Ryan Fitzpatrick: MERGED

[Rangers9]

2 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

If you pay him $10M in 2016, that's $10M less the team has available in 2017. What part of this don't you understand?

I don't understand your point and probably it's because I'm dense. But how does getting paid on a one year deal for 2016 affect our cap space in 2017. 

[Mike135]

1 minute ago, Rangers9 said:

So let me get this straight. You want to go with Hackenberg (because he's cheaper) a guy who didn't even play well in college. Or Geno a guy who is pretty much known as being a terrible Qb. So for all of the talk we have on this board about how important the Qb position is some of our fans want to go cheap and lose games. 

Don't think I've been shy about my opinion on the matter.

But if I had to choose between Geno and Fitz to be the QB this season, money not being a factor at all... I absolutely choose Geno.

With money being a factor, it's not even close.

Petty and Hack.  I honestly have no idea.  No one does so I leave them out of the starting QB discussion.

However I wouldn't mind Fitz as a solid (very well paid) 5mil per season backup QB for 2 or 3 years.

[Mike135]

3 minutes ago, Rangers9 said:

I don't understand your point and probably it's because I'm dense. But how does getting paid on a one year deal for 2016 affect our cap space in 2017. 

Because we currently don't have the cap space to pay Fitz.  The only way to do so would be to push cap hits to 2017 and beyond.

[Rangers9]

Just now, Mike135 said:

Don't think I've been shy about my opinion on the matter.

But if I had to choose between Geno and Fitz to be the QB this season, money not being a factor at all... I absolutely choose Geno.

With money being a factor, it's not even close.

Petty and Hack.  I honestly have no idea.  No one does so I leave them out of the starting QB discussion.

However I wouldn't mind Fitz as a solid (very well paid) 5mil per season backup QB for 2 or 3 years.

Well we must have been watching different teams. There is no way Fitz is going to be the backup to Geno. The coach doesn't think so and the GM doesn't think so. And his teammates don't think so. 

[Sperm Edwards]

6 hours ago, CrazyCarl40 said:

According to Over the Cap, Cutting Clady next year saves 10.5 million without any penalty. I never said cut Marshall or Mangold. I said make decisions. It's about looking beyond 2016 and 2017. I wouldn't cut Gilchrist either, I'm just laying down options.

It's unusual, but I think it's wrong. If Clady plays this year it will kick in $1.5M in incentives (I mistakenly thought it was $3M, but no matter). That would be treated as a NLTBE incentive because he didn't reach that threshold the prior season, so it would hit the following season instead. It's also wrong because the true "worst case" scenario cap-wise is more than that as well, because it doesn't take into account his $3M escalator (probably if that NLTBE incentive is reached).

I'm saying all those cuts are unlikely except Giacomini. But you're also not counting the 2017 draft picks because they're not on the ledger yet, and they will offset Giacomini's savings.

It's not that they can't get the number down lower; of course they can. I'm saying as things stand right now, without some phony $25M cap number for one player everyone knows will be gone, the Jets will be right up against the cap if they extend Mo. If they re-sign Fitz this year, then kiss away another $7M next year (or however much more gets shifted from 2016 to 2017 to make room for him). 

[Mike135]

3 minutes ago, Rangers9 said:

Well we must have been watching different teams. There is no way Fitz is going to be the backup to Geno. The coach doesn't think so and the GM doesn't think so. And his teammates don't think so. 

I'll admit odds are with you.  But I'm holding out hope.

If fact I'm holding out for a hero (Geno).

 

[Rangers9]

11 minutes ago, Mike135 said:

Because we currently don't have the cap space to pay Fitz.  The only way to do so would be to push cap hits to 2017 and beyond.

They can find the cap space for Fitz. It will be no problem. And Mac doesn't seem to be worried about that. Look I honestly think that Fitz deserves a two year deal. At a low starters salary. Maybe they can back load it for 2017. I just threw out the idea of a one year deal but it's not something that most starting Qbs would not agree to. Even RG3 got a two year deal with guaranteed money over his first year salary and he didn't even play a snap in 2015. And he's getting over 7 per season.

[Rangers9]

4 minutes ago, Mike135 said:

I'll admit odds are with you.  But I'm holding out hope.

If fact I'm holding out for a hero (Geno).

