Jump to content

Sperm Edwards

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by Sperm Edwards

  1. 5 hours ago, Alka said:

    Left and right tackles aren't holes if Brown stays healthy and Becton stays healthy.  But what happens if one of these guys go down for a few weeks due to injury, or worse than a few weeks?  What happens after this year when Brown retires?  What happens after this year if Becton gets hurt again?

    The thing is, offensive tackle is one of the strongest positions in this draft, and 1 of the top 3 will most probably be available at #13.  It seems logical to grab one of them at #13.  If the Jets could have gotten Orlando Brown, then drafting one would be off the table for this year.  But just the fact that the Jets tried to get Brown, tells you that the Jets brass feels the same way that I do, which is that they need to pick up a quality tackle before the year begins.

    You could say that about literally every position group on every team in the NFL; that they don't have holes if their starters remain healthy.

    I've got no problems whatsoever with the Jets drafting a LT early - quite the contrary - but that doesn't equate to the Jets having active, current starter holes. What's as concerning is the only tackle who's under contract past this year is Mitchell. Combine that with Becton being an unlikely 5th year option after the last two seasons (it's one thing to bet on him this year; it's another to bet on him for the next 2 out of 2 seasons), plus Brown's age making an extension unlikely (at least at this point in time), that drafting or otherwise acquiring another young tackle makes sense.

    Yes LT would've been off the table in round 1 if they'd signed Orlando Brown, but whomever else they ultimately sign with that $ would've then been off the table as well. Until shown otherwise in a month-plus, then (even aside from the Rodgers transaction) I'm confident they're not done assembling their pre-draft roster.


    • Upvote 1
    • Sympathy 1
  2. 6 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

    I don't disagree at all with what you're saying - but counting on him to have made the jump starter caliber this year - on a one year-all in with Rodgers season, is a mistake.  I also would't count on a rookie either - even a first rounder. 

    Any other season I would be on board and agree 100% with what you're saying.   The idea that two T's on the roster will rise up and be solid players, all makes sense and the proper way to manage resources..

    This just happens to be a very unique season.  

    They have 3 starting tackles on the roster - and lay out as two at LT, two at RT - not even counting AVT who further fills in in a pinch to either side.

    They should and surely will add at least one more, and will swap out for Brown if the opportunity presents itself (e.g. the offer to Orlando Brown).

    • Sympathy 1
  3. 12 minutes ago, rangerous said:

    Didn’t McGovern already sign with Detroit?  I think the big issues are qb oline, and wr. We all know the deal at qb. Zach really can’t start but he can be back up. I’m guessing they draft a qb to develop alongside Zach. Oline has the players but they need to get time as a unit. Obviously some concern about becton. Wrs probably need one more solid guy either to replace Davis or play slot behind Moore. We’ll see if nasrildeen can play more than spot duty. The dline can be an issue without enough bodies for rotations. I’m guessing they’ll draft dline.

    Wrong McGovern. Jets’ McGovern is still a FA.

    Lazard replaces Davis + all 3 starters work well out of the slot. Replacing Berrios as a nominal SL2 won’t be crazy-hard at all, and Rodgers-buddy Cobb seems both cheap and as likely a fit as any.

    Agree on DT. They need a starting DT, whether that’s from FA or the draft. Lawson will probably stick since his cap $ aren’t desperately needed, though I like him fine I don’t find him irreplaceable without a major pay FA or major pick. Either way they’ve got plenty of ends to rotate on & off.

    I find tackle less of a ‘23 crisis as some (but would have welcomed swapping Browns at LT). They could use one more, and they have to be playing long ball at least somewhat, realizing by next season Mitchell might be the only rostered tackle.

    • Upvote 2
  4. 16 hours ago, FidelioJet said:

    Mitchell isn't really starting caliber - Seems like he filled in okay for a while there, but was really getting beat before he got injured.  Counting on Becton to be anything is a huge mistake.

    They need to sign or trade for a legitimate NFL starting caliber OT

    So the Giants need two starting tackles? Both their starters - each a top 10 pick - had terrible rookie seasons (getting beat worse & more often than Mitchell).

    I don’t know what his ceiling is, but it isn’t destined to be his partial rookie season when they sent him out immediately to pass block for Flacco 50-60x per week. The whole point of drafting him iirc was to let him spend his rookie season bulking up, not starting week 1.

