Kerley SIGNS with Jets

[JetsFanatic]

1 hour ago, Philc1 said:

Why?  So we can continue to torture our own eyeballs with Hack/Petty in 2018?

 

Go BILLS

Pathetic!  You are not a Jets fan.

[Philc1]

31 minutes ago, JetsFanatic said:

Pathetic!  You are not a Jets fan.

Yeah I've only been a Jets fan since the Kotite days when we went 4-28. I get to watch the Giants and Patriots win all these Super Bowls with great QB play and I'm stuck with Bryce Putrid and Christina Wackintard and whatever crappy qb we reach for with the 14th pick in next year's draft because you want to feel good about winning meaningless games.

[win4ever]

4 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I'm still wondering about this. We're 6th and New Orleans is 11th.

Like you, my impression as well is that's the pecking order for every player (i.e. it's not like waiver wire rounds in fantasy football, where our #1 request was Tye or someone else whom we got, where the Saints' #1 request was Carr). I always thought every player's waiver was taken as its own mini-draft (with us then picking #6 overall in every draft, as opposed to picking #6 in every request "round").

Or maybe the leak of us putting in a WW request is just a poorly thought-out lie that's easily debunked as being BS.  

Yeah, I'm pretty confused about it, because I thought things didn't reset like fantasy leagues, where if you blow your waiver spot, you go to the back of the pack.  

The only other way is the one where you mentioned, prioritizing the waivers so Player A was our first choice, and Player B was our second choice, and so the league has to go through the whole list of teams that may or may not have Player B as the first choice before going through the teams that have him listed as the second choice.  However, I can't find anything to affirm that notion.  

https://www.milehighreport.com/2017/9/1/16239998/nfl-waiver-wire-rules-2017

That article mentions that no matter the number of claims, the teams retain the WW spot so the Jets would always get priority this off-season over the Saints.  Although, it's an SB Nation post, so it's not the most definitive of sources.  

Given the history, I'm much more likely to lean towards some made up BS by Mehta to prove that he may have inside sources, lol.

[win4ever]

4 hours ago, NYs Stepchild said:

If it's true then would have had to have rescinded our claim after being awarded other players. 

That could be part of it, but then that makes the Kerley signing even more befuddling.  

By comparison, Kerley and Carr are extremely similar.  So why would they rescind the offer when Carr would essentially offer you 3 years at league minimum almost, while Kerley offers you 1 year without discount?  Best case scenario has Kerley producing enough to earn a larger contract either with the Jets, or some other team.  Worst case scenario, both flame out.  

For a rebuilding team looking for a long term answer at the slot position, why not go for Carr over Kerley?  Enunwa (assuming they resign him after his contract is up), Anderson (who will also need to be signed since I believe next year is his last year), Stewart, and Hansen seem like the core of the future according to how the regime has operated.  However, they've gone out of their way to find a shifty slot guy, picking up guys like Myles White, retaining Marshall even after a myriad of drops, and eventually signing Kerley.  So why would they rescind the WW, with essentially a free player with potential, only to turn around and sign someone awfully similar?  

Only possible idea would be roster maneuvering, since they both had to count Marshall/ASJ on the 53 prior to designating them as suspended I believe.  However, they didn't cut anyone from the receiving core for Kerley, instead releasing the fullback, so why not just release the guy outright with Carr.  

I'm still leaning towards Mehta BS, but if it's not, it seems to show a lack of planning with the GM otherwise.  

[#27TheDominator]

7 minutes ago, win4ever said:

That could be part of it, but then that makes the Kerley signing even more befuddling.  

By comparison, Kerley and Carr are extremely similar.  So why would they rescind the offer when Carr would essentially offer you 3 years at league minimum almost, while Kerley offers you 1 year without discount?  Best case scenario has Kerley producing enough to earn a larger contract either with the Jets, or some other team.  Worst case scenario, both flame out.  

For a rebuilding team looking for a long term answer at the slot position, why not go for Carr over Kerley?  Enunwa (assuming they resign him after his contract is up), Anderson (who will also need to be signed since I believe next year is his last year), Stewart, and Hansen seem like the core of the future according to how the regime has operated.  However, they've gone out of their way to find a shifty slot guy, picking up guys like Myles White, retaining Marshall even after a myriad of drops, and eventually signing Kerley.  So why would they rescind the WW, with essentially a free player with potential, only to turn around and sign someone awfully similar?  