 

That song brings back memories. My daughter played Urleen in Footloose a few years back and was in that number as a backup singer. In one dance scene the guy who played the lead threw her over his shoulder. It was kind of cool. 

[Mike135]

4 minutes ago, Rangers9 said:

That song brings back memories. My daughter played Urleen in Footloose a few years back and was in that number as a backup singer. In one dance scene the guy who played the lead threw her over his shoulder. It was kind of cool. 

Very cool.  The only memory it stirs for me though is having it blasting in my car as I'm singing along to it with the windows open, when a jeep full of hot chicks pulled along side me.

Kinda sucked.

[Sperm Edwards]

8 minutes ago, Rangers9 said:

I don't understand your point and probably it's because I'm dense. But how does getting paid on a one year deal for 2016 affect our cap space in 2017. 

We don't have room to fit him in 2016. To make room, the team will need to shift cap hits from 2016 to 2017. For example, Brandon Marshall is due to hit this year's cap at $9.5M. So they convert $8M of that to (new) signing bonus that gets spread evenly for the rest of his contract. Since there are 2 years remaining on his contract, that's $4M this year and $4M next year. It moves $4M from this year's cap to next year's. In doing so, it makes $4M more room to sign Fitzpatrick.

If you came late to the game and didn't know that occurred, it would seem like "oh, that's Marshall's cap number" but what you would be missing is that, if he wasn't restructured, it would be $4M lower. Now do that for enough people to create enough cap room to fit Fitzpatrick in 2016. That is what restructuring existing contracts does. The Jets already did that with Carpenter about a month ago.

However, if they did that restructuring and DIDN'T sign Fitzpatrick (say for $10M just for the sake of argument), then it would have no effect. We'd have pushed enough space around to clear $10M in 2016 but it doesn't get used. Or if we had that space without needing to restructure others. What happens to that unused space? It doesn't go in the garbage; the team can push that space to next year, in the form of raising the team's cap limit the following season. So if the cap limit was going to be $160M, the Jets would then have a cap limit of $170M for that season by pushing $10M unused forward.

That is why any cap $ you don't use this year is cap $ you have available next year, and vice versa (any cap $ you spend this year is cap $ you don't have available next year). So looked at that way - which is the correct way of looking at it - had we not signed Cromartie last year we'd have another $7M this year (even with the "no dead cap space" structure to his contract). We paid him $7M so it's $7M we can't pay another. You pay Fitz $10M this year then it's $10M less we'd have next year.

Get it now?

[Rangers9]

5 minutes ago, Mike135 said:

Very cool.  The only memory it stirs for me though is having it blasting in my car as I'm singing along to it with the windows open, when a jeep full of hot chicks pulled along side me.

Kinda sucked.

I said she played Urleen. It might have been Wendy Jo. Both were friends of the lead actress (part) who sang that song. 

[Rangers9]

2 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

We don't have room to fit him in 2016. To make room, the team will need to shift cap hits from 2016 to 2017. For example, Brandon Marshall is due to hit this year's cap at $9.5M. So they convert $8M of that to (new) signing bonus that gets spread evenly for the rest of his contract. Since there are 2 years remaining on his contract, that's $4M this year and $4M next year. It moves $4M from this year's cap to next year's. In doing so, it makes $4M more room to sign Fitzpatrick.

If you came late to the game and didn't know that occurred, it would seem like "oh, that's Marshall's cap number" but what you would be missing is that, if he wasn't restructured, it would be $4M lower. Now do that for enough people to create enough cap room to fit Fitzpatrick in 2016. That is what restructuring existing contracts does. The Jets already did that with Carpenter about a month ago.

However, if they did that restructuring and DIDN'T sign Fitzpatrick (say for $10M just for the sake of argument), then it would have no effect. We'd have pushed enough space around to clear $10M in 2016 but it doesn't get used. Or if we had that space without needing to restructure others. What happens to that unused space? It doesn't go in the garbage; the team can push that space to next year, in the form of raising the team's cap limit the following season. So if the cap limit was going to be $160M, the Jets would then have a cap limit of $170M for that season by pushing $10M unused forward.

