PDA

View Full Version : Team Needs Posted


Scott Wright
02-19-2009, 05:23 AM
Hey,

Just wanted to let everyone know I have posted my Team Needs feature:

http://www.draftcountdown.com/features/Team-Needs.php

There will be a lot of changes with free agency coming up but that is how I see it now.

AntoinCD
02-19-2009, 06:26 AM
What made you pick those three for Detroit? It really could have been anything but I would have thought defensive line definitely could've been there. In saying they went 0-16 so pretty anything's due an upgrade(except Megatron of course)

Halsey
02-19-2009, 06:46 AM
I sent this to you in a message, but I should have known you would make a thread about this. I'll post it here annyway:

You missed one by not listing OT as one of the Falcon's needs. Todd Weiner just retired, leaving the Falcons with a depth chart of Sam Baker at LT(who missed a number of games last year with a concussion and back issues), Tyson Clabo(who the Falcons actually list as a guard and who is listed on their depth chart as a backup guard as well), Quinn Ojinnaka and Wayne Gandy(who they signed off the street in the middle of last season in a pinch). A team that just aquired a young franchise QB should try to have a better situation at OT then that. A big reason the Falcons lost the game to Arizona in the playoffs was because the Cardinal's DE's sacked Ryan 3 times, pressured him all game, and the Falcons OT's had a few bad penalties called on them. The Falcons OT's played terrible in that game, and that was before Weiner retired. I would argue OT as the Falcon's biggest need.

http://www.atlantafalcons.com/People...son_Clabo.aspx
http://www.atlantafalcons.com/People...pth_Chart.aspx

RaiderFan
02-19-2009, 07:12 AM
Nice try, but you have the Raiders needs wrong(not surprised)

1. Offensive Tackle
2. Wide Receiver
3. DE,DT or outside linebacker


We don't need defensive backs Chris Johnson statistically was a top 10 cb last season. Plus we drafted Tyvon Branch to play Free safety. In reality we have at least 4 starting caliber DB's hence the 9th Ranked pass defense:
1. Stanford Routt
2. Gibril Wilson
3. Nnamdi Asomugha
4. Chris Johnson

And the main reason the Wide Receiver looked so bad is because we have the 31st sacks per pass ratio in the NFL. Which is a clear sign the offensive line is bigger problem than the WR. Not too mention we started a first year starter at QB.
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol

AkiliSmith
02-19-2009, 07:23 AM
Offensive tackle and center are MUCH bigger needs for the Bengals over a running back. I would even put strong side linebacker over running back.

Scott Wright
02-19-2009, 08:18 AM
Offensive tackle and center are MUCH bigger needs for the Bengals over a running back. I would even put strong side linebacker over running back.

If the Bengals had to play a game right now today with guys currently under contract who is their starting running back?

AkiliSmith
02-19-2009, 08:24 AM
If the Bengals had to play a game right now today with guys currently under contract who is their starting running back?
Chris Perry or Kenny Watson I would guess


Who would be the starting center and right tackle right now? Kyle Cook and Dennis Roland.

Good thing there is a free agency and draft

MicktheGreat
02-19-2009, 08:37 AM
Scott,

Regarding the Titans' team needs, I'd say that CB is probably need #1.

Based on pure talent (or the lack thereof), I would say that WR is need #1, but the Titans just don't value the position -- and see it as too much of a risk to address via high-priced FA or early draft pick. Personally, I can't blame them. Take a look at the well-known FA WRs that Fisher brought in over his time -- Carl Pickens, Yancey Thigpen, David Givens, etc. All of them busted BADLY with the Titans. Take a look at the early WRs that Fisher has drafted -- Kevin Dyson, Tyrone Calico, Joey Kent, etc. Ouch! Even worse than the previous list.

My reason for suggesting that CB is the #1 need is two-fold: 1) Team emphasis on the position (whereas the Titans' front-office doesn't care about the WR position, they care very much about their pass defense) & 2) Lack of depth.

Cortland Finnegan is a very good, very physical CB. However, Nick Harper is getting old, has had nagging injuries, and (still) isn't a great fit for most of the man-to-man coverage schemes. While filling in for Nick Harper this past year, Chris Carr proved that he definitely shouldn't be a starting CB for an extended period of time. Eric King is a free-agent, and even if he's brought back, he's more of a nickel CB guy. Vincent Fuller (who's also a FA, I think) is a safety/nickel hybrid -- not a starter.

All the positions that you listed (WR, MLB, and DT) are needs, along with a reliable power-RB, a long-term QB solution, etc.; however, they don't measure up to the immediate need at CB. I think most true Titans' fans would agree with this sentiment.

I'd rank them:
1. CB
2. DL (either DE or DT)
3. WR

Just my $.02...

Scott Wright
02-19-2009, 08:40 AM
Chris Perry or Kenny Watson I would guess


Who would be the starting center and right tackle right now? Kyle Cook and Dennis Roland.

Good thing there is a free agency and draft

Chris Perry is a free agent too. So right now Cincy's RB's are Kenny Watson and DeDe Dorsey.

Center is a need as well, nobody is disputing that.

AkiliSmith
02-19-2009, 08:46 AM
Chris Perry is a free agent too. So right now Cincy's RB's are Kenny Watson and DeDe Dorsey.

Center is a need as well, nobody is disputing that.
Perry is signed through 2010. Dorsey is the one that is a free agent.

