Citing an unnamed league source, Rich Cimini of the New York Daily News reports that the Jets are so enamored with Arkansas running back Darrren McFadden that they could trade up to draft him.
McFadden, who has visited New York twice in the last week and will be at Radio City Music Hall on draft day, is convinced that the Jets like him.
“I feel like if I’m there at No. 6, they’re going to take me,” McFadden said, adding of some of the character concerns surrounding his time at Arkansas, “I feel like they’re pretty convinced I’m a great guy who just made mistakes.”
But will McFadden be there at No. 6? He might not be, which is why the Jets could try to work out a deal with the Rams, who own the second pick. With the Dolphins having signed Jake Long as the first pick, trade talk surrounding the Rams’ pick is likely to intensify this week. The Saints may also try to trade up with the Rams.
Although NFL teams in recent years have shied away from trading up near the top of the draft to avoid the big contracts that top players receive, the Jets this off-season have shown a willingness to spend freely. Last year the Jets targeted a specific player they liked, cornerback Darrelle Revis, and traded up in the first round to take him. This year they seem to be considering the same approach.
_2.gif)





April 23rd, 2008 at 9:31 am
good for them. they need an offensive playmaker and should just go for it at the expense of a couple of mid-round so-and-sos that they love to stockpile every year.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
April 23rd, 2008 at 9:36 am
100% Smokescreen. Guaranteed. Cimini, as usual, plays the unwitting, obliging, town crier.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
April 23rd, 2008 at 9:38 am
I love it! Trade up for Reggie Bush, LOL. J-E-T-S SUCK! SUCK! SUCK!
They may have one good season, maybe two, but then the wheels will fall off of this horrid joke of a franchise. Thanks for the Super Bowl III win to put the AFL on the map. And now mire in suckitude for another 38 years! And tell your femal friends to shave their mustaches, because “With a great mustache comes great responsibility.”
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 1 / 5 with 1 rating(s)
April 23rd, 2008 at 10:01 am
OH and when someone has to say they are a great guy, that’s when you should worry. It’s like when someone says before a statement “Honestly”, does that mean they were lying the rest of the time?
My philosophy is that a person is never the person they are in the just the last conversation. They are the person they were in all the rest of the conversations. When someone tells you who they are, believe them the FIRST time they tell you.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
April 23rd, 2008 at 10:02 am
Please, Mangina, give up draft picks to take a part-time running back.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
April 23rd, 2008 at 10:10 am
Scout is 100% correct. No chance they move up for McFadden.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
April 23rd, 2008 at 10:13 am
I’m not a Jets fan, but I don’t know what I would think about this if I were…while McFadden looks like the real deal, I would think they could get a top tier lineman at 6 and worry about getting an RB later on or even next year. I’m not a football genius, but I agree that the line makes the back better than the back makes the line…the Jets may be one lineman away from having a heck of a core on O-Line…
any members of gang-green out there want to tell me how right or wrong I am? Like I said I don’t know as much about their team.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
April 23rd, 2008 at 10:20 am
After overpaying for all their free agents, they might as well mortgage their future on McFadden.
The Jets seem to be banking on an uncapped year. Good luck with that strategy.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
April 23rd, 2008 at 10:38 am
Move up for a RB with his off-field problems or potential for problems. Plus given how effective RB can be found later on in the draft or other place, why trade up.
It is a smoke screen. Has to be.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
April 23rd, 2008 at 10:43 am
That would truly be a shame for both parties, the Jets losing draft picks to take a true talent and see him whither away on such a terrible team.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
April 23rd, 2008 at 10:51 am
this makes alot of sense. their entire offseason has been pretty much geared toward taking him in the draft and allowing him to split time with thomas jones this year. they will have the new version of ap/chester taylor.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
April 23rd, 2008 at 11:15 am
“they will have the new version of ap/chester taylor.”
Except with half of the talent at twice the cost…
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
April 23rd, 2008 at 11:21 am
The Jets would be looking good with Mcfadden in their back field since thomas jones is old. Like most have said on here, I think it is a smoke screen in order to get one of the defensive players to fall to them like gholston, Dorsey or Ellis.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 5 / 5 with 1 rating(s)
April 23rd, 2008 at 11:41 am
as a raiders fan i hope they do so they can save al davis from himself.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 5 / 5 with 1 rating(s)
April 23rd, 2008 at 12:03 pm
It sounds to me like this is a smokescreen. They are trying to deter the Pats from moving up to get Gholston. The thinking being that if the Jets want to move up to get McFadden, the Pats most likely will have a crack at Vernon. When the draft comes around and the Jets dont move up, McFadden is gone, now the Pats can’t leapfrog the Jets, and the Jets keep New England behind them.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 5 / 5 with 2 rating(s)
April 23rd, 2008 at 12:20 pm
I tend to agree with FLyingElvis. If for some reason it’s not a smokescreen, I don’t think McFaddy would be a bad pick for the Jets (if his character issues are indeed a thing of the past). But they have a greater need for a speedy pass rusher like Ghoslton than a potential “Adrian Peterson II”
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 5 / 5 with 1 rating(s)