Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Finding an Identity on Offense Mock Offseason
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> New York Jets
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
rdelaney89


Joined: 22 Jan 2009
Posts: 3256
PostPosted: Sun Jan 08, 2017 8:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

barnaby8787 wrote:
In the edit, the QB and CB situation scare me. Also, if we did somehow get La'el, he struggled at guard and was benched for Leary, which would make me have concerns of him starting at LT. Everything else works though.


Linemen usually need some time to grow, given the issues with Mo and Sheldon I think I'd be okay with that move regardless how he turns out. I think the potential upside - negative attitude of Mo/Sheldon = a positive gain.

Whether the Cowboys would do it is another story. I'm willing to see how FA plays out before we start looking to move either of them.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bobby816


Joined: 21 Sep 2013
Posts: 7921
PostPosted: Mon Jan 09, 2017 7:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

barnaby8787 wrote:
In the edit, the QB and CB situation scare me. Also, if we did somehow get La'el, he struggled at guard and was benched for Leary, which would make me have concerns of him starting at LT. Everything else works though.

This statement completely goes against everything you were debating earlier in this thread. You were adamant the Cowboys won't trade Collins, but are now pointing out that they benched him for Leary. Leary will be 1-2 the price of Collins and yet you think they for sure won't trade Collins?

If anything this completely supports my trade idea. We can argue about him being a good LT. But I think Collins being traded here for Richardson is a good possibility bc of how much sense it makes for both teams. Wouldn't surprise me either if we throw Marshall in on the deal and get a pick from Dallas. Dallas needs someone opposite Dez. The issue with that is if they can clear up enough cap space to make those moves. Trading Romo would make that happen for them, just hope he's not traded here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
barnaby8787


Joined: 01 Jan 2006
Posts: 9816
Location: Manhattan, NY
PostPosted: Mon Jan 09, 2017 8:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bobby816 wrote:
barnaby8787 wrote:
In the edit, the QB and CB situation scare me. Also, if we did somehow get La'el, he struggled at guard and was benched for Leary, which would make me have concerns of him starting at LT. Everything else works though.

This statement completely goes against everything you were debating earlier in this thread. You were adamant the Cowboys won't trade Collins, but are now pointing out that they benched him for Leary. Leary will be 1-2 the price of Collins and yet you think they for sure won't trade Collins?

If anything this completely supports my trade idea. We can argue about him being a good LT. But I think Collins being traded here for Richardson is a good possibility bc of how much sense it makes for both teams. Wouldn't surprise me either if we throw Marshall in on the deal and get a pick from Dallas. Dallas needs someone opposite Dez. The issue with that is if they can clear up enough cap space to make those moves. Trading Romo would make that happen for them, just hope he's not traded here.
Do you really want to start this argument with me again? Leary consistently grades out an above average guard and La'el was struggling. Why wouldn't they bench him? La'el still has plenty of upside. And you're off your rocker if you think Leary is costing half. What does a starting guard go for these days? At least 4-5 mil, likely more right? But La'el will be at least 8-10 next year right? Wrong. He'll be tendered for starters. The following year he'll get a long-term deal and unless he's playing LT, he's not getting 8-10 mil. Again, they have zero reason to get rid of him and re-sign Leary, especially when they'd need to re-sign Sheldon next year anyway. I was playing devil's advocate. Let it go.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rdelaney89


Joined: 22 Jan 2009
Posts: 3256
PostPosted: Mon Jan 09, 2017 9:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

barnaby8787 wrote:
Bobby816 wrote:
barnaby8787 wrote:
In the edit, the QB and CB situation scare me. Also, if we did somehow get La'el, he struggled at guard and was benched for Leary, which would make me have concerns of him starting at LT. Everything else works though.

This statement completely goes against everything you were debating earlier in this thread. You were adamant the Cowboys won't trade Collins, but are now pointing out that they benched him for Leary. Leary will be 1-2 the price of Collins and yet you think they for sure won't trade Collins?

If anything this completely supports my trade idea. We can argue about him being a good LT. But I think Collins being traded here for Richardson is a good possibility bc of how much sense it makes for both teams. Wouldn't surprise me either if we throw Marshall in on the deal and get a pick from Dallas. Dallas needs someone opposite Dez. The issue with that is if they can clear up enough cap space to make those moves. Trading Romo would make that happen for them, just hope he's not traded here.
Do you really want to start this argument with me again? Leary consistently grades out an above average guard and La'el was struggling. Why wouldn't they bench him? La'el still has plenty of upside. And you're off your rocker if you think Leary is costing half. What does a starting guard go for these days? At least 4-5 mil, likely more right? But La'el will be at least 8-10 next year right? Wrong. He'll be tendered for starters. The following year he'll get a long-term deal and unless he's playing LT, he's not getting 8-10 mil. Again, they have zero reason to get rid of him and re-sign Leary, especially when they'd need to re-sign Sheldon next year anyway. I was playing devil's advocate. Let it go.