Only possible idea would be roster maneuvering, since they both had to count Marshall/ASJ on the 53 prior to designating them as suspended I believe.  However, they didn't cut anyone from the receiving core for Kerley, instead releasing the fullback, so why not just release the guy outright with Carr.  

I'm still leaning towards Mehta BS, but if it's not, it seems to show a lack of planning with the GM otherwise.  

The two TEs they picked up are mostly WR.  I believe Sterling in particular was a tweener coming out and played straight WR in college.  Funny you point out that they were looking for a shifty slot guy.  Gailey seemed to love putting the bigger bodies in the slot and I think that is part of his issue with Kerley.  I think his usual lineup had Decker in the slot. 

The reason they would cut Howsare is simple.  He has been on the block before and cleared.  FB is a less likely position to be scooped, so he would be more likely to still be there mid-week if they cut him than almost anybody else.

[#27TheDominator]

4 hours ago, ChuckkieB said:

Kearse and Kerley instead of Marshall and Decker.  Yeah, the team isn't tanking. 

“the best chance to win.”

[win4ever]

3 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

The two TEs they picked up are mostly WR.  I believe Sterling in particular was a tweener coming out and played straight WR in college.  Funny you point out that they were looking for a shifty slot guy.  Gailey seemed to love putting the bigger bodies in the slot and I think that is part of his issue with Kerley.  I think his usual lineup had Decker in the slot. 

The reason they would cut Howsare is simple.  He has been on the block before and cleared.  FB is a less likely position to be scooped, so he would be more likely to still be there mid-week if they cut him than almost anybody else.

I actually like Gailey's method of bigger guys in the slot better because they present a different match up issue.  Most slot corners are smaller in size, the larger ones take the outside spot, so there is an inherent advantage of size.  Second, if a corner follows Decker into the slot, motions clearly draw out man or zone defense since it's unlikely the defense has two slot corners with size on the same defensive play on opposite sides.  I felt like Decker was a great slot guy because he ran very good routes and had good size/speed.   

Sterling is listed as 6'3" 257, which is bigger than Tye, and some of our LBs.  

I don't believe in the use of FBs much because I think the game needs to be spread out more, especially if we don't actually have the talent on the field to match defenses. 

[joewilly12]

Reading this entire thread I have to ask those critical of the Kerley signing, did you guys happen to watch any pre-season games the WR's sucked ass all of them.  

Its a no wonder the GM who I'm not a fan of scoured the waiver wire and all free agents available and traded SR for Kearse. . Sheesh 

[#27TheDominator]

22 minutes ago, win4ever said:

Sterling is listed as 6'3" 257, which is bigger than Tye, and some of our LBs.  

Yeah, I was going to question how Sterling is listed.  He was 238 at his pro day in 2015.  I saw he said he was up to 245 in 2016, but now they have him at 257?  I find that questionable, but he may have bulked up.  Guess that is more common for small school guys.  Funny thing is, Tye was 257 at his pro day.  Now they list him at 256.  Either way they are catch first TEs.  Tomlinson is the only one anybody is expecting to block. 

I like the idea of running bigger guys from the slot because they can go in and out in motion and create a mismatch.  OTOH, I am not against motioning the little guy outside now and then - trouble is the poor man's little guy that we get generally can't get off a jam. 

[NYs Stepchild]

36 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

The two TEs they picked up are mostly WR.  I believe Sterling in particular was a tweener coming out and played straight WR in college.  Funny you point out that they were looking for a shifty slot guy.  Gailey seemed to love putting the bigger bodies in the slot and I think that is part of his issue with Kerley.  I think his usual lineup had Decker in the slot. 

The reason they would cut Howsare is simple.  He has been on the block before and cleared.  FB is a less likely position to be scooped, so he would be more likely to still be there mid-week if they cut him than almost anybody else.

It could also be that he's not a good blocker, and he can't catch. 

[joewilly12]

37 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

I believe Sterling in particular was a tweener coming out and played straight WR in college.

Sterling played strictly WR in college he bulked up to make the team in Jacksonville and to play TE where they were weak. He's got good hands the kid can run and catch. 

[win4ever]

8 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

Yeah, I was going to question how Sterling is listed.  He was 238 at his pro day in 2015.  I saw he said he was up to 245 in 2016, but now they have him at 257?  I find that questionable, but he may have bulked up.  Guess that is more common for small school guys.  Funny thing is, Tye was 257 at his pro day.  Now they list him at 256.  Either way they are catch first TEs.  Tomlinson is the only one anybody is expecting to block. 