I'm disputing that center and tackle are bigger needs than a running back. I agree running back is a need, but the Bengals have indicated re-signing Benson is their top priority, so what they need is a compliment to Benson, and I don't see that as the #1 need.

Sveen
02-19-2009, 08:47 AM
You got the Saints just right. Good job. Number 4 on the list I think would be offensive tackle because of Jon Stinchcomb being a free agent.

princefielder28
02-19-2009, 08:47 AM
Perfect with the Packers' assessment

Scott Wright
02-19-2009, 08:49 AM
Perry is signed through 2010. Dorsey is the one that is a free agent.

I'm disputing that center and tackle are bigger needs than a running back. I agree running back is a need, but the Bengals have indicated re-signing Benson is their top priority, so what they need is a compliment to Benson, and I don't see that as the #1 need.

Perry is listed as a free agent on my list but by all means go ahead with him again... :)

As I noted in the feature they want to re-sign Cedric Benson but the Titans want to re-sign Albert Haynesworth too, that doesn't guarantee it's going to happen.

If and when the Bengals sign Benson running back will drop off the list all together but as of now that is a huge glaring need for them.

keylime_5
02-19-2009, 08:51 AM
Cle:
1A-OLB

1B-ILB

3-CB

4-RB

:)

AkiliSmith
02-19-2009, 08:54 AM
Perry is listed as a free agent on my list but by all means go ahead with him again... :)

As I noted in the feature they want to re-sign Cedric Benson but the Titans want to re-sign Albert Haynesworth too, that doesn't guarantee it's going to happen.

If and when the Bengals sign Benson running back will drop off the list all together but as of now that is a huge glaring need for them.
Fair enough

Although I think Benson will be a little easier and cheaper to re-sign than Haynesworth... ;)

Scott Wright
02-19-2009, 08:56 AM
I think Benson will be a little easier and cheaper to re-sign than Haynesworth... ;)

Benson will get serious interest, especially now that Jacobs and Sproles are off the market.

bored of education
02-19-2009, 08:57 AM
hey Scott great work per usual. I was wondering how the needs would change for KC if they do swtich to the 3-4. Would you say every position other than S and CB. :D What about the offensive line? RT could be Barry Richardson, but Niswanger did average at center last year. They weren't abysmal but I feel an early round pick should be used to solidify the right side of the line.

DiG
02-19-2009, 09:00 AM
pretty tough not to nail the skins needs. oline and dline pretty much sum it up although lber deserves to be mentioned too. id just lump dline together.

coordinator0
02-19-2009, 09:26 AM
I strongly disagree with the Ravens #2 need being LB. I know you posted this before we tagged Suggs, but even before then we have plenty of young talent at the position. Maybe MLB I could see if both Scott and Lewis leave, but we are virtually set at OLB IMO. CB and WR are far and away the 1 and 2 need for Baltimore respectively.

Flyboy
02-19-2009, 09:28 AM
You got the Saints just right. Good job. Number 4 on the list I think would be offensive tackle because of Jon Stinchcomb being a free agent.

I would probably say center before RT, but I think the two are interchangeable.

derza222
02-19-2009, 09:29 AM
If the Bengals had to play a game right now today with guys currently under contract who is their starting running back?

Based on that logic, what about inside linebacker and safety for the Jets? Found it somewhat confusing those weren't on the list, at least they have possibly viable options at the other positions you listed but they've got NOBODY there.

Wide receiver I feel is a pretty big need also since they have nobody to stretch the field. Based on the same logic you used above they've got Cotchery and Coles under contract, but Coles is a free agent after next season and they usually take a little while to develop...

Flippityskip91
02-19-2009, 09:40 AM
Cle:
1A-OLB

1B-ILB

3-CB

4-RB

:)

Thank you, that's much better. I was going to fix it, but you got there first.

draftguru151
02-19-2009, 10:11 AM
Pretty spot on for Miami. Hoping to add someone at those positions in the 1st, all 3 positions look to have a guy in the mid 20s for us too.

gdamac
02-19-2009, 10:40 AM
Scott, you think the Raiders need a CB? They just signed Chris Johnson, he's no pro bowler but he played well opposite Nnamdi after the Hall debacle. At any rate, it would seem Al doesn't think it's a need. And no DT? Or you only had room for 3 needs per team? Thanks.

TheBuffaloBills
02-19-2009, 11:04 AM
Hey Scott, good job for the Bills. I agree with you that we need a TE and DE. However, I think the Bills need a Center more than a LOLB. We have Keith Ellison who is very mediocre, but he still young. As for Centers, we have Duke Preston and Fowler, who are both complete jokes. Another thing to add, is that Schobel had a poor season last year because of his injury week 2 which lasted the whole season. He did have an average 2007 season, but 2008 was because of the injury. Again, nice work, Scott!

Menardo75
02-19-2009, 11:10 AM
FS needs to be second on the list for the Niners with pass rusher as third.

Scott Wright
02-19-2009, 11:35 AM
Scott, you think the Raiders need a CB? They just signed Chris Johnson, he's no pro bowler but he played well opposite Nnamdi after the Hall debacle. At any rate, it would seem Al doesn't think it's a need. And no DT? Or you only had room for 3 needs per team? Thanks.

It doesn't look like the Raiders are going to franchise Nnamdi again so if he hits the open market he's gone. Then cornerback is an absolute mess in Oakland.

Paranoidmoonduck
02-19-2009, 11:39 AM
This is a minor point, but Oakland has so many more more needs than at defensive back right now. Chris Johnson played great towards the end of last season and Oakland just gave him a fat new 4-year contract as a reward. Sure, there's a distinct hole at free safety, but then again the team seems to want to give Tyvon Branch a chance there.