I think Sheldon for them could be more of a 1 year rental with a potential franchise tag just to get a ring. Once they get Romo off the books that should free up a lot of space, issue for them is I believe they need to resign their own players this off season. For me that would be the reason the don't trade for Sheldon, if they are trying to retain their current team.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
barnaby8787


Joined: 01 Jan 2006
Posts: 9816
Location: Manhattan, NY
PostPosted: Mon Jan 09, 2017 9:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

rdelaney89 wrote:
barnaby8787 wrote:
Bobby816 wrote:
barnaby8787 wrote:
In the edit, the QB and CB situation scare me. Also, if we did somehow get La'el, he struggled at guard and was benched for Leary, which would make me have concerns of him starting at LT. Everything else works though.

This statement completely goes against everything you were debating earlier in this thread. You were adamant the Cowboys won't trade Collins, but are now pointing out that they benched him for Leary. Leary will be 1-2 the price of Collins and yet you think they for sure won't trade Collins?

If anything this completely supports my trade idea. We can argue about him being a good LT. But I think Collins being traded here for Richardson is a good possibility bc of how much sense it makes for both teams. Wouldn't surprise me either if we throw Marshall in on the deal and get a pick from Dallas. Dallas needs someone opposite Dez. The issue with that is if they can clear up enough cap space to make those moves. Trading Romo would make that happen for them, just hope he's not traded here.
Do you really want to start this argument with me again? Leary consistently grades out an above average guard and La'el was struggling. Why wouldn't they bench him? La'el still has plenty of upside. And you're off your rocker if you think Leary is costing half. What does a starting guard go for these days? At least 4-5 mil, likely more right? But La'el will be at least 8-10 next year right? Wrong. He'll be tendered for starters. The following year he'll get a long-term deal and unless he's playing LT, he's not getting 8-10 mil. Again, they have zero reason to get rid of him and re-sign Leary, especially when they'd need to re-sign Sheldon next year anyway. I was playing devil's advocate. Let it go.


I think Sheldon for them could be more of a 1 year rental with a potential franchise tag just to get a ring. Once they get Romo off the books that should free up a lot of space, issue for them is I believe they need to resign their own players this off season. For me that would be the reason the don't trade for Sheldon, if they are trying to retain their current team.
Right, basically the argument was that they'll re-sign Leary instead of La'el because La'el will cost double next off-season, yet they'd still need to franchise tag or re-sign Sheldon. I don't see the logic in that. La'el can be tendered next year for cheap. They'd be better off trading a pick for Sheldon if anything and holding on to La'el. Either way, I don't think the need is as big as it was given David Irving's play in the last few games on the season.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
xenajets


Joined: 31 Mar 2012
Posts: 2011
PostPosted: Mon Jan 09, 2017 9:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

barnaby8787 wrote:
rdelaney89 wrote:
barnaby8787 wrote:
Bobby816 wrote:
barnaby8787 wrote:
In the edit, the QB and CB situation scare me. Also, if we did somehow get La'el, he struggled at guard and was benched for Leary, which would make me have concerns of him starting at LT. Everything else works though.

This statement completely goes against everything you were debating earlier in this thread. You were adamant the Cowboys won't trade Collins, but are now pointing out that they benched him for Leary. Leary will be 1-2 the price of Collins and yet you think they for sure won't trade Collins?

If anything this completely supports my trade idea. We can argue about him being a good LT. But I think Collins being traded here for Richardson is a good possibility bc of how much sense it makes for both teams. Wouldn't surprise me either if we throw Marshall in on the deal and get a pick from Dallas. Dallas needs someone opposite Dez. The issue with that is if they can clear up enough cap space to make those moves. Trading Romo would make that happen for them, just hope he's not traded here.
Do you really want to start this argument with me again? Leary consistently grades out an above average guard and La'el was struggling. Why wouldn't they bench him? La'el still has plenty of upside. And you're off your rocker if you think Leary is costing half. What does a starting guard go for these days? At least 4-5 mil, likely more right? But La'el will be at least 8-10 next year right? Wrong. He'll be tendered for starters. The following year he'll get a long-term deal and unless he's playing LT, he's not getting 8-10 mil. Again, they have zero reason to get rid of him and re-sign Leary, especially when they'd need to re-sign Sheldon next year anyway. I was playing devil's advocate. Let it go.


I think Sheldon for them could be more of a 1 year rental with a potential franchise tag just to get a ring. Once they get Romo off the books that should free up a lot of space, issue for them is I believe they need to resign their own players this off season. For me that would be the reason the don't trade for Sheldon, if they are trying to retain their current team.
Right, basically the argument was that they'll re-sign Leary instead of La'el because La'el will cost double next off-season, yet they'd still need to franchise tag or re-sign Sheldon. I don't see the logic in that. La'el can be tendered next year for cheap. They'd be better off trading a pick for Sheldon if anything and holding on to La'el. Either way, I don't think the need is as big as it was given David Irving's play in the last few games on the season.


