AFCE contract news: D'Bust signs D'extension

[Ring 6]

=============================================

What it does is set a salary that the Jets find workable for future cap.

But wouldnt it make sense to know what that future cap is in order to determine if its workable? Again, what is gained by rushing?

 

[ausbacker]

Telling the failed 260lb OLB that he is going to now be a 34 DE is like telling the ugliest girl in the town that she will get a lot of dates for her personality.

On another note, when the Jets drafted Vernon Gholston with th 6th pick in the draft and paid him many millions to rush the QB, I was watching from my couch, almost twice as old, almost 50 lbs overweight (NOT ANYMORE THOUGH!!!) and I have gotten as many sacks.
In other words the Jets could have put every draft eligible person in a bowl, picked out a random name, paid them millions and gotten the same number of sacks.

I must admit to being tricked by Gholston. I fell in love with the measurables. Luckily I trusted in BB. He's like a super hot tranny in Thailand. Looks like a girl, talks like a girl and wears clothes like a girl but is a confused guy. No No No No No.

Tranny Gholston. Perfect fit for the Jets.

 

[patfanken]

Revis and Harris were drafted in 2007...I guess thats weak?

...and moves in the 2007 draft brought the Pats Merriweather, Moss and Welker. I guess that shows what a total miss that was.

 

[Ring 6]

I must admit to being tricked by Gholston. I fell in love with the measurables. Luckily I trusted in BB. He's like a super hot tranny in Thailand. Looks like a girl, talks like a girl and wears clothes like a girl but is a confused guy. No No No No No.

Tranny Gholston. Perfect fit for the Jets.

Scary analogy.

I am a Buckeye fan, and felt Gholston was a great college player, and I always want Buckeye on the Pats, but I was 100% against drafting Gholston (and he was beloved on this board, half the board thought he was the only player we should think about) even as far as to say I wouldn't draft him in any round.
The reason was very simple, I saw every play he played at Ohio State and he was not a good player up until his last year (he was so-so his next to last) and was only good because he physically dominated guys who were not physically equipped to be NFL OL. He struggled with the guys who were going to be NFL caliber, and his game was outmuscling guys, which was NEVER going to work as an NFL 34 OLB.
I just can't believe that wasn't obvious from a mile away but I guess stats plus measuables blind a lot of people.

Thats why 34 OLBs are more succesful when they are speed guys first and strength guys second. The ones who overpowered college Ts and couldn't outquick them are screwed at the NFL level. Esp as a 34 OLB, and esp in a 2gap, because of the difference in the running game as well.

Thats my first look at Cunningham, whether he is going to try to get by by overpowering blockers or whether quickness and speed is a bigger asset to him, while making sure he has enough strength and agility to play contain on the run.

 

[ausbacker]

Scary analogy.

I am a Buckeye fan, and felt Gholston was a great college player, and I always want Buckeye on the Pats, but I was 100% against drafting Gholston (and he was beloved on this board, half the board thought he was the only player we should think about) even as far as to say I wouldn't draft him in any round.
The reason was very simple, I saw every play he played at Ohio State and he was not a good player up until his last year (he was so-so his next to last) and was only good because he physically dominated guys who were not physically equipped to be NFL OL. He struggled with the guys who were going to be NFL caliber, and his game was outmuscling guys, which was NEVER going to work as an NFL 34 OLB.
I just can't believe that wasn't obvious from a mile away but I guess stats plus measuables blind a lot of people.

Thats why 34 OLBs are more succesful when they are speed guys first and strength guys second. The ones who overpowered college Ts and couldn't outquick them are screwed at the NFL level. Esp as a 34 OLB, and esp in a 2gap, because of the difference in the running game as well.

Thats my first look at Cunningham, whether he is going to try to get by by overpowering blockers or whether quickness and speed is a bigger asset to him, while making sure he has enough strength and agility to play contain on the run.

We don't get the same access to college games down here like the NFL. They show teams in patches etc so I'm generally trusting most of the opinions around here when it comes to college players.

Gholston got me good.. just like he's got the Jets.. real good .

 

[Calciumee]

I go to bed, and this thread doubles in size! What is the betting that in the 10+ pages I can't be bothered to read through, DF is mentioned about 4 times?


Also...


Faneca sucks!

 

[ONS]

He is a good drive blocker too, and he is a smart OL who helps with blitz pickup and in pass protection.
His pass blocking problems amount to allowing 6 sacks all season. Its crazy IMO to say that the guy who was most important to your running game on a running team is a negative on your team because of 6 plays.