OG, NT, SLB, and probably DE are all significantly greater needs right now.

It doesn't look like the Raiders are going to franchise Nnamdi again so if he hits the open market he's gone. Then cornerback is an absolute mess in Oakland.

Scott, I will bet you anything that Asomugha is under some sort of contract to Oakland in some way by the end of today.

diabsoule
02-19-2009, 11:49 AM
Every year it's the same three positions for the Saints only that one position is rotated out as the top spot.

JRTPlaya21
02-19-2009, 12:55 PM
Hit the hammer right on the head in DC.

Cigaro
02-19-2009, 05:06 PM
How is defensive end not a top three need for the Panthers? Charles Johnson and Tyler Brayton are good strongside ends, but we have no legit pass rusher without Peppers.

Oaktown1981
02-19-2009, 07:41 PM
CB isn't a top 3 need for the Raiders.. No doubt OT, WR are needs.. 3rd biggest DL DE/DT

After that LB, OG, C

holt_bruce81
02-19-2009, 10:46 PM
I would say Strong Safety is more of a need than Cornerback for the Rams.

GB12
02-19-2009, 10:49 PM
Perfect with the Packers' assessment
I'd put DE and NT above CB.

Abaddon
02-19-2009, 11:39 PM
Asomugha signs a 3 year deal. CB is secure.

3. Defensive Back: Nnamdi Asomugha is probably the only starting-caliber cornerback on the roster.

Unless you're anticipating a serious regression in his play, I would respectfully ask that you go back to the tape and watch Chris Johnson's play last season. I'm an extremely harsh critic when it comes to Raider players, but that guy impressed the hell out of me.

OL
WR
DL

I don't think we can differentiate between individual line positions. LT is iffy. Center is vacant. RG is up in the air. RT is a sore spot.

On the D-line, we don't have a single starting caliber player at any position.

WR goes without saying.

princefielder28
02-19-2009, 11:41 PM
I'd put DE and NT above CB.

yeah, you're right

I would say NT is definitely something we need to look at, but I think we have some interesting pieces to work with at DE so I would put that in a tie w/ CB.

Crickett
02-19-2009, 11:51 PM
I'd question QB, CB or DE as the Jets top three needs.

1. CB: By your own admission, Dwight Lowry was a nice surprise and the Jets CB needs could be depth. The Jets have free agent starters at ILB and safety.
2. QB: The Jets might very well need a QB, but how much does it help adding an unproven QB into a group of unproven QB's?
3. DE. A need, but I'd argue that its not as much of a need as ILB (Eric Barton is a free agent), safety (Abram Elam is a free agent) or WR. After all, Shaun Ellis (the Jets aging DE) did have a much better season than Laveranues Coles (the Jets aging WR).

Chief49er
02-19-2009, 11:52 PM
Let me fix it for you Scott.


San Francisco 49'ers

1. Offensive Tackle: Joe Staley has shown the ability to excel on either the left or right side but guys like Jonas (Glassman) Jennings, Adam Snyder and Barry (Idiot) Sims haven't gotten the job done opposite him.
2. Quarterback: Shaun Hill has played well and should be the starter in 2009, but is he the long term answer? Alex Smith has one more chance to turn his career around with a restructured contract, but who knows? To many question marks to pass up a top talent.
3. Safety: Mark Roman is smart, but he has been with the 49ers for 3 years and only recorded 1 interception. He is constantly getting burnt for the big plays. On top of being a bad player, he is 31 and if he lost a step he would be offsides all the time.

GB12
02-19-2009, 11:52 PM
yeah, you're right

I would say NT is definitely something we need to look at, but I think we have some interesting pieces to work with at DE so I would put that in a tie w/ CB.
I think that we could have the other DE already on the roster in Justin Harrell or possibly Johnny Jolly, but I'd still put it above CB. We know that we'll get solid CB play next year. Between Woodson, Harris, and Williams we should be just fine for at least 2009. It's just the future that's the problem there. With DE it's a complete unkown. Cullen Jenkins will be fine, I'm not even worrying about him. The other side though is a huge question mark for right now and the future.

Menardo75
02-20-2009, 01:09 AM
Let me fix it for you Scott.


San Francisco 49'ers

1. Offensive Tackle: Joe Staley has shown the ability to excel on either the left or right side but guys like Jonas (Glassman) Jennings, Adam Snyder and Barry (Idiot) Sims haven't gotten the job done opposite him.
2. Safety: Mark Roman is smart, but he has been with the 49ers for 3 years and only recorded 1 interception. He is constantly getting burnt for the big plays. On top of being a bad player, he is 31 and if he lost a step he would be offsides all the time.
3. DE/OLB : The 49ers have been in need of an elite pass rusher for sometime. Manny Lawson has proved to be a solid starter when healthy, but an elite threat is still needed.

Fixed it for you.

RaiderNation
02-20-2009, 01:34 AM
Raiders list should look like: WR,OT,NT

nobodyinparticular
02-20-2009, 02:52 AM
Raiders list should look like: WR,OT,NT

Honestly, I feel those 3 positions are right on. I even think they are pretty much interchangeable. I guess I would place the offensive positions a little higher if for no other reason than to help Russell along in his development.

