, and Philip Wheeler
ILB... if we draft an ILB i will be very mad cause we def dont need one but J Leman looks good
CB...Jack Ikegwuonu, Tracy Proter and ofcourse D.R. Cromartie who we def sould try and get
S...were preatty solid at safty but Dominique Barber and Joe feilds are guys i think will be going 6th or 7th round or might go undrafted and i really like these guys

guys would think we really must get....Ahtyba Rubin...D.R. Cromartie, Adarius Bowman and Kendall Langford

I like most of the picks, but the guys i highlighted I beleive will be going in the first; i could be wrong so its not a big deal, good choices.

I highlighted the Oline part, because i don't think you should build a oline strictly through FA. If you have a chance to get a great RT or LG in the draft at good value than that should be the pick, it doesn't make sense to limit yourself going into the draft. I do agree that we should focus on guys in FA, but if we can't get the guys we want we have to look towards the draft.

I love DRC, but i feel after the unreal week he had he may be a first rounder now, but ya never know.

I used to like Kendal, however he weighed in at 275, which is far too light to play our 34DE. I think guys a loong the lines of Red Bryan, Dre moore and possibly Trevor laws would be a better look there.

I do like the idea of bowman and possibly limas sweed falling in the later rounds, because a reciever of their stature would be fantastic in the red zone.

derza222
01-27-2008, 02:30 PM
Speaking of Bowman, I did read somewhere that although he struggled at times he looked at his best in the red zone...

GET LOOSE
01-27-2008, 05:38 PM
Speaking of Bowman, I did read somewhere that although he struggled at times he looked at his best in the red zone...

which is exactly what we need...he would be great for us

GET LOOSE
01-27-2008, 05:43 PM
[QUOTE=BroadwayJoe10;863935]I like most of the picks, but the guys i highlighted I beleive will be going in the first; i could be wrong so its not a big deal, good choices.

I highlighted the Oline part, because i don't think you should build a oline strictly through FA. If you have a chance to get a great RT or LG in the draft at good value than that should be the pick, it doesn't make sense to limit yourself going into the draft. I do agree that we should focus on guys in FA, but if we can't get the guys we want we have to look towards the draft.

I love DRC, but i feel after the unreal week he had he may be a first rounder now, but ya never know.

I used to like Kendal, however he weighed in at 275, which is far too light to play our 34DE. I think guys a loong the lines of Red Bryan, Dre moore and possibly Trevor laws would be a better look there.








yea i really hope DRC does not go in the 1st round but your right he probally will and i didnt know Kendall weighed in at 275 so i guess i will take him out now...as for the o-line i just feel that we are fine at LT, C, and RG so if we can just pick 2 guys up then our o-line will be solid at the least...i just think that clemens needs a o-line who has expirience already so we know what were getting but if we can pick up a stud in later rounds then yes we should pick him

thetedginnshow
01-27-2008, 07:53 PM
I'll have some guys that might slip into the first, but my rankings would be...

QB
1. Chad Henne - I'm really not high on the QBs in this class at all (like any of them), but I'd give him the top spot. He isn't that tall, but he's got a hell of an arm and at times, he looks good. I blame Michigan's terrible coaching staff for not making him develop as he should have. Clemens is by far better than everyone in this class save for Ryan though.
2. Erik Ainge
3. Paul Smith

HB
1. Jamaal Charles - While for the most part the other 'backs here are bigger than him and that's what I think the Jets need, I think his talent outweighs that. He's like another Reggie Bush. His game-breaking speed is ridiculous, and he arguably might have the best vision of any of the runningbacks in this draft. Regardless, I think we need someone that can catch out of the backfield as well as run the rock. I would like a bigger guy to compliment Washington (since I have a lack of faith in TJ), so somene like Forte or Green-Ellis might be the best options.
2. Kevin Smith
3. Matt Forte
4. BenJarvus Green-Ellis
5. Yvenson Bernard

FB
1. Peyton Hillis - I've loved the way Hillis plays for a while now. I think he'd be a fantastic pick-up. He's the sort of hybrid fullback that I think we'd need, able to block terrificly, yet be used in the pass game.
2. Owen Schmitt
3. Jacob Hester

WR
1. James Hardy - The only reason for him to not be in the first is if he ends up with a mediocre pro day and the off-field concerns come up. But in any case, I think he could have a Randy Moss-like impact for the right team. Somewhere between him and Bowman is the perfect receiver for us IMO. At the very least, he could be something like a Plax for us I think, and that's still a hell of a receiver. We'd probably be better off looking for a receiver later though, and the rest should be there. Most of the guys are fairly physically imposing, but Bess is the exception. He's just such a great route runner with an excellent set of hands that I think he could be a hell of a slot guy.
2. Adarius Bowman
3. Adrian Arrington
4. Davone Bess
5. Marcus Monk

TE
1. Jermichael Finley - Since I feel as though Davis will be a 1st rounder, this is my top guy. We need a playmaker at TE, and beyond Davis, I think Finley has the most potential to be just that. He's a hell of an athlete with all the tools to be a great receiving threat at the position.
2. Martin Rucker
3. Martellus Bennett

OT
1. Gosder Cherilus - I'm going to cop out and hope for some reason he's there in the second. Absolutely he would be what we'd be looking for, and at RT, I think he's better than even Long. But in any case, he probably won't be there at our pick, but I'd love to see it.
2. Carl Nicks
3. Kirk Barton

OG
1. Branden Albert - The interior line is extremely weak this year, so I'm not too hopeful of finding a guy worth it in this draft. But Albert out of everyone easily has the most potential, and that's what I'd go on.
2. Roy Schuening

DE
1. Red Bryant - I feel that Bryant would be much better suited as a 3-4 DE than a 3-4 NT. I don't know. I don't think he could play NT. In any case, I think he's very talented, and as long as he could stay healthy, he could be a hell of a steal. Dre Moore doesn't seem that bad, but in general, I don't think 3-4 DE is that strong.
2. Dre Moore
3. Keilen Dykes

NT
1. Pat Sims - He could very well go in the late first, but in the event he doesn't, he could make for a great NT. I'd still maintain that Rubin is the best fit in the draft for the NT position, but this guy probably has more talent. Either way.
2. Ahtyba Rubin
3. Frank Okam

OLB
1. Shawn Crable - I'd actually put him over Harvey. He was having a nice Senior Bowl until he got hurt. I think playing by Harris would do wonders for his development, and he's a terrific pass rusher with a great build. Groves is a monster on the rush, but he's actually significantly lower on my grade book in comparison to Crable.
2. Quentin Groves

ILB
1. Philip Wheeler - Wheeler is a beast. I've been a big fan of his for a couple years now, and since realizing what weight he's at right now, I think Wheeler could be a hell of an acquisition. He could realistically play either OLB or ILB, but I think he's better suited on the inside. He can do a little bit of everything and is terrific as a pass rusher. The other two on this list aren't even close to him, but they're the only other ones that interested me considering my familiarity with their play from the Big Ten.
2. J Leman
3. Mike Klinkenborg

CB
1. Patrick Lee - I think that we need a physical corner, and these were the best in that regard IMO. It'd be nice to have someone that could pick-off a ton of passes, but I think we need a well-built, physical corner to accompany Revis. I thought Revis would be a perfect fit here before the draft, so I'm trusting I'm right with these guys. We most likely won't go for a CB, at least early, but if we were to, I'd think these guys would make the most sense.
2. Terrell Thomas
3. Chevis Jackson

S
1. Thomas Decoud - Probably the next two would be more in our range than Decoud, but I think they'd all work well. They're all playmakers, and I think that's what we have to focus on.
2. Eric Wicks
3. Nehemiah Warrick

GET LOOSE
01-27-2008, 09:54 PM
Yea....i have been a big fan of Wheeler as well and he will be a pro bowl LB in the NFL...he has good size and speed and great playmaking skills...he is also a great blitzer which is what we need so if we dont pick up Gholston in round 1 then i think we should def look at wheeler in round 2

nvot9
01-30-2008, 07:03 PM
Question, does anyone see the Jets taking a strong look at Owen Schmitt in the 4th, maybe 5th round? I along with I'm sure every other NFL fan, would love him on his team....he just screams Mangini player to me and would help the run game tremendously. Just thoughts on if anyone thinks this could actually happen.

BroadwayJoe10
01-30-2008, 10:36 PM
Question, does anyone see the Jets taking a strong look at Owen Schmitt in the 4th, maybe 5th round? I along with I'm sure every other NFL fan, would love him on his team....he just screams Mangini player to me and would help the run game tremendously. Just thoughts on if anyone thinks this could actually happen.

Absolutely i do. I've posted it a few times and of course it depends on how the draft shakes out but i definately see him as a perfect fit to our team. I don't think any team has any delusions of grandeur about owen schmitt becoming the next mike alstott, but he will definately make his living as a hard-nosed typical blocking fullback. I will somewhat go back on my statement in that i saw him show decent athleticism when he was given the opportunity to catch out of the backfield. Basically, i see him making his money as a lead blocker and i think he'll be a dammn good one.

I also would lean towards mangini being intersted in him due to his experiment with darien barnes. It seems as though mangini likes the idea of having a traditional fullback, but just fell out of favor with barnes and his antics. This, coupled with an improved offensive line could actually allow us to convert the 3rd/4th and shorts without throwing it or using a trick play.

TimD
01-31-2008, 06:15 AM
Absolutely i do. I've posted it a few times and of course it depends on how the draft shakes out but i definately see him as a perfect fit to our team. I don't think any team has any delusions of grandeur about owen schmitt becoming the next mike alstott, but he will definately make his living as a hard-nosed typical blocking fullback. I will somewhat go back on my statement in that i saw him show decent athleticism when he was given the opportunity to catch out of the backfield. Basically, i see him making his money as a lead blocker and i think he'll be a dammn good one.

I also would lean towards mangini being intersted in him due to his experiment with darien barnes. It seems as though mangini likes the idea of having a traditional fullback, but just fell out of favor with barnes and his antics. This, coupled with an improved offensive line could actually allow us to convert the 3rd/4th and shorts without throwing it or using a trick play.

Which would just be sensational

BroadwayJoe10
01-31-2008, 07:43 PM
This article is about a week old, but it's the first that i've read it and some of the stuff in it was very interesting.

http://jetsinsider.com/news.php?storyid=2258

The thing that I love is the fact that all the big names in the jets FO were at the senior bowl and not just the scouts. The one thing i hated to see was how mangini is getting a reputation after the kendal situation and I hope he learns that he doesn't have to be the so called "players manager," but he can atleast build a respectful repor with his players. I also loved to see Dre Moore's named mentioned and the fact that there's rumors of us being "very active during free agency."

gio
02-01-2008, 01:05 PM
This article is about a week old, but it's the first that i've read it and some of the stuff in it was very interesting.

http://jetsinsider.com/news.php?storyid=2258

The thing that I love is the fact that all the big names in the jets FO were at the senior bowl and not just the scouts. The one thing i hated to see was how mangini is getting a reputation after the kendal situation and I hope he learns that he doesn't have to be the so called "players manager," but he can atleast build a respectful repor with his players. I also loved to see Dre Moore's named mentioned and the fact that there's rumors of us being "very active during free agency."

well, we have plenty of money to burn since we barely made a dent last season. i totally agree that mangini better think about what he has and what is available in free agency and avoid another kendall disaster. i still don't get that move.

TimD
02-01-2008, 02:28 PM
If Gholston was a senior they would have been all over him. I think maybe they trade down and try to get Dre Moore and Cherilius, but if we don't trade down we'll take Gholston

BroadwayJoe10
02-01-2008, 02:50 PM
If Gholston was a senior they would have been all over him. I think maybe they trade down and try to get Dre Moore and Cherilius, but if we don't trade down we'll take Gholston

I agree 100% with that and I'm not sure if you've seen scotts mock, but i'm not sure how excited i am of ellis being our NT. I know he's a dominant DT, but i am not sure how well he'll fit in as a NT. I pose the question, because i was wondering how much better he is as a NT than Ahtyba Rubin; basically i wanted to know if Ellis would have a bigger impact than Gholston + Rubin.

hcbrad08
02-01-2008, 04:56 PM
I guess a way to settle this would be to look at how the drafts would pan out and see which you like more

Sign a LG &

1)Sedrick Ellis - DT
2)Pat Sims - DE
3)Shawn Crable - LB
4)Jordy Nelson - WR
5)Barry Richardson - OT
6)Peyton Hillis - FB

or No LG signing

1)Sedrick Ellis - DT
2)Gosder Cherilus -OT
3)Dre Moore - DE
4)Mike McGlynn - OG
5)Curtis Gatewood - LB
6)Adrian Arrington - WR

NOW W/ Gholston and Rubin
Sign a LG

1)Vernon Gholston - LB
2)Pat Sims - DE
3)Heath Benedict - OT
4)Aythba Rubin - DT
5)Paul Hubbard - WR
6)Peyton Hillis - FB

or No LG signing

1)Vernon Gholston - LB
2)Gosder Cherilus -OT
3)Roy Scheuning - OG
4)Aythba Rubin - DT
5)Carlton Powell - DE
6)Adrian Arrington - WR

These are rough mocks but by doing this you can see how our needs play out and if you would be satisfied more by starting with gholston or ellis...do with them what you will (plug in whoever whereever) just thought it could help.

Crickett
02-01-2008, 07:16 PM
Okay, lets take a look.

Sign a LG &

1)Sedrick Ellis - DT
2)Pat Sims - DE
3)Shawn Crable - LB
4)Jordy Nelson - WR
5)Barry Richardson - OT
6)Peyton Hillis - FB

I don't like it.
1. I don't see Ellis as a good fit for the 3-4 NT.
2. The Jets can't afford to wait until the fifth round to draft a right tackle.

No LG signing

1)Sedrick Ellis - DT
2)Gosder Cherilus -OT
3)Dre Moore - DE
4)Mike McGlynn - OG
5)Curtis Gatewood - LB
6)Adrian Arrington - WR

Same problem with Ellis as mock #1

And again, I just don't think the Jets can afford to try to fix all of their problems through the draft.

