Jackson Has Torn Acl Per Reiss

[Seymour93]

Fans who turned on Jackson so quickly in his first year are curious. They ignore the checkered history of great WRs in rookie seasons.

This is a myth. Not every great WR has a bad rookie season.

Greg Jennings didn't have any problems. Neither did the immature Terry Glenn way back. Even Santurdio Holmes in Pittsburgh had 824 receiving yards for the season. Do we really need to dig up Jerry Rice's, Randy Moss's, and Marvin Harrison's rookie numbers?

 

[Clonamery]

He certainly didn't live up to my expectations.

So lower your expectations..........

 

[Seymour93]

So lower your expectations..........

After his rookie season? I have. Many on this forum have not though. They see him as a messiah who is above criticism.

 

[Pat_Nasty]

This is a myth. Not every great WR has a bad rookie season.

Greg Jennings didn't have any problems. Neither did the immature Terry Glenn way back. Even Santurdio Holmes in Pittsburgh had 824 receiving yards for the season. Do we really need to dig up Jerry Rice's, Randy Moss's, and Marvin Harrison's rookie numbers?

Some great WRs have hit the ground running in the NFL, some have taken a bit longer to come around. The point isn't that one should think that Chad Jackson's disappointing rookie career is an indicator of future success, rather that you shouldn't consider it a powerful argument against it.

Dismissing any player by his rookie season would be a mistake... especially one who missed almost all of training camp due to injury.

That said, this current development is discouraging. Missing training camp his first two years in a row will seriously damage Jackson's progress, and if he's not careful, could permanently derail his career. Of course, he could come storming back in years 3,4 or even as late as 5. Unfortunately, this seriously limits the amount of time the Pats have to evaluate him before his rookie deal is up.

 

[Clonamery]

After his rookie season? I have. Many on this forum have not though. They see him as a messiah who is above criticism.

Some. And others believe he will develop in time and many of them are a better judge of talent than myself. Personally, I think the jury's out and will not be back until 2008 with a verdict.

The NFL is a 'show me' league.......

 

[BradyManny]

This is a myth. Not every great WR has a bad rookie season.

Greg Jennings didn't have any problems. Neither did the immature Terry Glenn way back. Even Santurdio Holmes in Pittsburgh had 824 receiving yards for the season. Do we really need to dig up Jerry Rice's, Randy Moss's, and Marvin Harrison's rookie numbers?

Right, and would you want Terry Glenn or Randy Moss on your team?

And are you willing to guarantee that Jennings and Holmes' strong rookie seasons will translate into great NFL careers?

I posted this in another thread, but no one seemed to want to respond, so I'll post again. I didn't dig these numbers up just for shyts and gigs, so somebody better acknowledge them....

Rookie years for some current wide receivers:
Santana Moss - 40 yards.
Chad Johnson - 329 yards.
Reggie Wayne - 345 yards.
Steve Smith - 145 yards.
Javon Walker - 319 yards.
Donald Driver - 31 yards.
Laveranues Coles - 370 yards.
Hines Ward - 246 yards.
T.J. Houshmandzadeh - 228 yards.
Issac Bruce - 272 yards.
Plaxico Burress - 273 yards.
Jerrico Cotchery - 60 yards.
Mushin Muhammad - 407 yards.
Derrick Mason - 186 yards.
Joe Horn - 30 yards.

SECOND YEAR STATS FOR THOSE RECEIVERS:
S Moss - 433 yards
C Johnson - 1166 yards
R Wayne - 716 yards
S Smith - 872 yards
J Walker - 716 yards
D Driver - 322 yards
L Coles - 868 yards
H Ward - 638 yards
T.J. Houshmandzadeh - 492 yards
I Bruce - 1781 yards
P Burress - 1008 yards
J Cotchery - 251 yards
M Muhammad - 317 yards
D Mason - 333 yards
J Horn - 65 yards


And as I said in the other thread: "For all those doubting Jackson at this point, I challenge you to find as many examples of good wideouts excelling in their first season as I have listed of good wideouts who had lackluster rookie seasons."

