Ryan Fitzpatrick: MERGED

[EM31]

7 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

He was toeing the opposite of the "company line" which was that there was a real competition between Geno and Fitzpatrick. Gailey was the outlier, who said there was no competition, which broke with the differing company line from Bowles on that same day. 

Again, I take for granted that Gailey would know who would be so singularly suited for his own offense, and there wouldn't have been any handing of the job to Geno if that was the case (let alone with his enthusiasm & blessing). Gailey would have pounded on the Bradway Table that his offense specifically works because of Ryan Fitzpatrick, and will simply not work with Geno or most other QBs who don't fit his offense. His offense is designed to be a "dumbed down" one for QBs who tend to lock in on receivers & can't look right & left without the OL buying them 4-5 seconds of time.

With better (or on-field smarter) QBs, such simplified play design is not necessary; on the contrary it would limit a good QB who is capable of much more. But because Russell Wilson can see more of the field and buy his receivers time with his legs (behind the LOS), that doesn't therefore mean he would do worse than Ryan Fitzpatrick in this offense. Frankly, it's the other way around: Fitz limits an offense but Gailey's offense hides his weaknesses better than most other designs. The flip side to that is the simplicity itself is a limitation, especially against better defenses, which is why every OC with a better/smarter QB & targets at his disposal doesn't employ the this design most of the time. 

I think we will leave it as a difference in interpretation about what Gailey and others really felt about Geno leading up to the punch.  You think it is a more positive opinion than I do.  I feel that the measurables AFTER the punch and after Geno's recovery tend to be more supportive my take on things.  But as I said we can agree to differ on this in part because it looks like we are all going to find out not so much what people think will happen but rather what will actually happen this year.

Can we take it as read that Villain, Nut and the other amigos will pre-register that the Jets have a tougher schedule this year excuse up front?  Or do we need to lose a few games first before we hear that?  Does the tougher schedule and particularly the tougher start give Geno a get out of jail free card again this year?

[Savage69]

1 hour ago, Warfish said:

Since I have a feeling this is aleast aimed in part at me old friend, let me be clear:  Kenny O was exciting, big armed, talented and fun to watch when I was 12.  He was good enough to win in that era, and would have been better behind an O-line that could actually block.

But he was not "great".  

With that said, he won as many Super Bowls as Dan Marino did, so yeah.  I refuse to cry tears over his pick instead of Marino.

 

[Savage69]

17 minutes ago, EM31 said:

Didn't he get really really close once late in his career?

Yep Eagles game he punked out close to the goal line..

[Sperm Edwards]

1 minute ago, EM31 said:

I think we will leave it as a difference in interpretation about what Gailey and others really felt about Geno leading up to the punch.  You think it is a more positive opinion than I do.  I feel that the measurables AFTER the punch and after Geno's recovery tend to be more supportive my take on things.  But as I said we can agree to differ on this in part because it looks like we are all going to find out not so much what people think will happen but rather what will actually happen this year.

Can we take it as read that Villain, Nut and the other amigos will pre-register that the Jets have a tougher schedule this year excuse up front?  Or do we need to lose a few games first before we hear that?  Does the tougher schedule and particularly the tougher start give Geno a get out of jail free card again this year?

It will for some. I don't care because getting to a superbowl isn't going to happen if you're a turnover-prone QB who can only win low-scoring games. So I don't see us as losing much with Fitz, even if Geno is worse. There is no way Fitzpatrick would have these same numbers again. He stinks when he has to put up points or goes up against a truly top-notch defense, and that's who you have to get past to hoist up a Lombardi. So if Geno struggles because he's playing harder teams, yeah sure it's not an even comparison but it doesn't matter. The road to the Super Bowl doesn't go through the 2015 Titans, Jaguars, Browns, or Dolphins. So if Geno was only capable of the same thing, it's not any more useful (other than being cheaper than Fitz).

I read Gailey's words and the tone and he was looking forward to relishing in the "I fixed Geno Smith" role. In the end, he's still a choker. He can make some good/clutch throws but the frequency of good ones isn't enough and won't be enough. I think he'd be a lot better than he was his first 2 seasons but even still, he's always going to have those perfect throws right at the MLB.

