UnitedWhofans Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 Now if he does let him go and Geno stinks, no one should be complaining Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity28 Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 20 minutes ago, UnitedWhofans said: Now if he does let him go and Geno stinks, no one should be complaining Not wanting to pay Fitz $18 million a year, or whatever, doesn't automatically mean Geno is the preferred starter. False choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRL Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 A desperate GM who gives out a STUPID contract does not set the market no matter what the fans or media think. Fitzpatrick's success last year (which didn't end well in BUF) was based on the players Maccagnan brought to the team and the offense crafted by Bowles & Gailey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangers9 Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 I could see Fitz getting some incentives based on making the playoffs, some of his stats, etc. Why not. But nothing like 18 mil per season. In that case you'd have to allow him to walk. Besides the Jets probably aren't going to have that amount of cap space. Of course you know what this could mean. Do I have to say it: Geno Smith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colgateman Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 If u look at fitztragics career, you would know he is a money chaser, his agent will definitely try to get him at least 15 million now, fitz will walk this year, geno will start, and we will flop for deshaun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
afosomf Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 7 minutes ago, Colgateman said: If u look at fitztragics career, you would know he is a money chaser, his agent will definitely try to get him at least 15 million now, fitz will walk this year, geno will start, and we will flop for deshaun that would be the correct plan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bitonti Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 this entire thread is selling Sam Bradford short. for the last 2 months of the season he was lights out http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/gamelog/_/id/13197/sam-bradford and he was throwing to nobodies. He didn't have a Brandon Marshall or an Eric Decker. It was Matthews, Ertz, and guys I can't even be bothered to look up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jetsfan80 Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 25 minutes ago, Colgateman said: If u look at fitztragics career, you would know he is a money chaser, his agent will definitely try to get him at least 15 million now, fitz will walk this year, geno will start, and we will flop for deshaun "Money chaser"? You mean that one time he signed an extension with the Bills? Dude is a journeyman who goes wherever he has a chance to start. He has an Economics degree from Harvard, and a wife who went to Harvard also. He'll never hurt for money, even with 5 kids to feed. You're just reaching for reasons not to like the guy now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet Nut Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 6 minutes ago, bitonti said: this entire thread is selling Sam Bradford short. for the last 2 months of the season he was lights out http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/gamelog/_/id/13197/sam-bradford and he was throwing to nobodies. He didn't have a Brandon Marshall or an Eric Decker. It was Matthews, Ertz, and guys I can't even be bothered to look up. I've said it before, he played a lot better after a slow start coming back from 2 missed seasons. Theyre paying him for the 2nd 9 games, hoping he continues to play like that or develop further. Right or wrong that's a huge difference than paying a 33 year old journeyman that kind of money Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmat321 Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 I love Fitz, but he is not worth anything near this. I'd offer 2x20 with 10-12 guaranteed max. The deal has to make him cut-able if he sh*ts the bed this fall. The GM must also do due diligence and inquire about the headcases named Kap & RG3 at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerfish Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 1 hour ago, UnitedWhofans said: Now if he does let him go and Geno stinks, no one should be complaining Even if fitz is gone geno is going to get cut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetrider Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 10 hours ago, Dcat said: How does Bradford always get the big contracts despite his injuries and sucktitude on the field? He's the Frito Bandito. Always gets away with it. Rollo Tomasi. "Number 1 Draft Pick" does a magic hypnotic mind-rape Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bitonti Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 9 minutes ago, Jet Nut said: Right or wrong that's a huge difference than paying a 33 year old journeyman that kind of money Fitz won't get Bradford money but he won't play for peanuts either. The Jets did win 10 games last year after all. We are all killing him for not winning an 11th but what's the alternative? Win 3 games with Geno? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dcat Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 3 minutes ago, jetrider said: "Number 1 Draft Pick" does a magic hypnotic mind-rape Bradford knows how to do those Jedi mind tricks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