    • Upvote 3
    • Sympathy 2
  5. 7 hours ago, BornJetsFan1983 said:

    I mean whatever you want to say. It ils very subjective. 5 TD and 9-7 seems pretty average. But hey I haven't dove into his career numbers.. I remember him as being reliable. But obviously you didn't catch the drift of the post or listen to the podcast. If you did you would have heard his pompous ass and not be so quick to try to get with spermy

    Garrett Wilson had just 4 TDs. If you ask him why so few I’m sure he’ll reply that there are other factors at play there.

    Even without being saddled with run-first wimp HCs and a total lack of gunslinger QBs his entire career (other than 1 yr if a Hackett-castrated, older Testaverde), 6000 rec yards in 6 years isn’t the NFL average.

    Other than one standout year of Marshall + Decker (which quickly died off), until drafting Wilson and seeing him on the field, from ‘12-14 and then ‘16-21 I remember more than once thinking ffs wish we had one guy who could play like either of these two instead of the Jets’ has-beens, never-weres, sub-mehs, and rarely-healthy wideouts.

    So while Wilson looks great so far he wasn’t a slam dunk great pick. It’s what made having two 1sts in that draft anticlimactic until seeing him in hindsight, because iirc there was no omfg WR prospect like Green, Julio, Chase, etc. and it’s why they instead tried to trade for Deebo.

    In this setting…

    I’ve still not listened to this one but have heard them back and forth a while before. I can’t remember the specific topic, but Coles came across as decidedly smarter & more insightful, with Chrebet offering kinda shoulder shrug comments in comparison I could get from Mrs. Sperm. Coles was more interesting (and frankly, just nicer) to meet in person, too (who knows what was going on for each personally that day/week/mo, and as I don’t know either personally it’d be unfair to make a blanket assumption beyond that day; but that was my experience). Maybe this day that was reversed.

    I’m quite sure I’d sometimes agree and sometimes disagree with takes from each. The rest is just tone, and if both hosts are so soft spoken like Chrebet is on mike, pretty much no one’s going to listen once the novelty of their names wears off for even the most loyal fans. 

    Like Sanchez & Mangold. One was a great player for many years while the other mostly sucked. Mangold may very well be smarter as well (i don’t really know) but he’s not as engaging of a listen on his own. They do play well off each other (especially when Mangold brings up or rips on Sanchez’s less than finer points as a player, while the latter is appropriately self-deprecating in his goofy way) but admit Sanchez gives their Exchange podcast whatever life it has. As much as I appreciated him as a player, and how there he comes across as really likable in their back & forth (not unlike being the anchor on his OL), the truth is listening to two Mangolds would probably be boring within 10 minutes even if I mostly agreed with what he’s saying.

    Bart Scott gets way over his skis plenty. He’s still more fun to listen to (granted not always). Ditto sometimes Colon, and Ray Lucas before them. Some are just more verbally opinionated. As long as it’s not merely clownishness artificially turned up to 11 all then l the time it makes for a better listen.

    Beyond playing for the team, like all of us here they’re all Jets fans. What that means is when the motivation in discussion is to show how “I know better” when the game is on they’re rooting for a win more than being right.

    Even after your most popular thread, I bet you still wanted Berrios to catch that TD vs the Vikes or just take any/every return all the way back. All good.

    • Upvote 1
  6. 23 hours ago, JoJoTownsell1 said:

    Beningo is the worst thing that happened to the Jets fan base.  He's worse than Woody, worse than Belicheat going to the patriots.  He's a cancer that feeds off jets fans frustration and would even find negativity in a Super Bowl win. 

    Buy him a spin on the GOT tee shirt that says "I complain and I don't know things" -- just an idea.

    • Upvote 1
  7. The Colts once felt Kelly was worth $12.5MM per season. That decision was made in 2020, under a $198MM cap, with the further knowledge the 2021 season's cap was going to drop (and ultimately did, to $183MM). Let's say they didn't know it'd fall quite that far, and split the difference as assuming it'd merely drop to $190MM. 

    Now entering 2023 they have him tied up at $10MM under a $225MM cap.

    • $12.5MM of $190MM = 7% (with more than 2 years effectively guaranteed at signing)
    • 10MM of $225MM = 4% (with $0 more guaranteed; year to year at the team's pleasure)

    Put another way:

    The team that knows him best, who determined he was deserving of a contract for 7% of their salary cap, has now determined he's no longer worth even 4% of their salary cap.

