Gather your pitchforks, light your torches...

[Mainejet]

8 minutes ago, gEYno said:

I don't get the Wilkerson issue.  Shouldn't we be happy that we kept our best player?  We're paying him a lot this year, but we still can potentially resign him and we also can still franchise and trade him again.

I guess I'm not all that disappointed we didn't lose a guy who's a top player (Yes, I know he's not JJ Watt) on the field for a draft pick that we could all complain about when he isn't the guy we wanted.

That's exactly what you're not understanding. First of all his contract demands are simply too high. He wants MORE money than what JJ Watt is getting and he is not worth it by a long shot. His cap number this season is 15.7 million and that will surely cause problems for the Jets wanting/needing some potential free agents. Hell, they are barely capable of signing their draft picks right now. If Mac hadn't signed Mo by now, what in the world makes you think he'll be able to now?

Next season it becomes even harder for the Jets to franchise Mo again. His number would up approximately another 1.5 million. Making his number approximately 17 and change million dollars. Trading Mo would have allowed Mac to free up almost 16 million in cap space and given us extra ammunition in the draft to confront things like TE or the OL - two areas of major neglect.

[ZachEY]

Just now, Mainejet said:

That's exactly what you're not understanding. First of all his contract are simply too high. He wants MORE money than what JJ Watt is getting and he is not worth it by a long shot. His cap number this season is 15.7 million and that will surely cause problems for the Jets wanting/needing some potential free agents. Hell, they are barely capable of signing their draft picks right now. If Mac hadn't signed Mo by now, what in the world makes you think he'll be able to now?

Next season it becomes even harder for the Jets to franchise Mo again. His number would up approximately another 1.5 million. Making his number approximately 17 and change million dollars. Trading Mo would have allowed Mac to free up almost 16 million in cap space and given us extra ammunition in the draft to confront things like TE or the OL - two areas of major neglect.

I guess you have proof to support that he wants more than Watt?

[BowlesMovement]

22 minutes ago, Mainejet said:

Well, first of all I do think he should have taken an OL. There were a lot of targets for the 2nd round. The Darron Lee pick makes no sense whatsoever. He's a small fry trying to play in a 3-4 alignment. The guy can fly around the field, but I think his best fit is as a Safety. I would have traded down out of the 1st round and gathered more picks rather than selecting a guy that is miscast in this defense

I would have also found a trade partner for Mo. The fact is now he's going to highjack our salary cap and leave after this season anyway. That's an automatic "F" for Mac IMO. Mo was/is the franchise and getting nothing for him is inexcuseable. If he had traded him we could have accumulated more picks in the 2nd and 3rd rounds. I would have selected Jason Spriggs in the 2nd round or tried to trade up and grab Laremy Tunsil. Under any circumstances, I would have selected a TE. Like Tyler Higbee or Jerron Lee in the 4th round. That would have been for starts. 

Couple of thoughts..... 1) it takes two to trade Mo, we don't know if he could have gotten anything for him, he very likely tried. 2) How are we going to win a SB this year or in the future without a QB, your plan does not adress the future QB, I take it you don't like Hack, but I don't see who you propose is the QB to win this SB.

[Rangers9]

 

On March 8, 2016 at 0:04 PM, sirlancemehlot said:

Because I'm going to do the unthinkable.  Criticize Mike Macagnan.  I hated Tannenbaum because he pissed away money (read: cap space) like a drunken sailor.  Well.  Idzik, love him or hate him, he fixed the Tannenbaum problem.  He cut dead weight,  signed very few, and turned the Jets cap into one of the best situations in the league, from one of the worst.  One year removed and we're in the worst cap hell in the league.  And we're about to lose our starting running back, nose tackle, quarterback, and already cut our #2 corner.  This isn't Idzik vs. Mac.  It's Mac vs. 31 other GM's in the league.  Take a deep breath now, and give me running start...Mac did a bad job.  

I think it's too early to give Mac a poor grade. It takes at least 3 years to evaluate a GM. But Mac imo wasn't Exec of the year the Panthers GM or Elway was. But what you said isn't frivolous and you didn't deserve a -19 from our clueless fan base.