Don Vito
02-20-2009, 03:56 AM
Pats needs look to be spot on.

twizbuck
02-20-2009, 03:58 AM
Chris Perry or Kenny Watson I would guess


Who would be the starting center and right tackle right now? Kyle Cook and Dennis Roland.

Good thing there is a free agency and draft

http://www.fvsports.com/forum/images/smilies/bangdesk.gif

Man, I'd dread seeing Perry starting... often injured, and when healthy can't hold onto the ball. The staff won't use Watson for some reason...

Perry is signed through 2010. Dorsey is the one that is a free agent.

I'm disputing that center and tackle are bigger needs than a running back. I agree running back is a need, but the Bengals have indicated re-signing Benson is their top priority, so what they need is a compliment to Benson, and I don't see that as the #1 need.

Benson isn't enough. I think we really need two more RB's, and let Perry and Dorsey go to make room, maybe even Watson too since we don't use him, but that would hinge on Benson returning or not.

Benson will get serious interest, especially now that Jacobs and Sproles are off the market.

Eh, they'd be putting a lot into him having three good games against two of the worst defenses in the NFL and one decent D.


Now when it comes to the needs you listed, I agree RB, OT and C are the biggest needs, but I'd throw C to the top. We have no one at all worthy of starting. At least at OT we have Collins to play on one side of the line. RB can't do much without a decent OL either, so C is my biggest need for us, despite the fact that we won't be drafting one high in the first. Oh how I'd love to get a stud FA Center... along with a RB then pick up another RB and a LT in the draft. I'd be happy.

scottyboy
02-20-2009, 02:57 PM
I'd question QB, CB or DE as the Jets top three needs.

1. CB: By your own admission, Dwight Lowry was a nice surprise and the Jets CB needs could be depth. The Jets have free agent starters at ILB and safety.
2. QB: The Jets might very well need a QB, but how much does it help adding an unproven QB into a group of unproven QB's?
3. DE. A need, but I'd argue that its not as much of a need as ILB (Eric Barton is a free agent), safety (Abram Elam is a free agent) or WR. After all, Shaun Ellis (the Jets aging DE) did have a much better season than Laveranues Coles (the Jets aging WR).

Dwight and Revis. that's your CB corps. You need more than 2 CB's, Jets need a CB badly. Maybe not too early, but it's a hole.

QB: Right now you'd start Clemens or Ratlif...You need a QB big time. Why not add another unproven guy? serisouly? to improve the talent. if the guys are all unproven but one is more talented...it's kind of a no brainer.

DE is a need. Coleman is ok, and as you said Ellis is aging. Barton and Elam are trash, that's addition by subtraction for the Jets. I'd maybe put safety over DE.

And the Jets are fine at WR, and Coles isn't exactly aging fast...


oh yea, and the Giants picks were perfect hah. excellent work Scott

Crickett
02-20-2009, 03:13 PM
Dwight and Revis. that's your CB corps. You need more than 2 CB's, Jets need a CB badly. Maybe not too early, but it's a hole.

QB: Right now you'd start Clemens or Ratlif...You need a QB big time. Why not add another unproven guy? serisouly? to improve the talent. if the guys are all unproven but one is more talented...it's kind of a no brainer.

DE is a need. Coleman is ok, and as you said Ellis is aging. Barton and Elam are trash, that's addition by subtraction for the Jets. I'd maybe put safety over DE.

And the Jets are fine at WR, and Coles isn't exactly aging fast...


oh yea, and the Giants picks were perfect hah. excellent work Scott


The Giants need depth at running back with Ward hitting free agency and a starter at SAM now that Kiwi is staying at DE. Would you say running back is the bigger need there? Holes in the starting lineup are bigger needs than holes in the depth chart.

The Jets are not fine at WR and Coles is not the receiver he once was. He simply doesn't have the speed he once did and it showed on the field and on the stat sheet.

Whatever your opinion of Eric Barton or Abram Elam, if they're not resigned, they need to be replaced. Hence, ILB and safety are pretty big needs.

scottyboy
02-20-2009, 06:59 PM
The Giants need depth at running back with Ward hitting free agency and a starter at SAM now that Kiwi is staying at DE. Would you say running back is the bigger need there? Holes in the starting lineup are bigger needs than holes in the depth chart.

The Jets are not fine at WR and Coles is not the receiver he once was. He simply doesn't have the speed he once did and it showed on the field and on the stat sheet.

Whatever your opinion of Eric Barton or Abram Elam, if they're not resigned, they need to be replaced. Hence, ILB and safety are pretty big needs.

safety is a huge need, even if Elam stays(ed). Barton is trash, and honestly, you don't need anything really even good to play next to David Harris. It's not a top 3 need by any means.

Coles, Smith, Jericho, Stuckey and Keller? that grouping along with LWash out of the backfield doesn't make WR a top 3 need at ALL.

and the Giants comparison is off, we've got Bradshaw and a fan favorite Ware. Without Bradshaw, I'd call RB a bigger need than SAM, and even now, it's pretty damn close in my mind

Crickett
02-20-2009, 07:25 PM
safety is a huge need, even if Elam stays(ed). Barton is trash, and honestly, you don't need anything really even good to play next to David Harris. It's not a top 3 need by any means.

