Just watched the Jets-Vikes replay
Michael
replay. The Jets O-line did about as good a job as you can expect
them to do. Both pass blocking and run blocking. I cant agree with
any fans that think it was just a "good" performance and not an
excellent one. Also... Slauson looked very good. I saw him pass
block very well and there was some excellent work run blocking
including good examples of trap blocking and pulling. He did not
look slow nor did he look clumsy. He did not get pushed back or over
powered on any single play. The moment the play allowed him to leave
his assignment he started looking for where he might be able to help.
No way is this guy a worry nor does he need to be replaced. He'll
only get better. Ready for this ??? At this point four games into his
first season as a starter he's actually ahead of where both Brick and
Mangold were at the same point in there careers. Props to Callahan
for tipping the Jets off on him. Excellent value from a 6th
rounder. No one is saying pro bowl or hall of fame, but he can do the
job. Lets see now what they can make of Vlad.
What I did not like..
Some of the defensive calls left me wondering. Taking chances is one
thing, but begging to be burned is somthing else. A few of those
blitzes took up all the jet manpower but did not appear to be well
considered. All they did was ensure that the qb had someplace juicy
to go with the ball. Either that, or there were player mistakes in
the coverage.
Erick Smith looked horrible. I dont know why they would have him out
there other then special teams.
MZ
> I was not able to see a few things at the game that I saw on the TV
> replay. The Jets O-line did about as good a job as you can expect
> them to do. Both pass blocking and run blocking. I cant agree with
> any fans that think it was just a "good" performance and not an
> excellent one. Also... Slauson looked very good. I saw him pass
> block very well and there was some excellent work run blocking
> including good examples of trap blocking and pulling. He did not
> look slow nor did he look clumsy. He did not get pushed back or over
> powered on any single play. The moment the play allowed him to leave
> his assignment he started looking for where he might be able to help.
> No way is this guy a worry nor does he need to be replaced. He'll
> only get better. Ready for this ??? At this point four games into his
> first season as a starter he's actually ahead of where both Brick and
> Mangold were at the same point in there careers. Props to Callahan
> for tipping the Jets off on him. Excellent value from a 6th
> rounder. No one is saying pro bowl or hall of fame, but he can do the
> job. Lets see now what they can make of Vlad.
Brick, yes. But Mangold, hell no. You could tell Mangold was going to
be a star in his rookie year.
Michael
>
> - Show quoted text -
i was one of the first people in here raving about mangold... his
first season. i remember a regular in here telling me "he's not the
beast you think he is". a few games into his career you could tell
he had pro-bowl tools. i'm not for one second saying that slauson has
the same level of tools that mangold has. i'm saying that it took
mangold into his second season to stop making the expected mistakes.
when he first started calling the line signals he got crossed up a few
times. obviously, he had the harder job to learn but it did take him
more than three games to have a near perfect game. slauson just had a
near perfect game. i expect it to continue. no reason not to. i'm
waiting now to watch him go up against the next very fast dt. i have
to look at the schedule and rosters to figure that one out. i think
that is the last test he needs to prove out on. or at least, that is
my thought. he's got to prove he can correct himself quickly agaisnt
a slick pass rusher. the power guys cant get the better of him in
pass rushing or run stuffing.
Michael
> X-No-Archive: Yes
>
>
>
>
>
> Michael <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > On Oct 13, 9:42 pm, MZ <m...@nospam.void> wrote:
>
> > > On 10/13/2010 9:40 PM, Michael wrote:
>
> > > > I was not able to see a few things at the game that I saw on the TV
> > > > replay. The Jets O-line did about as good a job as you can expect
> > > > them to do. Both pass blocking and run blocking. I cant agree with
> > > > any fans that think it was just a "good" performance and not an
> > > > excellent one. Also... Slauson looked very good. I saw him pass
> > > > block very well and there was some excellent work run blocking
> > > > including good examples of trap blocking and pulling. He did not
> > > > look slow nor did he look clumsy. He did not get pushed back or over
> > > > powered on any single play. The moment the play allowed him to leave
> > > > his assignment he started looking for where he might be able to help.
>
> judged not when he is not.
>
>
>
>
>
> > > > No way is this guy a worry nor does he need to be replaced. He'll
> > > > only get better. Ready for this ??? At this point four games into his
> > > > first season as a starter he's actually ahead of where both Brick and
> > > > Mangold were at the same point in there careers. Props to Callahan
> > > > for tipping the Jets off on him. Excellent value from a 6th
> > > > rounder. No one is saying pro bowl or hall of fame, but he can do the
> > > > job. Lets see now what they can make of Vlad.
>
> > > Brick, yes. But Mangold, hell no. You could tell Mangold was going to
> > > be a star in his rookie year.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > i was one of the first people in here raving about mangold... his
> > first season. i remember a regular in here telling me "he's not the
> > beast you think he is". a few games into his career you could tell
> > he had pro-bowl tools. i'm not for one second saying that slauson has
> > the same level of tools that mangold has. i'm saying that it took
> > mangold into his second season to stop making the expected mistakes.