So even if it's a valid excuse why his numbers aren't as good, it's not a valid excuse to stick with him if a tough matchup means an automatic loss. All it means is Geno's upside might be a 10-win season if we had a perfect storm of benefits. But just like I don't credit Fitz with a "woulda won" win vs Oakland, I don't credit Geno with a "woulda won 10 games" with the rest of the soft schedule. I'd need to see him actually do it before I give him that benefit of the doubt, but back to my original point, even if he does it's still not enough.

[EM31]

10 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

It will for some. I don't care because getting to a superbowl isn't going to happen if you're a turnover-prone QB who can only win low-scoring games. So I don't see us as losing much with Fitz, even if Geno is worse. There is no way Fitzpatrick would have these same numbers again. He stinks when he has to put up points or goes up against a truly top-notch defense, and that's who you have to get past to hoist up a Lombardi. So if Geno struggles because he's playing harder teams, yeah sure it's not an even comparison but it doesn't matter. The road to the Super Bowl doesn't go through the 2015 Titans, Jaguars, Browns, or Dolphins. So if Geno was only capable of the same thing, it's not any more useful (other than being cheaper than Fitz).

I read Gailey's words and the tone and he was looking forward to relishing in the "I fixed Geno Smith" role. In the end, he's still a choker. He can make some good/clutch throws but the frequency of good ones isn't enough and won't be enough. I think he'd be a lot better than he was his first 2 seasons but even still, he's always going to have those perfect throws right at the MLB.

So even if it's a valid excuse why his numbers aren't as good, it's not a valid excuse to stick with him if a tough matchup means an automatic loss. All it means is Geno's upside might be a 10-win season if we had a perfect storm of benefits. But just like I don't credit Fitz with a "woulda won" win vs Oakland, I don't credit Geno with a "woulda won 10 games" with the rest of the soft schedule. I'd need to see him actually do it before I give him that benefit of the doubt, but back to my original point, even if he does it's still not enough.

At the end of the day this thread has around 170 pages and there is pretty much consensus agreement that none of the above is probably our QB of the future.

Seems like a bit of a waste of energy even for a slow offseason.

[Sperm Edwards]

1 minute ago, EM31 said:

At the end of the day this thread has around 170 pages and there is pretty much consensus agreement that none of the above is probably our QB of the future.

Seems like a bit of a waste of energy even for a slow offseason.

LOL agree on that. But to be fair it it's only a 170 page thread because so many others have been merged into one.

[Warfish]

1 hour ago, j4jets said:

It is always wise to compare a rookie year and a 2nd year QB with a QB in his 5th and 6th year in the NFL. 

Geno was not viewed as bad because Fitz was viewed as good.

Geno was simply bad.

Quote

So as you can see, even if you compare apples to oranges, a sour apple (Geno) was still better than the orange (Fitz). Apples to apples n Fitz doesn't stand a chance no matter how you slice it. 

Only Jets Fans.....

[Rangers9]

If Fitz doesn't sign then next man up is Geno. I have no prob with that but imo a big drop off.But Bradford reported to the Eagles today so hopefully Fitz will be next to fall in line. 

[isired]

Geno Smith will never be a team's plan at QB1. He's shown enough, whether you want to talk about the talent around him or not, for us to know that. Look at some of the teams that Brady has had, and you'll see a talent level similar to what Geno had. So you want to say "well fine, he's not Brady but..." I'll still tell you that he made bad decisions and did not make the players around him better. If you want to tell me that you can win with a top 3 D, a running game, and a WR or 2 with a big catch radius I'll tell you there are a half dozen physically limited QBs with better heads that are far better suited for that job. Geno is a "great athlete, good physical tools, man if he ever gets his head right..." guy. And while I'd agree that he was handled very poorly year 1, that Sanchez should have been protected better in preseason and that Geno should never have been on the field year 1, we're too far into his career to use that excuse anymore. He made the same dumb mistakes when he came in vs. the Raiders last year, it was his career in a microcosm: some good plays, a few good throws, some bad decisions/bad throws that kept us out of the game.

Geno could very well have a long career as a QB2 - if you have a traditional passer go down, the D hasn't game-planned for Geno all week, he can come in and win a game, maybe keep a good team in the playoff hunt for a stretch.

[joewilly12]

43 minutes ago, Rangers9 said:

If Fitz doesn't sign then next man up is Geno. I have no prob with that but imo a big drop off.But Bradford reported to the Eagles today so hopefully Fitz will be next to fall in line. 