I like the idea of running bigger guys from the slot because they can go in and out in motion and create a mismatch.  OTOH, I am not against motioning the little guy outside now and then - trouble is the poor man's little guy that we get generally can't get off a jam. 

I think flexibility is one of the things that Seattle really emphasizes with their receivers because pretty much all of them can go inside/out without blinking.  A lot of people get caught up in their SPARQ score obsession, but I think they look for guys that can be moved around enough that defenses just can't key in on them.  I was watching tapes of Kerase against the Cards, and there are plays where Peterson is lined up against him, even though he's not the No. 1, and maybe not even the No. 2 receiver on a given play.  I really love the flexibility it offers, and I think that was part of the allure of drafting Stewart because he could be versatile.  Hansen on the other hand was pretty much limited to the right side, although he has the skills to be flexible.  I don't know why they passed on Goodwin, because I thought he was a perfect combination of skills/versatility.  

I'm guessing he bulked up to be a better blocker.  Watching some of these undrafted or very end of the draft videos that NFL puts out and some other media, these guys are pretty much willing to do anything to make a team, so I'm guessing he put on some weight to be a better blocker.  If he can block decently, then he has a chance to at least be on a roster for a bit because he has decent speed and athleticism.  

[Sperm Edwards]

3 hours ago, win4ever said:

That could be part of it, but then that makes the Kerley signing even more befuddling.  

By comparison, Kerley and Carr are extremely similar.  So why would they rescind the offer when Carr would essentially offer you 3 years at league minimum almost, while Kerley offers you 1 year without discount?  Best case scenario has Kerley producing enough to earn a larger contract either with the Jets, or some other team.  Worst case scenario, both flame out.  

For a rebuilding team looking for a long term answer at the slot position, why not go for Carr over Kerley?  Enunwa (assuming they resign him after his contract is up), Anderson (who will also need to be signed since I believe next year is his last year), Stewart, and Hansen seem like the core of the future according to how the regime has operated.  However, they've gone out of their way to find a shifty slot guy, picking up guys like Myles White, retaining Marshall even after a myriad of drops, and eventually signing Kerley.  So why would they rescind the WW, with essentially a free player with potential, only to turn around and sign someone awfully similar?  

Only possible idea would be roster maneuvering, since they both had to count Marshall/ASJ on the 53 prior to designating them as suspended I believe.  However, they didn't cut anyone from the receiving core for Kerley, instead releasing the fullback, so why not just release the guy outright with Carr.  

I'm still leaning towards Mehta BS, but if it's not, it seems to show a lack of planning with the GM otherwise.  

Quite possible they think there are enough WR projects on the roster, regardless of where they're ideally suited to line up, and they need 1 more that can actually play now.

[Larz]

Cool

Let's have Kerley and jalin Marshall return punts

#1 pick locked and loaded

[win4ever]

3 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Quite possible they think there are enough WR projects on the roster, regardless of where they're ideally suited to line up, and they need 1 more that can actually play now.

Then why cut Decker in the first place?  

I assume the plan was Enunwa, Anderson and see who steps up.  Once, Enunwa went down, they would need a veteran guy so they went and got Kearse later in the year (although signings such as Wilson, Harper seem to suggest they wanted a veteran guy).  I just don't get what Kerley does, that would tip the things in his favor.

Special Teams? God no.  

Route running?  Kerley specializes in the art of running a cross route, and not much else effectively.  Heck, if they wanted people to learn, why not let Decker do it.  He's a much more accomplished receiver, and a better route runner.  And he's worked with Manning in the past, so would have something better to share with our younger QBs than Kerley's stories of Sanchez's exploits, Geno's movie reviews, or how Kapernick removes grass stains from his paints.  

I think my biggest issue is that Kerley came back here after complaining over and over again, how he was phased out the last time.  How they benched him.  So he's either dumb to think that Bowles changed, or he knows from Bowles that he won't get benched like last time.  And with our roster, I'd much rather give someone like Anderson, Hansen, Peake, or even Marshall a shot than this guy.  So if and when that happens, it sounds like another situation where he's going to be unhappy.  And if he plays over the kids, it sounds like a situation where most fans would be unhappy.  

[Sperm Edwards]

1 hour ago, win4ever said:

Then why cut Decker in the first place?  

I assume the plan was Enunwa, Anderson and see who steps up.  Once, Enunwa went down, they would need a veteran guy so they went and got Kearse later in the year (although signings such as Wilson, Harper seem to suggest they wanted a veteran guy).  I just don't get what Kerley does, that would tip the things in his favor.

