2012 NFL Draft News: NY Jets Watching Melvin Ingram at South Carolina Pro Day
Andy Lyons/Getty Images
News that is causing the outlook of the first round of the NFL draft to change before our very eyes continues to come out of Columbia, South Carolina and the Gamecocks' pro day. SI.com's Tony Pauline checks in on Twitter:
Pauline later clarified that the "large presence" wasn't a reference to the carriage of head coach Rex Ryan, but instead the number of personnel from the Jets.
Perhaps the Jets are doing due diligence on a player that they hope falls to them at No. 16, but most mock drafts now have Melvin Ingram gone well before the Jets are on the clock.
The Jacksonville Jaguars (No. 7), Miami Dolphins (No. 8) and Seattle Seahawks (No. 12) are all prime destinations for Ingram, and an argument can certainly be made for the Arizona Cardinals (No. 13) and the Dallas Cowboys (No. 14) as the best player available that fits a current (for Arizona) or anticipated need (for Dallas with OLB Anthony Spencer only franchised right now).
Surely, if the Jets have designs on adding Ingram, they must be thinking trade up, but with who? John Oehser, who writes for the Jacksonville Jaguars' official site, tweeted this earlier this month:
Jaguars GM Gene Smith said the potential interest in Texas A&M QB Ryan Tannehill could lead to a possible trade at No. 7
Now that the Seattle Seahawks have signed Matt Flynn, perhaps the market for Tannehill has cooled down to just the Miami Dolphins, who pick eighth, but Smith surely would entertain a trade offer for the No. 7 for another player.
Maybe the urgency to get a pass-rusher isn't quite the same as the desperation to get a quarterback, but the Jets' large contingent at Ingram's pro day is probably proportional to their interest in him.
GM Mike Tannenbaum has orchestrated big moves in the first round with mixed results, getting CB Darrelle Revis in the 2007 draft and QB Mark Sanchez in the 2009 draft. Could a third move be in the works?
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?