Coles, Smith, Jericho, Stuckey and Keller? that grouping along with LWash out of the backfield doesn't make WR a top 3 need at ALL.

and the Giants comparison is off, we've got Bradshaw and a fan favorite Ware. Without Bradshaw, I'd call RB a bigger need than SAM, and even now, it's pretty damn close in my mind

1. Without Barton, the Jets have what next to David Harris? That makes it a top three need IMO.

2. Coles - Is over the hill. The Jets have no downfield option and watching them try to use Coles in that role only to have him fail miserably is why I think they need one so much.
Smith - Is good on reverses and thats about it. If I could, I'd exchange him with any receiver on the Giants roster other than Derek Hagan.

Leon Washington is a good receiving option out of the backfield and Keller and Cotchery are good possession receivers, but who is the Jets playmaker down the field? I'd think you of all people would know how important that is after watching the Giants offense with and without Plaxico Burress.

3. No, the Giants comparison is not off. If the Giants didn't have Bradshaw RB would be a bigger need. And if the Jets didn't have Lowry, CB would certainly be a bigger need for the Jets than safety or middle linebacker. But the Giants do have Bradshaw and the Jets do have Lowry. Needs in the starting lineup take precedence over depth needs period.

scottyboy
02-20-2009, 07:42 PM
1. Without Barton, the Jets have what next to David Harris? That makes it a top three need IMO.

2. Coles - Is over the hill. The Jets have no downfield option and watching them try to use Coles in that role only to have him fail miserably is why I think they need one so much.
Smith - Is good on reverses and thats about it. If I could, I'd exchange him with any receiver on the Giants roster other than Derek Hagan.

Leon Washington is a good receiving option out of the backfield and Keller and Cotchery are good possession receivers, but who is the Jets playmaker down the field? I'd think you of all people would know how important that is after watching the Giants offense with and without Plaxico Burress.

3. No, the Giants comparison is not off. If the Giants didn't have Bradshaw RB would be a bigger need. And if the Jets didn't have Lowry, CB would certainly be a bigger need for the Jets than safety or middle linebacker. But the Giants do have Bradshaw and the Jets do have Lowry. Needs in the starting lineup take precedence over depth needs period.

Smith was utilized so wrong it's not even funny. Mangini leaving will make your offense so much better. Coles is still an excellent option as is Stuckey downfield. BUT, depending on you new QB and coach, the whole offense will change. And personally, I LOVE Clowney and even Marcus Henry. They were favorites of mine outta college. But you've got a very solid group of WR's, hardly top 3 need worthy. And Coles still averaged 12.1 a catch last year, not exactly over the hill


Even with Bradshaw, I'm VERY close to putting RB as a bigger need over SAM. I truly am. Something about Bradshaw's lack of time last year scares me and tells me the coaches may have some doubts. I think RB is a bigger need that DT actually Scott, but it's very close between them.

Move Thomas inside or start Renkart. The D still clicked when Harris was out. Obviously losing Harris was devastating because of who he is, but his replacement played pretty well. The only game you really missed him was the Denver game. Definately not a top 3 need.

Crickett
02-20-2009, 07:57 PM
Smith was utilized so wrong it's not even funny. Mangini leaving will make your offense so much better. Coles is still an excellent option as is Stuckey downfield. BUT, depending on you new QB and coach, the whole offense will change. And personally, I LOVE Clowney and even Marcus Henry. They were favorites of mine outta college. But you've got a very solid group of WR's, hardly top 3 need worthy. And Coles still averaged 12.1 a catch last year, not exactly over the hill

1. No, Coles is not an excellent option downfield. All of the DB's that were tattoed to his *** as he was running down the field and his all of four receptions that went for more than 30 yards last year are a testament to that. And, you don't think the Jets should go with Clemens and Ratliff at QB but should go with Clowney and Stuckey at WR?

2. Since when is 12.1 yards per catch evidence of being a quality downfield threat?

3. Mangini is gone but Brian Schottenheimer is still there. And I've never been sold on Brad Smith's ability to be an effective wide receiver.

Even with Bradshaw, I'm VERY close to putting RB as a bigger need over SAM. I truly am. Something about Bradshaw's lack of time last year scares me and tells me the coaches may have some doubts. I think RB is a bigger need that DT actually Scott, but it's very close between them.

Move Thomas inside or start Renkart. The D still clicked when Harris was out. Obviously losing Harris was devastating because of who he is, but his replacement played pretty well. The only game you really missed him was the Denver game. Definately not a top 3 need.

Bradshaw didn't have a big year? He had 53 carries. 5.3 ypc is as good as you're going to get with that many carries.

Move Thomas inside and leave Gholston as the starter? Not the greatest plan considering his rookie season.

If you think the Giants need a RB more than a linebacker AND think the can just stick anyone at ILB...... I think you're underrating the linebacker position as a whole.

scottyboy
02-20-2009, 08:13 PM
1. No, Coles is not an excellent option downfield. All of the DB's that were tattoed to his *** as he was running down the field and his all of four receptions that went for more than 30 yards last year are a testament to that. And, you don't think the Jets should go with Clemens and Ratliff at QB but should go with Clowney and Stuckey at WR?

2. Since when is 12.1 yards per catch evidence of being a quality downfield threat?

3. Mangini is gone but Brian Schottenheimer is still there. And I've never been sold on Brad Smith's ability to be an effective wide receiver.



Bradshaw didn't have a big year? He had 53 carries. 5.3 ypc is as good as you're going to get with that many carries.

Move Thomas inside and leave Gholston as the starter? Not the greatest plan considering his rookie season.

If you think the Giants need a RB more than a linebacker AND think the can just stick anyone at ILB...... I think you're underrating the linebacker position as a whole.