[ZachEY]

9 minutes ago, BowlesMovement said:

Couple of thoughts..... 1) it takes two to trade Mo, we don't know if he could have gotten anything for him, he very likely tried. 2) How are we going to win a SB this year or in the future without a QB, your plan does not adress the future QB, I take it you don't like Hack, but I don't see who you propose is the QB to win this SB.

Quite simply, I think some are more impressed by a team that missed the playoffs with the league's easiest schedule than perhaps they should be.  This is an old and average at best football team who were helped to look better than they were by a QB performance ripe for regression to the mean.

[Rangers9]

9 minutes ago, gEYno said:

Quite simply, I think some are more impressed by a team that missed the playoffs with the league's easiest schedule than perhaps they should be.  This is an old and average at best football team who were helped to look better than they were by a QB performance ripe for regression to the mean.

Imo you don't assume a player is going to regress unless there were injuries. Esp coming off of a good year. And when Jets players including your two best playmakers think the team can go forward not backward and the Qb (Fitz) is the leader of the team then why make a change at the most important position on the team. It makes no sense at all and saying we won because of a weak schedule doesn't give our team any credit for their accomplishments. It's a bogus argument and pretty negative.

[peekskill68]

In a couple of years does anyone think we're going to give a crap about how he handled free agency in 2016 if Hack turns out to be a franchise QB?  If Hack turns out to be the real deal, Macc will be put in in the ring of honor next to Weeb...

[ZachEY]

2 minutes ago, Rangers9 said:

Imo you don't assume a player is going to regress unless there were injuries. Esp coming off of a good year. And when Jets players including your two best playmakers think the team can go forward not backward and the Qb (Fitz) is the leader of the team then why make a change at the most important position on the team. It makes no sense at all and saying we won because of a weak schedule doesn't give our team any credit for their accomplishments. It's a bogus argument and pretty negative.

Sorry, but the facts are that we missed the playoffs and we played the league's weakest schedule.  That is not a bogus argument at all, it's simply a retelling of the facts.  It is in fact, last season's "accomplishments."

But, yes, you can certainly expect, or at least be weary of a regression when a player 1) is 33 years old 2) has never played at that level before 3) played the leagues easiest schedule 4) had a number of exceptionally poor games.  In fact, if you don't expect a regression, then you pay him the $16M he is reportedly asking for.

[Rangers9]

If you really analyze the 2015 draft so far no home runs even though Williams was pretty good. But he isn't so far an impact player which is what you hope for at overall 6. The rest of the draft just fair so far and out of the six guys drafted he cut two guys who ended up on their PS. So that draft now wasn't an A like some experts gave him. 

[nyjunc]

1 minute ago, Rangers9 said:

If you really analyze the 2015 draft so far no home runs even though Williams was pretty good. But he isn't so far an impact player which is what you hope for at overall 6. The rest of the draft just fair so far and out of the six guys drafted he cut two guys who ended up on their PS. So that draft now wasn't an A like some experts gave him. 

they have only played a year and williams is an impact player already.

[slats]

22 minutes ago, gEYno said:

Quite simply, I think some are more impressed by a team that missed the playoffs with the league's easiest schedule than perhaps they should be.  This is an old and average at best football team who were helped to look better than they were by a QB performance ripe for regression to the mean.

This is 100% my take. Fun year, but there was a lot of smoke and mirrors going on. The rebuilding/retooling continues this year. No matter who's under center, I do not expect another ten win year. And I'm fine with that, actually. Develop some of the kids, and hope to have everyone ready to go -along with a QB- in 2017. 

[Rangers9]

3 minutes ago, gEYno said:

Sorry, but the facts are that we missed the playoffs and we played the league's weakest schedule.  That is not a bogus argument at all, it's simply a retelling of the facts.  It is in fact, last season's "accomplishments."

But, yes, you can certainly expect, or at least be weary of a regression when a player 1) is 33 years old 2) has never played at that level before 3) played the leagues easiest schedule 4) had a number of exceptionally poor games.  In fact, if you don't expect a regression, then you pay him the $16M he is reportedly asking for.