NOW W/ Gholston and Rubin
Sign a LG

1)Vernon Gholston - LB
2)Pat Sims - DE
3)Heath Benedict - OT
4)Aythba Rubin - DT
5)Paul Hubbard - WR
6)Peyton Hillis - FB

I like this one, but I have trouble seeing Rubin falling to day 2.

or No LG signing

1)Vernon Gholston - LB
2)Gosder Cherilus -OT
3)Roy Scheuning - OG
4)Aythba Rubin - DT
5)Carlton Powell - DE
6)Adrian Arrington - WR

Even better, but again, seems a bit like a pipe dream.

hcbrad08
02-02-2008, 07:33 PM
thats exactly what i wanted you to do with it... just see what presents us with the best start IMO its a trade down, but you cant really mock that anyway how would you fix the mock you liked the most?

thetedginnshow
02-03-2008, 10:32 PM
I'm really starting to like that Dre Moore. If we could snag him in the 3rd, having shored up some of our other needs through FA and the picks prior, I wouldn't mind him at all.

nvot9
02-09-2008, 09:13 AM
What's everyone's draft boards looking like right now? I'm asking this, because I'm just curious what we do if Gholston is taken ahead of 6 (Rams, Raiders, Pats trade up?) which I think is a very real possibility

1) Vernon Gholston/Chris Long
2) Chris Long/Vernon Gholston
3) ????

I think it's safe to say if Gholston or Long is there, one of them should be a Jets player no doubt. But what if both aren't? I don't think we'd have to worry about Jake Long, because if he makes it past the Rams I don't think the Chiefs pass on him. I'd like to see the Jets take Derrick Harvey with the pick...might be a slight reach, but who knows come combine time..

BroadwayJoe10
02-09-2008, 11:40 AM
I really hate the idea of drafting a RT with the #6 overall pick. I am pretty sure that Gholston is going to be there, but for the sake of the discussion I'll try to make a big board.

1a) Long
1b) Gholston
3) Ellis
4)McFadden
5) Harvey


I'm not sure how i feel about harvey being selected that high, he has the tools, but he is pretty mediocre from what i've seen against the run. I think Chris long and gholston have a more immediate impact than harvey would.

I think Ellis could play our version of a NT, because it seems mangini wants smaller quicker NTs that can do more than just occupy blockers. Anyways, I also do not like the idea of drafting mcfadden or most backs that high, but i guess i could see it happening if we address the oline in FA. Just a rough board i guess, because besides C.long and gholston i'm not too sure of anyone following.

Crickett
02-09-2008, 12:02 PM
thats exactly what i wanted you to do with it... just see what presents us with the best start IMO its a trade down, but you cant really mock that anyway how would you fix the mock you liked the most?

I'd say the only thing I'd do is address OT a round earlier in the fifth mock, move Rubin up a round and put someone else there in the fourth. As far as who I want the Jets to take day two, whoever is the BPA at any position other than kicker/punter. I don't know who that is going to be, but it is going to be, and just this once, I want the Jets to be the team that takes the guy nobody thought would fall to day two but did.

nvot9
02-16-2008, 09:43 AM
I'd love me some Brandon Albert in the 2nd :)

BroadwayJoe10
02-18-2008, 12:17 PM
Worst news i've heard this offseason so far...Can't say i blame them, but it certainly ruins my free agent hopes.


Bengals named OL Stacy Andrews their franchise player.
An amazing statement about a guy who has started 17 career games, but he would have been far more rich as a free agent. Andrews will make $7.455 million with the tag. Andrews was a mammoth 6'7/342-pound project coming out of Ole Miss in 2004, but has developed into building block who can play both guard and right tackle. Feb. 18 - 12:13 pm et

nvot9
02-18-2008, 09:42 PM
Eh, I'm not at all disappointed, I think we as Jets fans were severely overrating Andrews just cause he's huge and a good run blocker. But really, he's not been all that consistent, is not the best pass rusher, doesn't have a ton of experience, and for such a great run blocker, didn't have a great run offense.

As far as the draft goes, I'm REALLY starting to warm up to the idea of taking Merling 6th overall...

http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?t=18242 Some good info on him.

Toonster below...

I've long been of the opinion that the most critical players to a 3-4 are up front. Your rush backers are only going to be as effective as your DL talents. I also think, to the extent that a 3-4 end can be elite, that Merling could be an elite talent. What is there not to like about his chances of being elite? The frame's there, by most accounts, to play in the 290-300 range. The athleticism has been rumored to be stellar (of course, just rumors, but that's all we can really base it on until the combines). Could it be Gholston? Sure, I can definitely buy that. But how effective is Gholston going to be without a defensive line in front of him. Furthermore, it is far from certain. Another way to look at the elite equation. Merling, IMO, could be an elite 3-4 DE, and he could be a very good 3-4 rush backer. Tough to beat that. The reality is, I don't think they can go wrong with either pick. If the judgement is simply that you think Gholston is elite and Merling isn't, I'd disagree to that extent, as I think Merling has superb athletic tools to go with the frame to excel in whatever role he's asked to (4-3 interior pass rusher, 4-3 end, 3-4 end, 3-4 rush backer). Comes down to how you value the 3-4 ... do you value the line or the pass rushing linebackers more? Prior to recent picks of Merriman and Ware, amongst others, 3-4 rush backers were often guys that were developed and not necessarily high picks. You would have to be absolutely sold that said player could get you double digit sacks year in and year out to warrant a top 10 pick ... and I'm not sure you could say that about any rush backer in this draft. One other note: if I'm taking a rush backer, the fluidity of Harvey would still edge out Gholston for me, although I do acknowledge that Gholston is clearly, barring a stunner, going ahead of Harvey at this point in time.

I think a big thing, is that an equally productive 3-4 OLB will be much, much easier to find in later rounds or in FA, and I think that's a huge factor in our decision at #6...

BroadwayJoe10
02-18-2008, 11:20 PM
He also is a better pas blocker than starks, is very young, can play both LG and RT as well as he's still very raw. Oh well, nothing we can do anymore.

I've actually seen clemson play a couple of times this year, but i can't recall anything about merling specifically. If toonster, mayock, kiper and scott are high on him then i'm sure he's fantastic, but I still have to see more of Dre Moore and Red Bryant to see the value. I guess we're going to have see if our FO thinks that the bigger impacts are made by Chris Canty/Marcus Spears & Luis Castillo/Igor Olshansky or Demarcus ware and Shawne Merriman.

As much as I really would like gholston, someone like Richard Seymour is much more valuable to the team in my opinion, especially since OLBs seem to come around more frequently than NTs and 34 DEs. I guess this combine is going to tell us a lot; if merling weighs in around 290+ than by all means, but if he's under and we don't feel he can gain weight, than i don't want another undersized player on the line.

nvot9
02-19-2008, 08:09 AM
He also is a better pas blocker than starks, is very young, can play both LG and RT as well as he's still very raw. Oh well, nothing we can do anymore.

I've actually seen clemson play a couple of times this year, but i can't recall anything about merling specifically. If toonster, mayock, kiper and scott are high on him then i'm sure he's fantastic, but I still have to see more of Dre Moore and Red Bryant to see the value. I guess we're going to have see if our FO thinks that the bigger impacts are made by Chris Canty/Marcus Spears & Luis Castillo/Igor Olshansky or Demarcus ware and Shawne Merriman.

As much as I really would like gholston, someone like Richard Seymour is much more valuable to the team in my opinion, especially since OLBs seem to come around more frequently than NTs and 34 DEs. I guess this combine is going to tell us a lot; if merling weighs in around 290+ than by all means, but if he's under and we don't feel he can gain weight, than i don't want another undersized player on the line.

I think the implication is that he CAN play above 290, and that he has the frame to add 15-20 pounds to, so even if he came in at 280 lbs, I think he'd be playing more at like 295. Also, I love his versatility. Scott has him running a 4.75 40 and everyone knows Scott basically underrates people's 40 times for the most part. If he can run anywhere between 4.6 and 4.75 like I've heard he can, he'd make a great 3-4 OLB as well. Not necessarily a full time 3-4 OLB, but sort of the way we used Shaun Ellis this year (although I think he can play away from the line even more so than Ellis did). And just to continue with his versatility, he can play any position on the line in a 4-3 if we ever went to that for a play or two or w/e. I think Merling's so valuable because he helps our team in a lot of ways. First off, he's the best run stopper in this draft hands down, and I think that's something very valuable to this Jets team...especially considering the run stopping needs to come from the line. He's also a good pass rusher and can get behind the line and make plays with ease. But more importantly, his success will bring back the old Bryan Thomas, and perhaps we get a pass-rushing specialist in the 2nd or 3rd round...

Crickett
02-19-2008, 08:11 AM
I've actually seen clemson play a couple of times this year, but i can't recall anything about merling specifically. If toonster, mayock, kiper and scott are high on him then i'm sure he's fantastic, but I still have to see more of Dre Moore and Red Bryant to see the value. I guess we're going to have see if our FO thinks that the bigger impacts are made by Chris Canty/Marcus Spears & Luis Castillo/Igor Olshansky or Demarcus ware and Shawne Merriman.

As much as I really would like gholston, someone like Richard Seymour is much more valuable to the team in my opinion, especially since OLBs seem to come around more frequently than NTs and 34 DEs. I guess this combine is going to tell us a lot; if merling weighs in around 290+ than by all means, but if he's under and we don't feel he can gain weight, than i don't want another undersized player on the line.

This is why I don't like the idea of drafting Merling. He may be a good run stuffer in the 4-3, but so was Shaun Ellis.

And the way I see it, if someone is a tweener in the 3-4 between DE and OLB, then he's really not suited for either.

nvot9
02-19-2008, 08:17 AM
Not the same at all...this guy's no Chris Long, he's a big dude with the frame to pack on 15-20 pounds as mentioned above, which is why I think we should be more than satisfied if he can come to the combine at even just 280 lbs...because then I think he'll come to the NFL much bigger, at at least 290 or maybe more likely 300. I don't know what he'll come to the combine at though. Who knows, maybe he doesn't want to be drafted by a 3-4 team and comes in at 260 or 270. I'd say anything below 280 and you guys are right, but if he comes to the combine at even just 280...I think he'll be more than able to play at between 290 and 300.

Crickett
02-19-2008, 08:43 AM
Eh, maybe this is me, but I don't think the Jets can afford to wait and gamble that Merling will put on sufficient size to play 3-4 DE.

This may have more to do with my belief that 3-4 DE equates more with 4-3 UT's who are tall than 4-3 DE.

nvot9
02-19-2008, 08:46 AM
Eh, maybe this is me, but I don't think the Jets can afford to wait and gamble that Merling will put on sufficient size to play 3-4 DE.

This may have more to do with my belief that 3-4 DE equates more with 4-3 UT's who are tall than 4-3 DE.

What I'm saying though, is it's not a gamble...no more so than taking a Gamble on whether Gholston will really get us double digit sacks (cause otherwise he's not really worth it either right?)

Crickett
02-19-2008, 08:49 AM
What I'm saying though, is it's not a gamble...no more so than taking a Gamble on whether Gholston will really get us double digit sacks (cause otherwise he's not really worth it either right?)

I could see your point if Gholston came into the combine weighing 230. But of the concerns about Gholston, none of them are "does Gholston have the size to play 3-4 OLB"?

nvot9
02-19-2008, 08:53 AM
I could see your point if Gholston came into the combine weighing 230. But of the concerns about Gholston, none of them are "does Gholston have the size to play 3-4 OLB"?

Right, that wasn't exactly my point though. Let me try to make it a little clearer...

Ok, so obviously we're drafting a physical freak and talent in Gholston at 6 overall so that he'll get us double digit sacks and be our version of Ware. Why else would we take a guy this early to play a position that's almost strictly pass rushing, if he's not going to get us double digit sacks? That's the reason for drafting Gholston, plain and simple.

Now, what I'm saying, is that the gamble we'd take in Merling by assuming he can play above 290 lbs is no bigger than the gamble we'd take in Gholston by assuming he'd get us those double digit sacks.

Crickett
02-19-2008, 08:59 AM
Right, that wasn't exactly my point though. Let me try to make it a little clearer...

Ok, so obviously we're drafting a physical freak and talent in Gholston at 6 overall so that he'll get us double digit sacks and be our version of Ware. Why else would we take a guy this early to play a position that's almost strictly pass rushing, if he's not going to get us double digit sacks? That's the reason for drafting Gholston, plain and simple.

Now, what I'm saying, is that the gamble we'd take in Merling by assuming he can play above 290 lbs is no bigger than the gamble we'd take in Gholston by assuming he'd get us those double digit sacks.

Well, what I'm saying is that while its true that the Jets take a risk with Gholston, its the same risk as taking anyone including Merling. The risk that Merling won't have the size to play 3-4 DE is a risk above that or another way to say it, a second risk in the selection.

To me, 280 is just the right size to not have a place in the 3-4. Smaller and you could be an OLB. Larger than that and you can be a DE.

Especially for the Jets who already have a 285 defensive end in Shaun Ellis.

nvot9
02-19-2008, 09:01 AM
Well, what I'm saying is that while its true that the Jets take a risk with Gholston, its the same risk as taking anyone including Merling. The risk that Merling won't have the size to play 3-4 DE is a risk above that or another way to say it, a second risk in the selection.

To me, 280 is just the right size to not have a place in the 3-4. Smaller and you could be an OLB. Larger than that and you can be a DE.

Especially for the Jets who already have a 285 defensive end in Shaun Ellis.

Hmm...I guess that's fair enough. I do truly think the combine will settle my opinion as to what I'd like the Jets to do, because I truly believe we can go a number of different routes, and I also believe that the teams before us can go a number of different routes, which would affect our selection.

Bills2083
02-19-2008, 10:39 AM
I'm making a mock draft, and I'm not sure who to give you. Lets say you HAVE to stay at 6
These players are gone...
-Chris Long
-Vernon Gholston
-Jake Long
-Glenn Dorsey
-Sedrick Ellis


who would you take here?

