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

Jets Offseason Overlook
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 34, 35, 36 ... 50, 51, 52  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> New York Jets
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Bobby816


Joined: 21 Sep 2013
Posts: 8760
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 11:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jetsfandan423 wrote:
The draft is being perfectly set up for us to take a QB, and of course this is a down year for QBs. I am beginning to warm up to taking Watson at 6 though, he is the only QB I feel is worth taking in the top ten.

Watson, Adams, Hooker, or trade down. That is what I am hoping for as of right now, and not necessarily in that order.

On the surface I'd say I don't want us to draft a QB until we see what Hack has. But if Macc and the scouts think Watson is a Day 1 franchise QB then so be it. I wouldn't hate it.

My big board for us is still.
1. Garrett
2. Fournette
3. Adams
4. Hooker
5. Watson
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jetskid007


Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 10841
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 2:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bobby816 wrote:
Jetsfandan423 wrote:
The draft is being perfectly set up for us to take a QB, and of course this is a down year for QBs. I am beginning to warm up to taking Watson at 6 though, he is the only QB I feel is worth taking in the top ten.

Watson, Adams, Hooker, or trade down. That is what I am hoping for as of right now, and not necessarily in that order.

On the surface I'd say I don't want us to draft a QB until we see what Hack has. But if Macc and the scouts think Watson is a Day 1 franchise QB then so be it. I wouldn't hate it.

My big board for us is still.
1. Garrett
2. Fournette
3. Adams
4. Hooker
5. Watson


If Maccagnan thinks the BPA is a QB he'd take him, but I get the feeling he won't think that way. History shows he comes from organizations that draft against risk in round one, and QB is the riskiest position.

I fully expect EDGE, DB, or TE (Howard) if we stick at 6
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bobby816


Joined: 21 Sep 2013
Posts: 8760
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 4:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jetskid007 wrote:
Bobby816 wrote:
Jetsfandan423 wrote:
The draft is being perfectly set up for us to take a QB, and of course this is a down year for QBs. I am beginning to warm up to taking Watson at 6 though, he is the only QB I feel is worth taking in the top ten.

Watson, Adams, Hooker, or trade down. That is what I am hoping for as of right now, and not necessarily in that order.

On the surface I'd say I don't want us to draft a QB until we see what Hack has. But if Macc and the scouts think Watson is a Day 1 franchise QB then so be it. I wouldn't hate it.

My big board for us is still.
1. Garrett
2. Fournette
3. Adams
4. Hooker
5. Watson


If Maccagnan thinks the BPA is a QB he'd take him, but I get the feeling he won't think that way. History shows he comes from organizations that draft against risk in round one, and QB is the riskiest position.

I fully expect EDGE, DB, or TE (Howard) if we stick at 6

Not completely. He looked into trading up for Mariota year 1 and tried big time to trade up last year for Goff or Wentz. So not only is he not opposed to drafting a QB Round 1 he's tried to trade up both of his drafts here. I don't think any QB this draft is worth trading up for, but I think Macc drafting Watson or maybe even Trubisky at 6 isn't out of the question.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kyu


Joined: 26 Feb 2014
Posts: 388
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 4:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bobby816 wrote:
jetskid007 wrote:
Bobby816 wrote:
Jetsfandan423 wrote:
The draft is being perfectly set up for us to take a QB, and of course this is a down year for QBs. I am beginning to warm up to taking Watson at 6 though, he is the only QB I feel is worth taking in the top ten.

Watson, Adams, Hooker, or trade down. That is what I am hoping for as of right now, and not necessarily in that order.

On the surface I'd say I don't want us to draft a QB until we see what Hack has. But if Macc and the scouts think Watson is a Day 1 franchise QB then so be it. I wouldn't hate it.

My big board for us is still.
1. Garrett
2. Fournette
3. Adams
4. Hooker
5. Watson


If Maccagnan thinks the BPA is a QB he'd take him, but I get the feeling he won't think that way. History shows he comes from organizations that draft against risk in round one, and QB is the riskiest position.

I fully expect EDGE, DB, or TE (Howard) if we stick at 6

Not completely. He looked into trading up for Mariota year 1 and tried big time to trade up last year for Goff or Wentz. So not only is he not opposed to drafting a QB Round 1 he's tried to trade up both of his drafts here. I don't think any QB this draft is worth trading up for, but I think Macc drafting Watson or maybe even Trubisky at 6 isn't out of the question.


Was looking to get up to 1 or 2 last year serious? I thought it was more of a due diligence thing. But I did hear that he tried to move up when Tunsil was sliding.
_________________
J.e.t.s.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bobby816


Joined: 21 Sep 2013
Posts: 8760
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 4:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kyu wrote:
Bobby816 wrote:
jetskid007 wrote:
Bobby816 wrote:
Jetsfandan423 wrote:
The draft is being perfectly set up for us to take a QB, and of course this is a down year for QBs. I am beginning to warm up to taking Watson at 6 though, he is the only QB I feel is worth taking in the top ten.