The logic behind the Cowboys not spending huge money next year on Collins is quite simple.
The Cowboys possess the best o-line in the league and that's with or without Collins. Leary is a free agent and they may choose to plug in another cheaper vet or even a younger low round rookie. Or they may resign Leary at a hometown discount to be part of that formidable line.

Now their defense is average at best and would take a huge leap forward with a hungry and motivated Sheldon Richardson who on form is a top 5DE in my opinion. You mentioned Irving improving could you imagine having Sheldon on that line too? It would make the Cowboys a much better defense.

It makes more sense to help a lower graded part of your team and sacrificing a player from your best part of your team even if without that player they are still the best.

The analogy I'd use is like having a Ferrari, Lamborghini, Rolls-Royce and Bentley in the driveway but living in a very basic house. In reality you'd sell one of your super cars and put it towards improving your home!! That's why the Cowboys make a good trade partner for us In my opinion
_________________


Many thanks to IDOG_det on the sig
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bobby816


Joined: 21 Sep 2013
Posts: 7921
PostPosted: Mon Jan 09, 2017 10:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

xenajets wrote:
barnaby8787 wrote:
rdelaney89 wrote:
barnaby8787 wrote:
Bobby816 wrote:
barnaby8787 wrote:
In the edit, the QB and CB situation scare me. Also, if we did somehow get La'el, he struggled at guard and was benched for Leary, which would make me have concerns of him starting at LT. Everything else works though.

This statement completely goes against everything you were debating earlier in this thread. You were adamant the Cowboys won't trade Collins, but are now pointing out that they benched him for Leary. Leary will be 1-2 the price of Collins and yet you think they for sure won't trade Collins?

If anything this completely supports my trade idea. We can argue about him being a good LT. But I think Collins being traded here for Richardson is a good possibility bc of how much sense it makes for both teams. Wouldn't surprise me either if we throw Marshall in on the deal and get a pick from Dallas. Dallas needs someone opposite Dez. The issue with that is if they can clear up enough cap space to make those moves. Trading Romo would make that happen for them, just hope he's not traded here.
Do you really want to start this argument with me again? Leary consistently grades out an above average guard and La'el was struggling. Why wouldn't they bench him? La'el still has plenty of upside. And you're off your rocker if you think Leary is costing half. What does a starting guard go for these days? At least 4-5 mil, likely more right? But La'el will be at least 8-10 next year right? Wrong. He'll be tendered for starters. The following year he'll get a long-term deal and unless he's playing LT, he's not getting 8-10 mil. Again, they have zero reason to get rid of him and re-sign Leary, especially when they'd need to re-sign Sheldon next year anyway. I was playing devil's advocate. Let it go.


I think Sheldon for them could be more of a 1 year rental with a potential franchise tag just to get a ring. Once they get Romo off the books that should free up a lot of space, issue for them is I believe they need to resign their own players this off season. For me that would be the reason the don't trade for Sheldon, if they are trying to retain their current team.
Right, basically the argument was that they'll re-sign Leary instead of La'el because La'el will cost double next off-season, yet they'd still need to franchise tag or re-sign Sheldon. I don't see the logic in that. La'el can be tendered next year for cheap. They'd be better off trading a pick for Sheldon if anything and holding on to La'el. Either way, I don't think the need is as big as it was given David Irving's play in the last few games on the season.


The logic behind the Cowboys not spending huge money next year on Collins is quite simple.
The Cowboys possess the best o-line in the league and that's with or without Collins. Leary is a free agent and they may choose to plug in another cheaper vet or even a younger low round rookie. Or they may resign Leary at a hometown discount to be part of that formidable line.

Now their defense is average at best and would take a huge leap forward with a hungry and motivated Sheldon Richardson who on form is a top 5DE in my opinion. You mentioned Irving improving could you imagine having Sheldon on that line too? It would make the Cowboys a much better defense.

It makes more sense to help a lower graded part of your team and sacrificing a player from your best part of your team even if without that player they are still the best.

The analogy I'd use is like having a Ferrari, Lamborghini, Rolls-Royce and Bentley in the driveway but living in a very basic house. In reality you'd sell one of your super cars and put it towards improving your home!! That's why the Cowboys make a good trade partner for us In my opinion

Exactly my point. And to add to it they've already expressed interest in Sheldon at the trade deadline, so it's not a random trade rumor. They almost gave up a 1st rounder for him, so I'm sure they'd be ok with giving up Collins.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rich51


Joined: 16 Jan 2012
Posts: 2573
Location: WPB Fl via Jc NJ
PostPosted: Mon Jan 09, 2017 10:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

As NFL players Sheldon first two years before we started moving him to OLB placed him as a top 5 interior lineman. The last two years has shown his versatility and although he will never be a great OLB he was competent and to my knowledge never complained. I still think he could be dominant inside.