You're making assumptions that are basically not logical. Who says he's asking for 16 mil per season. Show me a verified source on that not just speculation. And Jets players including Willie Colon and his star receivers think that re-signing Fitz is essential to winning in 2016. The players don't think those 10 Ws were BS last season. 

[Rangers9]

5 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

they have only played a year and williams is an impact player already.

No way. He didn't have big stats. He's a good player so far not impact.

[nyjunc]

7 minutes ago, Rangers9 said:

No way. He didn't have big stats. He's a good player so far not impact.

so you need big stats to have an impact?  this might explain your fascination with Fitz.

[Augustiniak]

On defense, the jets have 2 old guys, revis and harris, and lee is slated to replace harris.  so on defense, there's only 1 guy, revis, who is 'old' and there is no obvious succession.

On offense, they have mangold, marshall and forte as the 'old' guys.  wr and ot will probably be focal points of FA and the draft next season when they're considerably under the cap and they're not looking for a qb b/c hackenberg is the successor for better or worse.  the whole 'old' thing comes from revis and marshall, who are probably the 2 best players on the team, both being over 30.  that does not mean they are in win now any more than any other team, since about 28 are in win now mode.  it's absurd to say the jets are in win now mode when they're the only team in the nfl who doesn't have a clear starting qb right now.  you can look at most every other team and say they're in win now mode worse than the jets b/c they are overpaying a qb who is aging or b/c the team hasn't made the playoffs in years and the gm overspent and the owner is getting restless.  

  

[Larz]

My main problem with Macc is when he had cash he spent waaaaaaay to much on Revis and skrine, and mo is unsigned.

 

That's not good

[Big Blocker]

36 minutes ago, gEYno said:

Quite simply, I think some are more impressed by a team that missed the playoffs with the league's easiest schedule than perhaps they should be.  This is an old and average at best football team who were helped to look better than they were by a QB performance ripe for regression to the mean.

Someone else answered the question about Wilkerson, Maine, even if I don't agree with all he said, but the problem is the situation remains unresolved and is not likely to be resolved.

But I keep seeing this argument made that the Jets had an easy schedule last year.  The fact is 10 of the games they played were against teams that were .500 or better in 2014.  Sure it turned out some of the teams they played, like Indy, were not as strong as the year before, but that was partly because they lost to the Jets.

Plus you usually (nearly 90% of the time ) make the playoffs with ten wins.

It is such a weak rhetorical point you are making here.  In any event you play the opponents on the schedule. 

[Rangers9]

16 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

so you need big stats to have an impact?  this might explain your fascination with Fitz.

Look I'm giving you my opinion after watching him for a season. And I think most would agree he wasn't an impact player. He wasn't significant in terms of sacks, Qb pressures, tackles, etc. An impact player makes game changing plays and I didn't see him do that. He was a steady player and a contributor but so far imo that's it. To me last year Fitz was a B but his importance to the team raised the bar for him. 

[nyjunc]

15 minutes ago, Big Blocker said:

Someone else answered the question about Wilkerson, Maine, even if I don't agree with all he said, but the problem is the situation remains unresolved and is not likely to be resolved.

But I keep seeing this argument made that the Jets had an easy schedule last year.  The fact is 10 of the games they played were against teams that were .500 or better in 2014.  Sure it turned out some of the teams they played, like Indy, were not as strong as the year before, but that was partly because they lost to the Jets.

Plus you usually (nearly 90% of the time ) make the playoffs with ten wins.

It is such a weak rhetorical point you are making here.  In any event you play the opponents on the schedule. 

Cleveland- awful

Indy- medicore(they were still healthy early in season)

Philly- mediocre

Miami- awful

Wash-had good season but were not good when we played them- loss dropped them to 2-4.

NE- first game top team

oak- were playing well when we faced them

jax- terrible

Buf-decent when we faced them first time

Hou- playing well at the time

Miami- awful

NYG- awful

Ten- beyond awful

Dallas- awful

NE- did not play to win against us

Buf- had quit

 

our sched was very easy last year, not quite as easy as 2008 but still easy.