Special Teams? God no.  

Route running?  Kerley specializes in the art of running a cross route, and not much else effectively.  Heck, if they wanted people to learn, why not let Decker do it.  He's a much more accomplished receiver, and a better route runner.  And he's worked with Manning in the past, so would have something better to share with our younger QBs than Kerley's stories of Sanchez's exploits, Geno's movie reviews, or how Kapernick removes grass stains from his paints.  

I think my biggest issue is that Kerley came back here after complaining over and over again, how he was phased out the last time.  How they benched him.  So he's either dumb to think that Bowles changed, or he knows from Bowles that he won't get benched like last time.  And with our roster, I'd much rather give someone like Anderson, Hansen, Peake, or even Marshall a shot than this guy.  So if and when that happens, it sounds like another situation where he's going to be unhappy.  And if he plays over the kids, it sounds like a situation where most fans would be unhappy.  

Not that I'm in the defending-Macc business, but I try to have my criticisms have basis. So in their defense I can think of 3 reasons.

1. At the time they cut Decker they still had Enunwa. Enunwa was sureoy (and understandably) assumed to be more reliable injury-wise than Decker as well. Ironic how that turned out.

2. Signing Kerley for next to nothing isn't the same as keeping Decker at $7m. Even more so if the goal is to have a younger kids leapfrog the veteran. 

3. Kerley, unlike Decker, wasn't one of the Fitz Lobby gang.

I'm totally sympathetic to the eye rolling over picking up Kerley for the reasons you stated. All I can think of is they're giving QBs a tryout as well. It isn't just a year to give WRs a tryout for 2018. The guys on the field have to do things maybe the younger guys - including 3rd year Peake - are screwing that up way more often than we realize, and just aren't ready for starter snaps. Or maybe they just don't think the guys they have are suited to the slot. You'd have to ask the GM, but I doubt you'd get an honest answer since he'd surely still say outwardly the team isn't tanking.

[win4ever]

1 hour ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Not that I'm in the defending-Macc business, but I try to have my criticisms have basis. So in their defense I can think of 3 reasons.

1. At the time they cut Decker they still had Enunwa. Enunwa was sureoy (and understandably) assumed to be more reliable injury-wise than Decker as well. Ironic how that turned out.

2. Signing Kerley for next to nothing isn't the same as keeping Decker at $7m. Even more so if the goal is to have a younger kids leapfrog the veteran. 

3. Kerley, unlike Decker, wasn't one of the Fitz Lobby gang.

I'm totally sympathetic to the eye rolling over picking up Kerley for the reasons you stated. All I can think of is they're giving QBs a tryout as well. It isn't just a year to give WRs a tryout for 2018. The guys on the field have to do things maybe the younger guys - including 3rd year Peake - are screwing that up way more often than we realize, and just aren't ready for starter snaps. Or maybe they just don't think the guys they have are suited to the slot. You'd have to ask the GM, but I doubt you'd get an honest answer since he'd surely still say outwardly the team isn't tanking.

I figured going into the year with Enunwa, Anderson, and whatever youngster looks decent was an OK plan, but it's not a prudent plan though.  It relied on both of them stepping up without Marshall around (since Decker only played a limited amount).  Neither of them are polished route runners (nor are the guys they drafted), but then adding Kerase and Kerley abandons that plan.  It also directly flies against having McCown being the mentor QB, because you figure that means he can help bring along the younger guys.  Sort of hedging their bets by saying, we pair experienced QB with inexperienced WRs, so they can learn from the experienced QB and still playing.  With Petty/Hack, it's harder because both would be inexperienced and therefore harder to assign blame and scout.  

If they moved on from Decker for $7 million, I don't understand why Kearse and Kerley are then fine on the cap (the cap hit for both are around 3 million combined), although Kearse has a 5 million hit next year if he's not cut.  I figure Decker is a better player than both of them.  My biggest gripe with Kerley is that he came back after blasting Gailey about not playing him enough, when that's the exact best case scenario for the Jets again this season.  So either he fails (bad signing) or he blocks the kids because he's a veteran (impedes development). 

This is by far my biggest gripe with management.  There should have been no reason whatsoever to bend to Fitzpatrick's will last year.  He didn't have any offers, the positions were filled up (only Denver was remaining, and they liked Siemien, and picked Lynch by then).  I have no idea why Bowles kept mentioning Fitz as the starter even when he wasn't signed, or why they didn't offer him basically backup money instead of giving him the 1 year, $12 million contract.  If Decker/Marshall influenced the decision to a great amount, then we may as well throw out the GM with the bath water because it's his job to evaluate the talent without being compromised by feelings in the locker room.  I still can't believe they brought Fitz back.  

