181 replies to this topic

[Sperm Edwards]

Which team will be dumb enough to do that?

Put some sunglasses on Al Davis like in Weekend at Bernie's.

[Blackout]

good luck lmao

[unbanmadmike1]

If Vick comes to the Jets I will not watch a single game. What a farce.

Why? He's better than Sanchez.

[CrazyCarl40]

Why? He's better than Sanchez.

Slightly. He's also fragile and a felon. He's not a long term answer and he isn't coming cheap or on a one year deal and that's what they'll need before they draft another "franchise" quarterback.

[JiF]

This was posted in a different thread:

http://www.nypost.co...I#axzz2FYYjRqqN

[unbanmadmike1]

Slightly. He's also fragile and a felon. He's not a long term answer and he isn't coming cheap or on a one year deal and that's what they'll need before they draft another "franchise" quarterback.

I don't want to commit out year cap space to him but as a one year flyer, why not? You'd rather have Matt Moore?

[unbanmadmike1]

Anyone know the real cap situation? If Sanchez is only a 3 million hit to the team that trades for him they could find a taker.

Edited by unbanmadmike1, 19 December 2012 - 09:48 PM.

[bitonti]

If the "plan" is seriously to take a $17 million dollar hit on Sanchez only to replace him with a punch-drunk Michael Vick, then this will officially become the worst iteration of the New York Jets to ever exist.

Tannenbaum cannot be allowed to see this through.

on this we agree. Vick suffered more than 1 concussion this year and he has a bad habit of holding on to the ball too long.

all this is moot cause the trade market for Sanchez is non-existent.

[unbanmadmike1]

on this we agree. Vick suffered more than 1 concussion this year and he has a bad habit of holding on to the ball too long.

all this is moot cause the trade market for Sanchez is non-existent.

Not if it's only a 3 million dollar hit.

[bitonti]

Not if it's only a 3 million dollar hit.

I can see Vick signing. I don't see Sanchez being traded to any1. And it opens the door for Vick's injury to be the return of Sanchez. It's got Tanny's last stand written all over it.

[unbanmadmike1]

I can see Vick signing. I don't see Sanchez being traded to any1. And it opens the door for Vick's injury to be the return of Sanchez. It's got Tanny's last stand written all over it.

If you put Vick with Kerley, Edwards and Hill and draft a guy like Travon Austin and a speed back, that could be a respectable offense. Not great, but not 2012.

[T0mShane]

Dude, honestly, they're not winning it all next year.

The Jets with Vick might actually be fun to watch, if nothing else... When was the last time you could say that?

I think Vick is brain dead at this point. The beatings he's taken with the Eagles has been ungodly. The second game against the Giants last year, I really thought there was a chance Vick was going to die. I agree that 2013 will suck anyway, but I'd rather see them give a few starts to a mid-round rookie QB than waste time on a washed-up vet.

[unbanmadmike1]

I think Vick is brain dead at this point. The beatings he's taken with the Eagles has been ungodly. The second game against the Giants last year, I really thought there was a chance Vick was going to die. I agree that 2013 will suck anyway, but I'd rather see them give a few starts to a mid-round rookie QB than waste time on a washed-up vet.

He's not really washed up. He's good when he has time.

[bitonti]

so let's think this thru, they'd be paying 5+ mil to Sanchez to be on another team (or 8.25 to sit the bench) and another 5-7 mil to Vick to play for the Jets. That's a ton of money to spend on shiesty QB's.

[T0mShane]

on this we agree. Vick suffered more than 1 concussion this year and he has a bad habit of holding on to the ball too long.

all this is moot cause the trade market for Sanchez is non-existent.

When do we not agree?

[unbanmadmike1]

so let's think this thru, they'd be paying 5+ mil to Sanchez to be on another team (or 8.25 to sit the bench) and another 5-7 mil to Vick to play for the Jets. That's a ton of money to spend on shiesty QB's.

If it's only a short term commitment who cares though? It's not like Aaron Rodgers is walking in the door next season. What other QB are you going to sign who is as good as a healthy Vick?

[JiF]

Not if it's only a 3 million dollar hit.

See I told you they needed to dump Sanchez.

[T0mShane]

He's not really washed up. He's good when he has time.

I think the inside of Vick's brain looks and sounds similar to a game of Angry Birds being played by someone having a stroke on a Tilt-a-Whirl.

[unbanmadmike1]

See I told you they needed to dump Sanchez.

I had no idea it was that small a hit to the trading team. That changes everything. You really need an accounting degree to understand the cap. In fact I have an accounting degree and I don't understand it haha.

[bitonti]

When do we not agree?

it was an ugly qualifier. WE always agree.

PFT actually does a good job of breaking down the cap ram of a trade. 14 mil cap hit, 5+ mil in money to sanchez. ouch.

A trade makes the most sense. Apart from the face-saving value of getting something in return for the fifth overall pick in the 2009 draft, trading Sanchez would reduce both the cap charge and the cash expenditure. As it stands, Sanchez is due to earn a base salary of $8.25 million in 2013, along with a workout bonus of $500,000. Since the base salary is fully guaranteed, the Jets will owe Sanchez the full $8.25 million even if he’s cut, with no offset even if he signs elsewhere.
The goal will be to try to persuade a new team to shoulder a portion of the financial burden. Mehta believes the limit for a trade partner will be in the range of $3 million.
Under our analysis of the potential cap hits from keeping, cutting, or trading Sanchez, trading him before June 1 to a team that would pay him $3 million in 2013 would still result in a cap charge of more than $14 million, which is more than the cap hit that would come from cutting Sanchez.
It’s also more than 10 percent of the total 2013 cap for a guy who wouldn’t even be on the team.

Edited by bitonti, 19 December 2012 - 10:01 PM.