Why the Jets haven't reworked D'Brickashaw Ferguson's contract ~ ~ ~

[kelly]

There's a lot of chatter among fans and media about the possibility of theNew York Jets reworking D'Brickashaw Ferguson's contract to create more salary-cap room. His $14.1 million cap charge jumps off the page, making him an obvious candidate, but the Jets haven't approached him (yet) and here's why:

They're not facing a financially driven deadline.

In cases like this, the team often has to make a decision on the player and his contract early in the league year (which begins Wednesday), when roster bonuses typically are paid. The deadline forces both sides to the bargaining table before money changes hands. Once the team doles out a nice-sized roster bonus, it loses its leverage. (It should be noted, however, that Darrelle Revis was traded in 2013 after receiving a $1 million roster bonus from the Jets, but that was unusual.)Ferguson has a total of $1.75 million in bonus money this offseason, but none of it is due immediately. It includes a $750,000 workout bonus (June) and a $1 million roster bonus payable upon the completion of training camp. As you can see, there's no sense of urgency for the Jets -- unless, of course, they're desperate for cap room, which they might be.

The Jets could try to slow-play the Ferguson situation, waiting until after the first wave of free agency to approach him. By then, there will be fewer job opportunities around the league, creating leverage for the team in any negotiations with their longtime left tackle.Ferguson has an $8.625 million base salary, plus the $1.75 million in bonuses, plus a $3.7 million pro-ration charge on an old signing bonus. It adds up to $14.1 million, the highest cap charge for an offensive lineman in the NFL. The ideal scenario for the Jets would be a straight pay cut, which would lower his cap charge without adding money into 2017, the final year of the contract. Whether Ferguson agrees is another story.

The Jets would save $9.1 million by releasing Ferguson, but they'd be cutting off their nose to spite their face. He may not be what he was, but the future Ring of Honor member still is a solid left tackle. The Jets also don't have a replacement on campus.

>     http://espn.go.com/blog/new-york-jets/post/_/id/58844/why-the-jets-havent-re-worked-dbrickashaw-fergusons-contract

[32EBoozer]

I can see how MacDaddy can try and dictate terms of a new less costly contract. After FA Brick will have less options and might take a 2 yr. 16 contract with zero guaranteed next yr. 

It would be nice to be able to sign a younger replacement this FA period however.  Well...I guess we'll see how it goes tomorrow 

[Maxman]

I think that is it 100%. They will approach Brick in late March and try to wrap this up in April. Why do it now when Brick has the leverage? If the Jets threaten to waive him, lots of teams have lots of money.

Wait until the free agency feeding frenzy is over, then the team will have more leverage.

[Beerfish]

I think Brick is going to hang on here for one more year, the Jets will draft a tackle and then cutting D'Brick next year gives us much more savings.  I guess a lot depends on what the org really thinks of him going forward.  If they think he is still useful for 2 or 3 more years then they may do a restructure.

[Maxman]

7 minutes ago, Beerfish said:

I think Brick is going to hang on here for one more year, the Jets will draft a tackle and then cutting D'Brick next year gives us much more savings.  I guess a lot depends on what the org really thinks of him going forward.  If they think he is still useful for 2 or 3 more years then they may do a restructure.

I think they have to bring down the # this year regardless.

[Joe Jets fan]

Restructure at much less $$ or get cut.   I can see doing it at the end of the month. 

[BurnleyJet]

He's aweful, been a good player over the years, but his play has fallen of the cliff last two years. He's bottom 5 starting LT, payed like top 5. We need the cap more then we need him at 14 mill per.

[PatsFanTX]

He's aweful, been a good player over the years, but his play has fallen of the cliff last two years. He's bottom 5 starting LT, payed like top 5. We need the cap more then we need him at 14 mill per.

If you think Brick is a "bottom 5" LT, then you don't know anything about NFL football.

[The Crusher]

30 minutes ago, PatsFanTX said:

If you think Brick is a "bottom 5" LT, then you don't know anything about NFL football.

Wait a damn minute..   Screw this I quit

[redlichtie]

10 hours ago, PatsFanTX said:

If you think Brick is a "bottom 5" LT, then you don't know anything about NFL football.

Thank you, it never ceases to amaze how little credit Brick gets from Jets fans. We have plenty of players we overrate but to criminally undervalue a guy who has never taken a play off and is still relatively young for his position is bizarre. He may not be the absolutely unanimous No 1 best shutdown tackle in all of football but he's a damn site nearer to that than he is bottom 5. Sure his cap number is high but that likely will change but in my view some guys have earned the right to be paid through their loyalty and actions and deeds both on and off the field.

it's sad it takes a Patriots fan to appreciate that

[The Troll]

Thank you, it never ceases to amaze how little credit Brick gets from Jets fans. We have plenty of players we overrate but to criminally undervalue a guy who has never taken a play off and is still relatively young for his position is bizarre. He may not be the absolutely unanimous No 1 best shutdown tackle in all of football but he's a damn site nearer to that than he is bottom 5. Sure his cap number is high but that likely will change but in my view some guys have earned the right to be paid through their loyalty and actions and deeds both on and off the field.

it's sad it takes a Patriots fan to appreciate that

32 year old 11 year pro is not "relatively young" for any position except maybe for an all-time great QB.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sperm Edwards]

Great to hear that none of Ferguson's 2016 bonus $ is due until after the draft and FA are both overwith. Means we can move on from him without an obvious, gaping hole influencing Mac into a bad decision. IMO leaving him as starter, with a nearly $15M cap charge no less, should get him to find a replacement as it stands. But the best news is it looks like he's doing just that and is doing it in a non-panicky way, by not cutting or approaching him even 1 minute before he needs to, and by not extending him with guarantees just to make some temporary cap room for a team who doesn't have a known, good answer for the QB position.

What if we find ourselves staring at a good LT prospect in round 1 who fell a little, and swapped out Breno for a better veteran replacement? Well if we "restructured" (read: guaranteed an extension of) Ferguson, we'd likely pass up on that opportunity because we'd again be drafting a player at a position that we've already financially committed the team to for the 2 upcoming seasons. It's a waste. First round picks aren't just better prospects outright; they're also prospects that we should have a reasonable expectation to be not just starters but immediate starters. Projects and backups you groom are for the later rounds. So if a LT prospect is there or within reach, I'd want Mac to pounce on him and just cut Ferguson outright (unless we can find a trade partner to fork over any pick, which would be even better).