If it was just Kerley or Kearse, I would have been fine, because it allows them enough space to let one or two guys to get some playing time in a rebuild.  Now, the 3 WR set is Kearse, Anderson, and Kerley.  Factoring in a rise of TE usage with ASJ coming back, how much opportunity do these kids get to unseat Kerley without injury? Especially with "I need veterans" Bowles.  This plan reeks of the same stupidity last year where they admitted to doing absolutely nothing mechanically with Hackenberg, instead letting him get up to speed with the NFL.  They wasted a whole year to redo his mechanics, and then expected him to be a starter this year?  They treat these kids like alcohol, you pick them and lock them away to be forgotten, and then hope they turn good in a couple of years by sitting around and getting second string reps.  

I just feel as if the organization doesn't have a plan, nor does it actually stick to a plan.  It seems they think one way at one point, and then a week later decide to change their mind.  

[Sperm Edwards]

6 hours ago, win4ever said:

I figured going into the year with Enunwa, Anderson, and whatever youngster looks decent was an OK plan, but it's not a prudent plan though.  It relied on both of them stepping up without Marshall around (since Decker only played a limited amount).  Neither of them are polished route runners (nor are the guys they drafted), but then adding Kerase and Kerley abandons that plan.  It also directly flies against having McCown being the mentor QB, because you figure that means he can help bring along the younger guys.  Sort of hedging their bets by saying, we pair experienced QB with inexperienced WRs, so they can learn from the experienced QB and still playing.  With Petty/Hack, it's harder because both would be inexperienced and therefore harder to assign blame and scout.  

If they moved on from Decker for $7 million, I don't understand why Kearse and Kerley are then fine on the cap (the cap hit for both are around 3 million combined), although Kearse has a 5 million hit next year if he's not cut.  I figure Decker is a better player than both of them.  My biggest gripe with Kerley is that he came back after blasting Gailey about not playing him enough, when that's the exact best case scenario for the Jets again this season.  So either he fails (bad signing) or he blocks the kids because he's a veteran (impedes development). 

This is by far my biggest gripe with management.  There should have been no reason whatsoever to bend to Fitzpatrick's will last year.  He didn't have any offers, the positions were filled up (only Denver was remaining, and they liked Siemien, and picked Lynch by then).  I have no idea why Bowles kept mentioning Fitz as the starter even when he wasn't signed, or why they didn't offer him basically backup money instead of giving him the 1 year, $12 million contract.  If Decker/Marshall influenced the decision to a great amount, then we may as well throw out the GM with the bath water because it's his job to evaluate the talent without being compromised by feelings in the locker room.  I still can't believe they brought Fitz back.  

If it was just Kerley or Kearse, I would have been fine, because it allows them enough space to let one or two guys to get some playing time in a rebuild.  Now, the 3 WR set is Kearse, Anderson, and Kerley.  Factoring in a rise of TE usage with ASJ coming back, how much opportunity do these kids get to unseat Kerley without injury? Especially with "I need veterans" Bowles.  This plan reeks of the same stupidity last year where they admitted to doing absolutely nothing mechanically with Hackenberg, instead letting him get up to speed with the NFL.  They wasted a whole year to redo his mechanics, and then expected him to be a starter this year?  They treat these kids like alcohol, you pick them and lock them away to be forgotten, and then hope they turn good in a couple of years by sitting around and getting second string reps.  

I just feel as if the organization doesn't have a plan, nor does it actually stick to a plan.  It seems they think one way at one point, and then a week later decide to change their mind.  

Truthfully, every time a player is added, his cap hit is overblown by glossing over how the cap works. It's always the top 51 calculated hits, and only the top 51 hits; whenever we add (or keep) a player, it's effectively referred to as though it's 100% additive (i.e. as though 52 players count). Just saying, whenever you think we added or kept someone we shouldn't have, subtract the minimum salary - currently $465K - from the amount, since that's the on-the-bubble #51/#52 player that would or wouldn't count, depending on the presence/absence of the more expensive player you're talking about.

An effect of this is 2 players' salaries together (at roughly $1.5m each) are less than 1 player at $1.5m (because the former would bump two $465K players out of the top 51, where the latter would bump only one).