Collins has been a below average guard. In Dallas at best he will be a good starting guard or RT. With Tyrone Smith only a few years older, I doubt he ever plays LT for them.

That being said I think the trade makes sense for us. Collins will only be 24 and is potentially as good as or better than any T we could take in the first round. With Wilkerson and Williams under contract, Sheldon is the odd man out if we continue with a 3-4 base so getting Collins, who I wanted two years ago anyway, would be almost equal to getting a first round pick this year.

Dallas has a bend but not break defense but Sheldon would definitely improve it. Dallas could replace Collins at OG with a rookie or low cost free agent but they will not get someone as good as Sheldon was his first two years. So I guess, imo, it makes sense for them as well

Ps just looked at Dallas' cap and they can't afford Sheldon. They are 5m over with very little dead wood. Cutting Romo might save them 5-10m but they still couldn't pay Sheldon or their draft picks


Last edited by Rich51 on Mon Jan 09, 2017 10:52 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
barnaby8787


Joined: 01 Jan 2006
Posts: 9816
Location: Manhattan, NY
PostPosted: Mon Jan 09, 2017 10:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

xenajets wrote:
barnaby8787 wrote:
rdelaney89 wrote:
barnaby8787 wrote:
Bobby816 wrote:
barnaby8787 wrote:
In the edit, the QB and CB situation scare me. Also, if we did somehow get La'el, he struggled at guard and was benched for Leary, which would make me have concerns of him starting at LT. Everything else works though.

This statement completely goes against everything you were debating earlier in this thread. You were adamant the Cowboys won't trade Collins, but are now pointing out that they benched him for Leary. Leary will be 1-2 the price of Collins and yet you think they for sure won't trade Collins?

If anything this completely supports my trade idea. We can argue about him being a good LT. But I think Collins being traded here for Richardson is a good possibility bc of how much sense it makes for both teams. Wouldn't surprise me either if we throw Marshall in on the deal and get a pick from Dallas. Dallas needs someone opposite Dez. The issue with that is if they can clear up enough cap space to make those moves. Trading Romo would make that happen for them, just hope he's not traded here.
Do you really want to start this argument with me again? Leary consistently grades out an above average guard and La'el was struggling. Why wouldn't they bench him? La'el still has plenty of upside. And you're off your rocker if you think Leary is costing half. What does a starting guard go for these days? At least 4-5 mil, likely more right? But La'el will be at least 8-10 next year right? Wrong. He'll be tendered for starters. The following year he'll get a long-term deal and unless he's playing LT, he's not getting 8-10 mil. Again, they have zero reason to get rid of him and re-sign Leary, especially when they'd need to re-sign Sheldon next year anyway. I was playing devil's advocate. Let it go.


I think Sheldon for them could be more of a 1 year rental with a potential franchise tag just to get a ring. Once they get Romo off the books that should free up a lot of space, issue for them is I believe they need to resign their own players this off season. For me that would be the reason the don't trade for Sheldon, if they are trying to retain their current team.
Right, basically the argument was that they'll re-sign Leary instead of La'el because La'el will cost double next off-season, yet they'd still need to franchise tag or re-sign Sheldon. I don't see the logic in that. La'el can be tendered next year for cheap. They'd be better off trading a pick for Sheldon if anything and holding on to La'el. Either way, I don't think the need is as big as it was given David Irving's play in the last few games on the season.


The logic behind the Cowboys not spending huge money next year on Collins is quite simple.
The Cowboys possess the best o-line in the league and that's with or without Collins. Leary is a free agent and they may choose to plug in another cheaper vet or even a younger low round rookie. Or they may resign Leary at a hometown discount to be part of that formidable line.

Now their defense is average at best and would take a huge leap forward with a hungry and motivated Sheldon Richardson who on form is a top 5DE in my opinion. You mentioned Irving improving could you imagine having Sheldon on that line too? It would make the Cowboys a much better defense.

It makes more sense to help a lower graded part of your team and sacrificing a player from your best part of your team even if without that player they are still the best.

