Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

2021 New York Jets


Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, rockaction said:

Jumpin' blankety blank blank on a jumpety blank.

On a totally unrelated note. Good luck with the new coach, I really thought he would end up coming back home. He grew up in my hometown and went  to a rival HS in my city. He still shows up to their HS games from time to time. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, rockaction said:

:shrug:Not really. I just dissent from the good vibes. I don't want to. I really wanted an offensive coach to coach the Jets. If you've watched us the past twenty years religiously, you might have the same feeling. We haven't moved the ball effectively since Vinny Testaverde. That's some 1998 stuff. Before anybody chimes in with Pennington, he never had a strong arm and good defenses adjusted even before his injury, hence getting wiped by the Raiders in '02 in the playoffs the year he was remotely effective.

I don't care if we lose, frankly, I'm just tired of losing ugly, which is what I see a lot of with our new DL coach. Lots of money in the defensive line, just like when we had Sheldon Richardson/Muhammad Wilkerson/Leonard Williams and Todd Bowles as head coach. I see 10-6 as our ceiling with that arrangement in today's football. Even the Giants, who dominated the SB with guys like Strahan, Osi, and Justin Tuck (and JPP for the second one, IIRC) had some legendary guys at the position. We're going to spend all our money going from a 3-4 to a 4-3 because now the front has got to be paid. And we have paid tied up in our linebacker Moseley and first-round capital in Williams, who's an interior guy. 

All in all, it's not a happy day. I've never been impressed with a guy that jumps up and down on the sidelines as a head coach kind of guy. I mean, Shanahan had his prints all over that team.

Maybe they should fire Saleh. I hear offensive genius Adam Gase is available.

 

(You cannot win with some people.Some just want to be miserable.)

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fariq said:

Maybe they should fire Saleh. I hear offensive genius Adam Gase is available.

 

(You cannot win with some people.Some just want to be miserable.)

So after reading my reasoning, you conclude I just want to be miserable.

Nice comprehension. And I already covered the happiness about being rid of Gase in my post. Do you know what the difference is between a necessary and sufficient condition is?

Proposition:

The Jets need to hire a competent offensive guy if they want to have a successful coach.

Necessary condition:

The Jets need to hire a competent offensive guy

Not sufficient:

The Jets hired an offensive guy, therefore he will be a good coach.

"A necessary condition is a condition that must be present for an event to occur. A sufficient condition is a condition or set of conditions that will produce the event. A necessary condition must be there, but it alone does not provide sufficient cause for the occurrence of the event."

Edited by rockaction
  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the Jets want a successful coach, then he needs to be competent offensively

If A ---> B

The Jets hired a competent offensive mind

B (competent offensively)

does not follow that therefore, A (he will be a successful head coach)

It only follows that if you have ~B, then ~A

In other words if he is not competent offensively, you won't have a good head coach

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Maximus* said:

You got to figure if the Jets trade down from 2 to let's say Atlanta even at 4, the Jets are going to get alot more than a 3rd and 4th rounder. If anything, I'd expect a 2nd rounder this year and probably a 1st and 3rd next year in order for us to move down. And if it's lets say the Panthers at 6, we should get alot more than that.

I don't have that draft trade chart that they use handy but if Jets trade down, they are going to get a bigtime haul.

I'm talking about trading down from #23

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's bs about the 49ers discounting RBs. They paid big money for Mackinnon at $7m per year (before RBs got paid in double digit millions). Tevin Coleman got paid over $4 m/yr.  Even Mostert got a $3m/yr which is not insignificant.

They were forced to use undrafted guys like Breida, Hasty, and Wilson because their featured guys got hurt.