Crickett
02-19-2008, 10:42 AM
I'm making a mock draft, and I'm not sure who to give you. Lets say you HAVE to stay at 6
These players are gone...
-Chris Long
-Vernon Gholston
-Jake Long
-Glenn Dorsey
-Sedrick Ellis


who would you take here?


No trade downs allowed?

If not, either McFadden or Ryan Clady if he can play RT. But I'd be gritting my teeth. Strongly.

Bills2083
02-19-2008, 10:44 AM
^alright, thanks.
+rep for cooperating and not trading down.

Predicting trades are extremely difficult, and one team will be complaining that the trade doesnt make sense, or is uneven.


EDIT: I tried to give you rep, but I gave too much in the last 24 hours.
PM me to remind me go give you rep.

nvot9
02-19-2008, 11:06 AM
No trade downs allowed?

If not, either McFadden or Ryan Clady if he can play RT. But I'd be gritting my teeth. Strongly.

I wouldn't like any of those picks...

McFadden maybe, but we don't have the luxury. Clady...why do we want two D'Brick's on our team?

Give me Merling or Harvey there, I'll take reaching for a need at this point.

Crickett
02-19-2008, 11:24 AM
I wouldn't like any of those picks...

McFadden maybe, but we don't have the luxury. Clady...why do we want two D'Brick's on our team?

Give me Merling or Harvey there, I'll take reaching for a need at this point.

Well, with Clady, I think of that is a reach for a need, but again, thats IF he can play RT.

As far as Merling, we'll see what happens at the combine, but you know what my take on him is as of now. Keep this in mind, I'm really not a fan of drafting McFadden, but if both Longs and Gholston are gone, and the Jets cant trade down, that and Clady seem to be the only routes the Jets can go IMO.

nvot9
02-19-2008, 11:33 AM
Well, with Clady, I think of that is a reach for a need, but again, thats IF he can play RT.

As far as Merling, we'll see what happens at the combine, but you know what my take on him is as of now. Keep this in mind, I'm really not a fan of drafting McFadden, but if both Longs and Gholston are gone, and the Jets cant trade down, that and Clady seem to be the only routes the Jets can go IMO.

I agree with you on a bunch of things, one of them mainly being that Merling being a possibility as our pick will depend completely on his combine. If he comes in at 290 and runs around a 4.7 I'd be thrilled to have him on my team...his combine weight will be the main issue though.

As far as Clady goes...sure, IF he can play RT then I'd consider it and you're right, that is definitely a reach for a need, but I don't think that's an issue because I'm fairly confident he won't and can't play RT in the NFL. He's more of a finesse/speed blocker like D'Brick, not a big mauler like you'd want your RT to be. Plus I'm still really not overly sold on taking an OL within the top 10. I did some research a while ago and don't remember the specific number, but from what I recall, the percentage of top 10 OL's in the last 10-15 years who turn out to be something is very underwhelming. Although "being something" is pretty subjective, I think it's relatively easy for the most part to determine. The number might very well have been above 50%, but still...I'm not willing to take that gamble when you can just as easily find a top notch guy later.

That's why I'd be more prone to go with a guy like Merling or Harvey, because they're very talented players who fill our needs, rather than DMac, who's a more talented player but fills no need.

Also, I know he said no trades, but realistically speaking, if the draft were to play out that way, I'd strongly consider a trade with Dallas involving their two firsts and perhaps even Marion Barber (imagine that?)

BroadwayJoe10
02-19-2008, 02:51 PM
Dammn that's a tough one. We've had this conversation quite a bit actually and by the time the combine, prodays and free agency plays out we'll have a better idea of where to go. I despise the idea of taking a RT this high in the draft and am very interested to see what Philip Merling weighs in at and not only his 40, but his agility drills. BEcuase if he can play at 290+ and run the 4.7 or so but still have good agility, he can be extremely versatile. He can play 34 DE, 43 DE when we switch over and if his agility is good he could play some 34 OLB at points. He is a very interesting prospect.

Another darkhorse for the jets is derrick harvey. Most admit he is the most fluid and pure pass rusher in the draft, but i question is play against the run and how stout he is at the point of attack.

Number 10
02-26-2008, 09:17 PM
These are the picks I had for the Jets in my recent 13 page mock-

6 - NYJ - Darren McFadden - Arkansas

I have go on record saying I don’t think McFadden is the prospect some make him out to be but this is a good value pick for the Jets. I think for McFadden to be at his best, he needs to be involved within a 2 back system. That’s where you have Thomas Jones for a couple years and Leon Washington for the long term future. Some will argue the Jets should look elsewhere but their offense is in need of speed and playmakers. Why not get both of those with one pick? While I personally don’t feel McFadden will be an Adrian Peterson, his ceiling is higher than any prospect in this class. If he avoids the injury bug and learns how to carry the ball, the Jets may have a top tier back for a long time. They have passed on superior talent for need far too many times throughout their history, time for those mistakes to go bye-bye.

36 - NYJ - Marcus Harrison - DT/DE - Arkansas

I love this kid, a ton. I personally feel he is right below Ellis and Dorsey on the DT board but a bum knee and character concerns may hinder him a bit. But watching him this past season and knowing his knee was not 100%, I just fell in love with him. Fires off the ball well, moves exceptionally well, holds his weight well, plays with intensity….Perfect fit for the Jets’ front seven needs. Will likely be an end in the 3-4.

TRADE:
TB trades #52 (2) to NYJ for DT DeWayne Robertson
The Bucs upgraded their defensive front with Merling in round 1 however they still lack a stout, pass rushing attack up the middle. Roberton has gotten a raw deal in New York, just isn’t a fit for the 3-4. Bad timing too because he was coming on in the 4-3 before the switch occurred. Change of scenery and a more aggressive scheme will allow him to realize some of his potential some have forgotten about. Jets trade up for someone that fits their scheme.

52 - NYJ (f/TB) - Ahtyba Rubin - NT - Iowa State

Sure this may be a reach in the eyes of most, but the Jets have made it clear they will trade up for a scheme guy. They have lacked a NT throughout this entire 3-4 switch, but not anymore. Rubin isn’t a stud, but nose tackles are always overlooked in the 3-4 and a new duo of him and Sims will help elevate that defense for years.

67 - NYJ - Donnie Avery - WR - Houston

McFadden and Avery bring a ton of playmaking ability to an offense that needed it. Speed guy to offset Coles and Cotchery.

thetedginnshow
02-26-2008, 09:51 PM
Can't say I like any of that, except for Rubin, but then that'd mean that we didn't get Rogers, so again, not so happy.

nvot9
02-28-2008, 01:37 PM
This is a mock draft I wanna post just to show what can actually happen realistically speakin...this would be ideal and it's assuming all rumors are true..

Trades:
Vilma and Dewayne for Kris Jenkins and a 4th rounder
6th overall for 22nd, 28th, and Marcus Spears (Gholston, Ellis, and both Longs are gone, McFadden is available)

Free Agency:
Alan Faneca
Calvin Pace

Draft:
1a) Quentin Groves/DRC
1b) James Hardy
2) Gosder Cherilus/Carl Nicks
3) Justin King/Bruce Davis
4a) some ILB
4b) Owen Schmitt

blah blah blah...I just think that would be absolutely insane...I can't envision this happening, but I do see some elements of this happening, and I'd be ecstatic...

BroadwayJoe10
02-28-2008, 03:53 PM
It's definately a possibility, however i still don't like the idea of giving pace solid money and then signing quentin groves. It's not that bad, but we already gave bryan thomas a 25 million dollar extension, have bowens under contract it just seems like a bit of a surplus that's all. I also am pretty apprehensive that he had one good year during his contract year, much like thomas.

Anyways, i do like groves quite a bit and if we did sign pace, that would be a good place for him to learn behind. I love the rest of the draft, although i would rather have antoine cason than justin king, but thats just nitpicking really. Really a great overall draft, too bad i don't see it happening either, but it'd be phenomenal for us.

Crickett
02-28-2008, 04:13 PM
This is a mock draft I wanna post just to show what can actually happen realistically speakin...this would be ideal and it's assuming all rumors are true..

Trades:
Vilma and Dewayne for Kris Jenkins and a 4th rounder
6th overall for 22nd, 28th, and Marcus Spears (Gholston, Ellis, and both Longs are gone, McFadden is available)

Free Agency:
Alan Faneca
Calvin Pace

Draft:
1a) Quentin Groves/DRC
1b) James Hardy
2) Gosder Cherilus/Carl Nicks
3) Justin King/Bruce Davis
4a) some ILB
4b) Owen Schmitt

blah blah blah...I just think that would be absolutely insane...I can't envision this happening, but I do see some elements of this happening, and I'd be ecstatic...

Couple of things

I haven't exactly heard glowing praise from Cowboys fans for Marcus Spears

Vilma getting traded means ILB is a pretty big need for the Jets.

Calvin Pace has never had more than 6.5 half sacks in his NFL career. For a team thats needs a pass rusher as bad as the Jets do, he is not the answer for that.

nvot9
02-28-2008, 04:57 PM
Couple of things

I haven't exactly heard glowing praise from Cowboys fans for Marcus Spears

Vilma getting traded means ILB is a pretty big need for the Jets.

Calvin Pace has never had more than 6.5 half sacks in his NFL career. For a team thats needs a pass rusher as bad as the Jets do, he is not the answer for that.


Hence Spears being simply a throw in,
Hence the Jest drafting Groves in addition to Pace.
As for Vilma, it wasn't that big of a need when he was on the IR, I dnno why that would change when he's traded. I think it will be very easy to simply shift someone over to ILB...I given the ILB prospects suitable for the 3-4, I'd be pretty upset if we spent anything higher than a third or 4th on ILB....

nvot9
02-28-2008, 04:59 PM
Also, this wasn't me saying this will happen, that wasn't my attempt. I was simply pointing out that it's very possible for a scenario similar to this happening, involving us getting a bunch of quality players in a bunch of positions we could use help in.

Crickett
02-28-2008, 06:41 PM
Hence Spears being simply a throw in,
Hence the Jest drafting Groves in addition to Pace.
As for Vilma, it wasn't that big of a need when he was on the IR, I dnno why that would change when he's traded. I think it will be very easy to simply shift someone over to ILB...I given the ILB prospects suitable for the 3-4, I'd be pretty upset if we spent anything higher than a third or 4th on ILB....

I guess the question I have is (especially in the case of Calvin), why should the Jets even bother bringing them in?

nvot9
02-28-2008, 09:05 PM
I guess the question I have is (especially in the case of Calvin), why should the Jets even bother bringing them in?

Possibly as just an extra passrusher, maybe to replace Bryan Thomas and make him the backup, maybe move Thomas inside or Pace inside ala Adalius Thomas. I couldn't say for sure what their motive is if they still plan on drafting a passrusher but I will say that regardless, I wouldn't be opposed to the signing...

He has officially narrowed it down to 3 teams though, I read some link...the 49ers, the Jets, and some other team...

BroadwayJoe10
02-28-2008, 09:47 PM
Possibly as just an extra passrusher, maybe to replace Bryan Thomas and make him the backup, maybe move Thomas inside or Pace inside ala Adalius Thomas. I couldn't say for sure what their motive is if they still plan on drafting a passrusher but I will say that regardless, I wouldn't be opposed to the signing...

He has officially narrowed it down to 3 teams though, I read some link...the 49ers, the Jets, and some other team...

Consequently the teams who play the 34, i personally think he's just doing it to play the field. I heard the interview and he sounded very upset that the cardinals didn't seem to want to keep him.

nvot9
02-29-2008, 04:59 PM
Could anyone see the Jets drafting ILB Philip Wheeler in the second round? He just screams 3-4 to me, whether it be as an ILB or OLB...

Crickett
02-29-2008, 05:23 PM
Could anyone see the Jets drafting ILB Philip Wheeler in the second round? He just screams 3-4 to me, whether it be as an ILB or OLB...

The idea of drafting an ILB that early makes the Vilma trade even worse. :(

GET LOOSE
03-01-2008, 12:44 AM
The idea of drafting an ILB that early makes the Vilma trade even worse. :(


if we draft an ILB i will be so angry i might become a saints fan....i mean what would be the point of getting rid of vilma if we now need a ILB that will never be half of what vilma is....i want gholston but will settle for jake long

BroadwayJoe10
03-01-2008, 11:22 AM
if we draft an ILB i will be so angry i might become a saints fan....i mean what would be the point of getting rid of vilma if we now need a ILB that will never be half of what vilma is....i want gholston but will settle for jake long

Guys please get over the fact that vilma left. He was terrible in our defense and would have left us; he stated he wanted to be back in a 43 and a 34 wasn't for him. He was always a class act and you can still cheer for him, but just realize letting him go was the best thing for our team.

We got harris in the 2nd round and hes twice the linebacker vilma was in the 34 in his first year. I love vilma, but i'm not blinded by my admiration for him that i can't see he was hurting the team like you guys. He will remain a good player, but the bottom line is he has a degenerative bone disorder and was coming off the IR. The fact that we have a 4th this year and the potential for a high 2nd or low 2nd (if he signs than we swap our 4th with their second next year, which lowers a high 2nd to mid second and low 2nd to high 3rd) is more than we could have hoped for.


So you would have us not get another ILB just because vilma left?? That doesn't make any sense; we should be in the position to take the best offer or best player available at our pick.

nvot9
03-01-2008, 12:07 PM
Guys please get over the fact that vilma left. He was terrible in our defense and would have left us; he stated he wanted to be back in a 43 and a 34 wasn't for him. He was always a class act and you can still cheer for him, but just realize letting him go was the best thing for our team.

We got harris in the 2nd round and hes twice the linebacker vilma was in the 34 in his first year. I love vilma, but i'm not blinded by my admiration for him that i can't see he was hurting the team like you guys. He will remain a good player, but the bottom line is he has a degenerative bone disorder and was coming off the IR. The fact that we have a 4th this year and the potential for a high 2nd or low 2nd (if he signs than we swap our 4th with their second next year, which lowers a high 2nd to mid second and low 2nd to high 3rd) is more than we could have hoped for.