The analogy I'd use is like having a Ferrari, Lamborghini, Rolls-Royce and Bentley in the driveway but living in a very basic house. In reality you'd sell one of your super cars and put it towards improving your home!! That's why the Cowboys make a good trade partner for us In my opinion
I see the logic behind a plug and play vet. That I understand. I don't understand the logic of re-signing Leary and then trading La'el. Even at a hometown discount, Leary is running you at least 4-5 mil. And in terms of Sheldon on that line, I get that, I really do, I just don't see them sacrificing La'el for Sheldon. I see more logic in trading a late round pick for Sheldon and keeping La'el under team control for this year and next at a low rate. Basically, I see more logic in trading La'el next year if they were to trade him than right now.
_________________


Last edited by barnaby8787 on Mon Jan 09, 2017 10:46 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
barnaby8787


Joined: 01 Jan 2006
Posts: 9816
Location: Manhattan, NY
PostPosted: Mon Jan 09, 2017 10:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bobby816 wrote:
xenajets wrote:
barnaby8787 wrote:
rdelaney89 wrote:
barnaby8787 wrote:
Bobby816 wrote:
barnaby8787 wrote:
In the edit, the QB and CB situation scare me. Also, if we did somehow get La'el, he struggled at guard and was benched for Leary, which would make me have concerns of him starting at LT. Everything else works though.

This statement completely goes against everything you were debating earlier in this thread. You were adamant the Cowboys won't trade Collins, but are now pointing out that they benched him for Leary. Leary will be 1-2 the price of Collins and yet you think they for sure won't trade Collins?

If anything this completely supports my trade idea. We can argue about him being a good LT. But I think Collins being traded here for Richardson is a good possibility bc of how much sense it makes for both teams. Wouldn't surprise me either if we throw Marshall in on the deal and get a pick from Dallas. Dallas needs someone opposite Dez. The issue with that is if they can clear up enough cap space to make those moves. Trading Romo would make that happen for them, just hope he's not traded here.
Do you really want to start this argument with me again? Leary consistently grades out an above average guard and La'el was struggling. Why wouldn't they bench him? La'el still has plenty of upside. And you're off your rocker if you think Leary is costing half. What does a starting guard go for these days? At least 4-5 mil, likely more right? But La'el will be at least 8-10 next year right? Wrong. He'll be tendered for starters. The following year he'll get a long-term deal and unless he's playing LT, he's not getting 8-10 mil. Again, they have zero reason to get rid of him and re-sign Leary, especially when they'd need to re-sign Sheldon next year anyway. I was playing devil's advocate. Let it go.


I think Sheldon for them could be more of a 1 year rental with a potential franchise tag just to get a ring. Once they get Romo off the books that should free up a lot of space, issue for them is I believe they need to resign their own players this off season. For me that would be the reason the don't trade for Sheldon, if they are trying to retain their current team.
Right, basically the argument was that they'll re-sign Leary instead of La'el because La'el will cost double next off-season, yet they'd still need to franchise tag or re-sign Sheldon. I don't see the logic in that. La'el can be tendered next year for cheap. They'd be better off trading a pick for Sheldon if anything and holding on to La'el. Either way, I don't think the need is as big as it was given David Irving's play in the last few games on the season.


The logic behind the Cowboys not spending huge money next year on Collins is quite simple.
The Cowboys possess the best o-line in the league and that's with or without Collins. Leary is a free agent and they may choose to plug in another cheaper vet or even a younger low round rookie. Or they may resign Leary at a hometown discount to be part of that formidable line.

Now their defense is average at best and would take a huge leap forward with a hungry and motivated Sheldon Richardson who on form is a top 5DE in my opinion. You mentioned Irving improving could you imagine having Sheldon on that line too? It would make the Cowboys a much better defense.

It makes more sense to help a lower graded part of your team and sacrificing a player from your best part of your team even if without that player they are still the best.

The analogy I'd use is like having a Ferrari, Lamborghini, Rolls-Royce and Bentley in the driveway but living in a very basic house. In reality you'd sell one of your super cars and put it towards improving your home!! That's why the Cowboys make a good trade partner for us In my opinion

Exactly my point. And to add to it they've already expressed interest in Sheldon at the trade deadline, so it's not a random trade rumor. They almost gave up a 1st rounder for him, so I'm sure they'd be ok with giving up Collins.
Not true at all actually. Mac asked for a 1st and Dallas balked at it.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bobby816


Joined: 21 Sep 2013
Posts: 7921
PostPosted: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

barnaby8787 wrote:
xenajets wrote:
barnaby8787 wrote:
rdelaney89 wrote:
barnaby8787 wrote:
Bobby816 wrote:
barnaby8787 wrote:
In the edit, the QB and CB situation scare me. Also, if we did somehow get La'el, he struggled at guard and was benched for Leary, which would make me have concerns of him starting at LT. Everything else works though.

This statement completely goes against everything you were debating earlier in this thread. You were adamant the Cowboys won't trade Collins, but are now pointing out that they benched him for Leary. Leary will be 1-2 the price of Collins and yet you think they for sure won't trade Collins?