Shanahan would laugh at you if you thought he would rely on these undrafted guys. Look at the money paid in free agency. He obviously values the position.  If he thought they could just get undrafted RBs, then he wouldn't be spending big cash in Free Agency.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, rockaction said:

Okay guys,

Count me among the dissent. First, defense. That's not how today's game moves. The Rams have one of the best players on defense ever along the line and at DB and are 9-6 and mediocre. Moreso, we just invested in a 4-3 coach coming from a 3-4 build. That means cap capital and draft capital going into defensive end, the most expensive defensive position there is to maintain, the two DEs. On a team that has no pass rush to speak and whose best linebacker that would fit that scheme hasn't played in two years. So there goes all your draft and cap capital going to a team that had an adequate defense last year in an offense-laden league (anyone watch the Bills lately?) with QBs out the wazoo and rules not to touch them. Ever. So we're fighting into the fire of the dragon to begin with. Our coach's strength vs. league tendencies doesn't add up. And he was a DL coach before coordinator. He hasn't bounced around from the offense and back to defense like some of these guys that have experience on both sides of the ball. That worries me. Shanahan ran that very complex offense hiding all things QB. Saleh had nothing to do with that. So all things constant, wrong hire.

Second, you guys are wrong about running backs. We're likely not taking a running back to fit San Francisco's scheme early. SF spends time and scouting on late-round guys, guys who are thin, low BMI, fast, one cut runners who hit holes fast and hard and run with great speed. Just not great durability. They have an embarrassment of UDFA riches over in Frisco. I highly doubt draft capital goes to a running back. I could see Etienne, but not Harris if that's the way they surprise me and choose to go. Depends how they run in the forty. But all Jets backs will at least be this: One cut and off. That's the type of guy they'll bring in. They probably won't bring in all around backs like Harris at #23. I highly doubt it. Depends what he runs. 

Third, Darnold. One of the worst QBs, statistic-wise, in the NFL. Not even close to Tannehill level under Gase. And Tannehill has Henry and Brown and Davis to make him look good now. It's not just Gase. Darnold has some of the worst advanced metrics you'll ever see for a guy starting for three years. So we're stuck with him for another year. And how will we address our QB issue when we're fairly certain that cap room will address the defensive line? I don't see it. 

In all, bad hire for the Jets for all that it portends. I know today's not the day we do it, but today is to celebrate a non-Super Bowl coach maybe going 10-6 some years if you're really lucky.

The Rams are in the final 8 literally because of their awesome defense. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, rockaction said:

I'd go with Overthecap vs. Me. I just just checked. They have accounted for his opt-out year. Wow, did they ever sign him to a huge deal!

He's done absolutely nothing as a Jet.

He had a fumble for a td in his one healthy game.

 

Here's my question - why does everyone here seem to think it's a foregone conclusion that Darnold is returning as qb next year?  He's not good, the jets have a number of picks in the first two rounds, and there's a number of qbs who will end up going in the first two rounds.  Even if they don't take a qb with 2 they can still take one with 23.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Capella said:

The Rams are in the final 8 literally because of their awesome defense. 

With the greatest DL to play the game in twenty years and maybe the best corner to play in ten, yes. They made the final eight after squeaking into the playoffs because Kyler Murray was hurt. They weren't very good this year. They were a six seed with that type of capital investment in those guys. I'm saying that they're fighting odds in today's NFL. Why fight them when you can try and go with them?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, NYRAGE said:

That's bs about the 49ers discounting RBs. They paid big money for Mackinnon at $7m per year (before RBs got paid in double digit millions). Tevin Coleman got paid over $4 m/yr.  Even Mostert got a $3m/yr which is not insignificant.

They were forced to use undrafted guys like Breida, Hasty, and Wilson because their featured guys got hurt.

Shanahan would laugh at you if you thought he would rely on these undrafted guys. Look at the money paid in free agency. He obviously values the position.  If he thought they could just get undrafted RBs, then he wouldn't be spending big cash in Free Agency.

It's probably somewhere in the middle, and less definitively towards high investment than you think. MacKinnon's deal was for four years at 30M. Only 18.25M was guaranteed. He played for 910,000 dollars this year. Coleman was on the last year of a four million dollar deal and he was supposed to be their starter. They extended Mostert from about 1 million to 2.1 million and gave him money when he squawked about starter money this off-season. All told this off-season, they had eight-ten million total at the position. That's not that much. They dumped Breida after making him a second-round tender and got out of his salary, full well knowing they were going with Mostert, Coleman, and Wilson. JaMycal Hasty was a UDFA who made the team. Salvon Ahmed was another UDFA signing -- he wound up in Miami. All told, they haven't used draft capital on a running back and they certainly weren't in the market for a marquee guy. MacKinnon had been the backup in MN before his payday. He was the exception to the rule. I doubt they invest heavily in another RB going forward, though they're going to have to get help sometime. Neither Mostert nor Wilson can stay healthy. The collisions they run into at their BMI is unsustainable.

