GenoandtheJets Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 Idzik hasn't done enough bring in Desean Jackson. They need his help at WR more then they need Vick which they don't need Vick at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 I think I'm for bringing in Jackson overall, as long as it doesn't involve tying long money to him. He's gotta be cuttable after two years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 BACK TO YOUR POST, do you think the Eagles interest in dumping Jackson is purely economic? If so, letting these rumors linger about Chip Kelly wanting him gone and how they're going to cut him regardless would seem to hurt the market value for what is clearly a talented, productive player. No one thinks that. Things are rarely done all due to one reason or all due to another reason despite your pretending it is so to further a point. It is quite common for a combination of things to be weighed together. Hence "the whole is greater than the sum of the parts," and "the straw that broke the camel's back," and other quotes or sayings. In this case, it may just be one man's trash is another man's treasure. I'm sure he's an enormous pain in the ass. The details of it are largely unknown to outsiders like us. They may be worse than we realize, and they may not be. Maybe Kelly just thinks he can find and develop someone just as good; one who doesn't have his personal issues and isn't a $10M+/year cap hit (and who wants more than the $10M/year of new money that he has coming to him under his current deal). Maybe he and Foles have irreparable personal issues. I can't guess, but I'm sure things will get leaked out after he's off the team so the team can justify the move to its fans. Meanwhile, the Raiders once gave up Randy Moss for a 4th rounder. Miami was only too happy to dump Welker for a draft pick. Miami also jumped at the chance to recoup draft picks for Brandon Marshall and give him a one-way ticket out of town. I'm not going to run through a bunch more examples, but you get the drift. It's also yet to be seen whether dumping Jackson will be a wise decision on their part as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 No one thinks that. Things are rarely done all due to one reason or all due to another reason despite your pretending it is so to further a point. It is quite common for a combination of things to be weighed together. Hence "the whole is greater than the sum of the parts," and "the straw that broke the camel's back," and other quotes or sayings. In this case, it may just be one man's trash is another man's treasure. I'm sure he's an enormous pain in the ass. The details of it are largely unknown to outsiders like us. They may be worse than we realize, and they may not be. Maybe Kelly just thinks he can find and develop someone just as good; one who doesn't have his personal issues and isn't a $10M+/year cap hit (and who wants more than the $10M/year of new money that he has coming to him under his current deal). Maybe he and Foles have irreparable personal issues. I can't guess, but I'm sure things will get leaked out after he's off the team so the team can justify the move to its fans. Meanwhile, the Raiders once gave up Randy Moss for a 4th rounder. Miami was only too happy to dump Welker for a draft pick. Miami also jumped at the chance to recoup draft picks for Brandon Marshall and give him a one-way ticket out of town. I'm not going to run through a bunch more examples, but you get the drift. It's also yet to be seen whether dumping Jackson will be a wise decision on their part as well. Bold is hurtful. The difference with Moss/Marshall/Welker is that they went to teams with coaches who didn't just spend four years getting absolutely steamrolled by Santonio Holmes. If, as it appears, Jackson is a discipline/maturity case, there is nothing in Rex's history that suggests he'd be the guy capable of getting him to toe the line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slats Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 Bold is hurtful. The difference with Moss/Marshall/Welker is that they went to teams with coaches who didn't just spend four years getting absolutely steamrolled by Santonio Holmes. If, as it appears, Jackson is a discipline/maturity case, there is nothing in Rex's history that suggests he'd be the guy capable of getting him to toe the line. Aaaaaaaand.... Back to Rex. Lol. Meanwhile, Parcells continues to be a god in another thread. I do get a kick out of you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 Bold is hurtful. The difference with Moss/Marshall/Welker is that they went to teams with coaches who didn't just spend four years getting absolutely steamrolled by Santonio Holmes. If, as it appears, Jackson is a discipline/maturity case, there is nothing in Rex's history that suggests he'd be the guy capable of getting him to toe the line. It wasn't intended to be hurtful. Sorry if you took it that way. I figured you were making a tongue-in-cheek argument, and that you would know nothing is as simple as any one thing like the salary cap (unless he was due a $50M roster bonus or something). Otherwise Philly would have already announced that: "We're looking to trade Jackson because we're going to have trouble fitting him under the cap next year." No one believes that, yet you insinuated that I had no idea that Jackson had any personal baggage. That my take on it was Jackson isn't a problem there at all and it's all about the cap. I'm saying he has some baggage, and when a team is on pace to have a $150M cap number next year, they have to see where they can get that number down. IMO they made the decision that he would be the one to go before free agency even started. First they extended Cooper so they wouldn't be left without him either, which would make trading Jackson difficult. He's got issues. He's due about $10M/year that the team can't afford without cutting others. He wants MORE than that $10M/year, meaning they need to cut