If anything this completely supports my trade idea. We can argue about him being a good LT. But I think Collins being traded here for Richardson is a good possibility bc of how much sense it makes for both teams. Wouldn't surprise me either if we throw Marshall in on the deal and get a pick from Dallas. Dallas needs someone opposite Dez. The issue with that is if they can clear up enough cap space to make those moves. Trading Romo would make that happen for them, just hope he's not traded here.
Do you really want to start this argument with me again? Leary consistently grades out an above average guard and La'el was struggling. Why wouldn't they bench him? La'el still has plenty of upside. And you're off your rocker if you think Leary is costing half. What does a starting guard go for these days? At least 4-5 mil, likely more right? But La'el will be at least 8-10 next year right? Wrong. He'll be tendered for starters. The following year he'll get a long-term deal and unless he's playing LT, he's not getting 8-10 mil. Again, they have zero reason to get rid of him and re-sign Leary, especially when they'd need to re-sign Sheldon next year anyway. I was playing devil's advocate. Let it go.


I think Sheldon for them could be more of a 1 year rental with a potential franchise tag just to get a ring. Once they get Romo off the books that should free up a lot of space, issue for them is I believe they need to resign their own players this off season. For me that would be the reason the don't trade for Sheldon, if they are trying to retain their current team.
Right, basically the argument was that they'll re-sign Leary instead of La'el because La'el will cost double next off-season, yet they'd still need to franchise tag or re-sign Sheldon. I don't see the logic in that. La'el can be tendered next year for cheap. They'd be better off trading a pick for Sheldon if anything and holding on to La'el. Either way, I don't think the need is as big as it was given David Irving's play in the last few games on the season.


The logic behind the Cowboys not spending huge money next year on Collins is quite simple.
The Cowboys possess the best o-line in the league and that's with or without Collins. Leary is a free agent and they may choose to plug in another cheaper vet or even a younger low round rookie. Or they may resign Leary at a hometown discount to be part of that formidable line.

Now their defense is average at best and would take a huge leap forward with a hungry and motivated Sheldon Richardson who on form is a top 5DE in my opinion. You mentioned Irving improving could you imagine having Sheldon on that line too? It would make the Cowboys a much better defense.

It makes more sense to help a lower graded part of your team and sacrificing a player from your best part of your team even if without that player they are still the best.

The analogy I'd use is like having a Ferrari, Lamborghini, Rolls-Royce and Bentley in the driveway but living in a very basic house. In reality you'd sell one of your super cars and put it towards improving your home!! That's why the Cowboys make a good trade partner for us In my opinion
I see the logic behind a plug and play vet. That I understand. I don't understand the logic of re-signing Leary and then trading La'el. Even at a hometown discount, Leary is running you at least 4-5 mil. And in terms of Sheldon on that line, I get that, I really do, I just don't see them sacrificing La'el for Sheldon. I see more logic in trading a late round pick for Sheldon and keeping La'el under team control for this year and next at a low rate. Basically, I see more logic in trading La'el next year if they were to trade him than right now.

Very average Guards can look good playing against the bet LT and best C in the game. LG really isn't a position Dallas should invest a ton of money. So maybe they trade Collins don't resign Leary and start Cooper or a late round draft pick at LG.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
barnaby8787


Joined: 01 Jan 2006
Posts: 9816
Location: Manhattan, NY
PostPosted: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bobby816 wrote:
barnaby8787 wrote:
xenajets wrote:
barnaby8787 wrote:
rdelaney89 wrote:
barnaby8787 wrote:
Bobby816 wrote:
barnaby8787 wrote:
In the edit, the QB and CB situation scare me. Also, if we did somehow get La'el, he struggled at guard and was benched for Leary, which would make me have concerns of him starting at LT. Everything else works though.

This statement completely goes against everything you were debating earlier in this thread. You were adamant the Cowboys won't trade Collins, but are now pointing out that they benched him for Leary. Leary will be 1-2 the price of Collins and yet you think they for sure won't trade Collins?

If anything this completely supports my trade idea. We can argue about him being a good LT. But I think Collins being traded here for Richardson is a good possibility bc of how much sense it makes for both teams. Wouldn't surprise me either if we throw Marshall in on the deal and get a pick from Dallas. Dallas needs someone opposite Dez. The issue with that is if they can clear up enough cap space to make those moves. Trading Romo would make that happen for them, just hope he's not traded here.
Do you really want to start this argument with me again? Leary consistently grades out an above average guard and La'el was struggling. Why wouldn't they bench him? La'el still has plenty of upside. And you're off your rocker if you think Leary is costing half. What does a starting guard go for these days? At least 4-5 mil, likely more right? But La'el will be at least 8-10 next year right? Wrong. He'll be tendered for starters. The following year he'll get a long-term deal and unless he's playing LT, he's not getting 8-10 mil. Again, they have zero reason to get rid of him and re-sign Leary, especially when they'd need to re-sign Sheldon next year anyway. I was playing devil's advocate. Let it go.


