Jump to content

Sperm Edwards

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Sperm Edwards last won the day on February 25 2019

Sperm Edwards had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

346,236 JN Hall Of Fame

About Sperm Edwards

  • Rank
    Hall Of Famer
  • Birthday 10/21/1968

Contact Methods

  • Email
  • Facebook

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

28,854 profile views
  1. Yeah I don't see that either. There is one precedent - Rivers/Brees - but Brees wasn't as highly touted as Darnold. He was only a 2nd round pick as a rookie; he wasn't going to command 2nd round value 3 seasons in, with his height already considered a handicap. If they take a QB in the top 10 (or really, anywhere in round 1) then Darnold is traded for a deal worked out before the draft.
  2. Nah, unless you already know something. The biggest gamble of an "extension" would just be exercising the 5th yr option, which has to be considered a long shot where we sit today. Second-biggest gamble they'll do, at this point is the most likely gamble if he's even back at all, is keep him for one more year only, to see if the light goes on. If it does, then keeping him beyond that point ends with them tagging him while they work out an extension at worst, or trying to reach an extension with him during the season so it doesn't come to that.
  3. This 100%. @Doggin94it You've not left much upside for Darnold, presuming he believes in himself and won't want to already sell himself short at age 23. He's not cutting his own balls off to lock himself into a lower-base, 4-year extension with only 1 guaranteed season, unless there are heavy incentives in it whereby he can earn an additional $10MM/year more if he's playing at a FQB level. Of course in that case it removes the Jets' very incentive for taking on this extra risk in the first place. May as well just do the 5th year option, which would be a shocker as it is. So it's an idea that works in theory only, but wouldn't/couldn't actually happen imo. On one hand it sounds like the potential upside of extending Sanchez when MT did, thinking we're getting in cheaper at 75% of a top 5 FQB's deal. Except this is a much bigger relative discount than when Sanchez was extended - the top QBs now get $35-45MM per - but has only half the number of fully guaranteed seasons. Darnold is definitely not locking himself in for 4 years at $21MM/year, with no incentives to earn much more, where you're only going to guarantee the first season alone. If you want him for a discount with only a 1 year guarantee, what that looks like is a 1 year contract. like Brissett had last year with Indianapolis. If they do keep Darnold, without signing a Watson/Stafford or drafting a QB in round 1, they're still going to have to sign a Brissett/Trubisky type veteran at $12-16MM give or take, in case Darnold's lousy again, and there goes the supposed savings. I get the idea to hope to profit - locking him in at a lower cost based on his bust years, since it'd obviously be more expensive to lock him up after he's turned his career around - but it's unrealistic. He's better off on a 1 year prove-it deal with a playoff offense that's shedding cash. Letdown that he's been, it's good enough to (at worst) bounce around the league as a backup for a decade like Clemens, Geno, and others.
  4. I don't think this is true anymore, starting with Darnold's class. It's 100% guaranteed as soon as it's exercised. There is no way they're doing that unless something heavy falls on JD's head.
  5. With the flexibility & options at the GM's disposal, this team should be in the playoffs by the 2022 season. Only acceptable reasons otherwise are just repeated bad luck at the end of 2-3 games and/or an impossible string of injuries. This is a stupid notion that, because the Jets were 2-14 with horrid trash QBing and such a string of injuries, that therefore the realistic expectations should be incremental improvements to 5 (+/-1) wins in 2021 and 8 (+/-1) wins in 2022, and finally the playoffs with 11 (+/-1) wins in 2023. Who writes off the upcoming 2 seasons - 2 whole football seasons - as rebuilds? Sitting on our hands, because spending half of the $80MM in cap room we'll have (which will grow to nearly double that next year with the roster we'll start with in March 2021), is not the "smart" way of rebuilding. I can actually sympathize because that's the mentality this team has instilled, so while I'll mock it I don't fully blame the fans loyal to this trash heap. The only truly stupid band-aids (without the benefit of hindsight)? Spending like crazy with pretty much all of it on a combination of never-was younger players who happened to reach FA when we had cap room, and last-leg/about-to-be-has-been players whose best years are certainly behind them. In other words, exactly what "GM of the Year" Maccagnan did in 2015, where he created a 1-year window for 2+ years of spending, and did so without a good QB on the roster in the first place. What's ok is finding starters today who still have