So you would have us not get another ILB just because vilma left?? That doesn't make any sense; we should be in the position to take the best offer or best player available at our pick.

Yea seriously...it's getting old and annoying already. Vilma was a very good 4-3 LB...he was not the best, maybe not even top 5, but yes he was very good. He was atrocious however in the 3-4 and CLEARLY, EVER SO CLEARLY NOT GOING TO RESIGN WITH US AFTER THIS YEAR. As a 3-4 LB coming off an injury once considered career threatening, his value shouldn't have been greater than a 5th or 6th rounder, the fact that his value was higher was based purely on the potential that he would REEMERGE and play the way he did TWO YEARS AGO. As lovely as that sounds, and as likely as it might be that that will happen, the risk is still there and that simply even more so diminishes his value, not to mention the fact that the Jets had absolutely no leverage with their trading partner consider we'd be SCREWED IF WE KEPT HIM. I'm sick of hearing all this crap about how he'd be amazing in a 3-4 if only he had a better NT...that's absolute bull. It's impossible to tell if a simple upgrade such as that would affect his play at all, and even more so, Vilma was simply a horrible 3-4 LB...it had nothing to do with the lack of talent around him, it had to due with his inability to shed blockers and lack of size...his skill set clearly was not fit for the 3-4 and regardless of the ability of the 3-4 he WOULD HAVE FAILED. Furthermore, the need for an ILB in the draft has been the same the last two years. We still would have needed one had Vilma not been traded...why is it now all of a sudden a big deal?

My second point, stop complaining that we didn't get solid immediate value...first off, we did get immediate value, we got a 4th rounder (despite us possibly giving up a 4th rounder of our own I believe), but even more so, we got a 2nd/3rd rounder next year...this is exactly, if not better, value that we had projected all along...it just happens to be for next year, in fact I think we all might have been overestimated the value of Vilma so even more so it's good value. It's inconceivable to me that you guys are pissed that we only got a pick next year...what, is the 2nd rounder we would be getting this year going to bring us to the Super Bowl THIS year? Am I missing something, or are we not in a rebuilding mode? Since when did a rebuilding mode require you to get immediate value/picks? Is it that some of you just don't know the meaning of the word "future" when talking about rebuilding for the future?

I capitalized some of the words for you guys because clearly some of you still don't get it, perhaps this will help. Some of you guys need to stop dwelling on what was or what could have been, and realize that this was the right move and the best possible move we could have made at this point in time.

GET LOOSE
03-02-2008, 02:38 PM
No trade downs allowed?

If not, either McFadden or Ryan Clady if he can play RT. But I'd be gritting my teeth. Strongly.

yea i would definitly want mcfadden but i would be in shock that my luck is that bad....im hopeing we can get Gholston Chris Long or i hell i would even take jake long but the other options dont really make alot of sense

thetedginnshow
03-02-2008, 04:57 PM
if we draft an ILB i will be so angry i might become a saints fan....i mean what would be the point of getting rid of vilma if we now need a ILB that will never be half of what vilma is....i want gholston but will settle for jake long

Haha. Just become a Saints fan then.

nvot9
03-02-2008, 05:00 PM
I was gunna post a thread in the draft forum, but I figured I'd just post it in the Jets forum...how would you guys rank the 3-4 OLB Prospects, and what are some potential comparison's you can think of between them? Personally, I think it's such a one dimensional position, that perhaps trading down to stockpile picks would be the best idea. I dnno if Gholston is necessarily that much better than a guy like Harvey, Groves, or Avril to warrant taking him at 6th over some of those guys in the late first/early second, especially if it means gaining some extra picks..

Vilma the Animal
03-02-2008, 07:02 PM
1a. Chris Long-More of an all around player than just pass rusher. Id equate him to a Mike Vrabel type.
1b. Vernon Gholston-Sick pass-rusher, makes me think of Demarcus Ware
2. Derrick Harvery
3. Groves
4. Avril

Late Rounds:
A guy I can see making a big impact as a situational pass-rusher is Bruce Davis. Also, I know many of you guys have said this, but taking a flier on Tommy Blake in about the 4th routh round or later area wouldnt bother me.

BroadwayJoe10
03-03-2008, 11:03 PM
1a. Chris Long - Has a great motor, good closing speed, amazing technique and ability to diagnose a play (probably better at diagnosing plays than any other DE/OLB in the draft). He reminds me a lot of adalius thomas.
1b. Vernon Gholston - Probably the best first step out of this group, great against the run, when he uses proper leverage, but gets taken out of the play if he doesn't. To me he kind of is a cross between merriman and ware, but not at the same level. I would love to have him, but i don't like the idea of moving pace inside.

Havn't seen enough of the other guys to make an opinion, but it seems groves is one of the most explosive rushers.

nyjets5125
03-04-2008, 09:03 PM
if gholston and long are both gone, which seems liek a real possibility, i think our best bet would be CB...hopefully we can trade down to grab one at a little better value but if not, i think we might be forced to overdraft...i dont really like talib so i would say DRC, McKelvin, or Jenkins

Young Nasty Man
03-06-2008, 11:16 AM
1a. Chris Long- I think we all agree, he has those Tanginiables. He is strong, fast, and works like no other. Really just plays non-stop to the ball. Has played in the 3-4 as a DE, but can also play OLB. Shows that Versatility. If he is on the board, he is the man we are taking.
1b. Vernon Gholston- I guess the name "Verno"n tends to mean your a monster and your goin to be strong as hell (Vernon Davis). Vernon Gholston is clearly a pass rusher and a physical Phenom. I seriously don't see why we would pass up on this guy if he is there. Has the size strength and everything else to be the 3-4 OLB.
2. Groves- workout warrior, with a true pass rush.
3. Cliff Avril- played both OLB/DE in college (im high on this guy).
4. Darrell Robertson- has those Tanginiables and winds up being the guy the jets draft that you never hear of.

hcbrad08
03-10-2008, 12:13 AM
After Gholstons show at his pro day what do you think of this mock
Trade 2nd rd for 2 3rds...
Trade Drob to Denver for a 4th and 5th

1) Vernon Gholston- OLB
3a) Jordy Nelson- WR
3b) Jonathan Goff- ILB
4a) Tashard Choice- RB
4b) Trae Williams- CB
5) Lionel Dotson- DE
6) Gary Barnidge- TE
7) Bernard Morris- QB

No Tradebut DRob 4 and 5

1) Vernon Gholston- OLB
2) James Hardy- WR
4a) Jonathan Goff- ILB
4b) Thomas Brown- RB
5) Antwan Molden- CB
6) LeTroy Guion- DE
7) Bernard Morris- QB

nyjets5125
03-10-2008, 12:58 AM
After Gholstons show at his pro day what do you think of this mock
Trade 2nd rd for 2 3rds...
Trade Drob to Denver for a 4th and 5th

1) Vernon Gholston- OLB
3a) Jordy Nelson- WR
3b) Jonathan Goff- ILB
4a) Tashard Choice- RB
4b) Trae Williams- CB
5) Lionel Dotson- DE
6) Gary Barnidge- TE
7) Bernard Morris- QB

No Tradebut DRob 4 and 5

1) Vernon Gholston- OLB
2) James Hardy- WR
4a) Jonathan Goff- ILB
4b) Thomas Brown- RB
5) Antwan Molden- CB
6) LeTroy Guion- DE
7) Bernard Morris- QB

after his show, i dont think hell be left...but if i had to pikc one of those i owuld probably go with the 2nd...but either are good except i want a CB earlier than 4th or 5th, someone who can come in and start right away, even if we add like foxworth or someone

hcbrad08
03-10-2008, 02:37 PM
after his show, i dont think hell be left...but if i had to pikc one of those i owuld probably go with the 2nd...but either are good except i want a CB earlier than 4th or 5th, someone who can come in and start right away, even if we add like foxworth or someone

I think the only chance ghoslton has of being picked in the top 5 is with the Raiders and they might trade out...I dont think his show made him a guaranteed top 5 pick I think it helped us a lot as many people saw that he would be a great fit. Imagine the pass rushing D we would have...We wouldnt be the giants but we would be close... Gholston, Pace, Thomas, Bowens Jenkins, Ellis, Coleman, Harris, Barton. That said I think he'll be around I think the questions about whether he's a reach pick or not will be dismissed.

I disagree on drafting a #2 CB before the 4th or 5th (esp considering we dont have a 3rd..which would be ok too)

These are Mangini's words at a press conference where he was according to this article "NOTICEBALY FRUSTRATED" on how he felt about losing Justin Miller as a CB...

"Justin had an outstanding off-season and I really liked the way he was working at his craft[Cornerback]," Mangini said. "He and Bryan Cox spent a lot of time together and Bryan was helping him along, giving him some insight on things that helped him grow as a player and as a person. I saw that quite a bit, at practice and at the defensive and special teams meetings. He takes some of the most impressive notes of any of our players and those things all add up... It’s tough, it's tough."

I think if we can resign Poteat and Miller comes back guns blazing our CB situation is good enough to merit not taking a CB until the 3rd 4th or 5th.I used to advocate taking a high caliber CB early but I think it would be a waste considering the strong class... Other positions are top heavy so if the needs are close to equally important you can draft a less pressing (albeit close need) bc no one will fit later. we can do very well as long as needs are weighted properly and we dont reach for a NON need.... We drafted Revis 1st last year and Miller 2nd (our 1st pick) 2 years a go. We did finish #1 in passing defense after the BYE and 9th overall for the season why not address more pressing needs. Also Troy Brown was a Super Bowl CB...if the 34 is set up well in the front 7 the farther away from the line you get the less importnat you are... For me Revis Miller Poteat Coleman are a good CB core and a 4th or 5th rd pick could help that improve and maintain its top 10 status. No need to reach

hcbrad08
03-10-2008, 02:47 PM
it posted twice for some reason sorry

BroadwayJoe10
03-10-2008, 05:23 PM
From what i've been reading about gholston's pro-day is that he is definately a top 10 talent and has incredible potential, but because of his physique he lacks the fluidity and lateral movement of the guys like merriman and ware. He was my 2nd overall pick behind long the entire season, but once calvin pace was signed and the oline was solidified a bit more i have leaned more towards dmac. I personally don't think he is much better than mendenhall; i like mendenhall as a better all around back, but it seems every scout and analyst (minus mayock) has him as the #1 player. If you listen to the podcast that AlexDown left on the jetsdiscussion page scott talks about the jets and their draft strategy a fair amount. It seems the general consensus is that if mcfadden is there and they can't trade down he is going to be the choice. Scott and a lot of others have gholston ruled out for us, but that doesn't mean they know what our FO is thinking.

It's a good listen, i suggest listening to it.

nyjets5125
03-10-2008, 05:44 PM
i think the raiders is a very likely destination for gholston if he is there because they just lost chris clemons and need a compliment to derrick burgess, and we all know that al davis loves atheltic freaks...but that can only happen if he is there

I think the only chance ghoslton has of being picked in the top 5 is with the Raiders and they might trade out

i disagree with that...although theres obivously a good chacne he does fall past the top 2, im starting to think that long and gholston will be the top 2 picks (barring any trades)...i think we can agree that its unlikely taht he oges to the falcons (just drafted jamal anderson) and chiefs (are trying to get jared allen back) because of the () reasons and the fact that they have much more pressing needs...but miami and st louis, thats another story

miami--they clearly want a 3-4 OLB, as proven by their efforts to sign calvin pace (which we outbidded them for), and that makes for the long/gholston pick more likely...i dont konw which way to lean with this...probably long because he is the safer pick and more versatile (can also play DE in the 3-4)...but parcells may want his demarcus ware/lawrence taylor type OLB in gholston...i think AS OF NOW, long or gholston will be their pick

st louis--they need a pass rusher, especially because they cut james hall...last season they played both the 4-3 and 3-4, and lacked true pass rushing (especially in the 3-4), which both long and gholston have (like i stated in the miami argument), and their defense is clealry there strong point unless they want to go Jake Long but that might be unlikely with the money they just gave to jacob bell...i think AS OF NOW the rams would take whichever of the two (j long/gholston) that the dolphins dont pick

hcbrad08
03-10-2008, 07:02 PM
1st when was the last time an OLB taken #1 overall.
2nd the better question is if McFadden and Gholston are gone before we pick and we have no trade down options who do we pick...
I dont go CB as some would say I think the best pick for value and need is Keith Rivers and put him at ILB 63 243 4.6 great fit and he is versatile and we could move barton around.

I actually like the idea and our position bc i love Rivers

TimD
03-10-2008, 07:07 PM
1st when was the last time an OLB taken #1 overall.
2nd the better question is if McFadden and Gholston are gone before we pick and we have no trade down options who do we pick...
I dont go CB as some would say I think the best pick for value and need is Keith Rivers and put him at ILB 63 243 4.6 great fit and he is versatile and we could move barton around.

I actually like the idea and our position bc i love Rivers

If we can't trade down I think we should go WR or if Ryan is still left take him.

nyjets5125
03-10-2008, 07:17 PM
1st when was the last time an OLB taken #1 overall.
2nd the better question is if McFadden and Gholston are gone before we pick and we have no trade down options who do we pick...
I dont go CB as some would say I think the best pick for value and need is Keith Rivers and put him at ILB 63 243 4.6 great fit and he is versatile and we could move barton around.

I actually like the idea and our position bc i love Rivers

just because it hasnt happened recently doesnt mean it wont...when was the last time that two DE/OLB were at the top of draft boards with the first two teams playing the 3-4

but i do agree taht we should be talking about what happens if gholoston and mcfadden are gone, becuase i think its clear that either one will be left, or more likely, neither will be left

idk about rivers in the 3-4, i think that limits his skills and speed, but idk too much about him in a 3-4, and i would say if no trade down, with no mcfadden gholston or long i would have to go CB just based on the lack of value at WR

BroadwayJoe10
03-10-2008, 08:35 PM
I don't like rivers at all in the 34, he reminds me of a heavier vilma. He plays the run well when he's in open space, but is not strong/stout enough at the point of attack and does not shed blockers well. He would get destroyed by some of the bigger interior lineman in the NFL and would look like "baby animal" did in the national championship game when LSU ran right at him.

