Can Jets’ Richardson Play Himself in to Long-Term Deal?

[nyjunc]

12 minutes ago, section314 said:

No good, experienced NFL coach or executive will ever come here as long as Woody owns the Jets. How is this still even being discussed?  Isn't 17 years a pretty good sample size?

it's been tough since 2011 but from 2000-2010 under Woody the Jets were one of the better teams in football, how soon we forget.

[sciond]

1 hour ago, Integrity28 said:

Another falsehood created by the fans.

If you pay them, they will come. Woody Johnson has been trying to find the next Beli by hiring non-experienced coordinators for the past ~20 years. Coaches, GM, everyone he hires is a ******* 1st-timer... and then they hire experienced coordinators and throw them under the bus to extend their job lives.

It's a racket, and the Jets fans are equal parts cause and victim.

So give us an exasmple of someone who did not come because of money. 

39 minutes ago, Integrity28 said:

Can you name an example of recent memory when Woody interviewed top, experienced coaching talent - when they've been on the market - and we've had an opening?

No. 

Going all the way back to when he blew off interviewing Cowher. He hires the less expensive coordinators, because he understands that with inexperienced coaches/GMs comes the stipulation that the fans must lower their expectations and embrace the "hope" of the new guys becoming great. When, in reality he's not even finding guys who are capable... nevermind great.

He's shooting for the middle, and delivering every time... because the fans say "good coaches don't want to come here, so it's okay". 

It's nonsense. Good coaches will go to where the biggest challenge and paycheck lead them.

 

Except here.  Unless you can prove Woody low balled top talent your argument is  not valid

[whodeawhodat]

1 hour ago, jamesr said:

No - we either sign him, franchise him or let him walk.

okay, I thought there was something about tending a player at a second round offer.  maybe i am misremembering...

[kdels62]

Short answer. Yes

Longer Answer: Yes but that mean moving Wilk or him within the next two years. If you move Wilk you'll save money and probably get more value  since he's got a clean record and 1 bad season in his career. We could also trade Leo for more but everyone loves Leo

[Tinstar]

6 minutes ago, kdels62 said:

Short answer. Yes

Longer Answer: Yes but that mean moving Wilk or him within the next two years. If you move Wilk you'll save money and probably get more value  since he's got a clean record and 1 bad season in his career. We could also trade Leo for more but everyone loves Leo

If trading Leo could get you the edge rusher this team has long wanted, would you do it ?

[Bleedin Green]

The only way Richardson has any shot at all in sticking with the Jets is if he both steps his play up and has absolutely no off-the-field problems (either locker room or drug tests), AND Wilk doesn't rebound enough to make it convincing that, true or not, his year last season was injury-related.

Even if Richardson does right, but so does Wilk, all you'll really see is a tag and trade attempt of Rich from the Jets.  While obviously they essentially tried to do that this offseason, a big year would certainly help increase interest of other teams.  But I would say the odds are strongly in the favor of him simply walking next year.  Maybe the Giants will show some interest next year and keep their streak alive.

[Bleedin Green]

10 minutes ago, whodeawhodat said:

okay, I thought there was something about tending a player at a second round offer.  maybe i am misremembering...

That's only for restricted free agents.  For the franchise tag, the only options are exclusive, non-exclusive, or transition tag.  However, a franchise tag can be used and then the team agree to trade the player away at a lower cost.

[SickJetFan]

1 hour ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Except it wouldn't be a fraction of that cost (unless you are referring to fractions like 19/20).

everyone here and media seems to think he is not worth even a 4th round pick but he is worth 19million a year?

[joewilly12]

SR isn't the problem TB and KR are the problems. 

[phill1c]

18 minutes ago, Tinstar said:

If trading Leo could get you the edge rusher this team has long wanted, would you do it ?

I probably wouldn't. They have this thing called a DRAFT. Often, teams will address needs through it. And then they have FREE AGENCY. Either of these methods don't diminish what a team has to get something a team needs.

All kidding aside, diminishing one unit to bolster another seems counterproductive.

[joewilly12]

21 minutes ago, Tinstar said:

If trading Leo could get you the edge rusher this team has long wanted, would you do it ?

Yes we haven't had an edge rusher since JAbe. 

[phill1c]

Just now, joewilly12 said:

SR isn't the problem TB and KR are the problems. 

Tampa Bay and Knute Rockney are the problems???!

 

[joewilly12]

Just now, phill1c said:

Tampa Bay and Knute Rockney are the problems???!

 

Todd Bowles and Kacy Rodgers this is a NY Jets message board. 