Next, when you see a veteran making his respective veteran-minimum amount, he counts less than he's getting paid. So let's say you see a player like Purdum making nearly $1m in salary and bonus; that doesn't mean his cap hit is $1m. It's built into the CBA that veterans have higher minimums than younger players, and they make more with each accrued year, but if you make any veteran minimum wage it only counts the veteran amount for a 2-year veteran (currently $615K). Another $80K can be added as bonus to still count as a "veteran minimum" contract" to make that $695K, which is what I think Purdum was scheduled to count. This cap relief is done for teams now so marginal veterans don't get priced out of getting signed like they used to; in the past they weren't permitted to accept a contract that would cost the team less on the cap, so this was the compromise (and I think it's a good one).

Now look at Kerley. As a veteran in years 4-6, his minimum that he must be paid is $775K, and that's what the Jets are paying him. There appears to be no signing bonus, likely because it makes no difference, as it all offsets the guaranteed money SF has to still pay him; he makes the same total either way, and all that matters is which team is paying what. His 2017 cap hit with the Jets should therefore be $615K, not $775K.

So you've got Kearse at $2.2m and Kerley at 0.6m = $2.8m. Having them on the team bumps the last 2 minimum-salary guys, or $930K, from the cap total. For the two veterans, the net cost is therefore $1.9m. Now compare that to Decker - I believe his salary was scheduled to be $7.25m - who'd bump only 1 minimum-salary guy, and the net cap savings for cutting him was $6,785,000 (or it was, until we added Kearse). 

The total means Kearse + Kerley together count about $5m (technically $4.885m) less than Decker, who couldn't be reliably depended upon to play a full season anyway. I think that's a significant difference in a season like this, unless they had certain plans to keep Decker around for even longer. The net costs for Kearse and Kerley this year are $1.735m and $0.15m respectively. So from a cap standpoint, Kerley's hit isn't consequentially different than an UDFA rookie.

Those are just the numbers. But as far as their overall plan and judgment from the top on down, I agree with you this franchise is a colossal sh**show. 

[win4ever]

14 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Truthfully, every time a player is added, his cap hit is overblown by glossing over how the cap works. It's always the top 51 calculated hits, and only the top 51 hits; whenever we add (or keep) a player, it's effectively referred to as though it's 100% additive (i.e. as though 52 players count). Just saying, whenever you think we added or kept someone we shouldn't have, subtract the minimum salary - currently $465K - from the amount, since that's the on-the-bubble #51/#52 player that would or wouldn't count, depending on the presence/absence of the more expensive player you're talking about.

An effect of this is 2 players' salaries together (at roughly $1.5m each) are less than 1 player at $1.5m (because the former would bump two $465K players out of the top 51, where the latter would bump only one).

Next, when you see a veteran making his respective veteran-minimum amount, he counts less than he's getting paid. So let's say you see a player like Purdum making nearly $1m in salary and bonus; that doesn't mean his cap hit is $1m. It's built into the CBA that veterans have higher minimums than younger players, and they make more with each accrued year, but if you make any veteran minimum wage it only counts the veteran amount for a 2-year veteran (currently $615K). Another $80K can be added as bonus to still count as a "veteran minimum" contract" to make that $695K, which is what I think Purdum was scheduled to count. This cap relief is done for teams now so marginal veterans don't get priced out of getting signed like they used to; in the past they weren't permitted to accept a contract that would cost the team less on the cap, so this was the compromise (and I think it's a good one).

Now look at Kerley. As a veteran in years 4-6, his minimum that he must be paid is $775K, and that's what the Jets are paying him. There appears to be no signing bonus, likely because it makes no difference, as it all offsets the guaranteed money SF has to still pay him; he makes the same total either way, and all that matters is which team is paying what. His 2017 cap hit with the Jets should therefore be $615K, not $775K.

So you've got Kearse at $2.2m and Kerley at 0.6m = $2.8m. Having them on the team bumps the last 2 minimum-salary guys, or $930K, from the cap total. For the two veterans, the net cost is therefore $1.9m. Now compare that to Decker - I believe his salary was scheduled to be $7.25m - who'd bump only 1 minimum-salary guy, and the net cap savings for cutting him was $6,785,000 (or it was, until we added Kearse). 

The total means Kearse + Kerley together count about $5m (technically $4.885m) less than Decker, who couldn't be reliably depended upon to play a full season anyway. I think that's a significant difference in a season like this, unless they had certain plans to keep Decker around for even longer. The net costs for Kearse and Kerley this year are $1.735m and $0.15m respectively. So from a cap standpoint, Kerley's hit isn't consequentially different than an UDFA rookie.