    Further note that, instead of moving on from Kelly, they can clear more '23 space by restructuring any one of three others with $16-19MM base salaries (never mind just restructuring Kelly outright).

    If he's so wonderful, why would they want to get rid of him when he's cheaper now than when they extended him, and they aren't in a desperate cap situation where he's become an unaffordable luxury?

    Buyer beware.

    • Upvote 2
  8. 2 hours ago, OtherwiseHappyinLife said:

    Thought it might be nice to centralize here.

    Who is still available?

    Starting Center:  Quiet after missing out on Brendel, who signed back with the 49ers.

    McGovern, Draft, anyone else?

    Left Tackle  Quiet after missing out on Brown who signed with the Bengals.

    Jonah Williams (via trade— allowed 20 sacks the last 2 years), Draft, anyone else?

    Starting Defensive Tackle:  Let Rankins walk for a 1 year deal w/ the Saints.  Missed out on Cox who stayed with the Eagles.

    Calais Campbell (6 sacks w/ Ravens last year, continues to grade well after being dominant for years), Draft, who else?

    Starting Free Safety:  Surprisingly haven’t heard a peep.  Clark likely replaces Whitehead at SS.  Neither is great deep, big need for someone with range.

    Pro Bowler Kevin Byard might be cut after being asked to take a pay cut by the Titans).  Separately, how much do the Jets like Tony Adams?

    Sub Linebacker

    Re-sign Kwon, replace with Sherwood, FA, or Draft?  Will they use Clark in this role who has excelled covering Tight Ends (possibly rotating at SS w/ Whitehead)

    Back-up QB:  White wisely chose Dolphins where he has a chance to start if Tua has another concussion

    Are we really going with Wilson as the back-up?  Others are signing elsewhere (Minshew, Rush, Mariota).  Jets would be wise to use a mid round draft pick to develop post Rodgers.. but not as the primary backup ..


    Jets could easily free up $32M from Davis, Lawson, Whitehead to sign some good players here.

    LT isn’t a hole, and I’d probably rather they just go with Brown than trade a draft pick for Williams. If a very obvious upgrade presents itself, fine, but hopefully no moves just to make a move.

    S isn’t a hole. They have two starters, worries about FS/SS designations aside. Figure those are this year’s starters & aside from the draft they could always re-sign Joyner as depth.

    C technically isn’t a hole (they’re set up to draft one, and if they sign a 3rd veteran to be the starter then you can forget about them drafting one this year)

    DT is a hole. Absolutely. I think an older veteran pairs well with a draft pick given Saleh’s heavy rotations.

    QB2 isn’t a hole. Would be surprised if they sign another veteran until at least after the draft, if not until the summer. The team’s goal isn’t necessarily shared by the fans. They’re not relegating ZW to QB3 before they at least see him in practice again.

    LB is hard to say. The team got a better look at Sherwood than we did. He’ll now enter his second season at his new weight. They’ll still need another body either way. l’ve no issues re-signing Kwon if no one else is offering him starter money either.


    • Upvote 3
  9. 3 hours ago, mrcoops said:

    This has always been the way it was headed.

    Wilson is just too expensive to be a #3 behind another high-priced backup.

    It will be Rodgers (hopefully), Wilson and either Streveler or another minimum salary player (rookie UDFA or low-level vet) this year.


    Yeah I figured this as well. Not having Wilson start this year is one thing, but they’re not planning on practice squaddling him as a QB3.

    I imagine they’d draft one on day 3 (if not later day 3 at that, or just an UDFA as you say); if the rookie beats out Wilson in the pecking order then so be it.

  10. 14 hours ago, OtherwiseHappyinLife said:

    Agreed and I appreciate your responses.  Always well thought out and insightful.

    I guess the nuance I would add is that the signing bonus component is upfront cash (which is why players love them) that is supposed to be a payment for the number of years a team expects to keep a player.  In the case of Brown, 2 years even though the Jets had some dummy years added in for cap purposes.

    Yes, it’s a cost that has been paid but it’s poor long term ‘investment/cash management’ to not strongly consider the length of investment just because an upfront amount has already been paid.  Furthermore because there is a real replacement cost.