[phill1c]

2 minutes ago, joewilly12 said:

Todd Bowles and Kacy Rodgers this is a NY Jets message board. 

I don't think Todd Bowles or Kacy Rodgers made Sheldon Richardson the unproductive knucklehead he's been the last couple of years, when he wasn't suspended...

[joewilly12]

Just now, phill1c said:

I don't think Todd Bowles or Kacy Rodgers made Sheldon Richardson the unproductive knucklehead he's been the last couple of years, when he wasn't suspended...

Bowles and Rodgers turned decent defensive players into JAG's

[phill1c]

Just now, joewilly12 said:

Bowles and Rodgers turned decent defensive players into JAG's

Newsflash: he wasn't doing much before they arrived. Canton didn't have him on speed dial.

Sheldon Richardson had the opportunity to be a leader on the defense and, instead, he dragged everyone down with him. That's the kind of selfish prick, cancer, no one really needs.

[joewilly12]

9 minutes ago, phill1c said:

Newsflash: he wasn't doing much before they arrived. Canton didn't have him on speed dial.

Sheldon Richardson had the opportunity to be a leader on the defense and, instead, he dragged everyone down with him. That's the kind of selfish prick, cancer, no one really needs.

Fact:

Kacy Rodgers is the worst defensive coordinator in the NFL 

Todd Bowles is one of the worst head coaches in the NFL. 

Our defense last year couldn't stop a nose bleed.  

If you bothered to stop the hate and actually watch the Jets defense Richardson was one of the few who was trying he was chasing guys all over the field and making tackles where he shouldnt have been or doesn't belong. 

 

[phill1c]

4 minutes ago, joewilly12 said:

Fact:

Kacy Rodgers is the worst defensive coordinator in the NFL 

Todd Bowles is one of the worst head coaches in the NFL. 

Our defense last year couldn't stop a nose bleed.  

If you bothered to stop the hate and actually watch the Jets defense Richardson was one of the few who was trying he was chasing guys all over the field and making tackles where he shouldnt have been or doesn't belong. 

 

You seem to actually not know what the word "fact" means. What you wrote was OPINION.

And, really I need to "stop the hate" while you get to hate on Todd Bowles and Kacy Rodgers?!

I don't hate Sheldon Richardson. I think he's a knucklehead and not worth the money he's already been paid and stands to earn. I think his personality or play doesn't bring out the best in anyone and, because it's a TEAM game, I don't want him ruining other players.

Riddle me this: why, when the JEts didn't have Richardson, did the DL register 7 sacks in ONE GAME. And probably 7 sacks the rest of the year with him? Yeah, he was chasing guys. But there's no NFL statistic called "chasing but not catching guys" is there?

[Sperm Edwards]

30 minutes ago, SickJetFan said:

everyone here and media seems to think he is not worth even a 4th round pick but he is worth 19million a year?

There is so much wrong with this thought process I don't know where to begin.

First off, Mo doesn't make $19m/year. His new money amount is closer to $16m/year. The extra $3m/year has already been paid to him, so tack that amount onto anyone the Jets might pick up to replace him.

To your next assumption, welcome to what every GM (it seems except ours) already knows: just because a player could get a huge FA contract doesn't therefore mean some team is willing to surrender a high draft pick for the privilege of paying that high contract.

It's why it was asinine for Maccagnan to ever expect to net a 1st round pick and more for Mo (as he initially stated he was seeking at a minimum), nor even any 1st round pick as he later lowered his demands to. 

Same thing with Sheldon. Drawing a line in the sand at a 1st round pick for him was no less sub-moronic. It doesn't matter that Sheldon was a 1st round pick when he was drafted. It doesn't matter that he might command a $15m/year contract as a FA if we let him go after the '16 season. It isn't therefore to be concluded there's a team that is willing to surrender both a 1st round pick and a $15m/year contract. Only a great fool would think this, and our GM is that great fool.

Want another example? Look at Suh a few years back. Nobody would fork over a high pick to Detroit for his rights, but someone was very willing to make him the NFL's highest paid non-QB. And if Miami didn't sign him, someone else would have (even if it was for slightly less). 

It is a misguided assumption to suggest a player that gets a high contract would also garner a high pick in trade. It's why far more players hit free agency rather than get traded shortly before they hit free agency (or while they're tagged). 

 

[Integrity28]

1 hour ago, sciond said:

So give us an exasmple of someone who did not come because of money. 

Except here.  Unless you can prove Woody low balled top talent your argument is  not valid

I never said he low balled them. I said he doesn't go after them.