If the Jets invest in an RB, more power to them, but they'll be doing it exactly wrong like they did with Bell, who I argued was one of the worst signings ever, only to be met with the same reaction on this very board and in a similar thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, rockaction said:

Dude - you’re stretching it now.

A 22 year old kid lied to his boss about missing work? The horror.

  • Like 1
  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, rockaction said:

If the Jets want a successful coach, then he needs to be competent offensively

If A ---> B

The Jets hired a competent offensive mind

B (competent offensively)

does not follow that therefore, A (he will be a successful head coach)

It only follows that if you have ~B, then ~A

In other words if he is not competent offensively, you won't have a good head coach

You’re reading way too much into the backgrounds of HC. All three of the other HCs in the AFC East have defensive backgrounds but they still have potent offenses - well not the Pats THIS season but you get the idea.

A HC should be a CEO type and have his hands on both side of the ball. The success of the offense will depend on a lot of factors including OC LaFleur and whoever is playing QB next season - why do you think Saleh will be a detriment? 
 

I have no idea if Saleh will ultimately be successful or not, and I get that we’ve been beat down year after year as Jets’ fans but right now to act like this signing was such a disaster is going a bit over-board, especially when some of your reasons are completely speculative in nature.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dr. Octopus said:

A HC should be a CEO type and have his hands on both side of the ball. The success of the offense will depend on a lot of factors including OC LaFleur and whoever is playing QB next season - why do you think Saleh will be a detriment?

They're hiring a defensive guy and keeping Sam around, per sources. I think that's enough reason to piss and moan a bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, rockaction said:

They're hiring a defensive guy and keeping Sam around, per sources. I think that's enough reason to piss and moan a bit.

Well, it’s up to you I suppose.

I still don’t see the fact that Saleh being a DC as a big deal. I’m guessing that he wants the offense to be successful and will hire offensive assistants.

If they keep Darnold (which is yet to be determined) he will either sink or swim. If he sinks he’ll be gone the next season with (hopefully) a great supporting cast for the next QB. I don’t necessarily want him back, I’m just not sure there are better options available to the Jets this offseason. If Douglas thinks so then Darnold won’t be back.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would say this....."wasting" (assuming he does indeed suck, which I think is the case) one more year on Sam (while using their considerable resources to build up the team for the next guy) is better than using a premium pick on another qb that we won't be able to cut bait on for 2-4 years. 

If they're not comfortable with one of the non Trevor qbs, you can't pick one just to pick one.

You obviously have to find a qb eventually,  but taking a new bad one is WAY worse than keeping Sam for one more year to see. They can always find a hold the fort guy for 2022 if they have to

Edited by Todd from Utah
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In 2015 Jets hired Todd Bowles who was 100% defensive coach.....yet the Jet O was one of the best in the league run by an archaic OC in Chan Gailey with Fitz, Decker and Marshall.going off.  

Bill Belichick was a defensive coordinator and developed Brady and the NE O

Brian Billick oversaw one of the best offensives of all time in Minn and developed one of the best defensive teams in league when he went to the Ravens

McVay is an offensive guru but the Rams are a defensive team

There are several examples of this....its all about finding the right leader and CEO coach. No need to box yourself into coaches on one side of the ball....we saw where that ended up with Gase.  

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really hope you guys are right. A day later and you seem to have talked me down from the ledge I was out on. I'm hoping Saleh kills it and that all my kvetching just lets us all know -- including myself -- that I'm not a scout. I'm just (I think justifiably) weary of hearing about how the defensive line wins games because the Giants found the only way to Brady in a decade-plus. I think that's a bit overstated.

But enough. Good on Saleh. Let's go!

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Todd from Utah said:

I would say this....."wasting" (assuming he does indeed suck, which I think is the case) one more year on Sam (while using their considerable resources to build up the team for the next guy) is better than using a premium pick on another qb that we won't be able to cut bait on for 2-4 years. 