Bradford was under contract Fitzpatrick isn't 

[Villain The Foe]

3 hours ago, Rangers9 said:

Nobody ever said the Fitz has had a great career but not bad for a 7th round pick of the Rams. Not easy to elevate yourself from a low draft position like that and become a starter which he's done with several teams. He actually played very well when he got chances to start like with the Bengals, the Texans and us. And Buff when he earned a bigger contract. The guy is better than you give him credit for even though you've spent a lot of time digging for stats to prove he sucks. You can do the same for any Qb: find bad stats on them. But the bottom line is the team won last year with him and he had the support of his coaches and teammates plus most of the fans. Our best chance to win in 2016 is with Fitz. Let the team work out the contract. Probably part of this stalemate is that he was dramatically underpaid last season, considering that he was signed as a backup and started and was successful. So he's probably trying to recoup money he didn't get in 2015 and add it in on 2016. I don't know it's just a guess but I hope Mac can get this done soon. 

Much of Fitz career came based on the fact that he was the back up on the team and the starter was injured. Last year, Fitz was the back up and Geno got injured. 

[Integrity28]

This ******* thread.

[Integrity28]

[ljr]

5 hours ago, slats said:

And what exactly is Fitz's market value? I don't see anyone else in the market offering any more than the $7-8M the Jets have allegedly offered - and frankly, I think even that is a little high. 

That is a good question.

it appears to be the Jets offer or retirement at this point.

Cimini just sent out something saying the Jets have actually offered more than that 7-8 mil range that has been rumored to be on the table ... But unlike the previous regime there does not seem to be very many leaks of real info with Mac & Co.

so whether the threat of retirement will cause the Jets to pay 6million, 8million, or 10 million before they balk ... That number (whatever it is) will be market value.

my post was in response to the other person trying to put responsibility of managing the Jets Salary Cap on Fitz ... Which is silly

[Big Blocker]

I am amused by the notion some have here that they can be so certain that Fitzpatrick will have a bad season if he is brought back.  Only one year older and in good health, why should that follow?

On the other hand, second year in an O with an OC he fits with, adding Forte, perhaps Amaro returns and contributes when last year was a gaping hole at TE, and don't forget the mess at 3rd wideout that can't be any worse this year and likely will be improved.  And he was injured for part of last season, and may avoid that.

I know some complain about the schedule, but it is a FACT that the Jets played the same number of teams last season that were .500 or better the year before as they will this season.  In any event it is not a given that the schedule will be worse.

Of course if Fitzpatrick does not come back, it is all moot.

[Big Blocker]

2 hours ago, Villain The Foe said:

Much of Fitz career came based on the fact that he was the back up on the team and the starter was injured. Last year, Fitz was the back up and Geno got injured. 

This is a meaningless consideration.  Is the "point" supposed be that he does worse when he's prepared to be the starter?  There is no evidence of that.  In any event he had the starting job last year well before the season began, and it's not as if he came off the bench in the middle of the season.

[Villain The Foe]

1 minute ago, Big Blocker said:

This is a meaningless consideration.  Is the "point" supposed be that he does worse when he's prepared to be the starter?  There is no evidence of that.  In any event he had the starting job last year well before the season began, and it's not as if he came off the bench in the middle of the season.

I think is rather meaningful. He's gotten opportunity after opportunity after starters have been injured yet he's either come up with one very good season then cut, or simply cut. This time around his contract ran out and he wasnt resigned....by anyone. WTF is even the point of trying to somehow validate this guy's career? 99.9% of Jets fans dont take that same time out for a QB who's only been in the league 3 years. 

 

And trust me, I understand what you're saying, but Jetnation has never been about "evidence" but more about popularity contest. You need to figure out the playing field that you're on my friend! lol. 

[Big Blocker]

6 minutes ago, Villain The Foe said:

I think is rather meaningful. He's gotten opportunity after opportunity after starters have been injured yet he's either come up with one very good season then cut, or simply cut. This time around his contract ran out and he wasnt resigned....by anyone. WTF is even the point of trying to somehow validate this guy's career? 99.9% of Jets fans dont take that same time out for a QB who's only been in the league 3 years. 

 

And trust me, I understand what you're saying, but Jetnation has never been about "evidence" but more about popularity contest. You need to figure out the playing field that you're on my friend! lol. 

