agreed.. i want a punter to kick.. because 99 out of 100 times.. when he goes on the field.. he is suppose to KICK.. don't care about speed, throw power.. nothing except how far he can kick.. and if he can put the ball where he wants..
Finally, a punter thread. Steve was ok, but we could do much better. Moose hit on all the good points. Field position is key for our defense, so why not upgrade it by drafting a P in the later rounds? I know it's not a glamorous position/pick, but I'm surprised at how little attention this position has gotten in Draft talk.
Yea, we could do better than Weatherford. Probably a lot better. But right now, there are more things that are more important than the punting game. In no particular order: -2/5 of the starting OLine is north of 30 years old. -3/3 of the starting DLine is north of 30 years old, most of the(active) back-ups, too. -Lito and Strickland are gone -Kerry Rhodes could be sent to over-value his early-season contributions on another team. -MAJOR drop off in WR talent after Edwards and Cotchery -Pass Rusher? -Drew Coleman is still on the roster. I'd like to see at least two of these questions solved before I start thinking about the punting situation(yes, cutting Coleman counts for one).
Feagles! Can you imagine rexs blitzes with the opposition O consistantly starting inside the ten yard line? Even more defensive td's! ... Feagles!
Why aren't fakes necessary? I think his 2 (or 3?) fakes easily gave us extra 50-60 yards on the drives since u get a fresh set of downs as well. Interesting fact: Weatherford had 26 forced fair cathces, most in the league. Which either means the coverage unit is good or he gets a good hang time. He had maybe 3-4 bad punts I believe (maybe more?) that went for less than 30 yards. If he can fix that issue, he'd be in the top half of the NFL. I like him and I think he can improve. He had Net of 37.5 his rookie yr (2006. 37.7 in 2008). Im sure he can push that to around 38. I wouldn't mind having someone who can average a net of 39-41 of course but the question is, are you willing to give up a draft pick for couple of extra yards a punt (or about 15 yards a game)? FA probably won't have a punter for us that can average a net of 39
I don't see anyone talking about the CBA FA rules so does that mean that we're actually free to sign one of these UFA punters?
Weatherford has an EXCELLENT hang time! Sure he doesn't have the best directional kick in the world nor the strongest leg but: A) teams are always wary of him faking B) the hang times are top notch For these reasons his punts are so difficult to return... and I love that because our coverage teams are suspect at best. WIth better coverage teams I would agree on getting a stronger P but Weatherford fits well with the (lack of) talent we have on coverage units.
Feagles would be a mistake. He averages 35% inside 20 punting. Weatherford is 31%. But Weatherford averaged more yards (avg and avg.net). Feagles had a great 08, but his production dropped big time and it probably won't get much better. He could be a tackle or two away from the IR. Not sure if I want to take that chance. Weatherford will get better imo. Or atleast I hope so.
Yeah I prefer Weatherford. He does have a great hang time. He gave a lot of headache to Jerry last yr as well lol. I think our coverage units are decent. Sure we gave up couple of Shit Ginn Jnr TDs, but there were too many missed tackles. Two or three missed tackles and you are looking at a big return. Eitherway, Weatherford does fit the bill with his fake abilities. Didn't he fake one with Titans in preseason as well?
I think you mean Trapasso. Our coverage teams are ok in the sense that sure the almost never give up the big play (except Ginn's) but especially on KR They always seem to find a way to gift the opposing teams of 5-10 yds. I WANT TRUSNIK BACK! He was the first guy down the field and would always tackle the return man...
Fake punts are gimmicky plays that are always a risk. Those risks aren't needed very much when your team is playing well and your offense can move the ball. No GM worth his salt is going to let a punter's ability to run the ball heavily affect his decision making process when considering a punter, just as he wouldn't let a quarterback's ability to punt affect his assessment of him as a quarterback. If it comes down to comparable punting abilities, then sure, it matters, but everyone saying we should keep him just based on that when we don't even know who else is being looked at is just silly. Even with that fair catch stat, his net return yardage was still 26th in the league. What that tells me is that the punts were not very long and have room for improvement. There are better guys out there and we should explore those options.
I completely agree my friend , we need a Punter with a Cannon of a Foot that can be serviceable in our worst conditions. Understand Sanchez hasnt worked out every kink in his game and there will b times where wur under tha 20 nd need the ball around the our 40 yrd line and under im not confident Weatherford could produce that for us.
With the Jets being hamstrung by the limits on the final 8 teams' ability to sign free agents, do you all really think the Jets should be concerned with free agent punters???????? I can think of 22+ positions of more importance. Weatherford was fine. Why waste the limited free agent money the Jets have on a punter when the player they had was more than serviceable???? Makes no sense. And don't base Weatherford's season on stats. How was he in pinning the opposition inside the 20?
Why do you insist that the punter has to come as a high price free agent. That is only one of many avenues including: UDFA, low-tier FA, other leagues, and Aussies. Sav Rocca was the best at the stat you value so much, but for some reason don't see as a stat. Cool article: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/?p=709 My original point in this thread, however, was calling out the people saying we should keep him based on his running ability, and that is still the dumbest reason to keep a punter that I have heard.