You can't decide what is and isn't valid until you can debate within the context of what was actually said.

[SickJetFan]

22 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

There is so much wrong with this thought process I don't know where to begin.

First off, Mo doesn't make $19m/year. His new money amount is closer to $16m/year. The extra $3m/year has already been paid to him, so tack that amount onto anyone the Jets might pick up to replace him.

To your next assumption, welcome to what every GM (it seems except ours) already knows: just because a player could get a huge FA contract doesn't therefore mean some team is willing to surrender a high draft pick for the privilege of paying that high contract.

It's why it was asinine for Maccagnan to ever expect to net a 1st round pick and more for Mo (as he initially stated he was seeking at a minimum), nor even any 1st round pick as he later lowered his demands to. 

Same thing with Sheldon. Drawing a line in the sand at a 1st round pick for him was no less sub-moronic. It doesn't matter that Sheldon was a 1st round pick when he was drafted. It doesn't matter that he might command a $15m/year contract as a FA if we let him go after the '16 season. It isn't therefore to be concluded there's a team that is willing to surrender both a 1st round pick and a $15m/year contract. Only a great fool would think this, and our GM is that great fool.

Want another example? Look at Suh a few years back. Nobody would fork over a high pick to Detroit for his rights, but someone was very willing to make him the NFL's highest paid non-QB. And if Miami didn't sign him, someone else would have (even if it was for slightly less). 

It is a misguided assumption to suggest a player that gets a high contract would also garner a high pick in trade. It's why far more players hit free agency rather than get traded shortly before they hit free agency (or while they're tagged). 

 

lol so he is Suh now.  did YOU not say "19/20"

ok so a player who is 1 asinine event from 1 year susp will get Suh money? a player who has a fraction of his stats?

I think you love these discussions so you can somehow turn it to a beat up Macc thing or something

my original post is spot on  - if Wilkes cant live up to his contract this upcoming season then he is a goner and they could sign SR at a fraction of his 20mil.  Hell they could frachise him as OLB since that is where they list him on depth chart every year and that would be 14 million (under your 16million)

 

 

[OH THE PAIN]

Enough said .

[Sperm Edwards]

17 hours ago, SickJetFan said:

lol so he is Suh now.  did YOU not say "19/20"

ok so a player who is 1 asinine event from 1 year susp will get Suh money? a player who has a fraction of his stats?

I think you love these discussions so you can somehow turn it to a beat up Macc thing or something

my original post is spot on  - if Wilkes cant live up to his contract this upcoming season then he is a goner and they could sign SR at a fraction of his 20mil.  Hell they could frachise him as OLB since that is where they list him on depth chart every year and that would be 14 million (under your 16million)

 

 

uh, what?

On the 2018 ledger, 19/20 is a best-case scenario if they dump Mo in favor of Sheldon. You presented it as "a fraction of $20 million" like it would be 1/2 or something, and that isn't within the realm of possibility. The root of the problem is you have trouble adding and counting up to 20. If that's too high for you to count in your head, take your shoes off & count on your fingers and toes.

Try to follow along:

1. If the Jets cut Wilkerson then $9m accelerates to 2018.
2. If Sheldon counts only $10m in year 1 of a new extension it's roughly the same $20m (literally $19m, or as a fraction, 19/20). 

The idea you came up with is a net larger cap hit in the 2018 season: you want to tag Richardson as an OLB at $14m. Add to that the $9m accelerated hit after cutting Mo, making the new total is $23m. 

In what theoretical universe is $23million a fraction of $20million?

[sciond]

2 hours ago, Integrity28 said:

I never said he low balled them. I said he doesn't go after them.

You can't decide what is and isn't valid until you can debate within the context of what was actually said.

that is because they get shut down.... the Jets are not a destination franchise at this time

[section314]

I think this last line from "A Bronx Tale"  had Sheldon in mind......"the saddest thing in life is wasted talent, and the choices you make stay with you forever."  It will be on his Jets epithet.

[SickJetFan]

10 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

uh, what?

On the 2018 ledger, 19/20 is a best-case scenario if they dump Mo in favor of Sheldon. You presented it las "a fraction of $20 million" like it would be 1/2 or something, and that isn't within the realm of possibility. The root of the problem is you have trouble adding and counting up to 20. If that's too high for you to count in your head, take your shoes off & count on your fingers and toes.

Try to follow along:

1. If the Jets cut Wilkerson then $9m accelerates to 2018.
2. If Sheldon counts only $10m in year 1 of a new extension it's roughly the same $20m (literally $19m, or as a fraction, 19/20). 