afosomf Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 20 minutes ago, bitonti said: this entire thread is selling Sam Bradford short. for the last 2 months of the season he was lights out http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/gamelog/_/id/13197/sam-bradford and he was throwing to nobodies. He didn't have a Brandon Marshall or an Eric Decker. It was Matthews, Ertz, and guys I can't even be bothered to look up. lights out??????????? Far from it...the guy is even more brittle than dee milliner if possible. Iggles fans hope he is gone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gastineau Lives Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 11 hours ago, ljr said: You lose all credibility saying Fitz to Geno is no dropoff might as well say there is no drop-off from banging Marissa Tomei to banging Rosanne Barr Did your penis fall off in 1998? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bitonti Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 1 minute ago, afosomf said: Iggles fans hope he is gone They would rather not see Chase Daniels or the Sanchize. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jetsfan80 Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 1 minute ago, bitonti said: They would rather not see Chase Daniels or the Sanchize. Pretty sure they hate all 3 options. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangers9 Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 If I had to throw out a prediction the Jets win ten games with Fitz and eight with Geno. Who knows but those two games can be the difference. I think the Jets will sign Fitz but they've been slow trying to make a deal with him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BowlesMovement Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 The Bradford deal seems insane on the surface, but I look at it more as a creative application of the Franchise Tag. If the Eagles tagged Bradford, they give him ~$19mil. Instead, they gave him ~$22mil, BUT, if he plays well next year, they can re-franchise him again next year, and in neither year do they use their one franchise tag. For that flexibility, they paid an extra $3 mil. If you think about it from that perspective, its not a terrible deal. I personally don't think much of Bradford at all, and think Fitz is better, but I also realize that QB's don't fall on trees, and this allows them to see if the real Bradford was the 1st half Bradford, or the 2nd half Bradford, and adjust accordingly, without a long term commitment, and without killing them this year, where they are not winning a SB either way. I think its a far smarter deal than people are giving credit for. I also don't think this is an apples to apples basis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet Nut Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 9 minutes ago, bitonti said: Fitz won't get Bradford money but he won't play for peanuts either. The Jets did win 10 games last year after all. We are all killing him for not winning an 11th but what's the alternative? Win 3 games with Geno? Didn't I just agree with you? Why this reply? Where did I say he shouldn't get a nice raise? Or should pay for peanuts? And please, where is the only alternative for 2016 Geno? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ljr Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 14 minutes ago, Gastineau Lives said: Did your penis fall off in 1998? It did after I jerked it to Denise Richards in Wild Things ... Guess the Charlie Sheen effect was already active Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hawk Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 50 minutes ago, bitonti said: this entire thread is selling Sam Bradford short. for the last 2 months of the season he was lights out http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/gamelog/_/id/13197/sam-bradford and he was throwing to nobodies. He didn't have a Brandon Marshall or an Eric Decker. It was Matthews, Ertz, and guys I can't even be bothered to look up. Not everyone is selling him short. However, giving up $22 Million in guarantees is pretty big pill to swallow given his injury history. Personally, I would love to have Bradford as the Jets QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southparkcpa Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 13 hours ago, johnnysd said: IF GMs have one huge wealness almost uniformly, it is their inability to give up on their initial evaluation especially a #1 pick. On no planet is Bradford worth anywhere near that money. He has never even proven he is good, and he is as durable as an ice sculpture yet he gets chance after chance after chance. I do not get it. As much of a JAG as Fitz is, he is unquestionably better than Bradford and the Jets FO will make their first mistake and pay him a lot of money. well you could argue their 1st mistake was not signing him with a 2nd year option. Fitz is in a good spot, hope he doesnt screw the JETS over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangers9 Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 Is Fitz worth about an extra $10 mil (the possible difference between his asking price and the Jets bottom line) considering that we have no other viable option at Qb and we probably have the personnel to make a run at the playoffs. The last time Fitz got a big contract with the Bills he didn't play up to it. I guess it all depends on other offers. Would another team try to drive up his price to the 15 mil per season plateau. So is making the playoffs worth 10 million if you believe that Fitz gives us our best chance to win. In the scheme of things it's not so much but imo I don't give him that much. Maybe 12 per and incentives. Can you imagine the amount of complaining there will be if the Jets let him walk. Esp if he lights it up with another team and we go with Geno and he sucks. It would make the Idzik non signings look like no big deal. I mean don't think that Mac isn't thinking about that. he knows what and who (Jets fans) he's dealing with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Crusher Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 47 minutes ago, bitonti said: Fitz won't get Bradford money but he won't play for peanuts either. The Jets did win 10 games last year after all. We are all killing him for not winning an 11th but what's the alternative? Win 3 games with Geno? Sure. If it gets us a QB in the next draft. Or overpay for Fitz and hope he has another amazing year that puts us one win away from the playoffs again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bitonti Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 1 minute ago, The Crusher said: Sure. If it gets us a QB in the next draft. Or overpay for Fitz and hope he has another amazing year that puts us one win away from the playoffs again. a QB in the 2017 draft. That will be hitting his prime in 2020. I can't live like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
