We drafted Kerry Rhodes in the 4th round after trading up a few spots. The Jolley trade was: #23 and a 7th rounder for #47 (Oakland's 2nd rounder) and 2 6th rounders. You can't say we got Kerry Rhodes as part of the deal. The Jolley trade was a bad trade, even if we did get lucky with the Rhodes pick.
We used the extra picks to get up and draft Rhodes. He's part of the Jolley deal, w/o the extra picks we don't have him and again we got the 2 players we targeted in the 1st 2 rds of the draft anyway. Jolley is completely irrelevant to that deal. It was a GREAT trade, one of the best in franchise history.
I showed the players we had last year that helped us get to 10-6. Sure Tb had a few bad moves(the wash moves WERE not bad by the way) but he did alot more good than bad. he re-tooled this team multiple times and we made the posteason after each tie. he came in and we had a veteran team and we made the playoffs w/ a ltitletinkering, then we lost sme key vets to the cap and he re-tooled and we won the div then we got old at cerain positions and he re-toled again and we made th playoffs again in '04 then he set up mangini w/ a good roster to make the playoffs again in '06.
sorry NYJUNC, I disagree...Nugent is not great. We also could have drafted Rhodes with our own pick earlier... you also left out the first time Bradway gave Chad his big deal, that was a major blunder... I never said he was a crappy GM, I like Tannenbaum better so far...
As a PK Nugent is one of the best in the league already, he can't kick off but as a PK he is excellent and that was a good pick. We didn't draft rhodes w/ our own pick earlier. How was giving Chad a long term deal major blunder? Did he have a crystal ball and know Chad would tear his rotator cuff a few mos ater? When healthy Chad is one of the best QBs in the game and he locked him up.
no he's not part of the deal. If we wanted Rhodes, we could've gotten him without using that specific 6th rounder to trade up. Mere coincidence that a 6th rounder we got from oakland was used to trade up a few spots in the 4th round. Your argument is bunk. It was a pretty poor trade. Nugent was not worth a 2nd rounder. Jolley was not worth trading down out of the 1st round into the mid-2nd round. Cedric Houston came to nothing. If we had received Kerry Rhodes in the deal I would agree with you. We didn't. End of story.
BUT we didn't. That's what we needed to get the deal done. Nugent is one of the most reliable Kickers in the game right now, if we had 2006 Nugent in 2004 we at least make the AFC Title Game. Going into that draft te rumors were we would take Miller in rd 1 nd Nugent in rd 2 and we still got both of those players and 2 6th rd picks which one was tunred into kerry Rhodes. You can see "we could have found a way to make the trade anyway" but the facts are we didn't and we used the extra picks we got to get maye our best defensive player. We got him b/c of that deal.
The "great talent evaluator" has had some bad drafts, along with bad moves within those drafts (trades).
We didn't get him because of the deal. Stop making false arguments. If we didn't make the Raiders deal, we would've gotten him a different way (we may not have even needed to trade up a few spots with jacksonville!). If we really wanted him, you think it really made a difference which pick we used to trade up? junc, you know you're wrong. At least I seriously hope you do. Because if you don't, that means you really don't understand how the draft works. As for Nugent, I'm still not happy with that pick. IMO, you never draft a kicker that high unless he's like THE perfect kicker. Yes, that includes being able to kick off. Plenty of kickers can be signed after the draft. How has Justin Miller worked out? Great kickoff guy, very questionable at CB. I was not happy with the way the Jets handled that draft, and I still feel the same way. The Jolley trade was awful. If they wanted extra 6th rounders, they could've gotten them a different way. :wink: It was an accident it worked out the way it did.