 

[nyjunc]

3 minutes ago, Rangers9 said:

Look I'm giving you my opinion after watching him for a season. And I think most would agree he wasn't an impact player. He wasn't significant in terms of sacks, Qb pressures, tackles, etc. An impact player makes game changing plays and I didn't see him do that. He was a steady player and a contributor but so far imo that's it. To me last year Fitz was a B but his importance to the team raised the bar for him. 

you are entitled to your opinion but I guess you don't consider Richardson an impact player?  he only has 16 1/2 sacks in 3 seasons.

[Rangers9]

1 minute ago, nyjunc said:

you are entitled to your opinion but I guess you don't consider Richardson an impact player?  he only has 16 1/2 sacks in 3 seasons.

He's not an impact player yet, either. But he's better than Williams so far. Of Jets D players Wilk is closest to being an impact player. You're right in that it's not just on stats but a lot of sacks and pressures doesn't hurt in terms of evaluating players. 

[peekskill68]

27 minutes ago, Larz said:

My main problem with Macc is when he had cash he spent waaaaaaay to much on Revis and skrine, and mo is unsigned.

 

That's not good

Agree on Revis but I'm not sure lack of cash has been the issue with Mo.  It's always been about perceived value.  The Jets FO just doesn't put the same value on Mo as what he and his agent feel is doable with another team...

[nyjets782]

2 hours ago, Mainejet said:

Now after most of the offseason has concluded, I am in complete agreement with you. Mac was an idiot with the draft. The team lost two very good players and Mac did a piss poor job backfilling. It was a noble attempt at trying to sway the pendulum, but ultimately failure. This team is much worse now on paper than they were at any point last season. As I've said many times already, the GM's job is not to replace roster losses. The job is to replace roster losses and simultaneously make the team better year by year. The job is to win the SB not shoot for 10-6 every season. And actually he even failed miserably at that because this team is no better than about 6 wins as of right now.

 

Whenever anyone on this board questions their ability to be successful in life, I hope posts like this give them confidence.

[Rangers9]

18 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

Cleveland- awful

Indy- medicore(they were still healthy early in season)

Philly- mediocre

Miami- awful

Wash-had good season but were not good when we played them- loss dropped them to 2-4.

NE- first game top team

oak- were playing well when we faced them

jax- terrible

Buf-decent when we faced them first time

Hou- playing well at the time

Miami- awful

NYG- awful

Ten- beyond awful

Dallas- awful

NE- did not play to win against us

Buf- had quit

 

our sched was very easy last year, not quite as easy as 2008 but still easy.

 

Do you evaluate strength of schedule based on previous year (or in case of last season 2014) or after the fact: 2015, based on 2015. Some of those teams you call terrible might not be so bad in '16. The Panthers were bad in '14 but great in '15. It's roly poly and to me not reliable.

[Augustiniak]

4 minutes ago, peekskill68 said:

Agree on Revis but I'm not sure lack of cash has been the issue with Mo.  It's always been about perceived value.  The Jets FO just doesn't put the same value on Mo as what he and his agent feel is doable with another team...

the problem with mo from mccags standpoint is that it has been reported numerous times that they think sheldon is better, and they play the same position.  of course sheldon's potential problems with suspensions enter into it at some point but the FO would rather not give 2 guys long term deals who play the same position.  then they get lucky and leonard williams is there at 6.  so there was just no way they were/are going to pay mo that kind of money when they have sheldon who they think is better and leonard who is cheaper.  the money needs to be allocated next year in FA when they will pursue a tackle, their big FA spending next year.

[nyjets782]

48 minutes ago, Rangers9 said:

No way. He didn't have big stats. He's a good player so far not impact.

If your sole criteria for judging a 3-4 defensive end is stats, you do not understand the job of a 3-4 defensive end.