    So for simplicity, if a starting quality OT is paid on average a total of $10M per year and for a 2 year contract would get half in a signing bonus, the year 1 cash payment is $15M ($5M salary + $10M at signing).

    If this player is cut after year 1, and replaced at the same $10M total cost, the total investment was $25M rather than the 2 year going rate.

    So the length of time you keep a player is an important consideration regardless of the cost that has already been paid because that cost (signing bonus component)) considers the length of time you expect to keep the asset.

    It does makes sense to ‘move on’ when you need an upgrade, the player has been demoted, or the market rates for the same starting position has gone down.

    In the case of my Brown example above, if he’s no longer a projected starter, why pay him a large salary when you can get a replacement for much cheaper.  But if everything is equal, I don’t like the idea of cutting him to save some 2023 salary if the total cost over the 2 years is higher than the $20M starting point.

    The messiness can be disturbing at a glance, but math doesn’t care. The GM is supposed to allocate cap hits where they fit best. Sometimes it’s fine to let a big salary hit today; other times it’s better to keep pushing it off.

    I will say that a player’s compensation technically costs less to push it off, as in the future a constant amount represents a decreasing percentage of the cap ceiling, since that ceiling isn’t a constant & always rises.

    It looks neater to have few players count higher than their compensation for a future year, but that doesn’t make it better. When a team is figuring they’re non-contenders today then saving up future space at the expense of today’s makes more sense.

    Just keep in mind there’s also such a thing as too much space sometimes. It pushes a team to spend heavily on one particular off-season’s crop of FAs, which can lead to throwing money at bad just because there’s so much available & more positions in need of addressing all at once. The problem is in each off-season there are only so many cap-using expensive additions that prove wise in hindsight (see 2015’s off-season spending spree). Keeping it more even allows a team to be pickier & more surgical imo. Of course if there’s less space AND the team sucks anyway that situation isn’t any better lol. 

    • Upvote 1
  11. 1 minute ago, 32EBoozer said:

    Once you get on JD’s “not a team player” list it’s impossible to get off it…. and just like that, you’re done.

    Not close to chiefly where I was looking to take the convo, but fwiw he was also on JD’s “I made a mistake” list more recently than that.

    They don’t need him. He’s fast with starting experience and wouldn’t advocate for more than the league min for the time if/when he acts out and they needed to cut him mid-game lol.

  12. 5 hours ago, Rolloffjet said:

    I think we need a wr with speed if we add another. Would love dj chark a burner at 6’4 was hurt at beginning of year a little bit but then started looking like the Dj chark I remembered later in year. Only 26 still. And forget Cobb please. Would like hardman as the back up slot to Moore plus hardman would be great on punt returns and kickoffs 







    looks pretty good to me

    You think an $8-10MM WR4 is even a possible addition? Chark is a starter. They add him it means they’re dumping Moore. Aside from that it’s hard to ignore that last year he dropped a good 10% of passes thrown his way.

    Hardman was a 4+ target/game slot-starter for the SB champs last year until he got injured. Prior year he had >800 yards. Unless he’s still available in July, he’ll also be way overkill $ for a WR4, never mind as a WR5. 

    More likely they sign an AR-fayvie for a low snap role. As Rodgers can spread it around, it’s more important they are reliable route runners than burners. Non-starting role/backup players are filled by cheap veterans and day 3 draft picks.

    You want a cheap veteran who can still run and make a few credible spot-starts if Mims makes no visible improvements, look at bringing back Perriman (or even that knucklehead Robby A, lol) for the vet minimum if still unsigned by then. But more likely they go in another direction, like Cobb, plus a day 3 rookie to duke it out with Mims for a roster spot.

    JMO ;) 

  13. 7 hours ago, bla bla bla said:

    We'll hold onto Whitehead til at least after the draft. I expect a Safety to be selected, having Whitehead on the roster may hide our intent to draft one.

    None of the guys listed have bonuses due so we can cut them at any point.

    I think fans see Whitehead as more of a must-dump than the team sees him. He’s not particularly expensive for a starting safety and they likely don’t want to swap more pieces than necessary after a strong showing on D last year when they started Whitehead & Joyner.

    While some are clearly better in coverage than others, I do think too many get caught up in SS/FS designations. They currently have two legit starting safeties behind the league’s best CB duo and a strong NB. Things aren’t tragic left as is so they can wait for the right opportunity or leave it be.