still more players. By cutting/trading him the team can wipe out $18.5M between 2014-2015. If it's a trade, they at least hope to get a 3rd or 4th round pick in a very good draft. It is not ALL about the salary cap and I don't believe this decision to move on with him is in any way sudden this week. They're just releasing this plan this week because of good strategic timing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BroadwayJoe12 Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 BACK TO YOUR POST, do you think the Eagles interest in dumping Jackson is purely economic? If so, letting these rumors linger about Chip Kelly wanting him gone and how they're going to cut him regardless would seem to hurt the market value for what is clearly a talented, productive player. Tampa cut Revis strictly for financial reasons, and he was clearly a talented, productive player. It happens. Sometimes, regardless of the level of production, the contract isn't worth it. This, coupled with the fact that Kelly seems to prefer larger receivers and that they envision giving Maclin a big contract if he produces seems plenty enough reason to cut Jackson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flgreen Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 What will more then likely happen is, if Jackson is cut, Idzik will offer him a law ball take it or leave it deal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRealG_Newt Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 I don't think Idzik will lowball Jackson. He didn't lowball Decker. He paid him right about what he is worth. If we sign DJax it'll probably be a 2yr/16.5M deal. The Raiders will offer more money, but I do believe DJax knows that the Raiders aren't the best option for him at this point in his career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashmouth Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 It wasn't intended to be hurtful. Sorry if you took it that way. I figured you were making a tongue-in-cheek argument, and that you would know nothing is as simple as any one thing like the salary cap (unless he was due a $50M roster bonus or something). Otherwise Philly would have already announced that: "We're looking to trade Jackson because we're going to have trouble fitting him under the cap next year." No one believes that, yet you insinuated that I had no idea that Jackson had any personal baggage. That my take on it was Jackson isn't a problem there at all and it's all about the cap. I'm saying he has some baggage, and when a team is on pace to have a $150M cap number next year, they have to see where they can get that number down. IMO they made the decision that he would be the one to go before free agency even started. First they extended Cooper so they wouldn't be left without him either, which would make trading Jackson difficult. He's got issues. He's due about $10M/year that the team can't afford without cutting others. He wants MORE than that $10M/year, meaning they need to cut still more players. By cutting/trading him the team can wipe out $18.5M between 2014-2015. If it's a trade, they at least hope to get a 3rd or 4th round pick in a very good draft. It is not ALL about the salary cap and I don't believe this decision to move on with him is in any way sudden this week. They're just releasing this plan this week because of good strategic timing. If the Eagles Trade Jackson how much of his salary over the next 2 years are they responsible for ? He did get guaranteed money right ? That's usually spread over a few years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joewilly12 Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 ESPN New York reports the Jets have a "measured interest" in DeSean Jackson that will "intensify if he's released." This is likely the case with all of the clubs interested in Jackson. Nobody wants to take on his $10.7 million for 2014. Jackson has three years and $30 million left on his current deal and is unwilling to renegotiate. With Michael Vick now in the fold and the Jets starved for playmakers, they'd make plenty of sense as a landing spot for Jackson. Gang Green also has a ton of cap room. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 It wasn't intended to be hurtful. Sorry if you took it that way. I figured you were making a tongue-in-cheek argument, and that you would know nothing is as simple as any one thing like the salary cap (unless he was due a $50M roster bonus or something). Otherwise Philly would have already announced that: "We're looking to trade Jackson because we're going to have trouble fitting him under the cap next year." No one believes that, yet you insinuated that I had no idea that Jackson had any personal baggage. That my take on it was Jackson isn't a problem there at all and it's all about the cap. I'm saying he has some baggage, and when a team is on pace to have a $150M cap number next year, they have to see where they can get that number down. IMO they made the decision that he would be the one to go before free agency even started. First they extended Cooper so they wouldn't be left without him either, which would make trading Jackson difficult. He's got issues. He's due about $10M/year that the team can't afford without cutting others. He wants MORE than that $10M/year, meaning they need to cut still more players. By cutting/trading him the team can wipe out $18.5M between 2014-2015. If it's a trade, they at least hope to get a 3rd or 4th round pick in a very good draft. It is not ALL about the salary cap and I don't believe this decision to move on with him is in any way sudden this week. They're just releasing this plan this week because of good strategic timing. Thank you for explaining the cost-benefit for the Eagles of moving on from Jackson. It certainly helps to better understand the motives behind getting him off the team. I didn't mean to come off as snarky as I have here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 Aaaaaaaand.... Back to Rex. Lol. Meanwhile, Parcells continues to be a god in another thread. I do get a kick out of you. Fun thought exercise: Parcells coaching Sanchez and Holmes for a season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 @HubbuchNYP: Woody confirms the Jets are looking to trade for DeSean Jackson. By name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 @RapSheet: Woody Johnson mention, of DeSean, interest "at the right price" and "if he fits into the culture of our locker room." Questions persist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GREENBEAN Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 @HubbuchNYP: Woody confirms the Jets are looking to trade for DeSean Jackson. By name. BOOM!