If they're not comfortable with one of the non Trevor qbs, you can't pick one just to pick one.

You obviously have to find a qb eventually,  but taking a new bad one is WAY worse than keeping Sam for one more year to see. They can always find a hold the fort guy for 2022 if they have to

I think this is really true, and wise. The only counter-argument I would have is that they might not be in any position to draft one next year, and it might be difficult to even sign even a bridge guy. There aren't that many kicking around. There certainly aren't many easily groomed through the draft, so this year would seem to be the year to do it. 

Seems like there are a boatload of pro grades that are high on guys coming out this year, more so than in recent memory. (And there were likely at least three high pro grades coming into the year -- Fields, Lance, Lawrence.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, IHEARTFF said:

Never pass on a potential franchise qb. You might be perpetually 6-10 and never get the chance again. 

 

Define "franchise quarterback". We talking top 10 in the league? Top 15? Anyone startable?

Then we need to determine what constitutes a "potential franchise quarterback". Unless we assume that ANYONE  with consensus top 15 (just throwing a number out there) draft stock is a "potential franchise quarterback" that term is entirely subjective and in the eye of the evaluator.

Going back 10 years (To the 2011 NFL draft) there have been a total of 25 QB's drafted in the top 15 (I assume anyone the league considers a "potential franchise QB" wouldn't slip past 15)

2011-  Cam Newton, Blaine Gabbert, Jake Locker, Christian Ponder. - So 1 of 4.

2012- Andrew Luck, Robert Griffin, Ryan Tannehil,  So, 2 of 3 were good (but only 1 for their original team)

2013- No Qb's in the top 15.

2014- Blake Bortles,  So 0 for 1

2015- Jameis Winston, Marcus Mariotta, - 0 for 2

2016- Jared Goff, Carson Wentz. I'd argue 0 for 2, as I'm not a Goff fan, but he went to a superbowl, which is the goal. So I'll say 1 of 2

2017- Trubisky, Mahomes, Watson. 2 of 3 (although the wrong one was drafted first)

2018- Mayfield, Darnold, Allen, Rosen.   I'd argue 1 out of 4, as I dont think Sam or Mayfield are IT.

2019- Murray, Daniel Jones, Haskins. Murray could still get there.  I dont think Jones is it. So 1 out of 3.

2020 Still WAY too early but...Burrow and Herbert look legit. Tua is TBD,

 

So by my count, we've got.....

 

6  "franchise QBs" for the team that drafted them (if you count Goff, which I'll reluctantly do)

1 that made it for another team. (tannehill, although I think he's still more of a REALLY good game manager with great weapons as opposed to a guy that carries you on his back)

3 guys that seem likely to get there (Murray, Burrow, Herbert)

 

out of a total of 25 drafted. The rests are busts, extremely mediocre at best or appear to be on their way to mediocre or bust status (with a few still fully TBD due to circumstances)

 

Obviously any first round bust sets you back, but a bust QB sets you back YEARS if you dont recognize it quickly enough.

And even looking at the "franchise qb" group, there's a total of 3 superbowl appearances and only 1 win.

 

 

 

 

Edited by Todd from Utah
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The big thing there was that he said "potential," not necessarily that it had come to fruition. The guys listed are all first rounders, but some were not considered surefire stars in the league. And drafting at number two, your odds increase depending on the class of QBs you have coming out. I still think it behooves us to take a QB, even if we miss, because you can't pass on those guys and you can judge more quickly now than earlier thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see the appeal of building up the team outside of the qb and then getting a qb in a couple years when the rest of the team is ready, but there won’t be a qb for you there when you are ready for one. 
 

This is a deep qb class, and the talent evaluators should be able to know whether Fields or Wilson or Lance or more than 1 of them is likely to be great. You cannot pass on that opportunity. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, rockaction said:

The big thing there was that he said "potential," not necessarily that it had come to fruition. The guys listed are all first rounders, but some were not considered surefire stars in the league. And drafting at number two, your odds increase depending on the class of QBs you have coming out. I still think it behooves us to take a QB, even if we miss, because you can't pass on those guys and you can judge more quickly now than earlier thought.

