Comments on: Opinion: McFadden — Buyer Beware

By: Steve

Steve — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 17:51:00 +0000

This draft has a very deep RB class and solid RBs can and will be found by a number of teams in the later rounds but the Jets already solid RBs. I honestly feel that McFadden is the only RB that the Jets would draft because of his big play and home run ability. I can also see them taking a chance on Chris Johnson if the value at where they drafted him was too great to pass up but I highly doubt that he will fall into a position like that where the Jets could pick him. Thomas Jones is a solid RB and will be for the next 2 seasons but McFadden would add a dimension to the offense which is definitely not present at this time. TDs win games in the NFL and I don’t know about everyone else but I am sick and tired of seeing the Jets have to drive 80 yards and still settle for a FG once every 6 possessions and then we lose by less than 7

By: SackDance99

SackDance99 — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 17:05:44 +0000

I guess everyone knows that Cutler really hasn’t done anything in the NFL, yet. Plus, the Jets probably would have picked Leinart, who most draft pundits considered to be the better QB, had a higher FO ranking, a higher Wonderlic, and a much better collegiate resume. Plus, the Jets had Chad, who could not be cut because of the cap hit. So, the FO did the prudent thing: rebuild the OL and try to get the “QB of the future” in the 2nd round. Unfortunately, KC has been underwhelming. But, if KC ends up being the second-coming of Drew Brees, then the FO’s decisions in 2006 would have to be considered brilliant.

By: Bent

Bent — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 16:58:22 +0000

I think Clemens/Brick rather than Cutler or Leinart and McNeil actually does show a macro approach. For one thing, it was much more sensible cap-wise than committing a bunch more money to a position where Chad already had a big contract. And what good would drafting McNeil have been if he was almost ready to retire by the time the rebuilding process was complete (a realistic possibility based on data at the time).

McNeil is a good run blocker but Ferguson is better in pass protection, which was the principal need for the Jets at that time. McNeil did had the advantage of joining a team with a strong offensive line and the league’s best running back, which meant that pass rushers were unable to rear back and commit to the blitz. When they did (Jared Allen), he was regularly torched and actually regressed in that area last year, despite the pro bowl nod.

So, yes, we could have had Cutler/McNeil, but – as Harlan notes – that may yet not prove to be the best possible outcome anyway.

By: 96debacle

96debacle — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 16:49:28 +0000

McFadden will probably be gone by #6.
if he lasts to #4 the raiders will take him. Regardless of Fargas.
But I see someone leapfrogging to #3 and taking him. it would be in Atlanta’s best interest to move back in the draft and if the right offer (Dallas) comes along I see them moving.
Lets say he is gone and Gholston goes to Oakland. That leaves us with Ryan and I agree with this scenario the JETS trade out of #6. But with whom? I think in this scenario that the PATs will be doing the same thing blocking the JETs. Someone will want to move ahead of the Ravens at 8. Why pay for #6 when you can get #7 for less? Does anyone really think the JETS draft Ryan at 6?
That has as much as a chance of happening as the JETS trading their 6th and 36th pick to move up to #3 take McFadden.

By: Harlan Lachman

Harlan Lachman — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 15:58:23 +0000

Ian, 20 – 20 hindsight is perfect.

Reread the pre draft comments on McNeil. He was great and a better value than Brick. But everyone agreed Brick would be great and there were concerns that McNeil’s medical status might prevent him from both playing or lasting.

Also, most folks would say your hindsight is premature. Drafts are best evaluated after three or four years, not two. Who knows how the other QBs will fare this year, how Kellen may respond to a better OL and D, and whether this will be the year McNeil goes down for the count.

Patience my wise friend. Then, tell us you knew it all along :-)

harlan

By: James in TN

James in TN — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 13:16:14 +0000

Please FO, do not draft V. Gholston. He is a workout maniac who prepped for the combine and played in a very weak conference. If McDaddy is not our pick, I hope we trade down and draft a CB and a WR. Also, a QB with a arm and smarts would be nice.

By: ian

ian — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 03:14:06 +0000

i beleive in drafting bpa, but i also think that we as fans and the front office both need to look at the draft from a macro level rather than just on a pick by pick basis. for example, i think it would be much better to have mcfadden/gholston and brohm in first two picks than ryan and the fourth or fifth rb or olb/de off the board. looking back to the 2006 draft, we could have had leinart or cutler and marcus macneil instead of d’brick and clemens with such a macro approach.

By: RK

RK — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 03:01:27 +0000

By most assessments the top 6 will leave us with the 6th best player based on what the media’s predictions are. I’ve seen mock drafts with NE picking a CB at 7, and if their CB is good enough at 7 why not at 6?

If Sedrick Ellis is there at 6th certainly he is the 6th best player.

I don’t know. I think management is doing a good job and other than Ferguson, who some people have already, and I think erroneously, labeled a bust, they have picked well (Schlegel being a real reach but one pick of the lot is not getting a lot of minutes which is pretty good to me).

Whoever it is, if we do draft at 6, they will be getting money as a 6 will so it makes no difference if it’s a RB, QB, DE, LB, CB as long as it isn’t a kicker.

I would take a 1st this year and one next year plus something else if that was an available trade option or perhaps Denver wants our spot and D Rob will be part of the condition of getting it?

So much to speculate. I will be happy with the outcome but much like most of you I would rather have 2 more players in the top 50 or 60 to potentially fill spots than one at 6.

By: Mike

Mike — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 01:58:45 +0000

Thanks Subwayfare- and fortunately, this FO has shown itself as fairly competent in the draft in recent years.

By: k.c.

k.c. — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 01:57:36 +0000

how about a top rated WIDE RECIEVER? we addressed the DEFENSE this offseason,how about getting an OFFENSIVE WEAPON…..MALCOM KELLY or LIMAS SWEED. this is all by TRADING DOWN of course….NOT the 6th pick overall.