Watson, Adams, Hooker, or trade down. That is what I am hoping for as of right now, and not necessarily in that order.

On the surface I'd say I don't want us to draft a QB until we see what Hack has. But if Macc and the scouts think Watson is a Day 1 franchise QB then so be it. I wouldn't hate it.

My big board for us is still.
1. Garrett
2. Fournette
3. Adams
4. Hooker
5. Watson


If Maccagnan thinks the BPA is a QB he'd take him, but I get the feeling he won't think that way. History shows he comes from organizations that draft against risk in round one, and QB is the riskiest position.

I fully expect EDGE, DB, or TE (Howard) if we stick at 6

Not completely. He looked into trading up for Mariota year 1 and tried big time to trade up last year for Goff or Wentz. So not only is he not opposed to drafting a QB Round 1 he's tried to trade up both of his drafts here. I don't think any QB this draft is worth trading up for, but I think Macc drafting Watson or maybe even Trubisky at 6 isn't out of the question.


Was looking to get up to 1 or 2 last year serious? I thought it was more of a due diligence thing. But I did hear that he tried to move up when Tunsil was sliding.

Tennessee was set to accept our trade offer than Philly came in and out bid us and Macc didnt want to outbid Philly.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kyu


Joined: 26 Feb 2014
Posts: 388
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 4:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bobby816 wrote:
Kyu wrote:
Bobby816 wrote:
jetskid007 wrote:
Bobby816 wrote:
Jetsfandan423 wrote:
The draft is being perfectly set up for us to take a QB, and of course this is a down year for QBs. I am beginning to warm up to taking Watson at 6 though, he is the only QB I feel is worth taking in the top ten.

Watson, Adams, Hooker, or trade down. That is what I am hoping for as of right now, and not necessarily in that order.

On the surface I'd say I don't want us to draft a QB until we see what Hack has. But if Macc and the scouts think Watson is a Day 1 franchise QB then so be it. I wouldn't hate it.

My big board for us is still.
1. Garrett
2. Fournette
3. Adams
4. Hooker
5. Watson


If Maccagnan thinks the BPA is a QB he'd take him, but I get the feeling he won't think that way. History shows he comes from organizations that draft against risk in round one, and QB is the riskiest position.

I fully expect EDGE, DB, or TE (Howard) if we stick at 6

Not completely. He looked into trading up for Mariota year 1 and tried big time to trade up last year for Goff or Wentz. So not only is he not opposed to drafting a QB Round 1 he's tried to trade up both of his drafts here. I don't think any QB this draft is worth trading up for, but I think Macc drafting Watson or maybe even Trubisky at 6 isn't out of the question.


Was looking to get up to 1 or 2 last year serious? I thought it was more of a due diligence thing. But I did hear that he tried to move up when Tunsil was sliding.

Tennessee was set to accept our trade offer than Philly came in and out bid us and Macc didnt want to outbid Philly.


Really..

That's interesting.
_________________
J.e.t.s.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rickyt31


Joined: 29 Dec 2008
Posts: 9742
Location: HEATlanta , GA
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 6:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am starting to think we're going to draft someone. hard to read into any rumors because we're attached to all the QBs out there. The plus is if Hack and the Rookie turn out to be good, we can pull in another 1st round pick or more for one of them.
_________________

JETS . HEAT . ATLANTA UNITED FC . UCLA/GEORGIA STATE .
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kyu


Joined: 26 Feb 2014
Posts: 388
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 8:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

rickyt31 wrote:
I am starting to think we're going to draft someone. hard to read into any rumors because we're attached to all the QBs out there. The plus is if Hack and the Rookie turn out to be good, we can pull in another 1st round pick or more for one of them.


Let's find one for us before we start trading QBs. Wink
_________________
J.e.t.s.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rickyt31


Joined: 29 Dec 2008
Posts: 9742
Location: HEATlanta , GA
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 8:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kyu wrote:
rickyt31 wrote:
I am starting to think we're going to draft someone. hard to read into any rumors because we're attached to all the QBs out there. The plus is if Hack and the Rookie turn out to be good, we can pull in another 1st round pick or more for one of them.


Let's find one for us before we start trading QBs. Wink


Exactly why I said "if"
_________________

JETS . HEAT . ATLANTA UNITED FC . UCLA/GEORGIA STATE .
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rdelaney89


Joined: 22 Jan 2009
Posts: 3769
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 10:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kyu wrote:
ekill08x wrote:
Jetsfandan423 wrote:
rdelaney89 wrote:
Jetsfandan423 wrote:
The draft is being perfectly set up for us to take a QB, and of course this is a down year for QBs. I am beginning to warm up to taking Watson at 6 though, he is the only QB I feel is worth taking in the top ten.