Ferguson NEVER had to make up for Faneca. It does not work that way. A LT never helps out a G in pass protection. Fanecas impact on Ferguson (in pass protection) can only be to cover his mistakes, not to add to his job.

A LT doesn't have to help out a guard, but if a guard is weak, the left tackle receives less help (RB should help the inside rusher first). Also, six sacks + a lot of pressures + having to game plan around a very weak link in pass protection = a lot of rushed passes and reduced confidence in the passing game. If you don't realize that a bad pass-blocking LG doesn't do much help to a pass-blocking specialist at LT, you're delusional. And Faneca was adequate at drive-blocking, but the right side of the line got a more consistent push off the LOS, even without Faneca's pulling, from what I saw.

Ferguson wasn't Pro-Bowl caliber because of Faneca. He went to the Pro Bowl because he's an above-average to good pass blocking LT, and the starter was injured. He's deserving of the contract - it's not outrageous looking at comparable players who've signed recently.

Also, an example of my initial point: NFL Videos: Mark Sanchez Highlight, WK 01 vs. Texans 2009

This play was memorable for me because I was worried about Faneca last off-season, and it confirmed my fears - I didn't want him protecting Sanchez. He completely whiffs his assignment - the RB/Mangold have to block the interior rusher, leaving Ferguson on an island (as he was consistently that day). Luckily, Ferguson handles his assignment, Sanchez completes the pass. Also notable if you look up more from that game - They had Mario Williams lined up against D'Brick one on one a lot more in the first half, Willams never got close to Sanchez.

 

[ONS]

But wouldnt it make sense to know what that future cap is in order to determine if its workable? Again, what is gained by rushing?

They wanted Ferguson done before any premium LT talent make any new deals - as of now, he's under contract for eight years for $73.6 million. Averages to a bit over 9 million per year, which is less than the top tier LT contracts are going to be over the next eight years.

It was the easiest contract of their top four young "stars," to get signed. They want to resign as much as possible as fast as possible so there aren't a lot of disgruntled players with dire need of new contracts at the same time, this move, coming at this time, gives more stability to an uncertain future.

 

[ONS]

You don't even know who the QB is that he was protecting so how would you know anything else..

Considering the Jets gave up 30 and then 26 sacks, to say that Faneca was the weak link without bothering to show your proof, you are just talking out your rear end.

Not to mention that I believe that Faneca was giving more help to D'Bust in Pass protection than Jester fans want to admit. But in doing so, didn't do himself any favors and possibly missed stuff because of it.

I was paraphrasing FO regarding the new deal Faneca signed with the Arizona Cardinals, where Leinart seems to be the starting QB. Reading comprehension is your friend.

"One year, $2.5 million from the Cardinals nets them Alan Faneca. Not doing Matt Leinart any favors, but it'll help the running game."
- FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | Cards Sign Alan Faneca

Regarding evidence, if you have ESPN Insider, you can see for yourself here:
FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | ESPN Insider: Blown Blocks 2009

Or you can look at my above post for video evidence.

And again, your use of sacks as your "evidence" points to an extremely... limited ability to critically think about football.

 

[ONS]

It's not, actually. Because you don't provide a link and you don't provide the numbers to support what they said.

Link: FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | 2009 OFFENSIVE LINES

"Only five directions are listed because research so far shows no statistically significant difference between how well a team performs on runs listed middle, left guard, and right guard"

Jets didn't run outside of the ends well, no surprises. I was looking at runs over tackle - the right side of their line proved better than their left side, 5.06 ALY over right tackle compared with 4.05 over left tackle. 4.21 through the "middle", which is hardly dominating. For all the talk of how good the Jets O-Line is, they racked up yardage due to a lot of rushes and only one notable direction of their line. They're good (enhanced by their health), but not as good as a lot of people make them out to be. Faneca was certainly not dominant, but he was an excellent pull blocker, which is why their primary run formation allowed for him to pull, that's where his value was. Not helping Ferguson. He was their weak link in the passing game. D'Brickishaw was solid to good, and should get better without a rookie trying to direct the blocking assignments.

Anyone saying that this is a surefire move, good or bad, is being somewhat ridiculous. There is clear reasoning behind the move on the Jets part, but it could backfire, just like all long-term NFL contracts. There is plenty of reason to believe that D'Brickishaw will live up to the money, and if you aren't willing to recognize that, you're delusional.