 

Well yeah, but that's kinda my point.  I'm sure a decent amount of those guys were never considered potential "stars" but again....its all so subjective. I dont think the Vikings drafted Christian Ponder expecting him to be Joe Montana but a huge chunk of those guys were drafted in the top 5-10 picks.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Todd from Utah said:

Well yeah, but that's kinda my point.  I'm sure a decent amount of those guys were never considered potential "stars" but again....its all so subjective. I dont think the Vikings drafted Christian Ponder expecting him to be Joe Montana but a huge chunk of those guys were drafted in the top 5-10 picks.  

Your rebuttal was certainly taken by me. I was getting maybe hung up with language. Saying "you can't pass on a chance" is just a different way of saying it than saying, "you have to draft the right QB" is all I'm saying.

By the way, when is your good friend TLEF getting back from talking badly about the bad orange man? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Todd from Utah said:

 

 

2018- Mayfield, Darnold, Allen, Rosen.   I'd argue 1 out of 4, as I dont think Sam or Mayfield are IT.

 

 

 

 

 

Just for clarification - the Ravens traded back into the 1st round to take Lamar Jackson in '18. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also don’t really think you have to be stuck for 4 years necessarily if the qb busts. Just draft another one. They’re not expensive $ wise anymore in modern rookie pay scales. Your team is never going to be among the greats until you get one. So draft them until you do. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Uruk-Hai said:

Just for clarification - the Ravens traded back into the 1st round to take Lamar Jackson in '18. 

 

I limited the selection to top 15 picks. Obviously the Ravens hit a home run with Lamar, but considering how late he went, I can't make the argument that the league (as a general consensus)  saw him as a "potential franchise quarterback".  (which is what we're discussing here).

That being said, I can't now defend the wall of "you can find quarterbacks ANYWHERE" after knocking the Jets for hurting their draft position with meaningless wins over the past decade. (and costing themselves/increasing the cost of getting a "potential franchise QB" several times)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Todd from Utah said:

 

I limited the selection to top 15 picks. Obviously the Ravens hit a home run with Lamar, but considering how late he went, I can't make the argument that the league (as a general consensus)  saw him as a "potential franchise quarterback".  (which is what we're discussing here).

That being said, I can't now defend the wall of "you can find quarterbacks ANYWHERE" after knocking the Jets for hurting their draft position with meaningless wins over the past decade. (and costing themselves/increasing the cost of getting a "potential franchise QB" several times)

I guess I should have read your post better. My bad 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, rockaction said:

Your rebuttal was certainly taken by me. I was getting maybe hung up with language. Saying "you can't pass on a chance" is just a different way of saying it than saying, "you have to draft the right QB" is all I'm saying.

By the way, when is your good friend TLEF getting back from talking badly about the bad orange man? 

 

Yeah, that's really the crux of this whole discussion. I dont know nearly enough about football to judge whether Fields or wilson (let alone Lance) have a reasonable chance to be a "franchise Qb".  Its a subjective term.  

Gun to my head.......I'd define a "franchise quarterback" as a guy who is unquestionably in the top 10 in the league and has the ability to either A) consistently take a good team deep in the playoffs or B) take an otherwise mediocre team to the playoffs on a consistent basis.

Every GM is going to have a different definition what FQB is, what chance any individual player has to meet that definition and at what point in the draft that % chance makes that player a worthy selection (compared to what else they might be able to get)

 

And I believe our good friend TLEF will be back some time in March...

Edited by Todd from Utah
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, IHEARTFF said:

Also don’t really think you have to be stuck for 4 years necessarily if the qb busts. Just draft another one. They’re not expensive $ wise anymore in modern rookie pay scales. Your team is never going to be among the greats until you get one. So draft them until you do. 

That's what I think. Eventually teams are going to come around to that principle and will use draft capital appropriately. Until then, it's safeties in the top ten for organizations run like the Jets were.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Todd from Utah said:

And I believe our good friend TLEF will be back some time in March...

Ah, well. The bad orange man has been prompting some lengthy-### bannings. Wish TLEF well for us.