53 carries. That's ALL he had, most coming in blowout situations early in the year. It's no coincidence he saw VERY minimal time when Jacobs was out. He was in the doghouse. That's obvious.

OH NOEZ!!!!!! under a **** head coach a rookie didnt play well! OMGZ!!!! Rex Ryan will turn Gholston into a stud, it's the best course of action. And moving Thomas inside isn't the BEST action, but because of that option, it lowers it on the need ladder. Plus, you don't need a stud to play next to David Harris. You guys were what? 4-1 without Harris, your best LB'er? Yea, ILB next to him is a HUGE need...

WELL, considering the Giants won the Super Bowl starting the likes of Reggie Torbor and currently have prospects such as Kehl, Wilkinson and even Chase Blackburn on the roster, yes, RB is very close to being a bigger need than LB for the Giants.


12.1 shows he's not "over-the-hill". And starting 2 guys who've shown flashes in just preseason(Clemens, Ratlif) at QB doesn't make sense. Stuckey and Clowney have actually done stuff in the regular season and are...well.. WIDE OUTS. much different than QB...

And Smith hasn't been used right once with the Jets, hopefully Ryan realizes this.

Crickett
02-20-2009, 08:34 PM
53 carries. That's ALL he had, most coming in blowout situations early in the year. It's no coincidence he saw VERY minimal time when Jacobs was out. He was in the doghouse. That's obvious.

OH NOEZ!!!!!! under a **** head coach a rookie didnt play well! OMGZ!!!! Rex Ryan will turn Gholston into a stud, it's the best course of action. And moving Thomas inside isn't the BEST action, but because of that option, it lowers it on the need ladder. Plus, you don't need a stud to play next to David Harris. You guys were what? 4-1 without Harris, your best LB'er? Yea, ILB next to him is a HUGE need...

WELL, considering the Giants won the Super Bowl starting the likes of Reggie Torbor and currently have prospects such as Kehl, Wilkinson and even Chase Blackburn on the roster, yes, RB is very close to being a bigger need than LB for the Giants.


12.1 shows he's not "over-the-hill". And starting 2 guys who've shown flashes in just preseason(Clemens, Ratlif) at QB doesn't make sense. Stuckey and Clowney have actually done stuff in the regular season and are...well.. WIDE OUTS. much different than QB...

And Smith hasn't been used right once with the Jets, hopefully Ryan realizes this.

1. Bradshaw was put in during fourth quarterbacks and zipping up and down the field when everyone else was exhausted. That doesn't mean he's in the doghouse any more than Michael Turner's 71 carries a year meant he was in the doghouse in San Diego.

2. Yes, Gholston played like **** as a rookie. Which is why I wouldn't want to count on him. Sure Rex Ryan could mold him into the dominant pass rusher he was supposed to be at the pro level, but he might not.

3. Without Harris, the Jets middle linebackers are Brad Kassell and David Bowens. Yes, middle linebacker is a big need. Believe it or not, linebackers are important to a 3-4 defense. And coming from a team that had Ray Lewis, one of the all time great linebackers as well as Bart Scott, Rex Ryan knows it.

4. Wasn't used right? Reverses and trick plays seemed to be the only thing Brad Smith was good at.

5. Chansi Stuckey and David Clowney at least did something? As the Jets #3 and I guess #5 WR's last year, they combined for 395 yards. Yep, thats really something. 12.1 yards per catch not withstanding, Coles isn't a downfield option (four catches for more than 30+ yards with PLENTY of attempts) anymore.

scottyboy
02-20-2009, 08:48 PM
1. Bradshaw was put in during fourth quarterbacks and zipping up and down the field when everyone else was exhausted. That doesn't mean he's in the doghouse any more than Michael Turner's 71 carries a year meant he was in the doghouse in San Diego.

2. Yes, Gholston played like **** as a rookie. Which is why I wouldn't want to count on him. Sure Rex Ryan could mold him into the dominant pass rusher he was supposed to be at the pro level, but he might not.

3. Without Harris, the Jets middle linebackers are Brad Kassell and David Bowens. Yes, middle linebacker is a big need. Believe it or not, linebackers are important to a 3-4 defense. And coming from a team that had Ray Lewis, one of the all time great linebackers as well as Bart Scott, Rex Ryan knows it.

4. Wasn't used right? Reverses and trick plays seemed to be the only thing Brad Smith was good at.

5. Chansi Stuckey and David Clowney at least did something? As the Jets #3 and I guess #5 WR's last year, they combined for 395 yards. Yep, thats really something. 12.1 yards per catch not withstanding, Coles isn't a downfield option (four catches for more than 30+ yards with PLENTY of attempts) anymore.

1. Bradshaw came in garbage time in blowouts, he was rarely used. It was actually a complaint among Giants fans. He played the most in blowouts over Seattle, Baltimore and the Rams. 10 of his other carries were in the Vikings game in which Jacobs didn't play and Carr played. He was oft used, and I'm uncomfortable giving him a huge load of the touches next year, and we've got good young LB's behind him with potential. so yes, RB is pretty damn close to LB in terms of Giants needs.

2. Do you know how many other guys played like **** as rookies? I can't believe how many people are just giving up on him. Ryan's got an excellent track record of dirty 3-4 D's, especially the LBers. One year and you're willing to give up on him. Nobody "counts on" rookies and 2nd year guys who had off rookie season, but you play them and let them improve. If guys with bad rookie seasons were kicked to the curb, we'd have a lot less stars in the league.