I honestly have no idea who we'd pick if gholston and mcfadden aren' there, i would say who is ever next on our bigboard. I wouldn't put it past them to draft either mendenhall, jstew or even limas sweed. I'm not saying i would like it, but just that it's a realistic possibility; we may want someone to take over for jones in a couple years or we may think highly enough of one of the recievers, but ya never know.

nvot9
03-10-2008, 09:42 PM
I don't like rivers at all in the 34, he reminds me of a heavier vilma. He plays the run well when he's in open space, but is not strong/stout enough at the point of attack and does not shed blockers well. He would get destroyed by some of the bigger interior lineman in the NFL and would look like "baby animal" did in the national championship game when LSU ran right at him.

I honestly have no idea who we'd pick if gholston and mcfadden aren' there, i would say who is ever next on our bigboard. I wouldn't put it past them to draft either mendenhall, jstew or even limas sweed. I'm not saying i would like it, but just that it's a realistic possibility; we may want someone to take over for jones in a couple years or we may think highly enough of one of the recievers, but ya never know.

No way we go RB.

I think Merling is going to be an underdog pick, despite him coming in at a little less weight then expected at 276, he DEFINITELY has the frame to play between 285 and 300 and will/can be a real nice 3-4 DE...Balmer could rise too...

EDIT: I could potentially see a reach for Groves as well.

BroadwayJoe10
03-10-2008, 09:59 PM
No way we go RB.

I think Merling is going to be an underdog pick, despite him coming in at a little less weight then expected at 276, he DEFINITELY has the frame to play between 285 and 300 and will/can be a real nice 3-4 DE...Balmer could rise too...

EDIT: I could potentially see a reach for Groves as well.

I don't think we will go RB, but i mentioned that if we had our heart set on it they could be options. I am not sold on merling be able to play at 300, if he plays around 280 he'll remind me of ellis, just better against the run. Balmer has all the tools and size to play DE, but if merling can add the weight he would be the ideal choice.

I only mentioned jstew and mendenhall, becuase scott said it as a possibility in his podcast.


There are DE's to bad had in the 2nd or lower such as Moore and Bryant, so we can really go many different paths with the first overall. I plan on them picking BPA and i would be very interested to see where they have limas sweed or the other recievers; i wouldn't be too pleased with any of the WRs that high, but we definately need one.

hcbrad08
03-10-2008, 10:39 PM
Rivers sheds blockers well and plays better in traffic bc he becomes more disciplined...Hes much bigger than vilma and plays that way. I like him a lot for any LB in the 34 more so the ILB spot bc of his lack of pass rushing production. He is fluid in coverage helping our middle and is also a big hitter. Unlike Vilma he has the height and weight to take on bigger blockers. (He also has a frame to get bigger unlike vilma) Rivers is a great LB and is going unnoticed in these discusions. I would watch some more highlights and or flim if you can get your hands on it this guy isnt gholston in terms of measureables but has everything we would and should look for in a 34 LB

Also WR way too high taking Ryan TimDris Unbelievably a waste. What happens when you have Clemens Pennington and Ryan on a roster how much money/failure are you going to have at a position where there are already two potential starters.
CB 2 years in a row in the top 15 is the antithesis of stability. The Eagles patriots cowboys and others have maintain success bc of drafting in the trenches in round 1.

There is a reason no OLB has been picked #1 overall recently and none have ever suceeded. Bc there are plenty that will great nfl players elsewhere in the draft...Gholston is not going #1 overall to the Dolphins Bill Parcells would just as soon trade out bc he knows like everyone else that OLBs can be found all over the draft just like RBs and CBs.

nyjets5125
03-11-2008, 03:37 PM
There is a reason no OLB has been picked #1 overall recently and none have ever suceeded. Bc there are plenty that will great nfl players elsewhere in the draft...Gholston is not going #1 overall to the Dolphins Bill Parcells would just as soon trade out bc he knows like everyone else that OLBs can be found all over the draft just like RBs and CBs.

you say that parcells konws OLBs can be found all over the draft, yet Lawrence Taylor and DeMarcus Ware were both 1st round picks, 2nd and 11th respectively...i would think the opposite, thinking he knows he needs a stud OLB and 1st round is no better place to find one when there is a stud OLB on the board

BroadwayJoe10
03-11-2008, 04:20 PM
you say that parcells konws OLBs can be found all over the draft, yet Lawrence Taylor and DeMarcus Ware were both 1st round picks, 2nd and 11th respectively...i would think the opposite, thinking he knows he needs a stud OLB and 1st round is no better place to find one when there is a stud OLB on the board

You are of course assuming he thinks either long or gholston is on the same level as ware and taylor, which they are not. I love both long and gholston, but any other year they wouldn't be more of the 5-15 range type of players. Gholston and long don't posess the lateral fluidity of demarcus ware and don't look nearly as good in positional drills. I would say that long actually looked better in space and positional drills than did gholston. I'm not taking anything away from long or gholston, because they both are darn fine prospects, but i just don't feel either are on the level of taylor/ware and thus my not be worth the number 1 overall.

I would say long as the biggest chance out of the two to go #1, but most any other year he would just be considered a top 5 pick, atleast in my mind.

nyjets5125
03-11-2008, 04:46 PM
You are of course assuming he thinks either long or gholston is on the same level as ware and taylor, which they are not. I love both long and gholston, but any other year they wouldn't be more of the 5-15 range type of players. Gholston and long don't posess the lateral fluidity of demarcus ware and don't look nearly as good in positional drills. I would say that long actually looked better in space and positional drills than did gholston. I'm not taking anything away from long or gholston, because they both are darn fine prospects, but i just don't feel either are on the level of taylor/ware and thus my not be worth the number 1 overall.

I would say long as the biggest chance out of the two to go #1, but most any other year he would just be considered a top 5 pick, atleast in my mind.

im not assuming that they are as good, im just saying, parcells konws he needs a stud OLB which long and gholston both hve the ability to be, i agree that i dont think either is as good as LT or ware now, but they are the best options he has for the position, and its just unlucky that he has to have the 1st pick in a draft where frankly you probably dont want to invest the 1st pick money in a player that doesnt deserve it, but i think parcells is in a win now situation and knows he has to add a pass rusher, and also there are no really great options...there is no amazing QB worthy of 1st pick (although there is a small chance matt ryan gets picked) and they have beck...also, where else would they go other than Jake Long...mcfadden is probably the only player that you can make a case for as being 1st pick in a good draft, if you even can make taht case for him, but they dont need him and he would be a bad pick for them as they put 2nd pick money in a ronnie brown...just based on their needs, parcells desire for a pass rushers, the possible/likely departures of jason taylor and/or joey porter, and the talent level of this draft...gholston or c long seem like they likely pick as of now

BroadwayJoe10
03-11-2008, 05:11 PM
im not assuming that they are as good, im just saying, parcells konws he needs a stud OLB which long and gholston both hve the ability to be, i agree that i dont think either is as good as LT or ware now, but they are the best options he has for the position, and its just unlucky that he has to have the 1st pick in a draft where frankly you probably dont want to invest the 1st pick money in a player that doesnt deserve it, but i think parcells is in a win now situation and knows he has to add a pass rusher, and also there are no really great options...there is no amazing QB worthy of 1st pick (although there is a small chance matt ryan gets picked) and they have beck...also, where else would they go other than Jake Long...mcfadden is probably the only player that you can make a case for as being 1st pick in a good draft, if you even can make taht case for him, but they dont need him and he would be a bad pick for them as they put 2nd pick money in a ronnie brown...just based on their needs, parcells desire for a pass rushers, the possible/likely departures of jason taylor and/or joey porter, and the talent level of this draft...gholston or c long seem like they likely pick as of now


I agree and good analysis by the way, but i was more referring to the idea of taking gholston #1 overall. I just don't think he's as good of a prospect as a lot are making him out to be. Don't get me wrong, i love the guy and wanted him desperately for the jets, but any other year i think hes closer to the 10th pick than top 5. We just happen to have the misfortune of being in a very non-top heavy draft and he is easily a top 5 pick this year. All in all I think C.long will be the pick, with an outside shot of Matt Ryan.

I'm very intersted in the jets situation if Long, Long, McFadden and gholston are gone. I would be very eager to see who the jets have on their bigboard. If phillip merling can play at 300 pounds than that would be fantastic, but i don't know if he can add the 20 pounds. It would than come down to whether we could trade out of our pick with dorsey or ellis there..possibly a trade down to cinci, because we know they want a DT; if we can't i wouldn't at all be surprised to see us go WR. I know it's extremely high and would be a reach, but i'm not sold on taking another CB that high. Lets just say we have mckelvin ranked top 10 on our bigboard but sweed or kelly in our top 15, who would be the better pick?? BPA says mckelvin, but the dropoff in talent isn't that much on our board and WR is a definate area of need. I'm not saying its likely that would happen or i would be happy at all (i wouldn't be), but that it could be a possibility if the situation arises.

Young Nasty Man
03-11-2008, 05:19 PM
I really rather us trade down if none of those 4 are there because its not worth taking a guy that high when we can just get some extra stuff to help out our needs. So personally, I trade down and take either Balmer, Merling, Limas Sweed, McKelvin, or DRC. And then address OLB in the second round. I really stress the fact that we have to address that position becuase I feel its such a huge help if we get a rotation at OLB so we get fresh legs and always have a solid pass rush (a possible thing to what Philly and the Giants do, it always gets pressure on the QB).

nyjets5125
03-11-2008, 05:26 PM
I agree and good analysis by the way, but i was more referring to the idea of taking gholston #1 overall. I just don't think he's as good of a prospect as a lot are making him out to be. Don't get me wrong, i love the guy and wanted him desperately for the jets, but any other year i think hes closer to the 10th pick than top 5. We just happen to have the misfortune of being in a very non-top heavy draft and he is easily a top 5 pick this year. All in all I think C.long will be the pick, with an outside shot of Matt Ryan.

I'm very intersted in the jets situation if Long, Long, McFadden and gholston are gone. I would be very eager to see who the jets have on their bigboard. If phillip merling can play at 300 pounds than that would be fantastic, but i don't know if he can add the 20 pounds. It would than come down to whether we could trade out of our pick with dorsey or ellis there..possibly a trade down to cinci, because we know they want a DT; if we can't i wouldn't at all be surprised to see us go WR. I know it's extremely high and would be a reach, but i'm not sold on taking another CB that high. Lets just say we have mckelvin ranked top 10 on our bigboard but sweed or kelly in our top 15, who would be the better pick?? BPA says mckelvin, but the dropoff in talent isn't that much on our board and WR is a definate area of need. I'm not saying its likely that would happen or i would be happy at all (i wouldn't be), but that it could be a possibility if the situation arises.

thanks and yeha i agree, but i think more and more that gholston is playing into the sitatuion, i defintely think more than matt ryan but not yet c long...i do know that gholston had a private workout where the jets and dolphins were both there also

but for the scenario if none of the 3 are left, it would be very intriguing to see where we woudl go (and i think that this very well might happen, not as much as i did before the raiders restructured rhodes)...i would love a trade out, but i would prefer a trade to the mid 1st than to dallas with 2 late firsts but would take either...this is beause i think we could end up coming out with a top CB or a top WR (for this draft, doesnt mean top in the league, just top in this draft...both CB and WR are deep but not very talented at the top)...idk if the bengals would really like a trade up, although it would be ideal for us, but you have to consider the fact that is very unlikely that us, the pats, or ravens go for a DT (ellis or dorsey), and although it could happen, it is sooo unlikely that they will both be gone, so unless there is only one on the board i doubt they would ever trade up, and i doubt they would even if only one is...but in this case i think we would hope that matt ryan were to fall to us so that a team (like carolina chicago or detroit...or maybe baltimore to protect themselves from another team trading up) so taht we can still get a DRC/mckelvin/jenkins at CB or a sweed/kelly at WR

nyjets5125
03-11-2008, 05:28 PM
to add on to the last post because i forgot it, or a 3-4 DE like balmer or merling (depending on if we think he can fit at 34 DE)

nyjets5125
03-11-2008, 05:30 PM
I really rather us trade down if none of those 4 are there because its not worth taking a guy that high when we can just get some extra stuff to help out our needs. So personally, I trade down and take either Balmer, Merling, Limas Sweed, McKelvin, or DRC. And then address OLB in the second round. I really stress the fact that we have to address that position becuase I feel its such a huge help if we get a rotation at OLB so we get fresh legs and always have a solid pass rush (a possible thing to what Philly and the Giants do, it always gets pressure on the QB).

i do agree that addressing OLB round 2 (if not round 1) would be key and i would really like it, but i wouldnt want to force that (like reach for a guy if gholston, long, groves, avril, harvey are gone) and would also not want to be set on that in case someobody were to drop down (probably either a WR, CB, or DE)

BroadwayJoe10
03-11-2008, 07:02 PM
I really rather us trade down if none of those 4 are there because its not worth taking a guy that high when we can just get some extra stuff to help out our needs. So personally, I trade down and take either Balmer, Merling, Limas Sweed, McKelvin, or DRC. And then address OLB in the second round. I really stress the fact that we have to address that position becuase I feel its such a huge help if we get a rotation at OLB so we get fresh legs and always have a solid pass rush (a possible thing to what Philly and the Giants do, it always gets pressure on the QB).

Well that would definately be ideal, but the situation we were discussing would be if we are stuck at the 6 spot and long, long, mcfadden and gholston are gone who do we go with. Most people would love to trade down a few spots, grab an extra 2nd or 3rd, and still get a player they want, but trading is very unlikely. It's a real possibility that we could be stuck at 6 with no trading down possible and those guys are gone, who than would we take.