Those are just the numbers. But as far as their overall plan and judgment from the top on down, I agree with you this franchise is a colossal sh**show. 

I did not know that actually, thanks.  

Although, in that sense by having Kerase and Kerley over Decker, we're possibly losing one more guy we could have on the roster with potential.  The team is devoid of talent obviously, so it doesn't matter but we also lose that developmental guy.  For example (throwing out the Mehta BS) but would you rather have Decker/Carr or Kerase/Kerley for a cheaper rate?  

I probably would have kept Decker because discarding his rookie season where he didn't start, up until last year, he played in 78/80 possible games.  He started 73 of those games (5 are from his second year, not sure if it was injury or him breaking into the lineup).  While he's older and the shoulder can be tricky, I don't think he's chronically injured.  He was 1000 yard pace with both Geno and Fitz as QBs, and I thought he'd be a very good mentor to young receivers as well.  

Saying all this, I like Kearse.  I think he'll actually be a decent pick up.  I just wish they kept Decker instead of going full blown youth movement, and then abandoning it halfway through.  

[Sperm Edwards]

7 hours ago, win4ever said:

I did not know that actually, thanks.  

Although, in that sense by having Kerase and Kerley over Decker, we're possibly losing one more guy we could have on the roster with potential.  The team is devoid of talent obviously, so it doesn't matter but we also lose that developmental guy.  For example (throwing out the Mehta BS) but would you rather have Decker/Carr or Kerase/Kerley for a cheaper rate?  

I probably would have kept Decker because discarding his rookie season where he didn't start, up until last year, he played in 78/80 possible games.  He started 73 of those games (5 are from his second year, not sure if it was injury or him breaking into the lineup).  While he's older and the shoulder can be tricky, I don't think he's chronically injured.  He was 1000 yard pace with both Geno and Fitz as QBs, and I thought he'd be a very good mentor to young receivers as well.  

Saying all this, I like Kearse.  I think he'll actually be a decent pick up.  I just wish they kept Decker instead of going full blown youth movement, and then abandoning it halfway through.  

Yes. In fairness, though, at the time Decker was cut it was originally Decker + Enunwa; now with it's Kearse + Kerley. Same number of developmental guys. They cut Decker for the developmental guy, and clearly the summer showed them the best of the developmental bunch still needed more development before starting. Or that's just how they're rolling in week 1.

Decker was perfectly fine as a receiver when healthy, and if he can stay healthy I think he'll have a significant bounce back year stats-wise for Tennessee, but he's injured pretty much every year. I didn't say he's chronically injured because of the shoulder; I said he's unreliable (from a health standpoint) and I still say that's accurate. As I've noted, the irony is now Decker is totally healthy (so far) while a far more solid moose like Enunwa will miss the entire season. The other thing is that even when Decker's on the field, he's somewhat injured so often (if not most of the time):

• In 2016 obviously he went on IR early, but it wasn't just his shoulder; he also had a messed-up hip that would have caused him to miss time outright, or play at a lower level at best.
• In 2015 he missed a full game outright, missed a third of a couple more games on top of that, and was chronically banged up enough that from week 3 on he was listed as questionable 3x and merely probable in all the rest.
• In 2014 he messed up his hammy in week 2, and wasn't off the injury report until the 2nd game in November. Yeah he played through it, but he clearly wasn't nearly the same player he was otherwise capable of being. 
• In 2013, his best season by the numbers, he showed up on the injury report for 10 games
• 2011-2012, in comparison, he only showed up on the injury report a total of 3 times. But even though he was healthy for the first 15 starts in 2011, injured his knee in the 2nd-last game, ended up missing the last game outright with the playoffs on the line, then only showing up hobbled for a couple of insignificant snaps in that Tebow OT-miracle playoff game vs Pittsburgh, before missing the next playoff game outright again vs NE). And this is back when he was 24 years old, 6 seasons ago.

Not reliable.

[Sperm Edwards]

An all-youth WR corps depends on what the main goal is this season (because they clearly didn't plan out the season with winning a SB as the team's main goal).

If it's just to develop WRs, then they can keep a couple of vets like Kearse/Kerley on the roster (but not taking all their playing time away) to give these guys breathers and help them out. If they truly want to get a serious look at Petty and/or Hackenberg, then they're going to need starting receivers who know what they're doing, and Kearse/Kerley are more justified. Kearse is only 27 as well, so they could legitimately want to keep him around for another 3-4 seasons after 2017 is over, depending upon his role.