I think Sheldon for them could be more of a 1 year rental with a potential franchise tag just to get a ring. Once they get Romo off the books that should free up a lot of space, issue for them is I believe they need to resign their own players this off season. For me that would be the reason the don't trade for Sheldon, if they are trying to retain their current team.
Right, basically the argument was that they'll re-sign Leary instead of La'el because La'el will cost double next off-season, yet they'd still need to franchise tag or re-sign Sheldon. I don't see the logic in that. La'el can be tendered next year for cheap. They'd be better off trading a pick for Sheldon if anything and holding on to La'el. Either way, I don't think the need is as big as it was given David Irving's play in the last few games on the season.


The logic behind the Cowboys not spending huge money next year on Collins is quite simple.
The Cowboys possess the best o-line in the league and that's with or without Collins. Leary is a free agent and they may choose to plug in another cheaper vet or even a younger low round rookie. Or they may resign Leary at a hometown discount to be part of that formidable line.

Now their defense is average at best and would take a huge leap forward with a hungry and motivated Sheldon Richardson who on form is a top 5DE in my opinion. You mentioned Irving improving could you imagine having Sheldon on that line too? It would make the Cowboys a much better defense.

It makes more sense to help a lower graded part of your team and sacrificing a player from your best part of your team even if without that player they are still the best.

The analogy I'd use is like having a Ferrari, Lamborghini, Rolls-Royce and Bentley in the driveway but living in a very basic house. In reality you'd sell one of your super cars and put it towards improving your home!! That's why the Cowboys make a good trade partner for us In my opinion
I see the logic behind a plug and play vet. That I understand. I don't understand the logic of re-signing Leary and then trading La'el. Even at a hometown discount, Leary is running you at least 4-5 mil. And in terms of Sheldon on that line, I get that, I really do, I just don't see them sacrificing La'el for Sheldon. I see more logic in trading a late round pick for Sheldon and keeping La'el under team control for this year and next at a low rate. Basically, I see more logic in trading La'el next year if they were to trade him than right now.

Very average Guards can look good playing against the bet LT and best C in the game. LG really isn't a position Dallas should invest a ton of money. So maybe they trade Collins don't resign Leary and start Cooper or a late round draft pick at LG.
That's fair
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
doumeyer


Joined: 03 Jul 2013
Posts: 1872
PostPosted: Tue Jan 10, 2017 1:38 am    Post subject: Re: Finding an Identity on Offense Mock Offseason Reply with quote

Bobby816 wrote:
2017 Mock Offseason

We keep Macc and Bowles together. This is there make or break year though.

RETIRE:

Nick Mangold:
I think we handle him like we did Ferguson last offseason. Tell him he has to take a huge pay cut to not get cut. He in turn opts to retire.

David Harris:
Same as Mangold.

CUTS:

Darrelle Revis:
He isn't good anymore and has no heart either. No sense of wasting our time moving him to FS.

Ryan Clady:
Too injury prone and we need to get younger at OT.

Nick Folk:
Too big of a cap hit for a kicker when we're rebuilding.

Breno Giacomini:
He isn't good and we need to get younger at OT.

Buster Skrine:
Has been a disappointment since we signed him.

Marcus Gilchrist:
I've always thought he's average and overrated.

RESIGN:

Brian Winters:
He's been a pleasant surprise the last year and a half. He's still has good years ahead of him. Our G situation is pretty good with him and Carpenter.

Wes Johnson:
I think he's played pretty well this year. We have him battle for the starting spot in camp.

Marcus Williams:
We need the CB depth and he shouldn't cost too much.

Ben Ijalana:
Worth keeping around as a depth OT. Hasn't done enough this season to secure a starting spot at OT. But he's a solid depth player.

Bruce Carter:
ILB depth.

TRADES:

Jets trade Sheldon Richardson to Dallas for La'el Collins (I'd rather us trade Mo, but with his salary and play Sheldon just has more value. Collins can play LT for us and gives us good young bookend OTs with him and Shell. Dallas doesn't need Collins and it showed this season. Leary will be quite a bit cheaper than Collins in another year. Dallas can't afford to pay all these young players, so Collins becomes the odd man out. This trade makes sense for both teams).

Jets trade Brandon Marshall to Houston for there 5th Round draft pick.
(Looked off all year, if we're rebuilding it's ok to let him go and let the young WRs get snaps).

Jets trade Matt Forte to the Green Bay for their 7th Round draft pick.
(It's the respectable thing to do. Send him to a team competing for the playoffs).

FREE AGENCY:

EDGE Melvin Ingram
We need an edge rusher. We should've drafted him instead of a Coples years ago. I'd like Chandler Jones but I doubt he hits the market. Ingram I think can be a consistent 10-15 sack guy here with our front 7.

CB Dre Kirkpatrick
We need multiple CBs. Kirkpatrick can start right away. He has talent but hasn't maximized it yet.

ILB Zach Brown
Had a great season on a prove it deal. Buffalo cant afford him. Especially when they still have P. Brown and Ragland. Brown still has 2-4 more good seasons in him. Faster and younger than Harris with good size still.