TimD
03-11-2008, 08:04 PM
I honestly hope we trade down. I looked at the value chart and if we found a team that really wants whoever is left at 6 we could potentially get another 2nd and a 3rd plus that teams 1st, but I doubt that would happen. It'd most likely be a their 1st and either late 2nd or early 3rd. Either way we get an extra pick to help rebuild the team.

nvot9
03-11-2008, 08:08 PM
Well that would definately be ideal, but the situation we were discussing would be if we are stuck at the 6 spot and long, long, mcfadden and gholston are gone who do we go with. Most people would love to trade down a few spots, grab an extra 2nd or 3rd, and still get a player they want, but trading is very unlikely. It's a real possibility that we could be stuck at 6 with no trading down possible and those guys are gone, who than would we take.

That's the question I'm trying to find out myself. Could they reach for Balmer? I really don't see any WR prospect that they'd reach and take. Perhaps McKlevin or DRC? I honestly have no idea, and I think it's very interesting because this is a situation that could very likely happen. Derrick Harvey maybe?

I guess I could perhaps see Sweed, Scott's got him at 11 as of 2ish weeks ago, I think he'll be a number 1. Or what about Merling, I'm not sure the likelihood of that...

I will say this though, I would be 100% absolutely, positively SHOCKED if we took McFadden, I'll even go out and say that we're flat out no going to go that route.

nvot9
03-11-2008, 08:10 PM
I honestly hope we trade down. I looked at the value chart and if we found a team that really wants whoever is left at 6 we could potentially get another 2nd and a 3rd plus that teams 1st, but I doubt that would happen. It'd most likely be a their 1st and either late 2nd or early 3rd. Either way we get an extra pick to help rebuild the team.

I'm pretty sure we all agree...and although Mangini has been very good about getting trades done and hasn't been afraid to make plenty draft time trades, it's still a difficult thing to do, especially in the first round. The question's really just...what if it doesn't happen? Who do we take then, assuming the big guys are not there. I for one am hoping McFadden's available, that would make trading that much easier.

nvot9
03-11-2008, 08:13 PM
Don't underrate Groves though, he's supposedly working out with us tomorrow, he could really impress and be the pick at 6 perhaps...and to be honest, if he looks fluid enough and agile enough to be a solid LB, I'd love the pick, reminds me of Ware.....

TimD
03-11-2008, 08:14 PM
I mean the draft could very well end up like this:

1 C Long
2 Gholston
3 Ryan
4 McFadden
5 J Long
6 ?

Then what would we do? I mean we could use Dorsey as a 3-4 DE but I think we learned our lesson with paying undersized DL lots of money. There is really no one left that anyone would want to trade their entire day 1. Maybe reach on Groves, a corner, or Sweed?

EDIT: And about Groves I have a feeling he'll be a better OLB than Gholston. Not a better pass rusher but overall a better OLB because he's smoother and fits the position better.

nvot9
03-11-2008, 08:28 PM
I mean the draft could very well end up like this:

1 C Long
2 Gholston
3 Ryan
4 McFadden
5 J Long
6 ?

Then what would we do? I mean we could use Dorsey as a 3-4 DE but I think we learned our lesson with paying undersized DL lots of money. There is really no one left that anyone would want to trade their entire day 1. Maybe reach on Groves, a corner, or Sweed?

EDIT: And about Groves I have a feeling he'll be a better OLB than Gholston. Not a better pass rusher but overall a better OLB because he's smoother and fits the position better.

I agree with that statement, something that worried me a bit, was that I heard Gholston didn't look to fluid in his pro day drills as he was very big muscularly and couldn't make the proper adjustments and proper cuts that LB's need to make. Worries me a bit, but he'd be such a freak pass rusher I think...

nyjets5125
03-11-2008, 08:36 PM
I agree with that statement, something that worried me a bit, was that I heard Gholston didn't look to fluid in his pro day drills as he was very big muscularly and couldn't make the proper adjustments and proper cuts that LB's need to make. Worries me a bit, but he'd be such a freak pass rusher I think...

i heard that was a false report and was edited but not sure

i think groves in the 2nd is probably better than gholston in the 1st (especially with pace) but i wouldnt go as far to say groves>gholston as a 34 OLB

nvot9
03-11-2008, 08:40 PM
i heard that was a false report and was edited but not sure

i think groves in the 2nd is probably better than gholston in the 1st (especially with pace) but i wouldnt go as far to say groves>gholston as a 34 OLB

I would say Groves>Gholston as an LB in general. BUT Gholston>Groves as a pass rushing OLB. Similar to the comparison between Ware and Merriman, Merriman's the more dominant pass rusher with tremendous size and speed, can bull rush and beat the quick step to get to the QB, basically a DE playing with his hand up much like Gholston would be. Ware on the other hand, while also a tremendous pass rusher, plays with more speed and finesse as oppose to pure strength (not to say he's not strong) and is a more complete LB, against the run etc. like Groves.

TimD
03-12-2008, 04:59 PM
If we can trade down from #6 and get a WR/OLB/CB with a late 1st rounder and Brohm is available with our 2nd should we take him? We'd still have another pick in the top 3 rounds for a WR/OLB/CB and two 4th rounders. I think its a good idea.

nvot9
03-12-2008, 05:45 PM
If we can trade down from #6 and get a WR/OLB/CB with a late 1st rounder and Brohm is available with our 2nd should we take him? We'd still have another pick in the top 3 rounds for a WR/OLB/CB and two 4th rounders. I think its a good idea.

I'm gunna say pass. Brohm looks too much like Pennington, I'd rather go for a guy like Flacco or Johnson who could actually become big time QB's. More to the point though, I'd prefer next year to address the QB situation, I think this is the judgment year for KC.

BroadwayJoe10
03-12-2008, 08:02 PM
I'm gunna say pass. Brohm looks too much like Pennington, I'd rather go for a guy like Flacco or Johnson who could actually become big time QB's. More to the point though, I'd prefer next year to address the QB situation, I think this is the judgment year for KC.

I agree that we should pass on drafting a QB this year, becuase klemens deserves his chance. However, i would take brohm over the others in a second. I don't mind the comparisons to chad because chad in 2002 was a great QB, it's the two surgeries later that's not allowing him to paly. Brohm has a bit of a stronger arm than chad did in '02 and a lot stronger arm than he has now, but either way i don't think we should be drafting a QB this year.

nyjets5125
03-12-2008, 08:17 PM
I agree that we should pass on drafting a QB this year, becuase klemens deserves his chance. However, i would take brohm over the others in a second. I don't mind the comparisons to chad because chad in 2002 was a great QB, it's the two surgeries later that's not allowing him to paly. Brohm has a bit of a stronger arm than chad did in '02 and a lot stronger arm than he has now, but either way i don't think we should be drafting a QB this year.

agreed, i really dont think we need 3 QBs that migth not be able to handle the load this year, especially becasuse it seems like were in a win-now situation

but if we were to do it, i wouldnt be all too pissed

TimD
03-13-2008, 08:48 PM
wrong thread

nyjets5125
03-13-2008, 10:25 PM
wrong thread

why wrong thread?, were talkign about drafting brohm and i said why i wouldnt really like it that much

BroadwayJoe10
03-13-2008, 11:54 PM
why wrong thread?, were talkign about drafting brohm and i said why i wouldnt really like it that much

I'm betting that he typed something that wasn't supposed to be in this thread and then realized it, and edited it by saying 'wrong thread.' Just a hunch.

TimD
03-14-2008, 06:11 AM
wrong thread

i posted something and realized it was more for the discussion thread.

nyjets5125
03-14-2008, 10:57 PM
i posted something and realized it was more for the discussion thread.

o sorry, my bad

nvot9
03-15-2008, 07:59 PM
I'm still not going to rule out Merling as a sleeper pick for 6th overall, same goes for Groves. I'd be very surprised if they took Sweed or any other WR, I can't see them going with Desean after seeing the response Miami got with Ginn last year.

I still think a trade is going to happen though, Mangini has not been shy about trading up and down in the draft, especially within the first two rounds. Even more to the point, I think Tannenbaum's gunna want a lower pick for cap reasons...sucks to have a high first rounder in this draft.

nyjets5125
03-16-2008, 02:18 PM
I'm still not going to rule out Merling as a sleeper pick for 6th overall, same goes for Groves. I'd be very surprised if they took Sweed or any other WR, I can't see them going with Desean after seeing the response Miami got with Ginn last year.

I still think a trade is going to happen though, Mangini has not been shy about trading up and down in the draft, especially within the first two rounds. Even more to the point, I think Tannenbaum's gunna want a lower pick for cap reasons...sucks to have a high first rounder in this draft.

merlings hurt and his stock is dropping so i doubt 6th pick well be great value for him....and about a trade, i think most can agree tahtt they want that and think it would be the best for the team, but it could be hard to trade down beacuse like most drafts, most teasms want to go down than up, especially in this deep, not top-heavy draft

thetedginnshow
03-17-2008, 12:23 AM
Mainly, it just sucks that they won that last game, contrary to the popular belief around here before that the 6th pick was a perfect position.

BroadwayJoe10
03-17-2008, 09:14 AM
Mainly, it just sucks that they won that last game, contrary to the popular belief around here before that the 6th pick was a perfect position.

I beg to differ. I don't wanna get into the whole always playing to win the game, becuase that's a whole different argument; although it's been shown the teams who win the last game of the year have a better record the following year.

Regardless; from all the jets reporters and beatwriters, it seems as though the jets want to trade down more than anything. This makes me believe that even if gholston or dmac was their they won't pull the trigger; if they sat at the 3 spot, they would be in roughly the same situation. The only person they aren't in a position to get is chris long and he seems prime to go #1 overall, but we'll see.

nyjets5125
03-17-2008, 04:05 PM
Mainly, it just sucks that they won that last game, contrary to the popular belief around here before that the 6th pick was a perfect position.

but then what would happen if c long and gholston were both taken? then it would just be harder to trade out...and if it is mcfadden that we want, then thats more money we wouldve had to pay him

thetedginnshow
03-17-2008, 04:32 PM
I beg to differ. I don't wanna get into the whole always playing to win the game, becuase that's a whole different argument; although it's been shown the teams who win the last game of the year have a better record the following year.

Regardless; from all the jets reporters and beatwriters, it seems as though the jets want to trade down more than anything. This makes me believe that even if gholston or dmac was their they won't pull the trigger; if they sat at the 3 spot, they would be in roughly the same situation. The only person they aren't in a position to get is chris long and he seems prime to go #1 overall, but we'll see.

The bold is an awfully amusing statistic. Not that I ever said we should have "forfeited" the game, but oh well.

But yeah. Now, of course they're going to want to trade down. That really doesn't do anything but support the argument. Their outlook on the off-season could have been entirely different had they been in that spot. At this point, there certainly isn't anyone out of the question, but they are definitely in a worse position due to where they currently stand. Though we've been saying it for what it seems like months, it'll be interesting to see how things shake out.

TimD
03-20-2008, 01:37 PM
Im representing the Jets in the Group Mock Draft (mock draft thread). I chose Gholston with the first pick. Both Longs, Ryan, and DMac were off the board, but Gholston was my number 1 anyways.

http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/forum/showpost.php?p=960485&postcount=9

Young Nasty Man
03-23-2008, 01:14 AM
I read a rumor on the Jetsblog that the Jets were working out Keith Rivers...Possible trade down and draft USC's finest LB for the nasty tandem of K Rivs and D Harris?

TimD
03-23-2008, 08:17 AM
The Jets are probably just working out a bunch of the guys that they think will be available at 6. Of course they want to trade down, but if they do I don't think they'll take Rivers unless he fell or something. OLB, DL, CB, and WR are our 4 positions of need. The only other position I could see the Jets taking in the 1st is RB (McFadden). Barton and Harris is a solid combo in the middle, and I don't think we'd add another player to that without first addressing the other positions.

619
03-23-2008, 08:57 AM
A 3-4 ILB at #6 seems too high.

BroadwayJoe10
03-23-2008, 09:06 AM
They work out basically the top 10 players just to give the idea that they can and would select anyone. They also are doing just in case the players they want are no longer there; i would expect them to trade down and take less value than pick someone like rivers. I really dislike rivers in a 34 and think he would be completely out of place in our 34 system; someone like curtis lofton would be a much better fit and he could be had in the top of the second.

I wouldn't read much into who they are or are not working out.

nvot9
03-23-2008, 09:21 AM
Keith Rivers = Jonathan Vilma in 3-4

Not saying I would do this, but I'd rather take Curtis Lofton with our 6th overall than Rivers just because Lofton is a great fit and reminds me a lot of Harris coming out. The only reason Lofton is not as highly rated as Keith Rivers is because although he plays just as fast as him, Lofton doesn't time as well.

TimD
03-23-2008, 09:33 AM
Lofton and Harris in the middle would be scary good.

nyjets5125
03-23-2008, 11:53 AM
im still undecided about taking rivers to play ILB and i would definitely like lofton at ILB, but i feel like we can address more needs with that 2nd round pick because there will likely be great options for us at WR (hardy and others that fall), OLB (groves avril etc.), and CB (maybe caison or just others) that would be more important to add than lofton when barton proved to be more than capable at ILB

hcbrad08
03-23-2008, 02:48 PM
would much prefer Rivers inside as opposed to Lofton. Rivers isnt a prototypical OLB who rushes the QB he works well in junk and tackles well...he also drops back extremely well. For anyone saying Lofton is a much better fit or Rivers is Vilmas in 34 you are on crack if you put lofton on a higher scale... Rivers played in and out at USC with success everywhere but much more dominance outside. Hes also taller and able to sift through junk better which you need in the 34. Lofton is barely 6'0'' and only started a little more than a season. To compare lofton and Rivers is bad bc lofton although he projects to 34 ILB isnt of prototypical size which despite all other skills kills players in a 34 so w Rivers playing olb in college without a pass rush but with great instincts and size shouldnt we talk about how he and harris would produce better bc Harris has somewhat stiff hips but good blitzing technique (mangini: i didnt know he could rush that passer that well) and Rivers can drop back, deliver a blow but cant rush the passer as well.