afosomf Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 9 minutes ago, bitonti said: a QB in the 2017 draft. That will be hitting his prime in 2020. I can't live like that. deshaun watson is the next cam newton. watch the bama tape, clemson could have easily have won game. switch qbs and bama wins 55-0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gas2No99 Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 The curious case of the Sam Bradford deal Bill BarnwellESPN Staff Writer Email print comment While various franchise and transition player designations went about as planned Tuesday, the Eagles struck after the deadline with a surprising extension. Philadelphia doubled down on its investment in Sam Bradford, who was about to hit unrestricted free agency after a disappointing first season with the team. Bradford signed a two-year, $36 million deal to stay with the Eagles, and Adam Schefter reported that the contract will include a whopping $26 million in guarantees. The initial reaction to this deal is, essentially, "Wait, really?" It's hard to envision a player who has struggled as much as Bradford has, even at a premium position, getting $18 million per year. Something seems fundamentally off. J.J. Watt's deal doesn't average $18 million per year. Julio Jones' contract doesn't get there. Tony Romo's extension is $18 million per season, but Romo had virtually infinite leverage and has been a far better quarterback than his NFC East counterpart. I don't think it's a good deal for the Eagles, given Bradford's level of play during his pro career. What I do want, however, is to try to understand it. The Eagles could have locked up Bradford on a one-year deal for $20 million with the franchise tag. Instead, they chose to guarantee Bradford more than $6 million more as part of a two-year pact. Let's try to piece together the logic from Philly's perspective. 1. The Eagles need a quarterback. It seems like all parties involved can agree on this. If Bradford hit free agency, the Eagles were going to be stuck with Mark Sanchez and McLeod Bethel-Thompson as the only signal-callers on their roster. Even if you make the case that Sanchez might not be all that much worse than Bradford (I think that's a fair argument), Eagles personnel chief Howie Roseman was going to bring in a third quarterback. That could have been (and still could be) via the draft, but more likely, it was going to be a veteran acquired in free agency. If the Eagles wanted to add a quarterback, as much as I'm intrigued by this year's crop of quarterback free agents, Philly might not have seen many likable options. Kirk Cousins was franchised on Tuesday. Brock Osweilermight have a hush-hush deal to go back to Denver after Peyton Manningmoves on. You can understand why the Eagles might not have found high-profile options such as Peyton or Robert Griffin especially appealing. Also, the Rams have publicly suggested that they aren't likely to trade Nick Foles, even if Philly were interested. With new head coach Doug Pederson, it might have been a choice between Bradford and Chiefs backup Chase Daniel, whom Pederson saw on a daily basis as the offensive coordinator in Kansas City. Daniel has had buzz each time he has hit the free-agent market, and he should get a multiyear deal to serve as a backup somewhere, but he has thrown 77 regular-season passes in seven pro seasons. Daniel is certainly a high-variance option, but one person's variance is another's uncertainty, and NFL teams don't do well with uncertainty. Would the Eagles rather pay a former undrafted free agent whom most of the organization hasn't seen, such as Daniel, $6 million per year or give Bradford, a familiar face with the pedigree and athleticism of a former first overall pick, $18 million per season? If Daniel gets major reps and the Eagles crater, what's the fallout? 2. Bradford improved as the season went along. The former Oklahoma star put on a much better showing after Philadelphia's Week 8 bye. Bradford posted a league-worst 29.6 QBR over the Eagles' first seven games of 2015, with an impressive second half against the Falcons and a three-touchdown day against Washington mixed with a series of disastrous performances. Although Bradford missed two games after the bye because of a shoulder injury, he nearly doubled his QBR and got up to 55.0 in his seven post-bye starts. That was good for 20th in the league. His raw numbers also improved dramatically: Acknowledging Bradford's established reticence and limitations throwing downfield, those second-half numbers seem to point to the passer Bradford would have been expected to be in Philly, as a high-percentage, low-risk passer with limited upside. That guy probably isn't worth $18 million per year, but compare him to Alex Smith, who got $17 million per season on a four-year deal when the Chiefs re-upped him before the 2014 campaign. The Eagles might very well see Bradford as their Smith: a passer who can make safe, accurate throws and avoid giveaways. Remember: Bradford's bad first half wasn't a total shock, as he was coming off a long layoff because of injury. I don't think relying solely upon Bradford's second-half numbers is the best way to project his future performance, but it's plausible that the Eagles leaned more heavily on those figures in estimating what Bradford will do in 2016 and beyond. 