[ZachEY]

52 minutes ago, Rangers9 said:

You're making assumptions that are basically not logical. Who says he's asking for 16 mil per season. Show me a verified source on that not just speculation. And Jets players including Willie Colon and his star receivers think that re-signing Fitz is essential to winning in 2016. The players don't think those 10 Ws were BS last season. 

I neither work for the Jets, nor am I Fitzpatrick's agent, nor a member of his family, so I do not know what he is asking for for sure, but I do know that just about every report indicates it is around 16M.  So, I'm basing it on that, and the fact that he's still not signed.

Who cares what the players said, Marshall just said he's 100% confident in Geno.  Does that mean we are going forward with Geno?

I also never called them BS.  I pointed out that we did not make the playoffs and we played the weakest schedule in the league.  Both of these are simply facts, despite how you want to address them.

[nyjunc]

10 minutes ago, Rangers9 said:

Do you evaluate strength of schedule based on previous year (or in case of last season 2014) or after the fact: 2015, based on 2015. Some of those teams you call terrible might not be so bad in '16. The Panthers were bad in '14 but great in '15. It's roly poly and to me not reliable.

I was evaluating based on 2015 at the time we played each team.  This was for last season not this coming season.

[Rangers9]

1 minute ago, gEYno said:

I neither work for the Jets, nor am I Fitzpatrick's agent, nor a member of his family, so I do not know what he is asking for for sure, but I do know that just about every report indicates it is around 16M.  So, I'm basing it on that, and the fact that he's still not signed.

Who cares what the players said, Marshall just said he's 100% confident in Geno.  Does that mean we are going forward with Geno?

I also never called them BS.  I pointed out that we did not make the playoffs and we played the weakest schedule in the league.  Both of these are simply facts, despite how you want to address them.

I don't think he's asking for 16 per because it's not reasonable. And not all reports say 16 mil but some do all unsubstantiated. If they are true then the reporter should give his source not say things like: "we have heard" or "reports say" etc. And as Jets fans we should know not to believe everything we read. But if he is asking for that kind of money he won't get it. 

[slats]

13 minutes ago, Rangers9 said:

Do you evaluate strength of schedule based on previous year (or in case of last season 2014) or after the fact: 2015, based on 2015. Some of those teams you call terrible might not be so bad in '16. The Panthers were bad in '14 but great in '15. It's roly poly and to me not reliable.

Here's a list of every team in the NFL in the order of difficulty of schedule, with opponents' winning percentage on the right. Jets tied the Panthers at .441 for the league's easiest schedule. The Panthers went 15-1 against theirs. No idea what the he'll you're talking about. 

1. Chicago Bears .547
2. San Francisco 49ers .539
3. Detroit Lions .535
4. Cleveland Browns .531
4. Green Bay Packers .531
4. Dallas Cowboys .531
7. San Diego Chargers .527
7. St. Louis Rams .527
9. Seattle Seahawks .520 
10. Oakland Raiders .512
11. Buffalo Bills .508
11. Baltimore Ravens .508
11. Philadelphia Eagles .508
14. Pittsburgh Steelers .504
14. Minnesota Vikings .504
14. New Orleans Saints .504
17. Denver Broncos .500 
17. Indianapolis Colts.500
17. New York Giants .500
20. Houston Texans .496
20. Kansas City Chiefs .496
22. Tennessee Titans .492
23. Tampa Bay Buccaneers .484
24. Atlanta Falcons .480
25. Cincinnati Bengals .477
25. Arizona Cardinals .477
27. New England Patriots .473
27. Jacksonville Jaguars .473
29. Miami Dolphins .469
30. Washington Redskins .465
31. New York Jets .441
31. Carolina Panthers .441

[ZachEY]

44 minutes ago, Big Blocker said:

Someone else answered the question about Wilkerson, Maine, even if I don't agree with all he said, but the problem is the situation remains unresolved and is not likely to be resolved.

But I keep seeing this argument made that the Jets had an easy schedule last year.  The fact is 10 of the games they played were against teams that were .500 or better in 2014.  Sure it turned out some of the teams they played, like Indy, were not as strong as the year before, but that was partly because they lost to the Jets.