> > when he first started calling the line signals he got crossed up a few
> > times. obviously, he had the harder job to learn but it did take him
> > more than three games to have a near perfect game. slauson just had a
> > near perfect game.
>
> a LT to a G.Teams go an entire decade looking for a good center & LT.
>
> >i expect it to continue. no reason not to. i'm
> > waiting now to watch him go up against the next very fast dt. i have
> > to look at the schedule and rosters to figure that one out. i think
> > that is the last test he needs to prove out on. or at least, that is
> > a slick pass rusher. the power guys cant get the better of him in
> > pass rushing or run stuffing.
>
> this with some skepticism as you have a tendency to use hyperbole in
> defending your book.
>
> You also seem to forget that no one in here said Slausson would suck.
> The issue most of us had was for a $1MM you don't let go of a good
> veteran in an uncapped year. Slausson looks fine north south but he
> doesn't have the quickness to run some plays. They have adjusted
> which is a credit to Callahan & Schott. He knocked LT over in the
> Buffalo game & prevented a TD.
> --- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
not defending my book... half the predictions i make go north, the
other half goes south... and we did have a regular in here that
insisted that slauson would not be the answer and that the jets needed
to go shopping for a guard with all due haste, we know slauson is not
faneca. we know 99.9 % of the pro guards are not like faneca. we
also know faneca was not much of a straight ahead blocker or a good
pass blocker any longer. it does not mean you cant have an offense if
you dont have faneca. it means you change your running plays in
consideration that you dont have a singular talent like faneca as far
as slick pulling. schotty and callahan should be able to figure that
one out and correct it quicly as a minimum.
again... my book is toilet paper... i'm pleased that the jets appear
to have gotten value from a sixth rounder.
MZ
>>
>>> i expect it to continue. no reason not to. i'm
>>> waiting now to watch him go up against the next very fast dt. i have
>>> to look at the schedule and rosters to figure that one out. i think
>>> that is the last test he needs to prove out on. or at least, that is
>>> my thought. he's got to prove he can correct himself quickly against
>>> a slick pass rusher. the power guys cant get the better of him in
>>> pass rushing or run stuffing.
>>
>> Michael I have not watched the game again but forgive us if we view
>> this with some skepticism as you have a tendency to use hyperbole in
>> defending your book.
>>
>> You also seem to forget that no one in here said Slausson would suck.
>> The issue most of us had was for a $1MM you don't let go of a good
>> veteran in an uncapped year. Slausson looks fine north south but he
>> doesn't have the quickness to run some plays. They have adjusted
>> Buffalo game& prevented a TD.
>> --- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> not defending my book... half the predictions i make go north, the
> other half goes south... and we did have a regular in here that
> insisted that slauson would not be the answer and that the jets needed
> to go shopping for a guard with all due haste, we know slauson is not
> faneca.
This is either me or carl, right? :)
I think both of us took the cautious route on Slauson. He was an
unknown. To some degree, his inconsistent play still makes him an
unknown in my book.
Michael
>
> - Show quoted text -
i dont remember you saying much in reaction to my slauson commentary
other than that my prognosticating is hardly ever qualified. you did
not agree or dissagree with my conclusions. only that is was guess
work. you had another regular in here that was as cock sure that
slauson could not do the job as i was as sure that he could.
papa.carl44
"Michael" <mjd...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:f40c327f-58b5-4b5b...@j25g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...
Michael,
Slauson was better...he is still clumsy. He pulled and when it was obvious
his guy had over penetrated instead of making the play up field he fell
down. When your opponent takes himself totally out of a play it does no
good to chase him, that is when the guard with feet and agility makes the
move to get the next inside backer or corner coming across the play. That
is not going to happen with Slauson...but, he is better than what he started
out as. I tend to agree with you on Rex's gambles on defense. When I
called defenses I got the rep as a gambler and liked to blitz etc...but Rex
scares the crap out of me. If they are playing the Colts...Mannning is not
going to let him get away with that stuff.
papa.carl44
"MZ" <ma...@nospam.void> wrote in message
news:LKidnRGYS8LziyrR...@giganews.com...
He's imporved, but not a "known" yet...to me, he is still weak on pulling
and leading.
Michael
> > "Michael" <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote in message
> saw:
>
> When goes out & makes contact he is solid. If he has to move at all
> when the D tries to go around him he has trouble. He whiffed on pass
> block that caused a pressure not sack and when he pulls he is
> creating space -- that we successfully ran through-- but is worthless
> as a blocker when he pulls. He has no feet.
john... i think you are overstating and understating. he does not
have faneca like feet and pulling ability, but he can make it work.
did you see the trap block ??? when he makes contact in pass blocking
or pushes guys off the ball on running plays, he is excellent.
one thing i agree with... i am worried about his ability to recover
and adjust himself against a speed rusher with moves. especially to
his left. if he cant do that as a minimum it is a critical flaw