3. The open market could have earned Bradford just as much. As much as the NFL combine is about evaluating and interviewing college prospects, it's also about talking to agents and evaluating the free-agent market-to-be. The Eagles -- and Bradford's representation -- were likely able to gain insight into what the marketplace would've held for Bradford, if he hit unrestricted free agency in the middle of March. Part of that game is bluffing to create leverage, of course, but the Eagles might have wondered whether they would be able to compete with other suitors if Bradford were able to negotiate with 31 other teams. They paid a premium to lock up Bradford, but it's entirely possible that a quarterback-needy team such as the Browns or Rams would have been willing to shell out even more money to sign Bradford on a longer-term contract. (It seems crazy to include the Rams as a suitor, but this is the same franchise that offered Jeff Fisher's staff contract extensions. They love continuity!) Maybe the Eagles believed somebody was willing to offer Bradford, say, a three-year, $45 million deal with $30 million guaranteed. The Eagles would have preferred to see Bradford wade into free agency and find an unfriendly market before they brought him back on a one-year deal for less than the $20 million franchise tag, but that wasn't necessarily going to happen. 4. Philadelphia wanted to benefit in future years if Bradford succeeds in 2016. That's the best explanation I can come up with for why the Eagles didn't franchise Bradford for one year at a haircut under $20 million. Even if Bradford didn't want to be franchised, the Eagles could have used the leverage from the franchise tag to lock him up on a two-year deal without having to worry about him hitting the free-agent market. The Eagles didn't use their tag on any other player, so it seems bizarre that they would guarantee Bradford an additional $6 million in this deal. The structure of Bradford's deal hasn't been revealed, but that will likely tell us more about why the Eagles chose not to use the franchise tag. In the past, there have been quarterbacks who had massive amounts of "guaranteed" money that turned out to be modest amounts of truly guaranteed cash, and that might be the case here. It's unlikely Bradford truly has $26 million in fully guaranteed money coming as part of this deal. The difference between those deals and Bradford's, though, has to do with the nature of Bradford's playing history. Most of the inflation in reports about guaranteed money comes with deals guaranteed for injury; that means a player is only guaranteed to receive the dollars if he gets hurt, and his team can choose to cut him if he's healthy but ineffective. That might be part of the language in this deal, but the reality is "guaranteed for injury" means a lot more in a deal for Bradford than it does in one for, say, Eli Manning. Bradford has a lengthy injury history, and the chances that the Eagles are stuck paying an injured quarterback guaranteed money in 2017 are far greater with Bradford than they would be with a typical quarterback under the same contract. That's what makes this deal so curious. The best-case scenario appears to be that the Eagles lock up an average quarterback at pretty close to market value for two years, and the worst-case scenario is that they're stuck paying a guy who is alternately injured and mediocre more than they need to in 2016 and 2017. Few onlookers could have seen Bradford's 2015 and thought he was worth what the Eagles are paying, yet the team has signed on for another go-round. Then again, Bradford's four seasons with the Rams weren't especially impressive, and the Eagles (under Chip Kelly's control) traded for him anyway. As Bradford enters his seventh professional season, the Eagles will pay a premium for the privilege of hoping he finally breaks out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UnitedWhofans Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 1 hour ago, jetrider said: "Number 1 Draft Pick" does a magic hypnotic mind-rape Oh sh*t, I'm walking on ******* clouds man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UnitedWhofans Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 14 minutes ago, afosomf said: deshaun watson is the next cam newton. watch the bama tape, clemson could have easily have won game. switch qbs and bama wins 55-0 Except they didn't win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UnitedWhofans Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 I'm thinking a 1 year deal for 8-10 million. Then if he does well this year, let him go and get his payday. I just don't see what team is going to pay him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bitonti Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 18 minutes ago, afosomf said: deshaun watson is the next cam newton. watch the bama tape, clemson could have easily have won game. switch qbs and bama wins 55-0 this isn't the NBA there's no Lebron James coming to save the franchise. A team either wins or it loses. Losing an entire year is not a step forward. It's a step backward . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
afosomf Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 1 minute ago, UnitedWhofans said: Except they didn't win. bamas def has 3 1st rounders this yr, and another 3 next yr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
afosomf Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 1 minute ago, bitonti said: this isn't the NBA there's no Lebron James coming to save the franchise. A team either wins or it loses. Losing an entire year is not a step forward. It's a step backward . well cam brought carolina to SB. they sucked before him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.