3. Without Harris, the Jets went 4-1. It obviously didn't hurt them THAT badly. Kassel played well, and imagine replacing Barton with Harris, that's a huge upgrade. It's a need, but not even close to a top 3 need.

4. How would you know? that's all Mangini used him on were reverses. God forbid Jets fans actually be patient on a guy. Smith can be a HUGE weapon if used correctly, but Maningi was set on using him for just reverses, usually totally obscure and unneecessary triple reverses.

5. Stuckey and Clowney still did more than Ratliff and Clemens, so your other comparison made no sense. So sure, Jets need a downfield threat, that doesn't top the need of starting QB, DE/safety or CB...

Hurricanes25
02-20-2009, 08:54 PM
Smith was utilized so wrong it's not even funny. Mangini leaving will make your offense so much better. Coles is still an excellent option as is Stuckey downfield. BUT, depending on you new QB and coach, the whole offense will change. And personally, I LOVE Clowney and even Marcus Henry. They were favorites of mine outta college. But you've got a very solid group of WR's, hardly top 3 need worthy. And Coles still averaged 12.1 a catch last year, not exactly over the hill


Even with Bradshaw, I'm VERY close to putting RB as a bigger need over SAM. I truly am. Something about Bradshaw's lack of time last year scares me and tells me the coaches may have some doubts. I think RB is a bigger need that DT actually Scott, but it's very close between them.

Move Thomas inside or start Renkart. The D still clicked when Harris was out. Obviously losing Harris was devastating because of who he is, but his replacement played pretty well. The only game you really missed him was the Denver game. Definately not a top 3 need.

The Jets should at least give Renkart a shot. I think he is a good fit in the 34 defense and he looked good in the pre season.

nobodyinparticular
02-20-2009, 09:42 PM
No way CB is a need now that Asomugha is signed as well as Chris Johnson. With Routt and Johnson in the fold, the Raiders are just fine there. They just released Gibril Wilson, but I would be shocked if they didn't make Tyvon Branch a starter at one of the safety spots. NT is a much bigger need.

Crickett
02-20-2009, 09:57 PM
1. Bradshaw came in garbage time in blowouts, he was rarely used. It was actually a complaint among Giants fans. He played the most in blowouts over Seattle, Baltimore and the Rams. 10 of his other carries were in the Vikings game in which Jacobs didn't play and Carr played. He was oft used, and I'm uncomfortable giving him a huge load of the touches next year, and we've got good young LB's behind him with potential. so yes, RB is pretty damn close to LB in terms of Giants needs.

2. Do you know how many other guys played like **** as rookies? I can't believe how many people are just giving up on him. Ryan's got an excellent track record of dirty 3-4 D's, especially the LBers. One year and you're willing to give up on him. Nobody "counts on" rookies and 2nd year guys who had off rookie season, but you play them and let them improve. If guys with bad rookie seasons were kicked to the curb, we'd have a lot less stars in the league.

3. Without Harris, the Jets went 4-1. It obviously didn't hurt them THAT badly. Kassel played well, and imagine replacing Barton with Harris, that's a huge upgrade. It's a need, but not even close to a top 3 need.

4. How would you know? that's all Mangini used him on were reverses. God forbid Jets fans actually be patient on a guy. Smith can be a HUGE weapon if used correctly, but Maningi was set on using him for just reverses, usually totally obscure and unneecessary triple reverses.

5. Stuckey and Clowney still did more than Ratliff and Clemens, so your other comparison made no sense. So sure, Jets need a downfield threat, that doesn't top the need of starting QB, DE/safety or CB...

If the 4th quarter counts as garbage time, yes, Bradshaw was brought in during garbage time.

Lots of players play like **** as a rookie, but there's a large gap between giving up on a player and not wanting to count on a player to be an every down starter when you have two other options.

Without Harris, the Jets starters would be David Bowens and Brad Kassell. if thats not need, the Jets dont need anything at all, ever.

How would I know? Because in 2007, Brad Smith was very often used as a wide receiver. And often did his best impression of Justin McCareins very frequently. Thats why he wasn't used as a wide receiver so much in 2008. And there's a certain level of irony complaining about how Jets fans needing to be patient with guys when you're saying the Jets need to replace Clemens when he really only had one opportunity to start behind a swiss cheese offensive line that gave the 2008 comeback player of the year a 1-7 record in 2007.

Todd Bertuzzi
02-20-2009, 10:00 PM
Eagles needs are bang on.

scottyboy
02-20-2009, 10:04 PM
If the 4th quarter counts as garbage time, yes, Bradshaw was brought in during garbage time.

Lots of players play like **** as a rookie, but there's a large gap between giving up on a player and not wanting to count on a player to be an every down starter when you have two other options.

Without Harris, the Jets starters would be David Bowens and Brad Kassell. if thats not need, the Jets dont need anything at all, ever.

How would I know? Because in 2007, Brad Smith was very often used as a wide receiver. And often did his best impression of Justin McCareins very frequently. Thats why he wasn't used as a wide receiver so much in 2008. And there's a certain level of irony complaining about how Jets fans needing to be patient with guys when you're saying the Jets need to replace Clemens when he really only had one opportunity to start behind a swiss cheese offensive line that gave the 2008 comeback player of the year a 1-7 record in 2007.

garbage time is getting your most carries in a 20 point victory over the Ravens, a 30+ win over Seattle, a 28 point win over the Rams and the give up game in Minny. Those were the games he saw the ball the most, all in the 4th quarter(except the Minny game...) so trust me, it's garbage time. I saw every carry he got and 90% was in garbage time.