That is why any cap $ you don't use this year is cap $ you have available next year, and vice versa (any cap $ you spend this year is cap $ you don't have available next year). So looked at that way - which is the correct way of looking at it - had we not signed Cromartie last year we'd have another $7M this year (even with the "no dead cap space" structure to his contract). We paid him $7M so it's $7M we can't pay another. You pay Fitz $10M this year then it's $10M less we'd have next year.

Get it now?

So basically you're saying don't pay him nothing. If you don't sign Fitz you have more cap space for next year so go with the cheaper option Geno Smith. Not logical. 

[slats]

5 hours ago, Rangers9 said:

That would be a ridiculous offer and you know it. But say he takes your 7 mil guaranteed deal that's on the poll. (he's not going to but say he does). But with considerable steep incentives. He gets another 3 mil if the team makes the playoffs. 3 more if the Jets win the AFC Championship. And another 3 if we win the SB. So he gets 16 mil if we win the SB on a one year contract. Any objections to that? 

No problem at all. Similar to my employer having no problem adding a clause where I get a $3M bonus for banging Scarlett Johansson. 

[Rangers9]

58 minutes ago, slats said:

No problem at all. Similar to my employer having no problem adding a clause where I get a $3M bonus for banging Scarlett Johansson. 

I just love the lack of optimism of our fans. They think we can't win against a tough schedule and impossible to win a SB. So tank it! As for Scarlett if you're as cool and debonair as I think you are then you'd have a chance. ?

[Mike135]

14 minutes ago, Rangers9 said:

I just love the lack of optimism of our fans. They think we can't win against a tough schedule and impossible to win a SB. So tank it! As for Scarlett if you're as cool and debonair as I think you are then you'd have a chance. ?

Hey, I'm extremely optimistic we make the playoffs w/Geno.

@slats boning Scarlett?  Yeah, not so much.

[Sperm Edwards]

5 hours ago, Rangers9 said:

So basically you're saying don't pay him nothing. If you don't sign Fitz you have more cap space for next year so go with the cheaper option Geno Smith. Not logical. 

First of all, you should say "Thank you" for teaching you how the salary cap works, including the remedial math of why next year's $10M - $10M = $0.

Second, you have incorrectly stated the same position I've posted since March. I said we could/should pay him up to a maximum of $7M, but I prefer less since I see him as little more than a stopgap bridge to either Hackenberg or Petty taking over long term.

Third, it's only "logical" to pay a lot to Fitzpatrick if he is an obvious difference-maker between the Jets being a SB contender and a non-SB contender, or if he's a young "upside" type player in need of experience, which may help him become such a difference-maker someday. Fitzpatrick has never proven to be this type of difference-maker and has no such bright future in years to come. This is why nobody's offered him dick, except a declined offer from the Jets (who would at least theoretically benefit from continuity, and making him an offer is at least in part a PR move). I saw nothing from him last year that would lead me to believe we would score enough points against good defenses, or score enough points to keep up with and overcome good offenses, other than an occasional unexpected victory.

[Rangers9]

19 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

First of all, you should say "Thank you" for teaching you how the salary cap works, including the remedial math of why next year's $10M - $10M = $0.

Second, you have incorrectly stated the same position I've posted since March. I said we could/should pay him up to a maximum of $7M, but I prefer less since I see him as little more than a stopgap bridge to either Hackenberg or Petty taking over long term.

Third, it's only "logical" to pay a lot to Fitzpatrick if he is an obvious difference-maker between the Jets being a SB contender and a non-SB contender, or if he's a young "upside" type player in need of experience, which may help him become such a difference-maker someday. Fitzpatrick has never proven to be this type of difference-maker and has no such bright future in years to come. This is why nobody's offered him dick, except a declined offer from the Jets (who would at least theoretically benefit from continuity, and making him an offer is at least in part a PR move). I saw nothing from him last year that would lead me to believe we would score enough points against good defenses, or score enough points to keep up with and overcome good offenses, other than an occasional unexpected victory.

I don't agree with any of your analysis so thanks for nothing. The guy deserves a reasonable starting Qb contract not some low ball number that you have decided to assign him. 

[Sperm Edwards]

6 minutes ago, Rangers9 said:

I don't agree with any of your analysis so thanks for nothing. The guy deserves a reasonable starting Qb contract not some low ball number that you have decided to assign him. 