    Unless they take notable FA action, or draft a safety in the first two rounds, I don’t think Whitehead is getting cut so fast. Even if the latter happens it won’t be until a rookie actually beats him out, which is how it should be.

    • Upvote 2
  14. 17 hours ago, varjet said:

    For the Jets, they completely screwed up with the Darnold and Wilson picks.  A smart owner should tear the entire thing down to the studs and start over.  

    But they can trade for Aaron Rodgers, spread his cost over 3-4 years, restructure some contracts, use the 2023 draft and capitalize on the current rookie contracts to make a competitive run in 2023-2024.  For a fanbase starved for success, it is worth it.  

    But if we don't have our draft picks to fill the holes at C, LT, DT, LB, S, WR, having Rodgers will not get us out of round 1 of the playoffs, if even to the playoffs.  Its not worth it.

    So the Packers need to understand that.  Give them pick(s) starting in 2024.  But not rds 1-3 in 2023.   Its not worth trading for Rodgers if we have to give those up.  

    That can be Douglas’s stance, fine, but it isn’t really true.

    • They should add another center, but while it’s currently looking like they’ll address it in the draft they’re not forced into that corner. If they were actually desperate, last year’s starter is still very available.
    • They don’t have a hole at LT. I get people are nervous but there are two LTs on the roster (not counting AVT as a more credible 3rd LT than anyone else has). There are still veteran tackles left, too.
    • DT ok they do need another starter but it’s not some imperative that this must must come via this season’s draft. It didn’t last year.
    • On paper they have 3 starting LBs. 2 of last year’s starters and a 3rd who’s penciled in at least as a placeholder. Last year’s 3rd LB is still very available and so are other veterans, including a cheaper and better MLB. There’s still ample opportunity to address this in FA if needed post-trade.
    • They don’t gave a hole at safety, as there are two starting safeties on the team right now. That many fans here want to sub out one of them doesn’t make it a team hole. Less still given how much less safety help the corners need compared to most other teams. On the chance they do a veteran swap (e.g. Gardner-Johnson) they won’t feel it so much, as they will also be swapping out a $7MM veteran salary. Otherwise, they’re not likely dumping Whitehead just because they a 3rd-4th round FS prospect anyway.
    • They don’t have a WR hole in need of a draft pick. Their starting trio is in place. WR 4 or 5 isn’t a “hole” in any real sense, they can sign 2 depth WRs at will tomorrow if Douglas so desires, & at least one is probably waiting on the Rodgers trade becoming official.

    They should give up as little as possible, but we’re so used to bad QBing it’s hard to overstate how many warts get covered up by a superior QB. Every single serious SB team or contender isn’t loaded with greatness at every single position, and (particularly on defense) they’re not so magnified as when the offense only scores in the teens (or less).

    • Upvote 1
  15. Just now, Maxman said:

    Oh I thought he made the majors I guess I didn't watch the sequel haha.

    It was a bit heavy on the symbolism, like the thinly-veiled role of Timmy Lupus as a Christ figure. F***ing Hollywood, so cliché.

    • Haha 1
  16. 2 minutes ago, Maxman said:

    Did Kelly lose the game? I don't remember that LOL.

    Thrown out at home because he was a loser. Thug/punk, too -- comes from poor upbringing.

    The next season he was arrested after a failed attempt at robbing the concession stand. Spent the next 5 years in juvie then melted his brain sniffing glue & then staring at the sun for too long. 

    • Haha 1
  17. 11 minutes ago, varjet said:

    There is no guaranty that JMS will be there in the second.  Good C historically have gone late first/top of second.  Creed Humphrey slipped.  I think people regret that.  We picked E Moore instead.  

    Hard to say for sure, but it seems like Humphrey might not have slid that far if not for '21 being such an OL-heavy draft class.

    In hindsight, could be the team picked Moore because they weren't as thrilled with Mims as some fans were. Also it's hard to imagine Moore wouldn't have looked like a far better pick if the Jets had anything resembling a consistent passing game. Force-feeding ZWilson + 1 good, full game each year from White + watching through our face-covered fingers with Flacco's starts.

    You'd have to be one of the league's special WRs to put up #s under those conditions. Luckily Wilson seems to be one of those special WRs. Moore might be very good - he's certainly talented - even if he just isn't Garrett Wilson. If he has a big coming out party this year, a WR is more valuable than a C. 

  • Create New...