Plus you usually (nearly 90% of the time ) make the playoffs with ten wins.

It is such a weak rhetorical point you are making here.  In any event you play the opponents on the schedule. 

Mo Wilkerson is playing for the Jets this season.  That's a resolution.  Even if it's one you do not like because you don't know what next season will hold.

Who cares how the teams the Jets played in 2015 did in 2014?  Even if you do, they were 18th ranked in strength of schedule going into the season.  Yes, the Jets affected their opponents strength of schedule by beating them, but that's only 1/16 of their season, not enough to make a significant difference.  Beyond that, the "argument" you're talking about is just another fact, not an argument at all.  At the end of the season, the Jets played the weakest schedule in the league by opponent win percentage.

As far as that 90% of the time, can you back that number up?  Or, did you just make it up right now?

Yes, you do play the opponents on the schedule.  Again, no one is killing them for winning ten games.  But, if you want to make educated projections about how the team might perform in the future they become useful.  For instance, suppose two teams finish 8-8 in 2016... one team played the weakest strength of schedule and one team played the most difficult schedule.  Which team is more likely to improve upon that mark in 2017?

[Rangers9]

2 minutes ago, slats said:

Here's a list of every team in the NFL in the order of difficulty of schedule, with opponents' winning percentage on the right. Jets tied the Panthers at .441 for the league's easiest schedule. The Panthers went 15-1 against theirs. No idea what the he'll you're talking about. 

1. Chicago Bears .547
2. San Francisco 49ers .539
3. Detroit Lions .535
4. Cleveland Browns .531
4. Green Bay Packers .531
4. Dallas Cowboys .531
7. San Diego Chargers .527
7. St. Louis Rams .527
9. Seattle Seahawks .520 
10. Oakland Raiders .512
11. Buffalo Bills .508
11. Baltimore Ravens .508
11. Philadelphia Eagles .508
14. Pittsburgh Steelers .504
14. Minnesota Vikings .504
14. New Orleans Saints .504
17. Denver Broncos .500 
17. Indianapolis Colts.500
17. New York Giants .500
20. Houston Texans .496
20. Kansas City Chiefs .496
22. Tennessee Titans .492
23. Tampa Bay Buccaneers .484
24. Atlanta Falcons .480
25. Cincinnati Bengals .477
25. Arizona Cardinals .477
27. New England Patriots .473
27. Jacksonville Jaguars .473
29. Miami Dolphins .469
30. Washington Redskins .465
31. New York Jets .441
31. Carolina Panthers .441

My question was how is this determined. 

[kmnj]

I like some things mac has done-bmarsh was a STEAL, forte will be a STEAL, our left tackle was a great risk reward move

 

now sadly on to the negative

the Mo and Fitz situations have been terribly handled no matter what your position is on either player and their values

our new "franchise QB" is awful-his last two years are the guy were are getting here when we passed on a guy will will be a great qb in lynch( a guy multiple teams wanted and tried to trade up for"

This draft will be like the draft where we passed up marino for kenny o-the next two decades us fans will be saying to think we drafted a clown that lasted less than 3 years with the jets while Lynch has become a stud qb

 

 

[slats]

3 minutes ago, Rangers9 said:

My question was how is this determined. 

By how many games each team won in 2015. Pretty straight forward. 

[ZachEY]

10 minutes ago, Rangers9 said:

I don't think he's asking for 16 per because it's not reasonable. And not all reports say 16 mil but some do all unsubstantiated. If they are true then the reporter should give his source not say things like: "we have heard" or "reports say" etc. And as Jets fans we should know not to believe everything we read. But if he is asking for that kind of money he won't get it. 

You are arguing the least relevant portion of all of this.  You realize that right?

Regardless of the number... If Fitzpatrick was asking 16M, or for a reasonable number, or something closer to a reasonable number (as you claim), and the Jets expected him to give another 30 TD performance, and not regress at all, then in all likelihood the Jets and Fitz would have come to an agreement by now.  They haven't, which likely indicates that the team does not expect another performance like last season, or equally possible, that the performance last year wasn't as good as the stat sheet made it look.