a realistic shot of still starting even in 2023, where if they don't the guaranteed $ will be up by then and we'll have made more than enough draft picks to confidently release them if needed. The way that works is, whichever ones are not worth keeping in year 3, you can cut ties to get that cap relief back (few non-QB UFAs get a fully guaranteed 3rd season). Since 2023 is the cowardly goal some feel is acceptable for the Jets, well hey -- by then most will be cuttable if they're no longer holding up so what's really lost? In the meantime we'll get to watch a competitive team who just might catch lightning sooner than expected. I love draft picks, accumulating more draft picks, and am a big believer in building through the draft. But if any of you think we're realistically putting >10 good starters on the field from the upcoming 2 drafts, you're kidding yourselves. Never mind it'd be a decent idea if each had to beat out more than an obvious backup player to earn that starting job in the first place. Building through the draft doesn't therefore mean: sign nobody until Douglas has drafted another class or two. Nobody successful does that, and rightfully so. Just don't do that combo build with players who have 1 good season left in them if you're lucky. A playoff/championship team needs veterans, too -- on the field, not just old "mentor" types who don't play much anymore unless enough children starters are injured.
  6. Apparently he doesn't project anything other than a team using the draft for it's immediate starter needs, and projects that such teams leave those holes for the draft. Not even a team that'll be north of $80MM under the salary cap. We'll just let our current FAs go to other teams, sign nobody ourselves, fill all our holes in the draft, be $150MM under the cap next year, and will then do the same thing again. Because that's what every team does.
  7. Now you've got it. And we'd have won 2 super bowls, not 1.
  8. Yeah, I hear you. Just like Watson, for one. If he's available for just #2, I'd be confident that they're interested. If he's available only for 5 #1s including #2 overall this year plus 3 #2s (or pick some absurd package) then they probably aren't. Where the FO's scale is tipped to "we'll find a different QB" is pure guesswork at this point. Plus it's so early because no one's had 1-on-1 (zoom or in person) with any prospect, or get their measurable thingies in that shuffles things around more than it should, let alone offers for the pick coming in (whether it's for another prospect or for Watson). I'm probably more interested in discussion than you are because I haven't watched these guys much (let alone a lot). I want to see the Jets get a top-notch QB but don't have a dog in this race which it is, other than known quantity veterans available via trade.
  9. Depends what they do in FA. If they somehow add 2 serious iOL FAs then we're unlikely to see a G before day 3, nor should we. Hard to get a gauge on Clark. I'm most discouraged by how easily he was leapfrogged by a recently-cut bust when they were playing for nothing more than pride, and how Elflein's own meh play was more than adequate enough to keep Clark from seeing the field (was he even activated for any games as a backup?). He must have sucked something fierce in practice, and it's not like he was likely to be getting many practice reps against the team's own starting DL. Lots of guys make a big leap from y1 to y2 (particularly a raw prospect missing half his rookie season, to say nothing of the abbreviated summer anyway from covid), but team desire aside it's not looking good for him so far. I think a lot of people like Luvu, but that doesn't mean they're necessarily into depending on him for 16 starts as a primary plan. There's like and there's like-like, but yeah it's a good thing to find starters who don't break the bank or require high draft picks. Especially when the team has so many holes to fix they can't possibly address them all with (good) permanent solutions in just one offseason.
  10. Honestly any of these mocks - even with someone an ear in the FO - seem way too premature before the combine or league-organized pro days or whatever they are, plus all of FA, never mind the elephant in the room league-wide of what's going to happen with Watson and/or Stafford. The draft isn't for another 3 months, and far too much of significance happens between now & then, so it never matches January mocks outside of a unanimous #1 overall pick QB going #1.
  11. When the whole country who isn't fast asleep is always watching (because there's nothing else on), and this is what you wear to go on Carson, you're doing it right.
  12. That's what the internet says. I've never met anyone who's listened to a Brewers game on local radio, so I couldn't tell you.
  13. Holy crap he's still alive? And looking it up, he's 87 today, not 86. Anyway, good for him. Everyone likes Uke, except maybe fashion designers.

Content Partnership

Yes Network

Site Sponsor

MILE-Social - NJ Social Media & SEO company
  • Create New...