The idea you came up with is a net larger cap hit in the 2018 season: you want to tag Richardson as an OLB at $14m. Add to that the $9m accelerated hit after cutting Mo, making the new total is $23m. 

In what theoretical universe is $23million a fraction of $20million?

your right 9 million deadcap if they cut before 2018 - save 11 million.  9mill he was already paid.  so savings is not that much but you are only counting the 1 year.  Wilkes has 3 more years of this.

my original premise still holds...if Wilkes doesnt live up to contract you can cut his ass and save money with little drop off in play with SR which can be signed for a much cheaper deal..  Risk is losing SR to suspension which you can mitigate with another daft pick or cheap option.  which is only alternative aside from cutting both their asses and signing or drafting someone new which would go over like a fart in church but I would not mind either is SR doesnt play well this year either.

 

				Bonus Breakdown		Cap Details		Cash Details
Year		Age	Base Salary	Signing	Workout	Cap Hit	Dead Cap	Yearly Cash
2016		26	$7,000,000	$3,000,000	-	$10,000,000	$43,750,000	$22,000,000($22,000,000)
2017		27	$14,750,000	$3,000,000	$250,000	$18,000,000	$26,750,000	$15,000,000($37,000,000)
2018		28	$16,750,000	$3,000,000	$250,000	$20,000,000	$9,000,000	$17,000,000($54,000,000)
Potential Out: 2019, 3 yr, $54,000,000; $6,000,000 dead cap
2019		29	$15,250,000	$3,000,000	$250,000	$18,500,000	$6,000,000	$15,500,000($69,500,000)
2020		30	$16,250,000	$3,000,000	$250,000	$19,500,000	$3,000,000	$16,500,000($86,000,000)

 

[Sperm Edwards]

8 minutes ago, SickJetFan said:

your right 9 million deadcap if they cut before 2018 - save 11 million.  9mill he was already paid.  so savings is not that much but you are only counting the 1 year.  Wilkes has 3 more years of this.

my original premise still holds...if Wilkes doesnt live up to contract you can cut his ass and save money with little drop off in play with SR which can be signed for a much cheaper deal..  Risk is losing SR to suspension which you can mitigate with another daft pick or cheap option.  which is only alternative aside from cutting both their asses and signing or drafting someone new which would go over like a fart in church but I would not mind either is SR doesnt play well this year either.

 

				Bonus Breakdown		Cap Details		Cash Details
Year		Age	Base Salary	Signing	Workout	Cap Hit	Dead Cap	Yearly Cash
2016		26	$7,000,000	$3,000,000	-	$10,000,000	$43,750,000	$22,000,000($22,000,000)
2017		27	$14,750,000	$3,000,000	$250,000	$18,000,000	$26,750,000	$15,000,000($37,000,000)
2018		28	$16,750,000	$3,000,000	$250,000	$20,000,000	$9,000,000	$17,000,000($54,000,000)
Potential Out: 2019, 3 yr, $54,000,000; $6,000,000 dead cap
2019		29	$15,250,000	$3,000,000	$250,000	$18,500,000	$6,000,000	$15,500,000($69,500,000)
2020		30	$16,250,000	$3,000,000	$250,000	$19,500,000	$3,000,000	$16,500,000($86,000,000)

 

You are moving the goalposts. If you want to discuss the total value of the contract, then don't first bring up the 2018 cap hit as the measuring stick of this "fraction" savings of yours.

Next, if the Jets sign Sheldon long term at $15m per (a big "if"), how much is this enormous savings total over the 3 years from 2018-2020?

Answer = $3million, or $1m per year ($45m of new money for Sheldon vs $48m of new money for Mo).

So, wrong again. Anything else?

[SickJetFan]

18 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

You are moving the goalposts. If you want to discuss the total value of the contract, then don't first bring up the 2018 cap hit as the measuring stick of this "fraction" savings of yours.

Next, if the Jets sign Sheldon long term at $15m per (a big "if"), how much is this enormous savings total over the 3 years from 2018-2020?

Answer = $3million, or $1m per year ($45m of new money for Sheldon vs $48m of new money for Mo).