First of all I don't think this forum's members are all that different from other jet message boards.  For bad or good.  Nothing to figure out here in that regard.

Fact is that he had a very good season in 14, but broke his leg.  Is that why he was not brought back?  Certainly the Texans did worse without him.  Sure there were a number of factors, but that just belies the adverb "simply" in your post.  Rarely is the reason a player is cut only concerned with some perception of his prior history, rather than a review of more recent performance.  And he was the starter as I said well before Opening Day last year and did quite well.

The last two years mean more to me about what to expect from him now than a perception of some pattern that is more complicated than some simple inference you seem to be relying on.

[LIJetsFan]

6 hours ago, joewilly12 said:

He game planned on Fitzpatricks weaknesses and strengths and also the easy schedule we only beat 2 teams with winning records. 

Fitzpatrick couldn't throw the long ball teams stacked the box and that hindered the running game Ivory being the bruising back he was had success but paid the ultimate price. 

Im excited to see Gailey game plan for Geno Smith we will know once and for all if Geno Smith is the QB this team desperately needs and wants. 

Now this is a good post.  No outrageous claims.  Just a solid observation leading to reasonable conclusion.   

[Maxman]

6 hours ago, BowlesMovement said:

Probably true, Gailey is probably better than the other idiots we have had at OC, but I was not overly impressed with Gailey last year. He had just as easy as a schedule as Fitzpatrick did, and just as many weapons with Marshall and Decker. He constantly stuck to his game plan even when the defense was giving something else to stop it. 

Well in defense of Gailey his starting QB was knocked out in training camp by another player.

So he had to make do with another QB.

[Villain The Foe]

2 minutes ago, Big Blocker said:

First of all I don't think this forum's members are all that different from other jet message boards.  For bad or good.  Nothing to figure out here in that regard.

Fact is that he had a very good season in 14, but broke his leg.  Is that why he was not brought back?  Certainly the Texans did worse without him.  Sure there were a number of factors, but that just belies the adverb "simply" in your post.  Rarely is the reason a player is cut only concerned with some perception of his prior history, rather than a review of more recent performance.  And he was the starter as I said well before Opening Day last year and did quite well.

The last two years mean more to me about what to expect from him now than a perception of some pattern that is more complicated than some simple inference you seem to be relying on.

Then since the last couple years only mean something to you I'll leave you with this. The past 4 years Fitz has lost 92% of the games against teams who scored 21 or more points. Now I know, you're probably saying "Didnt I just say the last two years???". Well, last year Fitz was 1-6 in that category. 

Yeah, the Texans may have done worse at the QB position, but I think the Jets were a better all around team than the Texans were so that means in respects to Fitz he was coming into a better situation. Yet, the same numbers he produced over the past few seasons was rather evident last year. 

It seems to me like Fitz is who Fitz is. I dont want a QB who loses 92% of the time to teams who score 21 or more points when this is a passing league. 

 

[BowlesMovement]

4 minutes ago, Maxman said:

Well in defense of Gailey his starting QB was knocked out in training camp by another player.

So he had to make do with another QB.

Good point, and that other QB was probably the worst QB in the history of worst QBs, so if he had his QB playing, they would have thrown about 50 TDs instead of a crappy 31

[Adoni Beast]

The importance of re-signing Fitz is the obvious one: He gives us the best chance to win games this year. The other is that he is a perfect player to teach Hack and Petty.

No other current QB knows Gaily's system better, and he's a smart guy who isn't a long-term threat for the starter position. Now, by no means should be overpay and kill our cap next year or the year after for him. 

But, to the peope saying just start Geno, we'll have the same win total, you're not seeing the big picture here. You want Hack and Petty learning from a "leader" who had got knocked out by a teammate? Or one that the other players look up to and beg to be re-signed? These things matter. He can teach both the system and how to be a leader. 

The most under-appreciated aspect of the quarterback position isn't just knowing your own system, but reading defenses and audibiling out of bad plays. You want our younger guys learning this from Fitz, not Geno who misses meetings because he's at the movies.

I'd rather overpay by a little, if he can accept incentives and bonuses without hurting our cap. 

[Maxman]

32 minutes ago, Adoni Beast said:

The importance of re-signing Fitz is the obvious one: He gives us the best chance to win games this year. The other is that he is a perfect player to teach Hack and Petty.