2 other options? then why the hell would you draft Gholston in the first place? He needs to play and get better. He SHOULD start next year. And depending on where you go QB wise, it may be a semi-rebuilding year for you guys. I'm not saying you don't need an ILB, but it's not a top 3 need at all.

Used often? I don't know your definition of "used often" but I would hardly call the time he saw in '07 "used often"

gpngc
02-20-2009, 11:57 PM
The Jets definitely need a WR- Coles and Cotchery couldn't get any separation this year and the other guys are all gimmicky players (even though I love Stuckey because his name is hilarious).

For Seattle, safety(Russell is awful and Grant can play free or strong) is a need and WR is #1 over DT- Hawks love Terrill and Red Bryant. As for OT, there is so much $ locked up in Jones/Locklear that I think it waits to be addressed next year or at least when W. Jones shows some decline.

I'd personally have it like this: 1- WR, 2- S, 3- DT/OT/RB. But I'm not a fan of team needs anyway because in reality you can improve any spot on your team. Arguing that one area is more pressing than another is difficult to do because its unquantifiable.

Crickett
02-21-2009, 12:57 AM
2 other options? then why the hell would you draft Gholston in the first place? He needs to play and get better. He SHOULD start next year. And depending on where you go QB wise, it may be a semi-rebuilding year for you guys. I'm not saying you don't need an ILB, but it's not a top 3 need at all.

Used often? I don't know your definition of "used often" but I would hardly call the time he saw in '07 "used often"

Why should he start? Because he was drafted early? With Thomas and Pace, Gholston can still get his reps and not be pushed into the starting lineup clearly before he is ready to be a starting 3-4 OLB. As for ILB, the Jets need a starting ILB. As opposed to positions such as CB which is a potentially only a depth need or QB where Kellen Clemens didn't really get a fair shake.

Brad Smith was the Jets #3 receiver and had 32 receptions and plenty of drops. Thats my definition of "used often".

scottyboy
02-21-2009, 01:17 PM
Why should he start? Because he was drafted early? With Thomas and Pace, Gholston can still get his reps and not be pushed into the starting lineup clearly before he is ready to be a starting 3-4 OLB. As for ILB, the Jets need a starting ILB. As opposed to positions such as CB which is a potentially only a depth need or QB where Kellen Clemens didn't really get a fair shake.

Brad Smith was the Jets #3 receiver and had 32 receptions and plenty of drops. Thats my definition of "used often".

Clemens didn't get a fair shake? Are you serious? He had plenty of chances back in the Chad era when Chad was hurt and sucking and looked like garbage. Why do you think you guys: A) got Favre and B) kept FOUR QB's on the roster? no faith in Clemens and he didn't produce.

Gholston needs to see the field, plain and simple. Moving Thomas inside would give you your best 4 LBers on the field right now. Obviously, you can upgrade, but a LB corps of Gholston-Harris-Thomas-Pace is a pretty formidable group. Which is a lot better than Revis-Dwight-nobody. I'm not disputing ILB being a need, it's just not a top 3 need. I don't see how that's so hard to understand.

And Smith has been used so wrong by the Jets it's almost hilarious. I feel bad for the guy. 32 catches isn't all that much, and "plenty of drops"? hmm, I don't recall those at all watching him. With RR he should get some time and proper sets.

Sure, you could use a deep threat, but again, not a top 3 need...

Crickett
02-21-2009, 01:24 PM
Clemens didn't get a fair shake? Are you serious? He had plenty of chances back in the Chad era when Chad was hurt and sucking and looked like garbage. Why do you think you guys: A) got Favre and B) kept FOUR QB's on the roster? no faith in Clemens and he didn't produce.

Gholston needs to see the field, plain and simple. Moving Thomas inside would give you your best 4 LBers on the field right now. Obviously, you can upgrade, but a LB corps of Gholston-Harris-Thomas-Pace is a pretty formidable group. Which is a lot better than Revis-Dwight-nobody. I'm not disputing ILB being a need, it's just not a top 3 need. I don't see how that's so hard to understand.

And Smith has been used so wrong by the Jets it's almost hilarious. I feel bad for the guy. 32 catches isn't all that much, and "plenty of drops"? hmm, I don't recall those at all watching him. With RR he should get some time and proper sets.

Sure, you could use a deep threat, but again, not a top 3 need...


Constantly running for your life behind a swiss cheese offensive line isn't a fair shake. Its like saying David Carr got real opportunity for success behind the epicly bad offenive line in Houston. Its just not the case. As for why the Jets got Brett Favre........ its because he's Brett Favre. What else need be said?

Gholston does need to see the field, but pushing him in the starting lineup before he is ready is a recipe for failure. Oh, and I should edit this since I apparently wasn't paying attention to the waiver wire. The Jets cut Kassell and Bowens. So without Harris, the Jets starting ILB's are Cody Spencer and I guess either Brandon Renkart or Jason Trusnik. So the Jets are not only lacking a second ILB starter, but depth as well.

You may not recall those at all watching Smith, but I do. Every time I did, I wished the Jets had selected Brandom Marshall instead.

Yes it is a top three need, moreso than a replacement for the still productive Shaun Ellis or cornerback DEPTH. The Jets simply can't stretch the field at all. The Jets personel got itself accustomed to having noodle arm at QB and we got to see this past season what happens when you add a QB who actually has an arm to a team with a group of receivers who can't stretch the field or get much if any seperation.