So, wrong again. Anything else?

i didn't move any "goal posts" I said you right ...you can be right once in every 3000 paragraphs you write

i suppose you should get to celebrate once in while - fact is i only glanced at contract

 

as far as long term - Answer = $3million, or $1m per year  - I will take that 3 million and be right given your generous contract offer to an OLB who is 1 susp away from year long one.- thx

and pssst...guess what...they have to pay someone to play in those years

 

 

 

[jetspenguin]

8 hours ago, phill1c said:

Even when starting IN POSITION he didn't show much value. And Bowles was the second "stoopid" Jets head coach to do it.

thank you

[joewilly12]

3 hours ago, phill1c said:

You seem to actually not know what the word "fact" means. What you wrote was OPINION.

And, really I need to "stop the hate" while you get to hate on Todd Bowles and Kacy Rodgers?!

I don't hate Sheldon Richardson. I think he's a knucklehead and not worth the money he's already been paid and stands to earn. I think his personality or play doesn't bring out the best in anyone and, because it's a TEAM game, I don't want him ruining other players.

Riddle me this: why, when the JEts didn't have Richardson, did the DL register 7 sacks in ONE GAME. And probably 7 sacks the rest of the year with him? Yeah, he was chasing guys. But there's no NFL statistic called "chasing but not catching guys" is there?

Until Todd Bowles and Kacy Rodgers actually do something productive and positive here the FACT remains they both suck at what they do. 

Does Sheldon Richardson call the defensive schemes? 

[jetspenguin]

6 hours ago, Integrity28 said:

I ******* hate Rex Ryan, but I think even that dope would have found a way to use the 3 of them more successfully. 

Don't make excuses for the shortcomings of the first-time coaches we always hire. They don't deserve to be defended. There are coaches all over the league that are capable of scheming to the players they have, especially if they have a couple of great ones. The Jets aren't the first team to face this situation, but they are possibly the least inventive and creative. Sticking Sheldon at LBer isn't being creative either. It's stupid. 

The fact that they can't use, and can't trade Sheldon, is a ******* disgrace.

Mangini was probably the most gratuitous when it came to perpetuating the "can't run my system, without the right guys" bullsh*t. Giving away the best 2 defenders we had at the time in Vilma and Abraham... and the fans still didn't learn. This kind of crap from 1st-time coaches is call "job extending". Rex did it too. Now these buffoons are doing it. 

You want to know why that cheating piece of crap in NE wins? Not because he cheats, but because he uses what he has to the best he can. He has never told the fanbase in NE that they just need XYZ players in order to not be a trash team. That's ALL I CAN REMEMBER EVER BEING TOLD BY JETS LEADERSHIP MY WHOLE LIFE.

 

Maybe we cant use him and cant trade him because he isnt as good as he gets credit for and everyone knows it but Jets fans. He's had 2 decent years, 2 bad ones and the latter was the must recent. Technically he is trending in the wrong direction and has strikes against him. Maybe other teams have enough film on him that we are now at a point that what you see is what you get and the "flashes" that he occasionally shows are the best ya gonna get with this guy. Blaming Bowles is popular around here but when he is gone and turns into another Albert Haynesworth we will be glad we let him go. 

 For the record, I tired of his mouth years ago. I have never been impressed with players who talk more than they produce and despite his production declining his mouth is still in the pro-bowl. 

[Integrity28]

1 hour ago, sciond said:

that is because they get shut down.... the Jets are not a destination franchise at this time

Still not talking about what I actually said. It's cool, I'm not exactly expecting you to enlighten me here... lol

[HessStation]

The only way this works is by moving Mo to NT and he puts on another 10-15 lbs a la Kris Jenkins' career path. Richardson is a 3-5 tech, by putting him anywhere else makes you a ucking idiot.

[Sperm Edwards]

57 minutes ago, SickJetFan said:

i didn't move any "goal posts" I said you right ...you can be right once in every 3000 paragraphs you write

i suppose you should get to celebrate once in while - fact is i only glanced at contract

 

as far as long term - Answer = $3million, or $1m per year  - I will take that 3 million and be right given your generous contract offer to an OLB who is 1 susp away from year long one.- thx

and pssst...guess what...they have to pay someone to play in those years

 

 

 

How are you right? You said picking Sheldon over Mo long term would be a fraction of the team's cap hits in paying Mo. It isn't true short term and it isn't true long term.

You did move the goalposts. You started out faith the nonsense about the fraction of the cap savings in 2018. Then you changed it to being a fraction of the cap savings over the course of Mo's contract. You were wrong in both instances.

Glanced at the contract? You painstakingly re-pasted the whole thing.

[sciond]

11 minutes ago, Integrity28 said:

Still not talking about what I actually said. It's cool, I'm not exactly expecting you to enlighten me here... lol

that is because there was nothing of substance said......

and that remains