I dont know I have Rivers as a top 10 overall and Lofton as Top 50 in the low 40s. So I couldnt say that Rivers will suck inside in the 34 bc hes not as small as vilma and hes a better player than lofton with much more experience as a captain of his def unit.

all that said i only REALLY like a rivers pick if we trade back to around 10-12 AND THAT SAID I would prefer trading down to the Boys and getting ridiculous picks.
I really think we need a big WR, 34 DE and OLB. All with 1st to 2nd rd grades.

WR
-Sweed
-Kelly
-Hardy
OLB
-Groves
-Jones
DE
-Balmer
-Campbell

SO WE NEED MORE PICKS... TO MAINTAIN THE FRANCHISE AND DISPELL THESE IDEAS THE FO DOESNT CARE ABOUT THE FUTURE AND THEYRE ONLY TRYING TO WIN NOW.

Tannenbaum: "We still believe the best way to fortify a team and franchise is through the Draft and by maintaining a core of players."

WE NEED TO PROVE IT

nvot9
03-23-2008, 05:02 PM
would much prefer Rivers inside as opposed to Lofton. Rivers isnt a prototypical OLB who rushes the QB he works well in junk and tackles well...he also drops back extremely well. For anyone saying Lofton is a much better fit or Rivers is Vilmas in 34 you are on crack if you put lofton on a higher scale... Rivers played in and out at USC with success everywhere but much more dominance outside. Hes also taller and able to sift through junk better which you need in the 34. Lofton is barely 6'0'' and only started a little more than a season. To compare lofton and Rivers is bad bc lofton although he projects to 34 ILB isnt of prototypical size which despite all other skills kills players in a 34 so w Rivers playing olb in college without a pass rush but with great instincts and size shouldnt we talk about how he and harris would produce better bc Harris has somewhat stiff hips but good blitzing technique (mangini: i didnt know he could rush that passer that well) and Rivers can drop back, deliver a blow but cant rush the passer as well.

If that's how you feel, then YOU'RE the one on crack buddy. Lofton isn't prototypical size? He's bigger than Rivers, what does that say about him? Everyone puts so much stock into damn height...and honestly it's ********. The only position I'd really care about height, is WR and possibly QB. There's a huge difference between height and size. You don't need to be tall to be a good LB, but you it's good to be massive if you are going to be a good 3-4 LB, if anything, Rivers is actually pretty undersized, that was a knock on him after the season, he only bulked up for the weigh-in's etc. but can he play at 240? Lofton is 246, that's bigger than Harris...he's plenty big. And it's not even about the size, Lofton made a job of shedding blockers and making tackles despite blockers, all which will lead to him being a good pass rusher in the NFL, all attributes necessary to succeed in the 3-4. Rivers was pitiful against blockers. He's extremely "unphysical" and is not strong at all. Yea, he's very athletic, yea he's a good, instinctive LB.....so was Vilma, too bad that doesn't help me in the 3-4. I don't care if Rivers was captain or not....we don't need that from Lofton (this is all assuming we'd even take him). We've got leaders already, we need players who can play...I'm not drafting a guy to be a leader, I'm drafting him to succeed. I'd be pissed if we took Rivers at all, I don't care where...he could fall to the 7th and I still wouldn't touch him. We learned with Vilma, it doesn't matter how talented you are, the 3-4 and 4-3 are VERY different and a 4-3 ILB does not translate into a 3-4 ILB. Rivers is a WILL, nothing more...

hcbrad08
03-24-2008, 10:04 AM
You want Rivers to play as a WILL blitzing and covering screens? Id say covering screens yes bc of his athleticism but his pass rushing production sucked in college. So how are you going to justify his playing Weak side? He'd actually be better with his instincts and level of experience playing the run but not as a SAM..... INSIDE. You need to stop reading scotts scouting reports and using them exclusively. Rivers should play the WILL if outside but moving him inside in a 34 someone would get a better version of the smart high energy fluid LB for a long time and wouldnt try to force him into blitzing packages when he hasn't succeeded in that role but has in so many other aspects of the game. Also lb per inch Lofton is bigger but Rivers is taller and yes it matters in terms of reading plays in a 34 how tall you are. 5'11 3/4 isnt exactly prototypical. I dont want Lofton who hasnt played to 245 in college according to scout.com he played at235. Where as Rivers who is listed at 242 played at 238. Id say your argument about playing weight is moot if not in the favor of the guy youre arguing against. Lofton fits our mold in terms of character and football and IQ and I wouldnt mind (though I wouldnt be pleased) if we drafted him but I think the fact you just went on a tirade about the fact you dont want Rivers period, despite the fact that he has tons more experience and CAN shed blockers well as well as be versatile enough to play OLB at times and ILB says something about a)how much you watched USC this year b)how much you you have something against Keith Rivers.

How is 62 242 Keith Rivers in terms of size not similar more to Daivd Harris 62 243 as opposed to Curtis Lofton 60 245 Vilma 60 235 who is more similar to someone who didnt play well in the 34? and dont say its not all about size in the 34 bc it isnt always but it helps not to take chance when delaing with two guys who have high levels of play. (ex. of lack of prototypical size...DRob, Ellis, Vilma) and that hurts a franchise if you try and plug a square peg into a round hole Im not saying Lofton is Vilma Im saying Rivers is not but Considering Lofton played at 60 235 in his final (junior) season I think he matches the failure type ILB in the 34 and although he may play well there I dont think NY will be patient if they hear pundits saying the one knock on Curtis Lofton is height and playing weight he may be undersized (fans will call the FO nutty to trade Vilma for another undersized albeit a bit bigger Ilb). Keith Rivers is a good player and versatile at that something we covet. Again Im just Saying Rivers will be a better pick for our system and type of player.

That said Id probably prefer a guy like Jonathan Goff in the 4th as ILB if the season started today wouldnt be as big a need as others. The only reason in the draft when you take a player against your need is when he is the BPA and or one of the BPAs and an elite talent (like Rivers not Lofton)

I dont want Lofton in the second. Id prefer not to take Rivers bc that would mean we wouldnt have traded down as much I would have like bc we need a lot of picks if we a)want to win now b) want to still be able to claim we believe in the draft (WHICH IS THE WAY TO BUILD PERENIAL PLAYOFF/SUPERBOWL TEAMS)

And Yes Id like Keith Rivers in the 7th I dont understand how you could even make that statement. Im sure you were just trying to drive your point home but still.

thetedginnshow
03-24-2008, 02:59 PM
Height is actually kind of important as a 3-4 ILB. But in any case, I highly doubt we're drafting Rivers. If we wanted a SC LB, we should wait a year.

The Great Jonathan Vilma
03-27-2008, 05:34 PM
this thread has some intensity, and for nothing. Straight up, Rivers will not be drafted by the Jets, even if we trade down

hcbrad08
03-27-2008, 05:51 PM
I think the lack of posting anywhere in the Jets forum has brought down our idea of intensity in a forum haha. I said in my other posts and I think we all agreed after the thread was created that the scenario was unlikely if not flat out impossible. It was more a debate for me anyway about the fact that size in the 34 does matter, which is important but this is far from anything extremely meaningful having to do with the jets. This last month is definitely going to the longest and dullest. UGHH

d34ng3l021
03-28-2008, 05:38 PM
Long, Long, Gholston, McFadden, and Dorsey are all gone.

Who do you guys take?

derza222
03-28-2008, 06:02 PM
Depends on your draft board I guess, there's no real clear cut pick for the 6 spot in that scenario. If you've got McKelvin or DRC high on your board maybe we go that route, if you like Harvey he could be a 3-4 OLB for us, if you have Sweed or Thomas high we could use help at wideout, hell if you've got Ryan high and you like that fit maybe go there as it doesn't seem we have much faith in either of our QB's right now. You're probably looking at a reach pick but outside of Ellis and the guys you have gone everybody's muddled anyways. All of those are options we're going to be stuck with a bad pick in that scenario anyways so just go with your gut. No clear cut good choice in that scenario at all.

hcbrad08
04-10-2008, 03:25 AM
http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football/jets/2008/04/10/2008-04-10_kerry_rhodes_snags_huge_jet_deal-2.html

after that article Im looking at scenarios...its in keith Rivers area...what if we traded down in the 1st to 14 or so and take a rivers or other type player...we could get a their 1st 2nd and maybe 5th?

it really for me seems like good value if we cant get dallas' 2 1sts.

examples of mocks of such scenarios (the rivers idea isnt as pertinent as the trade)

1)Rivers-LB
2a)Hardy-WR
2b)Godfrey-CB
4a)Goff-LB
4b)Choice-RB
5)Dotson-DE
6)Morris-QB
7)Williams-S

1)Sweed-WR
2a)Balmer-DE
2b)Godfrey-CB
4a)Goff-LB
4b)Choice-RB
5)Robertson-LB
6)Morris-QB
7)Williams-S

derza222
04-10-2008, 10:43 AM
Tell me a little about Dotson at end, I don't know much about him so that pick intrigued me. Also the Williams you have at S in the seventh, DJ from Oklahoma or another guy? I liked that fit awhile ago. Couldn't complain about either of those scenarios.

Some other guys I wonder if we target. Perhaps a second deal down and go after a guy like Cason? I think he would be a TREMENDOUS fit across from Revis with his ball skills and skill set. Plus supposedly he's a leader. Devin Thomas as a #3 who learns behind Cotchery and Coles and takes over as a #1 down the road? We could give him time to learn and in the meanwhile with his ability to run after the catch he could be the "playmaker" we are supposedly looking for. Mayo has been flying up draft boards and I wonder if we think he's a solid fit inside. If Harvey falls he could be our OLB, Groves is another guy we could be targeting in that area. In the case Ryan slides by Baltimore if he drops to where we deal down I think we would have to give him a very long look. I'm sure there's a lot more possibilities but those are a few that came to mind.

As with the trade, I wonder who wants to move up. I doubt Millen is going to try and trade up, maybe for DMC since they need a RB but honestly who knows. I do think a deal with Detroit would be nice though, gives us a pick in a good range. New Orleans dealing up for one of the tackles is definitely possible, same with Denver and maybe we just slip them D-Rob in a deal. I wouldn't be surprised if Chicago or Carolina wanted to move up for a tackle either, and we traded with both of them recently (Jones deal and trade up for Revis). Buffalo I don't think we want to deal with and thought is they would want to move down anyway. But I wouldn't be surprised with any of those other 5 teams moving up, nobody knows what Millen is thinking and Shanny tends to do what he can to get his guy, and New Orleans for DT and Carolina/Chicago for OL tend to make sense. I'd definitely love a deal down there.

hcbrad08
04-11-2008, 03:12 PM
the williams is Bobbie Williams from Bethune Cookman he is IMO a really underated prospect.

Dotson is a DT and would be a good fit at DE he has the size his senior year was spent entirely in other teams backfields. He was a 4 year starter so I think if we are looking for depth and pass on the earlier picks he could be who we target

hcbrad08
04-11-2008, 03:18 PM
If we take Matt Ryan can we have a good draft overall? I think it kind of hurts us based on all of our needs. I dont know how I would feel about the pick...thoughts on if we can still compete if we go QB without perhaps trading down or addressing OLB or WR 1st.

Young Nasty Man
04-12-2008, 11:48 AM
ya bobbie willaims is the guy i think we may look at...also ive been reading a bunch of beau bell rumors...

derza222
04-12-2008, 02:28 PM
I think we can. Obviously we have some needs, but it seems a lot of them aren't that critical and don't need to be addressed this year. You may disagree but the way I see it (this is assuming Tangini does NOT think Clemens is the guy, otherwise why would you take Ryan anyway?) I'll split up what I think our needs are into tiers.

Our most immediate need is probably a #2 corner. It's a position that you can stick a guy in and be set. However, do we really want to draft that guy at #6? We could grab somebody in round 2, maybe even round 4, to be that guy. We don't need somebody with top end potential, just a guy that can make plays on the ball when forced to across from Revis. We have some solid guys there but a lot of question marks.

The pass rush is very similar to corner, except when you bring money into the equation. If we cut Barret, for example, we save some decent money off the cap. We save next to nothing for cutting Thomas. Plus we have an investment in Bowens and an improved D-line. Pace may or may not be a great pass rusher for us. Depending on how the FO sees it, we may or may not look in this direction. However, I think if we do go OLB for example value for Avril, possibly Groves at the top of round 2 is better than value for Gholston at the top of round 1.

Wideout is an interesting position. We kind of have a need for a #3, definitely need some size, and need a future #1. Maybe we could wait till next year but I think we address slot guy or size this draft. Now if we trade down in round 1 and get Devin Thomas or Limas Sweed, the two best fits for what we're looking for in a wideout IMO, we can kill two birds with one stone. However, we could just look for a mid-round guy like an Eddie Royal or Marcus Monk to fill one of those needs, who knows.

With the ILB position, Barton is probably fine this year, so we don't have to draft a guy really early to play inside soon. Because of that, we can afford to draft a guy later for some depth and then let him take over down the road. We could even wait till next year to be honest. Another possibility is drafting a guy early round 2 like Avril if we think he can transition to play inside, and kill two needs (pass rush and ILB) with one stone.

DE and OL would be nice for some depth and maybe future starting potential but we're probably in good shape right now and I see those more as mid-late round picks for us.

On the other hand, if we feel we don't have a franchise QB on the roster AND feel Ryan is a franchise QB, I think you have to take that chance. The team we have now is great but if we don't have a quarterback we probably will struggle, and we're not going to find one next year. A couple of possibilities I wouldn't mind if we do draft Ryan (after round 1). Won't go with specific OL/DE guys just for the more specific needs I outlined. Also we could trade some of our current players for picks later so that's something to watch out for. Maybe a 6th for D-Rob or something, but based on what we have now:

2. Cliff Avril
4. Trae Williams/Chevis Jackson/Orlando Scandrick/DeJuan Tribble
4. Marcus Monk
6. OL/DE
7. OL/DE

2. Tracy Porter
4. Jon Goff
4. Marcus Monk
6. OL/DE
7. OL/DE

Neither is great and both leave some needs open down the road but depending on what the FO thinks of the OLB position I'm not sold we go in that direction. Can we have a perfect draft if we go Ryan? Probably not. But if he turns out to be the guy at QB for us and plays the position for the next decade and we're good for awhile can it be a successful draft? I think it can be quite a successful draft, and we can pull some good players to fill needs out of it as well.