We got him through a trade w/ a pick from the Jolley trade- he is part of the Jolley trade! maybe we get him w/ or w/o the Jolley trade- we'll never know. Miller and Nugent were the guys we wanted, how they have fared doesn't really matter. That's a different argument but going into that draft all the rumors were we wanted Miller in rd 1 and Nuge in rd 2. We took Nuge that early b/c he would have been gone by our next pick in the 2nd rd. I'd prefer not to draft a K in the 2nd rd but he is a great PK and hopefully he develops into a better KO kicker. Miller has been inconsistent at corner but great at returning kicks. We got 2 players who helped us win 10 games last year and appear to be getting better and we got that for moving down about 20 spots and w/ the extra picks we were able to move up and get maybe our best defensive player and a serviceable RB who, when healthy, has helped us. You can say maybe we would have done it w/o the extra picks but we'll never know and before that trade we didn't have a 6th rounder. The Jolley trdae was a GREAT trade as it improves our team ALOT.
Resigning Chad was a terrible move. He gave him a 60 million dollar contract based on what he did in less then half a season and he hasn't come close to that level ever since.
he gave him that money based on leading the NFL in passing in 2002 and leading us to a div title in 2002 then playing well when he came back from injury in 2003. The ONLY reason the contract looks bad now is b/c Chad got hurt, if we didn't sign him and he didn't get hurt and we had to franchise him or pay him MUCH more then you guys would have been screaming "why didn't we re-sign the guy earlier?!" It was a fluke injury that changed history and before the injury in '04 he was playing like 2002 and even though he wasn't great statistically last year he led us to 10 wins w/o a running game and a poor D most of the year and in 3 mostly healthy years he is 3 for 3 leading us to the playoffs.
Pennington was at best mediocre in 03 after coming back. He was grossly over paid based on he's production.
I wish people would stop talking about the 10 wins last year. A high schoold team could have had 10 wins against that competition. If they get 10 this year then you can say something.
He struggled a it down the stretch mainly b/c D's finally realized Moss was his only option and rolld coverage towards Santana but when Chad first came back he threw 12 Tds in his first 5 starts and kept us in just about every game all year despite our shortcomings and msising half a year. based on that and based on his great 2002 season it was wise to lock him up. he also came out and was on fire to start the 2004 season where in the 7 games he started and ginsihsd he had a 102 rating. It's easy to say after a player gets hurt that the deal wasn't wise but that simply wasn't the case at the time we re-signed him.
So the only reason we won 10 was b/c of the sched? Buf and Mia had similar sched- how did their 10 wins work out? Wasn't it a coinicience we won the div in '02 w/ Chad then he msises almost half the year in '03 and we win 6 then we win 10 in '04 when Chad plays in 13 games then he gets hurt in '05 ad we win 4 then he's healthy in '06 and we win 10- notice a trend? W/o Chad last year we win 6-7 games maximum.
We went to the playoffs in 04. Should have made it to the championship game and maybe even the SB if not for a couple of missed kicks. It was the same team, more or less, with the exception of Martin. Maybe even better. What I am saying is we SHOULD have won 10 games at least against inferior competition. That was no great accomplishment. As far as Miami is concerned, they were terrible and we still managed to lose to them.
Winning 10 was agreat accomplishment for a team that was predicted by most to wn about 4-6 games. I don't care what the sched looked like as all those teams looked at us and said "easy" the sam way we think some of thse games were easy. A healthy Chad was the biggest reason we won 10 games last year.
By the way, we did have alot of the same defensive talent as '04 but the O was almost completely differenct except for Chad. Chad had to deal w/ a new system, new RBs, new WRs(although he had played w/ Coles before), new TEs, a new C, LT and RT and a new FB. The D struggled most of the year and we had no running game most of the year and he led us to 10 wins. I don't care if he was playing against HS teams that is impressive.
Predictions are meaningless. The people making them know less about football then we do. I agree a healthy Chad made the difference. I said that. In fact we had the healthiest team in the entire NFL last year. We lost so many games in 05 because of all the injuries so I don't even count that year. I was comparing 04 to 06 and based on that I still say 10 wins against the weakest teams in the NFL is no great accomplishment. This year will tell if Mangini has done anything to improve this team or not. I can't see 10 wins this year in my wildest dreams.