What makes comparatively little to no sense is benching all the WR kids (other than Anderson, who was starting no matter what anyway) while also benching their QB kids in favor of Josh McCown. If Petty's injured and it's just 1 week that's one thing; but it's his 3rd freaking NFL season already, so slow-dealing a healthy Petty into the starting lineup is pussy management to the Nth degree. Putting Hackenberg out there, certainly week 1, seems pointless unless it's the CS's goal to prove he's a failure in an effort to stick it to Maccagnan and shield themselves from more blame.

The far more acceptable combos are McCown with developmental WRs, or Petty with more reliable/veteran WRs (at least to start out). Petty with developmental WRs isn't likely helping either at this juncture, and benching the developmental WRs while starting McCown seems like a waste of playing time. 

[#27TheDominator]

On 9/6/2017 at 6:52 PM, win4ever said:

I think flexibility is one of the things that Seattle really emphasizes with their receivers because pretty much all of them can go inside/out without blinking.  A lot of people get caught up in their SPARQ score obsession, but I think they look for guys that can be moved around enough that defenses just can't key in on them.  

From what I have read, the Seahawks obsession at WR and CB is arm length, or more specifically wingspan.  You can't always get those numbers and the ones we get can't be trusted.  There was a guy with over a full inch difference combine to pro day.  Kearse, Richardson, Darboh, Moore, Chris Harper (K-State) all had long arms.  I think they generally won't touch anybody under 32" unless their wingspan is freakish compared to arm length.  I think Baldwin might fit in that category.  Of course, Lockett is considerably under that number.  They obviously are not afraid to go beyond their prototypes, because their most famous pick is a midget QB.  

FWIW, this may have contributed to some shying away from Godwin too high since he was at 31 5/8.  For comparison, Stewart is at 32 1/2.  Does not explain the Jets - Marks and Cannon for instance have very short arms.

[Sperm Edwards]

15 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

From what I have read, the Seahawks obsession at WR and CB is arm length, or more specifically wingspan.  You can't always get those numbers and the ones we get can't be trusted.  There was a guy with over a full inch difference combine to pro day.  Kearse, Richardson, Darboh, Moore, Chris Harper (K-State) all had long arms.  I think they generally won't touch anybody under 32" unless their wingspan is freakish compared to arm length.  I think Baldwin might fit in that category.  Of course, Lockett is considerably under that number.  They obviously are not afraid to go beyond their prototypes, because their most famous pick is a midget QB.  

FWIW, this may have contributed to some shying away from Godwin too high since he was at 31 5/8.  For comparison, Stewart is at 32 1/2.  Does not explain the Jets - Marks and Cannon for instance have very short arms.

This post wouldn't need much adjusting if the topic was penis size. Just saying.

[#27TheDominator]

1 minute ago, Sperm Edwards said:

This post wouldn't need much adjusting if the topic was penis size. Just saying.

C'mon.  I did not use the word "girth" once!

[NJ]

We now have a .01% better chance of beating the Bills at home .. no .. it'll be all Bills fans there. 

0-16   Let the rooks play.

[Sperm Edwards]

32 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

C'mon.  I did not use the word "girth" once!

It was implied when it was suggested that length was more important. More important than what? Girth, of course.

Please keep up.

[#27TheDominator]

5 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

It was implied when it was suggested that length was more important. More important than what? Girth, of course.

Please keep up.

Implied girth?  Is that what you tell @Mrs. Sperm it is? 

[kelly]

On ‎9‎/‎5‎/‎2017 at 1:06 PM, JetNation said:

Manish Mehta of the New York Daily news is reporting that wide receiver Jeremy Kerley may be joining linebacker Demario Davis as another former Jet taking just a short hiatus from Florham Park.

Kerley spent his first five pro seasons with the Jets before being phased out of the team’s offense in 2015 and moving on to the San Francisco 49ers where he was the team’s leading receiver with 64 receptions for 667 yards and 3 touchdowns.

The sure handed receiver would be a welcome addition to an offense that is severely lacking play makers on offense.

Click here to read the full story...

[Sperm Edwards]

4 hours ago, #27TheDominator said:

Implied girth?  Is that what you tell @Mrs. Sperm it is? 

For years I've limited her exposure to pictures of micropenis so I look like a Clydesdale in comparison.