As far as I'm concerned, you've listed one. Rice is going too far back, Moss' numbers are deceiving as he's not worth it. That leaves you with Marvin Harrison. So, you got about a dozen more to go. Having done much of the work for you, let me just get a few out of the way: Andre Johnson, Roy Williams, Anquan Boldin. You'll find more, but the point is, you can NOT judge a wideout by his rookie season.

 

[Seymour93]

Some great WRs have hit the ground running in the NFL, some have taken a bit longer to come around. The point isn't that one should think that Chad Jackson's disappointing rookie career is an indicator of future success, rather that you shouldn't consider it a powerful argument against it.

Dismissing any player by his rookie season would be a mistake... especially one who missed almost all of training camp due to injury.

That said, this current development is discouraging. Missing training camp his first two years in a row will seriously damage Jackson's progress, and if he's not careful, could permanently derail his career. Of course, he could come storming back in years 3,4 or even as late as 5. Unfortunately, this seriously limits the amount of time the Pats have to evaluate him before his rookie deal is up.

:agree:

I never said that Jackson can't become a good WR for us. What I'm saying is so far he's been a dud. After the departures of Branch and Givens, when Brady needed someone to step up the most, did Jackson step up on offense? Nope. You can blame it on him being a rookie, I'm not going to however since around the league other rookies have preformed capably. Can Jackson turn things around? Sure.

 

[TomBrady'sGoat]

Fans who turned on Jackson so quickly in his first year are curious. They ignore the checkered history of great WRs in rookie seasons, they disregard BB's judgment, they dismiss Pioli personnel savvy, they ignore Jackson's physical tools. Instead they focus on the personality struggles of a 21 year old college senior moving from the SEC to New England. The fans who turned on Jackson so quickly are short-sighted, historically ignorant and wilfully foolish. M the B has every right to say what he said and more.

Fans who continue to hype Jackson in spite of his first season are curious. They selectively pick and choose stats to pretend that all great WRs struggled through their rookie year (Seymour93 covered this one). They disreguard BB's judgement (it was BB's judgement that the team was better off with Bam Childress out there at the end of the year). They ignore that Pioli is not perfect (need I list busts?). They focus on physical tools to the exclusion of performance. They make excuses that aren't made for every other rookie. The fans who continue to hype Jackson are blind to the reality of last year and are out of touch with the core philosophy of the NE Patriots: results matter. We have every right to question them.

 

[patsox23]

Some great WRs have hit the ground running in the NFL, some have taken a bit longer to come around. The point isn't that one should think that Chad Jackson's disappointing rookie career is an indicator of future success, rather that you shouldn't consider it a powerful argument against it.

Dismissing any player by his rookie season would be a mistake... especially one who missed almost all of training camp due to injury.

That said, this current development is discouraging. Missing training camp his first two years in a row will seriously damage Jackson's progress, and if he's not careful, could permanently derail his career. Of course, he could come storming back in years 3,4 or even as late as 5. Unfortunately, this seriously limits the amount of time the Pats have to evaluate him before his rookie deal is up.

Congratulations and THANK YOU for bringing a touch of reality to this thread. CJ's been a disappointment so far, but there are lots of WRs who haven't hit the ground running - just as there are many examples of WRs who have. This latest development is obviously a huge bmmer, but people's eagerness to write off a guy is pointless and a little disturbing.

 

[BradyManny]

:agree:

I never said that Jackson can't become a good WR for us. What I'm saying is so far he's been a dud.

Well, that's kind of like declaring a movie sucks after 5 minutes. You might think it sucks, but how about you STFU and let everyone else in the audience watch the rest of the story in peace.

 

[BradyManny]

Fans who continue to hype Jackson in spite of his first season are curious.

Hmm, not really, a great number of pre-draft scouting reports said he was going to take a year to grow.

They selectively pick and choose stats to pretend that all great WRs struggled through their rookie year (Seymour93 covered this one).

Wrong again - we acknowledge that many great receivers have had great rookie seasons, but that even more great receivers have taken at least a year to start producing.