 

[ONS]

John Clayton said tonight that this contract will make it more difficult for the Jets to deal with Revis. That David Harris is going to have a problem because he is only making 550k in the last year of his deal, but Mangold will have to wait because his 3.2 mill will have to be enough for him in his last year.

You're getting your analytical contract information from John Clayton?! Jesus. I knew there was a reason I try and stay away from football forums.

 

[Clonamery]

Link: FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | 2009 OFFENSIVE LINES

"Only five directions are listed because research so far shows no statistically significant difference between how well a team performs on runs listed middle, left guard, and right guard"

Jets didn't run outside of the ends well, no surprises. I was looking at runs over tackle - the right side of their line proved better than their left side, 5.06 ALY over right tackle compared with 4.05 over left tackle. 4.21 through the "middle", which is hardly dominating. For all the talk of how good the Jets O-Line is, they racked up yardage due to a lot of rushes and only one notable direction of their line. They're good (enhanced by their health), but not as good as a lot of people make them out to be. Faneca was certainly not dominant, but he was an excellent pull blocker, which is why their primary run formation allowed for him to pull, that's where his value was. Not helping Ferguson. He was their weak link in the passing game. D'Brickishaw was solid to good, and should get better without a rookie trying to direct the blocking assignments.

Anyone saying that this is a surefire move, good or bad, is being somewhat ridiculous. There is clear reasoning behind the move on the Jets part, but it could backfire, just like all long-term NFL contracts. There is plenty of reason to believe that D'Brickishaw will live up to the money, and if you aren't willing to recognize that, you're delusional.

Got your PSL yet?

Let's recognize this, you are a Jets fan and THAT is plenty delusional.

 

[Clonamery]

I knew there was a reason I try and stay away from football forums.

Not hard enough.....try harder.

 

[ausbacker]

You're getting your analytical contract information from John Clayton?! Jesus. I knew there was a reason I try and stay away from football forums.

You should probably stay away from forums then. You did just call D'Bust a star. That's laugh worthy alone.

 

[Sivy]

Player on Jet roster...He's the BEST!!!!!! In the league!!!!

Same player leaves Jets...He SUCKS!!!! Could never play!!!Worst lineman ever!!!

Rinse....repeat....SS/SOJ

That sums up jets fans right there 100%

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

I must admit to being tricked by Gholston. I fell in love with the measurables. Luckily I trusted in BB. He's like a super hot tranny in Thailand. Looks like a girl, talks like a girl and wears clothes like a girl but is a confused guy. No No No No No.

Tranny Gholston. Perfect fit for the Jets.

I for one defer to your extensive personal international experience

 

[DaBruinz]

Well he would have to be on a team to play football.

He's on the Bills. Why don't you try and keep up.

 

[DaBruinz]

I was paraphrasing FO regarding the new deal Faneca signed with the Arizona Cardinals, where Leinart seems to be the starting QB. Reading comprehension is your friend.

"One year, $2.5 million from the Cardinals nets them Alan Faneca. Not doing Matt Leinart any favors, but it'll help the running game."
- FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | Cards Sign Alan Faneca

Regarding evidence, if you have ESPN Insider, you can see for yourself here:
FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | ESPN Insider: Blown Blocks 2009

Or you can look at my above post for video evidence.

And again, your use of sacks as your "evidence" points to an extremely... limited ability to critically think about football.

ONS - You really are truly clueless. My use of "sacks" was "evidence" that you weren't providing anything for information. It was blowing up YOUR use of sacks as evidence. But, typical jester fan, you spin it and try and point the finger at someone else.


As for your claim that you were "paraphrasing the FO," that's a joke. You didn't even make mention of that previously. So, now you spin and try and make it sound like you know what you are talking about???

 

[Rexorcism]

He's on the Bills. Why don't you try and keep up.

What you meant to say is hes on the Bills pratice squad and will be out of a job again come training camp.

The guy was cutting lawn somewhere last year and has had one catch since 07 and only 14 for his career.

He makes Gholston look like a hall of famer.

 

[Ring 6]

You're getting your analytical contract information from John Clayton?! Jesus. I knew there was a reason I try and stay away from football forums.

Why are you so defensive?
While this thread was being posted, ESPN put Clayton on to discuss and I posted what he said.
I think staying away may in fact be good for you.