No other current QB knows Gaily's system better, and he's a smart guy who isn't a long-term threat for the starter position. Now, by no means should be overpay and kill our cap next year or the year after for him. 

But, to the peope saying just start Geno, we'll have the same win total, you're not seeing the big picture here. You want Hack and Petty learning from a "leader" who had got knocked out by a teammate? Or one that the other players look up to and beg to be re-signed? These things matter. He can teach both the system and how to be a leader. 

The most under-appreciated aspect of the quarterback position isn't just knowing your own system, but reading defenses and audibiling out of bad plays. You want our younger guys learning this from Fitz, not Geno who misses meetings because he's at the movies.

I'd rather overpay by a little, if he can accept incentives and bonuses without hurting our cap. 

That would be great if Fitz took a deal that was a long term \ backup kind of deal. That is essentially what the Jets offered originally.

He doesn't seem to want any part of that. It would be great to sign Fitz to a 3 year deal and let him be the backup here for a long time.

[Big Blocker]

1 hour ago, Villain The Foe said:

Then since the last couple years only mean something to you I'll leave you with this. The past 4 years Fitz has lost 92% of the games against teams who scored 21 or more points. Now I know, you're probably saying "Didnt I just say the last two years???". Well, last year Fitz was 1-6 in that category. 

Yeah, the Texans may have done worse at the QB position, but I think the Jets were a better all around team than the Texans were so that means in respects to Fitz he was coming into a better situation. Yet, the same numbers he produced over the past few seasons was rather evident last year. 

It seems to me like Fitz is who Fitz is. I dont want a QB who loses 92% of the time to teams who score 21 or more points when this is a passing league. 

 

Team won lost record is a problematic metric for any player, including Qb.  Why?  Because it's a team record in a team sport.

The point about the Texans doing worse related to the question why they let him go.  They had their reasons, no doubt. In hindsight one can question whether they used the right reasons to come to their decision.

More generally I think a lot of the negatives going on around discussions of Fitzpatrick reflect a certain level of frustration with the position he has apparently taken on contract negotiations.  I understand that.  But he's still a vastly better option to lead the team than Smith IF a deal can be reached.

[Adoni Beast]

55 minutes ago, Maxman said:

That would be great if Fitz took a deal that was a long term \ backup kind of deal. That is essentially what the Jets offered originally.

He doesn't seem to want any part of that. It would be great to sign Fitz to a 3 year deal and let him be the backup here for a long time.

I'd be ok with giving him a couple million more front-loaded for this season, include it as a signing bonus or whatever incentive...with the deal dropping to a less annual salary for 2017, also making him cap-cut friendly. 

[Villain The Foe]

1 hour ago, Big Blocker said:

Team won lost record is a problematic metric for any player, including Qb.  Why?  Because it's a team record in a team sport.

The point about the Texans doing worse related to the question why they let him go.  They had their reasons, no doubt. In hindsight one can question whether they used the right reasons to come to their decision.

More generally I think a lot of the negatives going on around discussions of Fitzpatrick reflect a certain level of frustration with the position he has apparently taken on contract negotiations.  I understand that.  But he's still a vastly better option to lead the team than Smith IF a deal can be reached.

Well, technically the Texans did better. The Texans didnt go 9-7 last year and make the playoffs. Like you said, its a team sport. Though I find it funny that when we deal with my perspective then its problematic yet when you are trying to compare Fitz to smith then its so easy to see how vastly better an option Fitz is. Maybe he should have shown that during training camp last season. It looks like Macc and the rest of the NFL doesnt see it that way. 

As of this moment, Geno is the starter. Fitz didnt win the starting job last year, it was gifted to him. The awesome thing here is that we will most likely see what Geno can do. Not just with this team and coaching staff, but unlike Fitz last year, its looking like Geno will have a real difficult schedule. Not that cake walk Fitz had that he couldnt even turn into a playoff birth. 

[j4jets]

7 hours ago, Warfish said:

Geno was not viewed as bad because Fitz was viewed as good.

Geno was simply bad.

Only Jets Fans.....

I literally proved you wrong but ok. 