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 @HubbuchNYP: Woody: "I don't want to be patient. I want to do it [win] now." Idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joewilly12 Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 Woody win now baby! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 is Woody meddling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 Why the **** does Woody Johnson interject himself into player acquisition? Stay out of the ******* kitchen, you moron. @MMehtaNYDN: Woody Johnson talked to Roger Goodell and Eagles owner Jeffrey Lurie before Jets signed QB Michael Vick. #nyj Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joewilly12 Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 Why the **** does Woody Johnson interject himself into player acquisition? Stay out of the ******* kitchen, you moron. Its Woody Woodpeckers money that's why. He's a wanna be Jerry Jones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbatesman Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 Why the **** does Woody Johnson interject himself into player acquisition? Stay out of the ******* kitchen, you moron. This one doesn't bother me as much. The stuff about wanting to win now is retarded though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 This one doesn't bother me as much. The stuff about wanting to win now is retarded though. The guy is an absolute assclown. Idzik seriously needs to build a moat around his office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joewilly12 Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 This one doesn't bother me as much. The stuff about wanting to win now is retarded though. No its not 45 years and counting........... You play to win the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joewilly12 Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 The guy is an absolute assclown. Idzik seriously needs to build a moat around his office. Wait a damn minute everyone including me has been bashing Woody for not spending in free agency and now that he has finally seen the light and wants to acquire superstar players to win the guy sucks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 Wait a damn minute everyone including me has been bashing Woody for not spending in free agency and now that he has finally seen the light and wants to acquire superstar players to win the guy sucks? He sucks because he's an idiot who treats the Jets like an XBox. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbatesman Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 The guy is an absolute assclown. Idzik seriously needs to build a moat around his office. Yeah. He clearly cares about PR, so it doesn't surprise me that he'd call the other billionaires before singing a controversial player. But absolutely nothing about what we've done in the last 14 months suggests we're trying to win now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 Yeah. He clearly cares about PR, so it doesn't surprise me that he'd call the other billionaires before singing a controversial player. But absolutely nothing about what we've done in the last 14 months suggests we're trying to win now. He sounds like a Wilpon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 The AFC East stinks. Jackson is a really good player, we have money...if it's possible to figure out a way to get him here...it's not an awful move. Woody talking to Bart spin city Hubbuch...who cares. Nothing the Jets have done so far shows they're doing it the Tanny way Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 He sounds like a Wilpon. 90 wins this year! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joewilly12 Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 He sucks because he's an idiot who treats the Jets like an XBox. He can he has money and its about time the guy woke the hell up maybe his wife increased his Viagra dosage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 The AFC East stinks. Jackson is a really good player, we have money...if it's possible to figure out a way to get him here...it's not an awful move. Woody talking to Bart spin city Hubbuch...who cares. Nothing the Jets have done so far shows they're doing it the Tanny way Going out and getting Jackson is fine. Going out and giving Jackson 5 years, $60 mil is dumb. Woody has to shut up and stop sounding like a carnival barker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 Going out and getting Jackson is fine. Going out and giving Jackson 5 years, $60 mil is dumb. Woody has to shut up and stop sounding like a carnival barker. I wouldn't like that either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 90 wins this year! I'm not turning the TV on until September Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 BACK TO YOUR POST, do you think the Eagles interest in dumping Jackson is purely economic? If so, letting these rumors linger about Chip Kelly wanting him gone and how they're going to cut him regardless would seem to hurt the market value for what is clearly a talented, productive player. Doesn't he have gang ties, could be part of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.02d5a086ca7ed80fc66faf3bb6f878c7.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.