Edited by rockaction
Link to comment
Share on other sites

FYI/discussion Tannenbaum on Mike Greenberg's show put a "reasonable" price for Watson as 2 1st rounders, a 2nd round pick and Q Williams (this would be after being able to talk with Watson and have him be on board with it). 

-QG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, QuizGuy66 said:

FYI/discussion Tannenbaum on Mike Greenberg's show put a "reasonable" price for Watson as 2 1st rounders, a 2nd round pick and Q Williams (this would be after being able to talk with Watson and have him be on board with it). 

-QG

 

If that's the price, my answer is no. 

The #2 pick is not just "a first rounder". If a team was trying to move up from like 15 to 2, it would cost them at least 2 extra mid first rounders (per the value chart). And that doesn't even include the "QB tax" that you'd be paying.

If the Jets wanted to trade Q after the year he just had, (and with several more years of a rookie deal) they'd absolutely get a 1 plus probably a 3.

At that point, the Jets have exhausted a bunch of their draft capital and are basically rebuilding the defense from scratch. (How many long term pieces do they have D right now? 3? MAYBE 4 if we're being generous?)

Watson is incredible and I would love to have him (would have really loved to have him back in 17 when I was SCREAMING at the TV for them to draft him) but that's just a silly amount to give up.  IMO, let someone have him at that price. With the way this is going, Houston's leverage will diminish every day. He's gonna start throwing a fit.

Edited by Todd from Utah
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Todd from Utah said:

 

If that's the price, my answer is no. 

The #2 pick is not just "a first rounder". If a team was trying to move up from like 15 to 2, it would cost them at least 2 extra mid first rounders (per the value chart). And that doesn't even include the "QB tax" that you'd be paying.

If the Jets wanted to trade Q after the year he just had, (and with several more years of a rookie deal) they'd absolutely get a 1 plus probably a 3.

At that point, the Jets have exhausted a bunch of their draft capital and are basically rebuilding the defense from scratch. (How many long term pieces do they have D right now? 3? MAYBE 4 if we're being generous?)

Watson is incredible and I would love to have him (would have really loved to have him back in 17 when I was SCREAMING at the TV for them to draft him) but that's just a silly amount to give up.  IMO, let someone have him at that price. With the way this is going, Houston's leverage will diminish every day. He's gonna start throwing a fit.

Agreed - not putting Q in the deal.....Id do a max deal of the #2 this yr and a 1st rder the next 2 yes after for a total of 3 1st rders (solely due to having the Seattle picks this yr and next - thx Jamal)....happy to throw in Darnold if they want him.  Maybe some window dressing mid rd picks or a swap here and there - but not dealing a potential Pro Bowler on a rookie contract in addition and I cant see JD or Saleh doing that as well.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, QuizGuy66 said:

FYI/discussion Tannenbaum on Mike Greenberg's show put a "reasonable" price for Watson as 2 1st rounders, a 2nd round pick and Q Williams (this would be after being able to talk with Watson and have him be on board with it). 

-QG

If that's remotely plausible you do that immediately if you're the Jets.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rivers retired.....very good situation for a new QB....if Jets decide to deal Darnold I could definitely see Indy in the mix.  They pick #22 so a late 2d r pick could be in the mix.....would be a pretty big steal for the Colts who received 3 2d rd picks so would have essentially recd 2 net 2d rders and still gotten Darnold along with Quenton Nelson 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/19/2021 at 9:51 AM, Andy Dufresne said:

If that's remotely plausible you do that immediately if you're the Jets.

If that's the haul, you do that in a heartbeat. You have the number two pick but your big need is QB and there aren't any apparently any good enough in the entire class. And maybe not next year's, either. You take Watson and run. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Kiddnets said:

Rivers retired.....very good situation for a new QB....if Jets decide to deal Darnold I could definitely see Indy in the mix.  They pick #22 so a late 2d r pick could be in the mix.....would be a pretty big steal for the Colts who received 3 2d rd picks so would have essentially recd 2 net 2d rders and still gotten Darnold along with Quenton Nelson 

Darnold sucks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Dr. Octopus changed the title to 2021 New York Jets

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
  • Create New...