Then why have 32 teams declined to offer one to him, and only one has offered him any kind of contract at all? Because he isn't that good, and deserves no more than the contract he has been offered. Choking at the end of the Buffalo game probably cost him $20M over time, but it wasn't without reason. That "lowball" number I threw out there is more than 31 teams offered him, so I think it's comparatively generous. Nobody wants to pay a low-ceiling QB $16M to have nice games against underperforming (if not outright bad) teams they were probably going to beat anyway, and lose every game he's asked to pass the football after an opponent puts an average # of points on the board (literally without exception).

And you don't agree that $10M - $10M = $0? I assure you that math is correct.

[Larz]

I mean what is left to say about fitz at this point ?

 

 

[UpstateJetsGuru]

1 hour ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Then why have 32 teams declined to offer one to him, and only one has offered him any kind of contract at all? Because he isn't that good, and deserves no more than the contract he has been offered. Choking at the end of the Buffalo game probably cost him $20M over time, but it wasn't without reason. That "lowball" number I threw out there is more than 31 teams offered him, so I think it's comparatively generous. Nobody wants to pay a low-ceiling QB $16M to have nice games against underperforming (if not outright bad) teams they were probably going to beat anyway, and lose every game he's asked to pass the football after an opponent puts an average # of points on the board (literally without exception).

And you don't agree that $10M - $10M = $0? I assure you that math is correct.

Frankly, you have no clue what you are talking about...they couldn't beat the Raiders without Fitz and rushed him on the field when he was hurt because they clearly had NO faith that any of their other quarterbacks could win games that you irrationally assert they were probably "were going to win anyway". As for choking the Bills game away, the whole team took a collective s*it that day and Fitz was the main reason they were even in position to make a late playoff run. And to say that he lost games where he was asked to pass is equally absurd, as the team hat literally no running game late in the year and were forced to be one dimensional, yet won game after game with Fitzpatrick winning multiple AFC offensive player of the week awards. I think some of it stems from a bias against the guy and an ultimate desire to see him fail by many people who for some reason just don't like him. It's absolutely ridiculous that a guy could win 12 out of his last 17 NFL starts playing on average football teams, break a nearly five decade franchise record for TD passes, and yet be treated like he is a piece of garbage...pretty f'n unreal. Also, the word low-ceiling is pretty weird to use when the Jets offense just broke multiple offensive records. They were the only team in the NFL to score at least 17 points in every game, a pretty impressive feat considering that ZERO points contributed all season from either the return game or the defense (no pick sixes, fumble returns for TD's)...anyway, you will come up with undoubtedly more wonderful rebuttals to why the guy should only be paid low end starter/borderline back-up money. But I think it stinks to have a guy lead an offense that breaks records and who wins twice as many games as he loses for you and then lowball him. It sets a bad precedent, and by stubbornly sticking to what the team considers to be his "market value", the Jets are totally disregarding his importance to THIS team and THIS offense. In a way, they deserve to have Geno, Petty, and Hackenberg as their QB trio next year, and to all the fans who, for some reason that lies far beyond my scope of comprehensibility, become wildly offended at the notion of the Jets offering Fitz even a penny above 7 million a year, perhaps you deserve to witness yet another losing season and a return to what will truly be inferior quarterbacking. Be careful what you wish for. Life's lessons can sometimes come very harshly.

[cant wait]

10 minutes ago, UpstateJetsGuru said:

Frankly, you have no clue what you are talking about...they couldn't beat the Raiders without Fitz and rushed him on the field when he was hurt because they clearly had NO faith that any of their other quarterbacks could win games that you irrationally assert they were probably "were going to win anyway". As for choking the Bills game away, the whole team took a collective s*it that day and Fitz was the main reason they were even in position to make a late playoff run. And to say that he lost games where he was asked to pass is equally absurd, as the team hat literally no running game late in the year and were forced to be one dimensional, yet won game after game with Fitzpatrick winning multiple AFC offensive player of the week awards. I think some of it stems from a bias against the guy and an ultimate desire to see him fail by many people who for some reason just don't like him. It's absolutely ridiculous that a guy could win 12 out of his last 17 NFL starts playing on average football teams, break a nearly five decade franchise record for TD passes, and yet be treated like he is a piece of garbage...pretty f'n unreal. Also, the word low-ceiling is pretty weird to use when the Jets offense just broke multiple offensive records. They were the only team in the NFL to score at least 17 points in every game, a pretty impressive feat considering that ZERO points contributed all season from either the return game or the defense (no pick sixes, fumble returns for TD's)...anyway, you will come up with undoubtedly more wonderful rebuttals to why the guy should only be paid low end starter/borderline back-up money. But I think it stinks to have a guy lead an offense that breaks records and who wins twice as many games as he loses for you and then lowball him. It sets a bad precedent, and by stubbornly sticking to what the team considers to be his "market value", the Jets are totally disregarding his importance to THIS team and THIS offense. In a way, they deserve to have Geno, Petty, and Hackenberg as their QB trio next year, and to all the fans who, for some reason that lies far beyond my scope of comprehensibility, become wildly offended at the notion of the Jets offering Fitz even a penny above 7 million a year, perhaps you deserve to witness yet another losing season and a return to what will truly be inferior quarterbacking. Be careful what you wish for. Life's lessons can sometimes come very harshly.

The defense did nothing to help the offense? Guess you missed all those key turnovers that won games and gave the offense extra possessions. It's why Fitz's inflated volume passing statistics aren't impressing the NFL... throwing 4 TD's in a blowout game against the worst team in the league may be enough to win AFC offensive player of the week but when fitz had his big chance to prove he's not just a weak armed game managing frontrunner he failed  like he always does

[CrazyCarl40]

11 hours ago, Larz said:

I mean what is left to say about fitz at this point ?

Just wait until he re-signs. 

[NYs Stepchild]

13 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Then why have 32 teams declined to offer one to him, and only one has offered him any kind of contract at all? Because he isn't that good, and deserves no more than the contract he has been offered. Choking at the end of the Buffalo game probably cost him $20M over time, but it wasn't without reason. That "lowball" number I threw out there is more than 31 teams offered him, so I think it's comparatively generous. Nobody wants to pay a low-ceiling QB $16M to have nice games against underperforming (if not outright bad) teams they were probably going to beat anyway, and lose every game he's asked to pass the football after an opponent puts an average # of points on the board (literally without exception).

And you don't agree that $10M - $10M = $0? I assure you that math is correct.

This mindset is the reason so many are out of work. No one wants to except that a decent job, even if it's not what you think you deserve, is better than no job. 

Obviously that great job you used to have was not sustainable, or you'd still have it. Take whatever opportunity you have and prove your value. It's better than sitting home wondering why your wife and kids left you complaining about how unfairly you were treated. 

[Sperm Edwards]

13 hours ago, UpstateJetsGuru said:

Frankly, you have no clue what you are talking about...they couldn't beat the Raiders without Fitz and rushed him on the field when he was hurt because they clearly had NO faith that any of their other quarterbacks could win games that you irrationally assert they were probably "were going to win anyway". As for choking the Bills game away, the whole team took a collective s*it that day and Fitz was the main reason they were even in position to make a late playoff run. And to say that he lost games where he was asked to pass is equally absurd, as the team hat literally no running game late in the year and were forced to be one dimensional, yet won game after game with Fitzpatrick winning multiple AFC offensive player of the week awards. I think some of it stems from a bias against the guy and an ultimate desire to see him fail by many people who for some reason just don't like him. It's absolutely ridiculous that a guy could win 12 out of his last 17 NFL starts playing on average football teams, break a nearly five decade franchise record for TD passes, and yet be treated like he is a piece of garbage...pretty f'n unreal. Also, the word low-ceiling is pretty weird to use when the Jets offense just broke multiple offensive records. They were the only team in the NFL to score at least 17 points in every game, a pretty impressive feat considering that ZERO points contributed all season from either the return game or the defense (no pick sixes, fumble returns for TD's)...anyway, you will come up with undoubtedly more wonderful rebuttals to why the guy should only be paid low end starter/borderline back-up money. But I think it stinks to have a guy lead an offense that breaks records and who wins twice as many games as he loses for you and then lowball him. It sets a bad precedent, and by stubbornly sticking to what the team considers to be his "market value", the Jets are totally disregarding his importance to THIS team and THIS offense. In a way, they deserve to have Geno, Petty, and Hackenberg as their QB trio next year, and to all the fans who, for some reason that lies far beyond my scope of comprehensibility, become wildly offended at the notion of the Jets offering Fitz even a penny above 7 million a year, perhaps you deserve to witness yet another losing season and a return to what will truly be inferior quarterbacking. Be careful what you wish for. Life's lessons can sometimes come very harshly.