They disreguard BB's judgement (it was BB's judgement that the team was better off with Bam Childress out there at the end of the year).

Huh? WTF are you even talking about?

They ignore that Pioli is not perfect (need I list busts?).

Nobody's perfect, but hasn't Pioli earned the benefit of the doubt??

They focus on physical tools to the exclusion of performance. They make excuses that aren't made for every other rookie.

What, like the fact that he was injured and missed all of training camp? Yeah, well, that doesn't happen to all rookies. The circumstances are different.

The fans who continue to hype Jackson are blind to the reality of last year and are out of touch with the core philosophy of the NE Patriots: results matter. We have every right to question them.

Again, Jackson contributed in the ways BB asked him to. Does it make much sense to replace a 10 year veteran with a half a dozen years of experience with the starting QB with a 21 year old rookie who had missed all of training camp in the middle of postseason run in a system that relies so heavily on experience reading defenses and experience and chemistry with the QB?

My question is, why do people who call themselves fans get so giddy and excited at the prospect of a 21 year old failing? Don't give me that "I want to be wrong about him" crap. It seems like there are some posters on this board or patriotsplanet who derive some form of self-esteem from labelling players busts.

 

[Seymour93]

Right, and would you want Terry Glenn or Randy Moss on your team?

I'd rather have Glenn than Jackson, because he's a proven WR, but that's not the point. The point was that there have been WR's who have produced, attitudes aside, during their rookie seasons. And if we're going to disqualify someone for their mental state... well Jackson isn't the best example for Mr. Right Attitude according to unconfirmed reports.

And are you willing to guarantee that Jennings and Holmes' strong rookie seasons will translate into great NFL careers?

No. But certainly they've gotten to a better start than Jackson. They're ahead.

As far as I'm concerned, you've listed one. Rice is going too far back, Moss' numbers are deceiving as he's not worth it. That leaves you with Marvin Harrison. So, you got about a dozen more to go. Having done much of the work for you, let me just get a few out of the way: Andre Johnson, Roy Williams, Anquan Boldin. You'll find more, but the point is, you can NOT judge a wideout by his rookie season.

Andre Reed, Mike Irvin, Lee Evans, Torry Holt, Darrell Jackson, Larry Fitzgerald...

It's about 50/50 some are duds some are studs in their rookie season. However, not everyone goes through a rough first year like how some people are trying to say.

 

[Clonamery]

My question is, why do people who call themselves fans get so giddy and excited at the prospect of a 21 year old failing? Don't give me that "I want to be wrong about him" crap. It seems like there are some posters on this board or patriotsplanet who derive some form of self-esteem from labelling players busts.

I think they're called Red Sox fans....

 

[BradyManny]

I'd rather have Glenn than Jackson, because he's a proven WR, but that's not the point. The point was that there have been WR's who have produced, attitudes aside, during their rookie seasons. And if we're going to disqualify someone for their mental state... well Jackson isn't the best example for Mr. Right Attitude according to unconfirmed reports.

Unconfirmed reports from a guy who hated Jackson from the moment he was picked?

Andre Reed, Mike Irvin, Lee Evans, Torry Holt, Darrell Jackson, Larry Fitzgerald...

Fine, and how many of those guys came out early and were just a step above red-shirt their freshman year? Jackson was admittedly raw when we drafted him & we weren't looking for instant production...if it weren't for Meion being a whiny bytch, CJ just goes about his business and this isn't an issue.

It's about 50/50 some are duds some are studs in their rookie season. However, not everyone goes through a rough first year like how some people are trying to say.

No one said that. We just said a rough first year is no way an indication of a bust.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

i don't see that we have any choice other than to give the guy a chance, though I'm the first to admit that he's off to a rocky start.

if he's pupped, then he starts playing, when, sometime in November? so, no training camp and maybe a half dozen games or so to see what we've got. if there isn't some clear indication one way or the other after that, piolichick will have a "decision" to make when next season is over. it's just that low round picks, especially when we trade up for them, are so valuable that it's hard to think about writing the guy off without a good look at him.