Watson, Adams, Hooker, or trade down. That is what I am hoping for as of right now, and not necessarily in that order.


Judging by our moves last season and this offseason so far I'd argue we are against aiming for a QB at 6. If anything I think we see what we have in our 2 young QBs and build around them in hope to see them do well while also building a foundation for a top QB next year. I do think we'll take a QB at some point but I doubt it will be before round 4.


Whatever moves we make, it doesn't matter: if you have the chance to pick a franchise QB you take it. If Watson is there I could see us taking him even though we have a lot of holes. If we don't take him, then that means our FO doesn't believe in him as a franchise guy. Just because we have Petty and Hack, I don't think that would preclude us from taking a QB at 6. Certainly if we take Watson, I think Petty is a goner. I would be ok with that, because Petty didn't show me enough last year to think he could be a viable starter. I could see us rolling with a vet (Cutler, Kap, Siemian), Watson, and Hack.

I understand the argument against drafting a QB this year. I was even in that camp. But I think Watson could be special. And the way things seem to be shaking out, he could very well be there at 6. We will see if Mac feels the same way come April.


Negative. Not when you have 2 young QBs already, have the 6th pick that you really need to hit on and not a single QB this year truly has a first round grade. Thats bad drafting and will continue to set this team back. A QB at 6 this year would honestly be a nightmare and would show that we have not found a gm.


I disagree with your premise. If there's a QB that you feel can be the man, then you take him. I think that you're against taking a QB this year because you don't feel there is a franchise QB to take, which is fair. But if Luck were sitting there at 6, wouldn't you take him?

I agree with you though, I don't feel there is a QB for us to take. If we were to select one though, it'd be Watson.

I'm on the same page as Ekill, I don't believe there is a QB worthy of a top pick this year. Sure I'm no scout so if Macc is 100% sold on a QB I won't argue but I think there are so many sure fire studs to choose from at 6 that it would be a mistake to gamble on a QB when we already have 2 young guys to roll the dice on. See what our guys have this season and target a stud in next years draft.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
D.Revis24


Joined: 02 Apr 2010
Posts: 4302
PostPosted: Sat Mar 11, 2017 12:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Is Watson or Trubisky a legitimate franchise QB prospect?


Who is better, Hooker or Adams?
_________________


Props to El Ramster on the sig
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jonyankee1nyj


Joined: 05 Jan 2006
Posts: 11163
Location: The only Jazz Fan in New England...
PostPosted: Sat Mar 11, 2017 12:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

D.Revis24 wrote:
Is Watson or Trubisky a legitimate franchise QB prospect?


Who is better, Hooker or Adams?


Adams is the safest player to draft for me outside of Garrett in my opinion. That is saying something because safety prospects tend to be volatile. I think Hooker might have the higher ceiling because of his playmaking knack but if we stay at our pick and Adams is available I'd hope we take him.

QB wise if you're asking are they franchise QB level prospects like Andrew Luck then no. Most people don't even have them at Goff level either. But it only takes one team to think they're and it could be us.
_________________

Soaring Jets Wall of Honor Member
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Mr.O


Joined: 11 Jan 2014
Posts: 3855
Location: Parts Unknown
PostPosted: Sat Mar 11, 2017 2:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

D.Revis24 wrote:
Is Watson or Trubisky a legitimate franchise QB prospect?


Who is better, Hooker or Adams?


No and Adams
_________________

Props to CL on the

Carson Wentz/Noah Spence Bandwagon
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bobby816


Joined: 21 Sep 2013
Posts: 8760
PostPosted: Sat Mar 11, 2017 8:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

D.Revis24 wrote:
Is Watson or Trubisky a legitimate franchise QB prospect?


Who is better, Hooker or Adams?

My biggest reasons why I'm not overally high on Trubisky or Hooker is the lack of playing time. Both only have started 12 games I believe in their careers, so not a lot of experience. When with Watson he was a 3 year starter but his velocity numbers turnered me off to him as of yesterday. Adams I really like. My biggest question with him is FS where he should be? He seems like a more natural SS but we have Pryor there and contrary to a lot of people's mocks on here I don't think he's going anywhere.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
famousj


Joined: 04 Jan 2006
Posts: 2670
Location: Queens, NY
PostPosted: Tue Mar 14, 2017 8:22 pm    Post subject: Ulitmate GM Reply with quote

Fanspeak has an Ultimate GM simulator including the draft. The link below are the results of the simulation I did of the rest of the Jets offseason. My only complaint is that the simulator does not allow for in draft trading of players but I think I put together a solid draft non-the-less.

http://fanspeak.com/ugm/share.php?d=gxdvqe
_________________
Jet draft targets: None.
http://fanspeak.com/ugm/share.php?d=auulor
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 - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 34, 35, 36 ... 50, 51, 52  Next
Page 35 of 52

 
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