LOL they wouldn't have beaten the Raiders with Fitz either . What opponent has a Fitzpatrick team beaten when the opposition scored over 20 points and they need Fitz to still throw a football? Fitz has QB'd 30 consecutive losses when that happens. As in 0-30 in his last 30 such games. 

The Jets were not an average football team last year. They weren't great but they were an above-average football team with a limited QB whose numbers were inflated by an easy offensive system, easy schedule, and a premiere pair of wideouts.  The Jets know it, too, which is why they haven't even offered Fitzpatrick a low-end going rate for an NFL starter. Or is the team's FO nothing but a bunch of "haters" as well? If only they recognized his importance as much as a casual fan like yourself!

Your ceiling/floor rebuttal is hilarious, in that you are making my point for me. He has a higher floor, not a higher ceiling, unless you believe 17 points to be his ceiling this coming season. Not to mention you are further 100% wrong about the defense and special teams not contributing even once to the magical 17 points. A FG in the last game resulted from a turnover where we took over already in FG range. A 2-yard handoff and 2 incomplete passes later, Bullock hit a 39 yard FG. I suppose you credit those points to Fitzpatrick lol. 

And yet again we have another who openly believes Jets wins are to be credited as Fitzpatrick wins, but Jets losses are team losses. Nice to see it illustrated right there in the same post for convenience. Thanks.

[Villain The Foe]

26 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

LOL they wouldn't have beaten the Raiders with Fitz either . What opponent has a Fitzpatrick team beaten when the opposition scored over 20 points and they need Fitz to still throw a football? Fitz has QB'd 30 consecutive losses when that happens. As in 0-30 in his last 30 such games. 

The Jets were not an average football team last year. They weren't great but they were an above-average football team with a limited QB whose numbers were inflated by an easy offensive system, easy schedule, and a premiere pair of wideouts.  The Jets know it, too, which is why they haven't even offered Fitzpatrick a low-end going rate for an NFL starter. Or is the team's FO nothing but a bunch of "haters" as well? If only they recognized his importance as much as a casual fan like yourself!

Your ceiling/floor rebuttal is hilarious, in that you are making my point for me. He has a higher floor, not a higher ceiling, unless you believe 17 points to be his ceiling this coming season. Not to mention you are further 100% wrong about the defense and special teams not contributing even once to the magical 17 points. A FG in the last game resulted from a turnover where we took over already in FG range. A 2-yard handoff and 2 incomplete passes later, Bullock hit a 39 yard FG. I suppose you credit those points to Fitzpatrick lol. 

And yet again we have another who openly believes Jets wins are to be credited as Fitzpatrick wins, but Jets losses are team losses. Nice to see it illustrated right there in the same post for convenience. Thanks.

When listening to the Fitzpatrick defense then seeing this stat above, in a passing league, I laugh every single time! 

 

Good post. 

[Big Blocker]

On ‎5‎/‎18‎/‎2016 at 5:00 PM, cant wait said:

Didn't they have RG and hoyer in for workouts? I also recall them inquiring about kap, mccown & glennon as well. I just don't think the price was right... Although hoyer for $2M seemed pretty reasonable, maybe they are higher on their current QB's than we think

There were issues with all the Qb's you mention, and for one example while I might have looked a bit harder at Hoyer, it is obvious the Jets did not pursue him after considering him, and had their reasons.  I meant other options you did not mention.

[Sperm Edwards]

2 minutes ago, Villain The Foe said:

When listening to the Fitzpatrick defense then seeing this stat above, in a passing league, I laugh every single time! 

 

Good post. 

It's incomprehensible. At some point you have to beat teams that score points. Even if it's a defense-first team, it happens, and they can't all be automatic losses.