 

[mb6592]

I think it's pretty well established that some good receivers have had bad rookie seasons and some haven't. But that really isn't the issue. The better question is how many 2nd round receivers, that have had bad 1st seasons, have come back to be good receivers. My guess would be, based purely on probability (and speculation), his chances of becoming a good receiver are less than 25%. That being said, I'm still not writing him off - yet.

 

[cstjohn17]

We have every right to question them.

I agree, we can and should question them. For me the part that hurts the most is that we traded 2 high draft picks to acquire Jackson. I thought this was a risky move then and it has played out in a worst case scenario.

In most drafts there are elite players in picks 1-8 and the very good players from picks 9-25. But from 25-75 there is little dropoff. Trading 2 picks for 1 in the range 25-75 is high risk and runs contrary to the Patriots value approach. It is usually better to let the draft come to you, move up 3-4 spots if necessary but nothing drastic.

As it turns out there was plenty of good players at both 52 and 75. With Jackson's lack of production it diminishes the overall impact of the 2006 Draft. It is still too early to tell but lets hope it turns out beter than 2004.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_NFL_Draft#Round_two


Good picks
21(21) Laurence Maroney RB MINNESOTA
4 21(118) Stephen Gostkowski PK MEMPHIS
3 22(86) David Thomas TE TEXAS
7 21(229) Willie Andrews RS BAYLOR

Jury still out
2 4(36) Chad Jackson WR FLORIDA
4 9(106) Garret Mills FB TULSA
5 3(136) Ryan O'Callaghan OT CALIFORNIA
6 37(206) Le Kevin Smith DT NEBRASKA

No longer with team
6 22(191) Jeremy Mincey DE FLORIDA
6 36(205) Dan Stevenson OG NOTRE DAME

 

[salty]

It seems apparent to me that we can pretty much write off Chad Jackson for 2007. The guy really needed some time to work with the offense, the routes, the playbook, the quarterback, etc. Basically an entire off-season and training camp. So even if he were to make it back for opening day (which seems doubtful to me) I do not think he would make much of an impact.

Hope I'm wrong about that though.

Anyway, obviously the Patriots must sign or trade for a decent veteran wide receiver now. I thought that before news of Jackson's injury, but now I think it becomes an even greater priority. They need a deep threat, and honestly I'd like somebody that can be an every-down starter so we can get Mr. Unreliable (Caldwell) out of the line-up. Drew Bennett is my favorite and Kevin Curtis also fits the bill. Stalworth is an option as well, but he has consistency and durability issues, plus his price tag will probably be higher than the other two.

I'd really rather not see the team use a high draft pick on another WR. They are always such a crapshoot, rarely contribute right away, and I'd hate for them to sacrifice a much needed opportunity to get younger and faster on defense.

Also, kudos to Remix for bringing up this story. I was positive that it was just a ridiculous rumor.

 

[NEPatriot]

Without Remix starting this avalanche, we may not have known about Jackson's injury until training camp. Thanks, Remix. BTW, I believe this may end up helping JAckson long term. He should regain his athleticism as many Wrs have done after ACL injuries. But the injury should humble him, the absence should scare him into not taking his ability for granted, rehab should discipline him, the isolation should mature him, and, still only 21, when he finally does return, those factors should combine to help him reach his potential. Unfortunately, there is now no way of setting a career timeline for Jackson. I like Meachem or Rice in rd 1. Brady needs to enter his prime with a viable #1 option, and Meachem or Rice, can become that. Contrary to popular belief I don't see Rice as being a raw player. He's just young. There's a difference. He's also clutch (his catch vs. Florida that should have won the game for SC but was called back on a questionable holding call, leading to Moss' blocked kick).

Does anyone have an idea on how this type of injury might impact his spead?

 

[AzPatsFan]

Mark me down in support of a proven free agent deep threat. We don't need a #1 WR - just a proven deep threat.

quote]


A very good and cogent statement that is positively not understood by the posters here. Thankfully, Bill understands, though.