EDIT:
The way I look at it, drafting Ryan at 6 is not much different than drafting McFadden at 6 provided we aren't comfortable with our QB situation. We need a QB, we take a chance on a guy we like, we need a playmaker, we take a chance on a guy we like. Not like positionally RB is all that big of a need for us, though I wouldn't mind giving it a look in this draft just because the value is going to be great for some guys.

katnip
04-22-2008, 06:00 PM
I do. Do you?

Young Nasty Man
04-22-2008, 06:22 PM
no hell no.......

katnip
04-22-2008, 06:28 PM
Who do want?

I'd be happy with Gholston or Ryan.

hcbrad08
04-22-2008, 06:46 PM
I asked on eof my friends at school who follows the draft as much as I do what would he do if we drafted Ryan....

He replied, "I'd stab myself in the neck"

I tend to agree...in the class of Leinart Young Cutler Clemens...Ryan is one up from Clemens.

Way too high for 6 and not what we need. At 6 (no trade )Id take, Gholston, Harvey, McFadden, Stewart (just bc of rumors) not ryan we could trade the pick away bc about 3 teams below us want him and every other qb on the board garners late 1st early second grades.

NO RYAN. It would be dumb as hell. Ryan with 20 million in guarantees and a big number , Clemens with 2 Million this year and the most likely starter Pennington with a 7 mil number....

I Vote Nay

derza222
04-22-2008, 08:08 PM
Here's the deal:

Do I want Ryan? No.

If we pick Ryan, will I be pissed? No.

Clearly if we pick Ryan we saw something in Clemens that told us he can't be our quarterback of the future. I'd be kind of pissed that we wasted the pick on Clemens, but if he's not the future for this team I'd rather admit our mistake and move on than go into next year with a QB we have no confidence in. If we don't have confidence in Clemens and really like Ryan I think we grab him if he's there. The one thing that would really disappoint me about picking Ryan would be if we gave up #36, Kerry Rhodes, David Harris, Darrelle Revis, Leon Washington, D'Brick, Mangold, Cotchery, or any of our recent FA signings in a trade up. Anything else on the roster is up for grabs IMO, though I'm probably forgetting someone. I'd rather not give up Stuckey too but I doubt people ask for him in a deal anyways. I guess the way I view it is we wouldn't take Ryan if we didn't think we needed him to get stability at the QB position and were very, very confident he'd succeed, so why not just go for it if we do? I'd rather go defense but if that's what we need for stability at that position we could do worse things with our pick.

throwback54milkman
04-22-2008, 11:07 PM
I think the question is if Ryan is better than Cutler, Leinart, and Quinn because those are all quarterbacks that we could have had but passed over in the past two years. I wonder what the Jets see in him that they didn't see in those other guys.

derza222
04-22-2008, 11:36 PM
I think it's pretty easy to tell what the Jets see that they didn't in Leinart, Quinn, and Cutler. It's the intangibles that Ryan brings to the table. Elite intangibles plus adequate arm strength for the Meadowlands has to be something appealing for this front office based on what they look for in a player.

That said, I have to believe this is a smokescreen. It seems that the Jets have interest in pretty much each of the 5 best players that could be available at our pick besides Dorsey. Maybe we're just trying to entice a team to move up and take a player from us or even ahead of us so our guy isn't on the board. I sincerely hope that we don't want Ryan, but if we do something must be seriously wrong with Clemens.

As an aside, supposedly there's talks that if we take Ryan we'll deal Pennington to the Ravens for their second. That would certainly make taking for Ryan much more appealing, given we'd get another second in a range where there's going to be some good players for us. I'd still be disappointed if we moved up for him even though we'd recoup a second especially for a money perspective, I'd have a much more positive attitude (though skeptical, don't take this as me being hardcore for Ryan because I'd like it to be clear that I'm NOT but if we feel we need to I also won't completely flip we could do worse things at 6, but a trade up would kind of suck) if we just took him at 6.

Naked Jehuty
04-23-2008, 08:49 AM
Its extremley difficult for any qb to perform even decent with no ground game, virtually no lg or rt, and no elite wrs. By addressing the o-line this year we boosted the pass protection and running game and there is no doubt imo that Clemens will play much better than Pennington or Ryan this year. And to reach for Clemens in the 06' draft, we must've seen something in him too.

GET LOOSE
04-23-2008, 09:37 AM
I'm not sure if anyone else has heard this but their are rumors that the jets want to trade up with the rams to get mcfadden. I am kind of surpirsed if this is true because i thought if we were gonna trade up it would be to get gholston or chris long. Now i would love to get mcfadden but i dont want to give up to much on trading up

GET LOOSE
04-23-2008, 09:38 AM
I would stare at the TV for about an hour then i would cry and then i would become a saints fan lmao

bigbluedefense
04-23-2008, 10:32 AM
Theres a strong possibility that both Gholston and Long will be gone before your pick. If thats the case, thats a tough spot. Ive been saying for awhile that I don't think McFadden is the best idea, but if you can't trade out, who else do you take at 6?

It might have to be McFadden if you can't trade out. No one is worth reaching for at 6.

And what sucks even more is, the Pats are in a prime position now to trade out of the 7 pick. Bc if Matt Ryan falls, the ideal trading partner becomes NE, not the Jets. Only shot you have of trading out is if someone falls in love with McFadden.

katnip
04-23-2008, 10:46 AM
Personally, I'd be happy with Joe Flacco (believe he has the most potential) or Brian Brohm (big fan of him in college at Louisville) or Matt Ryan. I just think Ryan can start right away (mid-season) if Clemens don't pan out. I don't think he will personally. I think he could be a decent QB, just not a consistent we'll prolly go to playoffs each year QB. At RB I'd love to grab East Carolina's Chris Johnson in the 2nd Round or UCF's Kevin Smith, a tough back. And fourth I'd grab a guy like a Jerome Simpson from Coastal Carolina, Marcus Monk of Arkansas, or a explosive TE to put in special packages like a, Kellen Davis of Michigan St.

Naked Jehuty
04-23-2008, 10:53 AM
Personally, I'd be happy with Joe Flacco (believe he has the most potential) or Brian Brohm (big fan of him in college at Louisville) or Matt Ryan. I just think Ryan can start right away (mid-season) if Clemens don't pan out. I don't think he will personally. I think he could be a decent QB, just not a consistent we'll prolly go to playoffs each year QB. At RB I'd love to grab East Carolina's Chris Johnson in the 2nd Round or UCF's Kevin Smith, a tough back. And fourth I'd grab a guy like a Jerome Simpson from Coastal Carolina, Marcus Monk of Arkansas, or a explosive TE to put in special packages like a, Kellen Davis of Michigan St.

W/ Jones and Washington I dont see any need to take a back in the 2nd. We have more needs that can be adressed than RB

katnip
04-23-2008, 10:56 AM
Then whats the point of getting D-Mac by some fans?

Naked Jehuty
04-23-2008, 11:30 AM
Then whats the point of getting D-Mac by some fans?

I'm not high on taking McFadden either, but he has game changining speed and ability, unlike any other back we have or in the draft. Chris Johnson is fast, Stewart and Mendhenall are great backs, but none of them would add that big time playmaking that we need like D-Mac.

I would be fairly happy with McFadden at 6, but only if Long and Gholston are gone.

katnip
04-23-2008, 11:40 AM
I'm not high on taking McFadden either, but he has game changining speed and ability, unlike any other back we have or in the draft. Chris Johnson is fast, Stewart and Mendhenall are great backs, but none of them would add that big time playmaking that we need like D-Mac.

I would be fairly happy with McFadden at 6, but only if Long and Gholston are gone.

Yea. I'm only talking about Ryan cause that RUMOR in the other section. But I mostly want Gholston.

AlexDown
04-23-2008, 11:45 AM
Theres a strong possibility that both Gholston and Long will be gone before your pick. If thats the case, thats a tough spot. Ive been saying for awhile that I don't think McFadden is the best idea, but if you can't trade out, who else do you take at 6?

It might have to be McFadden if you can't trade out. No one is worth reaching for at 6.

And what sucks even more is, the Pats are in a prime position now to trade out of the 7 pick. Bc if Matt Ryan falls, the ideal trading partner becomes NE, not the Jets. Only shot you have of trading out is if someone falls in love with McFadden.

The Jared Allen trade really was bad for the Jets. There is a chance that Long, Gholston, and McFadden will not be there by their pick.

I also really can't believe that the Jets would trade up to get McFadden. I don't see any reason why that would be a smart move.

derza222
04-23-2008, 12:06 PM
It's interesting that all of this McFadden/Ryan talk has come out, generally when something like this becomes news it's a smokescreen or something. But why smokescreen a move up? Unless it's trying to force Al Davis' hand, and I don't think that really does much because the Raiders won't mention wanting to trade up since they don't have a second rounder.

The one thing I can think of is that (if the "leaked" interest is more Ryan than McFadden) we want a team to jump ahead of us to take Ryan so we have Gholston/Long/McFadden on the board.


I think all of our options have some serious downside to them financially. Taking a back and a pass rusher are pretty much the same thing for us, we have a player starting at the position that underperformed after a good year and making a big contract. In fact, the best option for us from a money perspective may be taking Ryan and giving up Pennington to the highest bidder.


On the field, there's truth to the "we need a playmaker on offense" and the "we need to rush the passer" talk. Personally I'm more of a defensive guy and I think with the improved line will help Jones and Washington anyways, plus if we want a playmaker on offense I think it's better to go wideout. Regardless we can't miss on this pick.

McFadden's chicken legs scare me and his fumbling problems are a HUGE issue IMO, 5 lost fumbles last year we don't want a guy that's going to put the ball on the turf. Unless we're completely convinced we can fix that problem (and I know it's been done) and soon that means the pick is incredibly risky.

Gholston I also think is risky, I like his potential and his skill set but he just doesn't seem to have a passion for football. Long's the guy I want more than anyone else for us, either of the other two carry a bigger risk and I'd prefer defense with Gholston but otherwise it's pretty much a toss up.


If none of those guys are available, it seems we may take Ryan. If not I think Carolina and Baltimore may try to move up, though I think they'll try and deal with the Patriots and not us. I'd be willing to take less than value though if we don't want Ryan. I do think teams may want Dorsey badly enough to trade with us if he falls, though I don't think he's the top 6 guy left at our pick. Forced to pick in that scenario I wouldn't mind Harvey, we may just take Ryan if the value is good, I can't think of anything else really it's a tough situation. Don't think we go corner there, but I could be wrong. Wonder how much there is to the Stewart talk as well.

gio
04-23-2008, 07:56 PM
Yea. I'm only talking about Ryan cause that RUMOR in the other section. But I mostly want Gholston.

if that rumor is true, then what do you think? penny for baltimore's #2? i like it and dont like it because then it kind of forces our hand at picking ryan @#6 if he is even there..if he is NOT there, then we have to use one of those 2nd rounders for a different, average qb...idk..we will see before draft day i guess.

J-E-T-S Jets Jets Jets
04-23-2008, 08:38 PM
if that rumor is true, then what do you think? penny for baltimore's #2? i like it and dont like it because then it kind of forces our hand at picking ryan @#6 if he is even there..if he is NOT there, then we have to use one of those 2nd rounders for a different, average qb...idk..we will see before draft day i guess.

I dont think there is any chance we can get a second rounder for pennington. And if he is traded, i dont think we are obligated to take a qb. Guys like Kelly Holcomb, Trent Dilfer, and even Leftwich are available and can serve as good veteran backups to Clemens.

HEISMANHERSCHEL
04-24-2008, 01:02 AM
From an outsider's point of view...

McFadden has elite measureables, and has the college career to go with it.

I hope you trade the pick to us (Cowboys) so we can have him. Other wise, Ryan=Cutler=Clements=whoever you want to plug in here.

The special player is McFadden. Dont pass on him. You will be sorry.....

thetedginnshow
04-24-2008, 03:13 AM
I will take any player projected in the top ten over Matt Ryan, to be honest.

gio
04-24-2008, 06:22 PM
I dont think there is any chance we can get a second rounder for pennington. And if he is traded, i dont think we are obligated to take a qb. Guys like Kelly Holcomb, Trent Dilfer, and even Leftwich are available and can serve as good veteran backups to Clemens.

the rumor was started on 1050 espn radio, and it was first circulated on baltimore radio stations...i personally think its a steal but it wont happen..
and i think we can find talent at qb in the later rounds anyway, that may in fact be better than ryan..we will see on saturday.

Chris777
04-24-2008, 09:03 PM
With Dorsey gone it looks like Atlanta is gonna go the Ryan route. I mean why not trade the Dewayne Robertson picks plus a 4th and the 6th overall to get up and select Long, or Mcfadden. Atlanta still has a huge chance to get Ryan (i doubt the Chiefs take him) or even go for Ellis and the Jets don't have to take a risk of losing out on all three of Mcfadden, Gholston, or Long. We've traded with them before so i can't see us not at least giving them a look.

This plan seems much better than the rumored inane plan of trading with the Rams for Ryan.

derza222
04-24-2008, 09:33 PM
It doesn't make any sense to trade up IMO. No way we get up for that little, a conditional pick next year and a fourth? I don't even think that's enough to get us up to 5, if it is it's barely enough. We'd have to give up our second, and that pick at 36 is WAY too valuable to give it up no matter who we're trading up for. If Dorsey goes two odds are we get at least Long, Gholston, or McFadden. And if that doesn't happen, Ryan is there who we either pick if we like him or we deal down with Baltimore/Carolina both of whom would want him and grab a guy wtih better value there. I think we're in perfect shape at 6 with 6-7 highly rated guys in this draft and if I move anywhere it's down, not up. We need the picks especially after having so few (even though they were good ones) last year. If we give up 36 to move up I'll be incredibly pissed.