I'm fine with him returning at up to $7M. It's more than some want to pay him and less than others (probably a little less than most, but not by a huge margin). I don't think he's good enough to QB this team to a SB win, but doubt anyone else on the roster will be QBing this team to a SB either. Re-signing him would have been worth an extra $2M at least as much as Jarvis Jenkins is worth an extra $2M (and a freaking draft pick next year) to be our #4 DE-DT for a year or two. The "we would have won with Fitzpatrick" after every/any loss will be intolerable so I'm fine with bringing him back at a little more than I'd prefer, just to put that to rest.  

I mean look at this comment I responded to: the defense gives up 34 points. That's not a team loss, that's a Geno Smith loss that surely would have been reversed with Fitzpatrick still in there. Contrast that with the defense surrendering 22 points to the Bills, and a Jets-D turnover gets us the ball already in FG range (where we only get a FG), and after multiple 4th quarter interceptions that is a team loss. Oakland scores 34 and we lose, the loss is on the not-Fitzpatrick QB; Buffalo scores a net 19 points on the D/ST, and the loss is on everyone. It's like a religion or something (and don't make a comment on that part, you freaking troublemaker).

[Big Blocker]

On ‎5‎/‎18‎/‎2016 at 5:16 PM, Sperm Edwards said:

They did bring in RGIII and leaked it publicly that they inquired into Kaepernick, Glennon (and maybe Hoyer as well but for some reason I can't remember the most recent one offhand). At some point if they too actively explore other options and look so desperate, without actually signing one, it gives Fitz more leverage. The message is: holy crap we can't go into the season with what we've got plus a rookie. We are so desperate...and came up short despite such desperation. 

I think he handled it about right but we'll find out for sure once we have the benefit of hindsight. In the end my guess is Fitz still returns. He gets a face-saving increase over the prior offer, even if it's only nominal, and gets to skip out on some of camp and avoid spring/early-summer injury in the process. 

First, I do agree with your second paragraph, and you might be right in the first about being TOO active.  But as it stands now I don't think the Jets have the greatest leverage.  People note that no one else has gone after Fitzpatrick, but that could change just like that once camp starts and some other team's starter gets hurt.

But yeah, when we see how this story ends, we'll better understand who played their hand better.

[Warfish]

It's funny, because I'm vastly more "Anti-Geno" than I am "Pro-Fitz".  

If we had signed a superior veteran QB to Fitz, Fitz would never have crossed my mind again this off-season.  Not even once.

It's the prospect of 16 games of Geno Smith that sickens me and makes me utterly unenthused for the 2016 season.  

Worse, the second the Geno excuse makers start tearing down the 2016 Jets Roster so as to make excuses for Geno.....If I had any hair left I'd be tearing it out at that point.  And lets not pretend the excuse makers won't pull out the same old tired excuses, bla blah talent, blah blah fair chance, blah blah got to know what we have.  

All I ask from the Jets every year is to go into a season with hope we can compete, and a belief that the front office is building for a consistent competitive team year to year.

Geno Smith as starter is, IMO, abandoning all hope for 2016 and saying, in brief, that the Jets don;t care about 2016 at all, and are happy to waste it to get Hack a year on the pine looking towards 2018 and beyond.  And that sucks.  I believe Geno Smith is a loser, a bad pick, and will never, ever amount to anything in this league.

We have (again IMO) a playoff talented roster.  To waste that to "find out what we have" in Geno Smith is a horrific waste.  I'm sick and tired of the Jets QB position being the laughing stock of the league, and the very definition of frustration and failure.  

[Big Blocker]

23 hours ago, Mike135 said:

Probably, but I'm not counting out Macc yet.  He seems pretty smart.

Really hoping he doesn't cave.

So does Smith.

"Cave".  Heh.

[Sperm Edwards]

13 minutes ago, Warfish said:

It's funny, because I'm vastly more "Anti-Geno" than I am "Pro-Fitz".  

If we had signed a superior veteran QB to Fitz, Fitz would never have crossed my mind again this off-season.  Not even once.

It's the prospect of 16 games of Geno Smith that sickens me and makes me utterly unenthused for the 2016 season.  

Worse, the second the Geno excuse makers start tearing down the 2016 Jets Roster so as to make excuses for Geno.....If I had any hair left I'd be tearing it out at that point.  And lets not pretend the excuse makers won't pull out the same old tired excuses, bla blah talent, blah blah fair chance, blah blah got to know what we have.  

