Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Garrett Wilson eyeing Bryce Young


thunderraiden
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Seltzer said:

I agree with you in principle. The only caveat I can add putting on my homer hat is that there is typically much more variance in defensive performance than offensive performance in consecutive years.

Meaning we stand a better chance of the defense rebounding to at least average next season based on history.

And our offense was playing for the most part at an average to above average level for most of the 2nd half of the season.

It's hard to believe a unit that finished this season as one of the very worst in NFL history being elite next year, but history says there is a high probability they will not be nearly this bad.

We can certainly hope, but to your original point, I think getting to .500 should be the goal for next year and at least being in the mix for the whole season.

Winning the division or anything beyond would be a nice surprise 

The law of averages says they will improve the defense to a level above what it is now, couldn't possibly be worse. Getting enough depth to survive more than a couple of injuries is going to be challenging. 

As crazy as it sounds Canales not only has the challenge of improving the offensive output and increasing his win total, now there's a full season of tape on it and Young. So in theory the offense could be worse. Yay.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Luciu5 said:

What does "He is" even mean and how is it related to the Panthers? Is he replying to something and I can't see it cause I'm not logged into X?

He’s replying to something. Someone posted something along the lines of “He might be better than we thought he was” pertaining to Bryce

 

”He is” was Garrett’s reply.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would love the player, but there's two big problems with it.

The first is that the Jets aren't trading a 24 year old #1 WR for anything less than a 1st rounder (and might need more than just a single 1st anyways), and under no circumstances should we be trading our 1st round picks in any year right now.

The second is that when the Jets inevitably move on from Rodgers (and then Adams) this offseason, Wilson isn't going to want out anymore as his problem is with those two more than the organization.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, *FreeFua* said:

It would take pick 8

And given I want Luther Burden at 8 I’d be willing to send it for a legit WR1 in Wilson

Young and Wilson could play together for the next 10 years 

I'm vehemently against Burden at 8, it's way too high for him.

But I'd rather take him at 8 than trade for Wilson, 100 times out of 100.

It's not that I think Burden is going to be the better player, I actually don't think he'll ever be as good as Wilson is/will be.  But if you make that trade you then have to give Wilson a new contract instead of having that position on a rookie deal.  

Using the pick on Burden and then the extra cap space on a defensive player would be a million times smarter than trading for Wilson and giving him a big deal.

It's basically would you rather have Wilson or Burden and a legit pass rusher, seems like an easy decision to me.

Edited by tukafan21
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, and this isn’t the first time that Wilson has openly endorsed Young . . .

 

Quote

 

Remember talking to Garrett about Young back in Jets locker room back October. He was adamant he was a player. Said everyone was gonna see.

I may, or may not, have rolled my eyes.

GW was spot on. https://t.co/co7etqLOAG

— Connor Hughes (@Connor_J_Hughes) January 7, 2025

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, tukafan21 said:

I'm vehemently against Burden at 8, it's way too high for him.

But I'd rather take him at 8 than trade for Wilson, 100 times out of 100.

It's not that I think Burden is going to be the better player, I actually don't think he'll ever be as good as Wilson is/will be.  But if you make that trade you then have to give Wilson a new contract instead of having that position on a rookie deal.  

Using the pick on Burden and then the extra cap space on a defensive player would be a million times smarter than trading for Wilson and giving him a big deal.

It's basically would you rather have Wilson or Burden and a legit pass rusher, seems like an easy decision to me.

You have to spend your cap at some point and Wilson is a #1 and 24.  We would be very lucky to get him.  If we give 8 I want something additional back

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Here is how Morgan is strategic-He re-signs Scott because he was not going S in round 1--he had the chance, and he did not.  He saw the top of the draft at T and knew none of them would be ready to start day 1, so he signs a veteran to a one-year deal, giving his tackle selection a chance to learn and prepare for what might be LT or RT.  Those two moves suggested, perhaps ironically because they contradict each other, what he was going to do, based on the talent pool.  He never brought in a Robinson replacement at DE/NT, and then moves up to draft one.   I almost wonder if the intent was to draft DT/DE all along at some point, maybe with a trade back, but then Freeling dropped to them.   Of course, we felt that they were looking WR, and wonder if the plan was to draft a WR in round 2 if you traded back in round 1.  However, when Freeling was there, the trade back fell apart.  Then we traded up for Hunter.  We could stick with XL and hope Metchie steps up, so we sat still in round three and took Brazell II, a 1000 yard speedster and perfect Z WR.  What a break. At that time, CB and Center were our biggest needs, and with several possible centers on the board and a good fit for our defense at CB, we grabbed Will Lee III.  Lee and Thornton have people in front of them, but I think Morgan knew we needed a guy who can play the outside and press--and probably step in as Jackson's replacement in 2027.    After making trades to get back into the fifth round, where we grabbed one of the best centers in the draft.  This is significant because we signed Fortner to a one-year deal; maybe Morgan saw what some of us saw--the center position is strong in this draft--on day 3, and day 3 players need a year, in most cases.  Moments later, a safety they had been talking to whose skill set matched what we are looking for in a FS.  As stated, Scott was signed,  but the fact that the Panthers were talking to Wheatley and not Theiemann means that they might have known they were not going FS early, but would need a developmental FS later--which explains why we signed Scott.  So if you pay attention to the one-year, vet deals, you can tell where we planned to sign later-round, developmental players.  What positions did we draft early that did not have 1-year veterans signed in front of them:  DL (Hunter) and WR (I don't count Metchie because I count starting-level players). I would not be surprised to learn later that the plan was DT and WR in rounds 1 and 2--then Freeling fell.  Notice that Freeling--from Mt Pleasant SC, did not come in for a visit.  Most of the other OT candidates had short arms or were certain to be gone. I don't think Freeling was in their plans.  I think a trade back and Hunter and maybe Boston was the vision.  I am guessing that CB was also high on their list.   So in this draft, we got 
    • This is one area I think that is not getting enough exposure in the midst of all the optimism. I like Chuba a great deal from a personal standpoint but he has largely proven nothing on a consistent basis yet. He's had the one season of production but before that most people pegged us as moving on. And last year injuries or not he just did not have that juice. The rest of the guys are completely unproven. I don't see anyone among the group having a game or a handful of games worth of high level production the way Rico Dowdle did last year. And yeah he dropped off and yeah he got an attitude about our incompetent handling of the touches which was honestly justified on his part and he moved on but he did legitimately save our season. That's what it is going to take to seize control of the NFC South. We all know that we will not be passing all over defenses. It is what it is. So who amongst this RB group is capable of doing that? And if we are struggling to run the ball AND pass are we going to revert to making excuses for our coach and QB again? That is definitely getting old.
×
×
  • Create New...