[UpstateJetsGuru]

 

54 minutes ago, Villain The Foe said:

Well, technically the Texans did better. The Texans didnt go 9-7 last year and make the playoffs. Like you said, its a team sport. Though I find it funny that when we deal with my perspective then its problematic yet when you are trying to compare Fitz to smith then its so easy to see how vastly better an option Fitz is. Maybe he should have shown that during training camp last season. It looks like Macc and the rest of the NFL doesnt see it that way. 

As of this moment, Geno is the starter. Fitz didnt win the starting job last year, it was gifted to him. The awesome thing here is that we will most likely see what Geno can do. Not just with this team and coaching staff, but unlike Fitz last year, its looking like Geno will have a real difficult schedule. Not that cake walk Fitz had that he couldnt even turn into a playoff birth. 

Fitz was 10-5 as the starter...Geno was 0-1. The Jets missed the playoffs by one game. Just about any reasonable commentator or football person states that it is Important for the Jets to resign Fitz to be competitive this upcoming season. You and your buddy JoeWilly take turns embarrassing yourself with all this ridiculous nonsense.

[PatsFanTX]

 

Fitz was 10-5 as the starter...Geno was 0-1. The Jets missed the playoffs by one game. Just about any reasonable commentator or football person states that it is Important for the Jets to resign Fitz to be competitive this upcoming season. You and your buddy JoeWilly take turns embarrassing yourself with all this ridiculous nonsense.

Why would the Jets want to waste money on a QB who was ranked in the bottom 25% in the majority of QB measures last year?

And that was suppose to be his "best" season in his 11 year career.

He is nothing more than a below average JAG QB without any upside potential whatsoever.

Jets FO has been smart not resigning this loser.

[GREENBEAN]

19 hours ago, ljr said:

No,player other than Brady( getting paid on the side) takes less than market value ... It's not fair to hold Fitz to that standard

will the FO & his agent work it out?  I believe so ... But time will tell

I actually agree with this in most instances and I am mostly on the player side of things where contracts are concerned. It's just the specific situation we are seeing here with Fitz. The money simply isn't there and it's not like 8 mil per season is a joke. I hear ya and am not in their shoes (I recently negotiated a $5000 bonus for myself and was so happy lol ) but I would think the reality of a situation would creep in at some point.

It's like ok Fitz... This is where you want to play. The players and coaches want you as well. You had a career year and it was you that blew the last game which kept everyone from the playoffs. They are offering $8-9 mil per season for two years in one of the best situations for you specifically. Come the F*ck on and take it already because it doesn't look realistic that they will be able to meet your asking price.

Oh they also drafted two QB's the last two drafts and also have an idiot who was supposed to start last season on the roster. The sun is setting.

Ya know ?

[ylekram]

11 hours ago, Warfish said:

2015, with Fitz, was the first time Chan Gailey has produced a Top 10 Offense since 1999, when he was coaching Troy Aikman.  It's been 16 years since Gailey sniffed the top 10.

 

since 2005, when Fitzpatrick was drafted, he failed to have a winning season much less the playoffs. since marshal and chan are obviously totally responsible for the jets offensive performance last year, and fitz was just baggage, would you mind telling the folks at home how many winning seasons and playoff appearances chan has had since Fitzpatrick was drafted? how many times was he fired? everybody seems to know how his stint in buffalo went. while you are at it, tell the nice folks how many wins he had in Kansas city. yea, he did wonders with tyler thigpen

[ylekram]

5 hours ago, Villain The Foe said:

Then since the last couple years only mean something to you I'll leave you with this. The past 4 years Fitz has lost 92% of the games against teams who scored 21 or more points. Now I know, you're probably saying "Didnt I just say the last two years???". Well, last year Fitz was 1-6 in that category. 

Yeah, the Texans may have done worse at the QB position, but I think the Jets were a better all around team than the Texans were so that means in respects to Fitz he was coming into a better situation. Yet, the same numbers he produced over the past few seasons was rather evident last year. 

It seems to me like Fitz is who Fitz is. I dont want a QB who loses 92% of the time to teams who score 21 or more points when this is a passing league. 

 

not really the truth,is it?

[TuscanyTile2]

Goal: 100,000 POST IN THIS THREAD

[Maxman]

9 hours ago, Adoni Beast said:

I'd be ok with giving him a couple million more front-loaded for this season, include it as a signing bonus or whatever incentive...with the deal dropping to a less annual salary for 2017, also making him cap-cut friendly. 

Sign me up for that.