All I ask from the Jets every year is to go into a season with hope we can compete, and a belief that the front office is building for a consistent competitive team year to year.

Geno Smith as starter is, IMO, abandoning all hope for 2016 and saying, in brief, that the Jets don;t care about 2016 at all, and are happy to waste it to get Hack a year on the pine looking towards 2018 and beyond.  And that sucks.  I believe Geno Smith is a loser, a bad pick, and will never, ever amount to anything in this league.

We have (again IMO) a playoff talented roster.  To waste that to "find out what we have" in Geno Smith is a horrific waste.  I'm sick and tired of the Jets QB position being the laughing stock of the league, and the very definition of frustration and failure.  

I don't think you have much to worry about Geno starting 16 games, almost all of them horribly. Really the 2 most likely outcomes are:

1. He starts the season, loses games against top teams we'd have lost most game to anyway, and it's then an easier/faster benching than Fitz would have been to transition to Hackenberg.

2. If he starts 16 games it'll be because he's not humiliating himself again, and actually did improve.

I don't think either of those scenarios is for the designed purpose of finding out what we have in Geno Smith. Even the second outcome, should it come to pass, I think they'd treat as a "wow, look what we found" situation. 

If it makes you feel any better I really do think they're bringing Fitzpatrick back. Something about the way Marshall - who speaks with Fitz regularly - said a week or so ago that he thought Fitz would be returning. At the time he said it, the 2 sides already hadn't spoken in weeks. Now the team is leaking a deadline of this coming Tuesday, so that might be their non-leverage-surrendering way of re-initiating talks. 

[Sperm Edwards]

15 minutes ago, Big Blocker said:

First, I do agree with your second paragraph, and you might be right in the first about being TOO active.  But as it stands now I don't think the Jets have the greatest leverage.  People note that no one else has gone after Fitzpatrick, but that could change just like that once camp starts and some other team's starter gets hurt.

But yeah, when we see how this story ends, we'll better understand who played their hand better.

See my above post. I do think they're re-signing Fitz (unless he's really got a hard line in the sand in that rumored $15-16M range). In that case, there's nothing more Maccagnan could have done about it, short of extending him for less in September (or during the team's 1-4 streak). 

[Sperm Edwards]

18 hours ago, slats said:

No problem at all. Similar to my employer having no problem adding a clause where I get a $3M bonus for banging Scarlett Johansson. 

For $3M you could easily fork over a couple bucks to get a girlfriend, or even any prostitute, to change her legal name (or his legal name, hey now) to Scarlett Johansson & then get a "service" after that. 

[Big Blocker]

4 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

See my above post. I do think they're re-signing Fitz (unless he's really got a hard line in the sand in that rumored $15-16M range). In that case, there's nothing more Maccagnan could have done about it, short of extending him for less in September (or during the team's 1-4 streak). 

Fwiw I don't think he's drawing that kind of line in the sand, because that kind of info probably would have come out if true.

I did want to comment on an earlier comment about no other teams pursuing him.

I don't think it is significant or meaningful to say that 31 teams have passed on Fitzpatrick.  In fact almost all of those 31 already have a starting Qb under contract, and could only even consider offering Fitzpatrick anywhere near starting money by in effect double paying for their Qb slot on the roster. Why would they?  They already have a starting Qb on their roster who they are reasonably satisfied with.

And of course beyond that the fact if you want to see it as such that other teams are set at Qb with players who even on average might be better than Fitzpatrick does not speak to the situation the Jets have.  The Jets' situation (since for the reasons that apply they did not go elsewhere with vet Qb options) at this point is they either sign Fitzpatrick or start Smith, who flat out sucks and is a proven failure.  In other words at this point what the other NFL teams did and did not do is not significant (or as they used to say in the 19th Cent. "does not signify").

[ylekram]

18 hours ago, slats said:

18 hours ago, slats said:

No problem at all. Similar to my employer having no problem adding a clause where I get a $3M bonus for banging Scarlett Johansson. 

No problem at all. Similar to my employer having no problem adding a clause where I get a $3M bonus for banging Scarlett Johansson. 

scarlet fever? maybe. scarlet Johansson, or even a llok a like? not in the cards for you, slats