Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Rob Kruegel's avatar

I’ve been higher on Jackson than many, certainly than Coller, who I’ve felt knocked him unfairly several times throughout this process until the end (ripping him for his game against Penn State to Sikkema stands out. His first in moving to Tackle. Against Abdul Carter. Yeah, that could be a struggle). Zabel, Grant, Jackson, Amos. I wanted one of those four with the first pick so I'm happy with this selection.

As Coller said, there was a big drop off after Jackson to the next Guard with potential to produce anything in year one. Yes, reaching for need is bad, but picking for immediate value is good. Tarzan said that. There are a bunch of DTs who can provide rotational value in the 90-140 range, but there weren't any Guards coming in to do that.

Would I have rather had Zabel? Yes, but nearly everyone had him going to Seattle so I didn’t expect him to be available at 24. I liked Jackson more from a Zone scheme perspective than Booker. For what it’s Jackson’s grades (71.9) at G last year are better than Booker’s (66.5). Jackson doesn’t have the highs of either of them—not as fast as Zabel or as strong as Booker, but he also has things over each—stronger than Zabel and a much better mover than Booker. So Jackson is Goldilocks, just right.

The “reaches” comments over and over from Coller and others last seem out of touch with the research and data he’s provided before and effectively reiterates in this article. When you see 3 guards in Booker, Zabel, and Jackson, ranked 31, 33, and 36 respectively on Arif’s Consensus Board all go between 12 and 24 maybe the media is out of touch with the value of the position. Dane Brugler said a few hours before the draft that what people “in the league” were telling him was that O-line would be drafted heavily in the first round and higher than draftniks were predicting. Yep.

Last, I believe the noise that Houston wanted Jackson so moving back with NY takes him out of the equation. And trading back with Atlanta cost the Rams their 101st pick, meaning the Vikings likely depart with pick 97 so yep, they’d have a likely mid-first round pick next year, but they’d have 46, 139, and 187 this year. I’ll take what they did over that.

Expand full comment
Josh Smith's avatar

Great breakdown. This revamped OL should also help time of possession, which seemed like an issue last season when they were a poor short-yardage running team. They couldn’t sustain drives as often as desired to keep opposing offenses off the field and give the D more of a break. I’m optimistic this will be less of an issue now, even if it means JJ isn’t making the number of explosive pass plays Sam produced. They should feasibly be a better overall offense in ‘25, and that starts with the line. Course, I wonder how far they could’ve traded back and still gotten Jackson.

Expand full comment
12 more comments...

No posts