CB Morris Claiborne
Talented just can't stay healthy. We take a risk on him bc his price won't be high with an injury history.

Case Keenum
I think Petty didn't show us enough for us to be comfortable with starting him next year. Keenum is a vet and is competition for Petty and Hack. He won't cost the money guys like Tyrod (if cut) or Glennon will fetch. Cheap vet body for camp.

EDGE Barkevious Mingo:
A bunch liked him out of LSU and he never fulfilled his potential. We need speed and he offers that. Hopefully another change of scenery can help him. Won't cost much either.

TE Dion Sims:
We need some TE help. ASJ hopefully amounts to something.

DRAFT:

1st: Jamal Adams (FS/LSU)
Might be the best safety prospect since Earl Thomas. Not a single weakness to his game. He can cover, tackle and has a nose for the football. If Pryor can turn a corner... this will be a nasty Safety duo for years like Seattle has.

2nd: Christian McCaffrey (RB/Stanford)
I think he's a steal in Round 2. He and Powell can make a great combo in the backfield. He's tougher than Reggie Bush was, so I don't like that comparison for him. Nice luxury to have 2 really good 3 down backs.

3rd: Jourdan Lewis (CB/Michigan)
Very deep CB class this year. Lewis can play on the outside or in the slot. Not a flashy CB, but gets the job done.

4th: (traded away last draft to get OT Brandon Shell)

5th: Jalen Reeves-Maybin (ILB/Tennessee)
Athletic fast sideline to sideline LB much like Lee. We need speed on our defense. We have great size on the D Line to allow smaller guys at ILB. Put these fast guys with great instincts at the LB spots to make tackles and not be mismatches in coverage. Good pass rushing skill from this guy as well. Can add 10-20lbs in the next couple years and has ST value right away as well.

5th (from Houston) Cole Hikutini (TE/Louisville)
Receiving TE with good size that needs work in the blocking game. We need to use the TE more, so Hikutini gives us depth at the position.

6th: Riley Sorenson (C/OG/Washington State)
Great size and that's why he can play G too. Solid player that can compete for a spot at C or G. Great story with him battling cancer and beating it this last offseason as well.

7th: Eddy Piniero (K/Florida)
Highly touted kicker with a monster leg. (He's hit a 77yd FG). We need to replace Folk with someone.

7th: (from Green Bay) Marlon Mack (RB/South Florida)
Solid talent at RB. We need 3 RBs not just 2. Mack gives us that safety valve in case of injury. Better size than Powell and McCaffrey as well.
Really you can sub the BA RB at this spot. There's always a RB projected to go in Rounds 3-5 that slips this late. I don't know who that is obviously, but De'Veon Smith, Kareem Hunt and Joe Yearby are a few other names that jump out to me. Even Joe Mixon might be a name to keep an eye on bc of his off the field issues.

QB: Petty vs Hackenberg vs Keenum
RB: Powell, McCaffrey, Mack
WR: Decker, Enunwa, Anderson, Marshall, Smith, Peake
TE: ASJ, Hikutini, Sims
LT: Collins, Ijalana
LG: Carpenter, Dozier
C: Johnson, Sorenson
RG: Winters
RT: Shell, Qvale

DE: Wilkerson, Williams, Thomas, Johnson
DT: McClendon, Simon
OLB: Ingram, Mauldin, Jenkins, Mingo, Martin
ILB: Lee, Brown, Carter, Reeves-Maybin
CB: Kirkpatrick, Burris, Lewis, Claiborne, Williams, Marshall, Roberts
FS: Adams, Middleton
SS: Pryor, Miles

K: Piniero
P: Edwards
LS: Purdum


I don't know much about most of your draft picks, but I would love to pick UP Christan McCaffery with our second pick also. Only problem is he is perfect for the Pats. And they might take him with their first pick. The kid has great speed and real good hands. I really like the idea of Powell & McCaffery combo. I also think it time to part ways with Forte, he was a outstanding player with the Bears, but at 32 years old he is not the answer.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bobby816


Joined: 21 Sep 2013
Posts: 7921
PostPosted: Sat Jan 21, 2017 9:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bumped for edit.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mr.O


Joined: 11 Jan 2014
Posts: 3408
Location: Parts Unknown
PostPosted: Sat Jan 21, 2017 10:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Trades wise I dont see Dallas moving Collins, he takes over for Leary and more than likley eventually replace Doug Free at RT and I don't think Houston would trade for BMarsh off the fact they spent a 1st and 3rd on Fuller and Miller this past year.

Draft wise Im not a fan of taking RB's in the 1st so personally id rather take a Barnett or Thomas at 6 and a McCaffrey, Mixon, or Kamara in the 2nd. Its just not worth taking RBs high anymore with how the style of the game is today.
_________________

Props to CL on the

Carson Wentz/Noah Spence Bandwagon
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> New York Jets All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 5 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group