Contract Details Emerge for Powell, Robinson

[JetNation]

By Glenn Naughton

 

Following earlier reports of the Jets coming to terms with running backs Bilal Powell and Khiry Robinson, Tom Pelissero is reporting the details of each signing via twitter.

#Jets running back deals: 3 years, $11.25M for Bilal Powell with $6M fully guaranteed. 1-year, $1.175M for Khiry Robinson, $80K guaranteed.

— Tom Pelissero (@TomPelissero) March 11, 2016

According to Rich Cimini of ESPN.com, the Jets were sitting at $5.3 million in salary cap space prior to yesterday’s signings.

Jets have $5.3M in cap room, per NFLPA. Doesn't include Forte, Powell, Robinson deals. They've got some trimming to do. #nyj

— Rich Cimini (@RichCimini) March 10, 2016

Even with the revamped backfield, the Jets are still in a staring contest with quarterback Ryan Fitzpatrick who has reportedly been contacted by the Denver Broncos.

Click here to read the full story...

[Larz]

I looked at over the cap and the only guy they can cut and get any decent savings without making dead money is breno

I wonder if they have a trade partner for mo ?

[32EBoozer]

1 minute ago, Larz said:

I looked at over the cap and the only guy they can cut and get any decent savings without making dead money is breno

I wonder if they have a trade partner for mo ?

Larz.... don't be so concerned with Dead Money.

Every team carries it. If getting rid of a player a yr. early gives you significant savings and allows them to upgrade the position, you do it.

[Larz]

1 minute ago, 32EBoozer said:

Larz.... don't be so concerned with Dead Money.

Every team carries it. If getting rid of a player a yr. early gives you significant savings and allows them to upgrade the position, you do it.

but if the dead money is equivalent to the savings you are painting yourself into a corner and headed to cap hell.  c'mon dude

[32EBoozer]

4 minutes ago, Larz said:

but if the dead money is equivalent to the savings you are painting yourself into a corner and headed to cap hell.  c'mon dude

Regarding Brick, this is not the case. Breno is all savings, Brick is $7m this yr. and $13m that will never have to be paid next yr.

[jgb]

Gonna be some restructuring going down

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mike135]

So we need to clear like 5mil just to get under the cap now.  Then more for any additional FAs and rookies.

How exactly does 8-10-12+mil for Fitz fit in?

Oh yeahhhh, it's Geno-Time!

[bealeb319]

3 minutes ago, Mike135 said:

So we need to clear like 5mil just to get under the cap now.  Then more for any additional FAs and rookies.

How exactly does 8-10-12+mil for Fitz fit in?

Oh yeahhhh, it's Geno-Time!

I think its funny going into the season last year everyone kind of accepted that Geno was our starter and Fitz was going to be our backup now everyone is freaking out because Fitz might not come back. I want Fitz back but at the end of the day we have the offensive weapons to make a scrub QB look decent. We are still in a decent position to win even with Geno throwing the ball in my opinion.

[Jetdawgg]

16 minutes ago, bealeb319 said:

I think its funny going into the season last year everyone kind of accepted that Geno was our starter and Fitz was going to be our backup now everyone is freaking out because Fitz might not come back. I want Fitz back but at the end of the day we have the offensive weapons to make a scrub QB look decent. We are still in a decent position to win even with Geno throwing the ball in my opinion.

With this backfield Geno won't be throwing too far nor too often. I really look for the Jets to go for OL. Brick and Breno may be at risk here.

[jgb]

27 minutes ago, Mike135 said:

So we need to clear like 5mil just to get under the cap now.  Then more for any additional FAs and rookies.

How exactly does 8-10-12+mil for Fitz fit in?

Oh yeahhhh, it's Geno-Time!

Cap isn't static it changes almost every day for every team this time of year

[Jet Nut]

Well the Jets just announced that Forte has officially signed on.  

As has Robinson

[Sperm Edwards]

28 minutes ago, 32EBoozer said:

Regarding Brick, this is not the case. Breno is all savings, Brick is $7m this yr. and $13m that will never have to be paid next yr.

Brick is not $7M in dead cap. Not unless you have it in mind to pay him a bunch of bonus money this spring before cutting him. 

[CrazyCarl40]

The running back contracts are a work of art. Perfect. 

[EM31]

57 minutes ago, Larz said:

I looked at over the cap and the only guy they can cut and get any decent savings without making dead money is breno

I wonder if they have a trade partner for mo ?

I was wondering the same exact thing

[32EBoozer]

34 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Brick is not $7M in dead cap. Not unless you have it in mind to pay him a bunch of bonus money this spring before cutting him. 

You misread or I mistyped(but it didn't read that way)

I said Brick is $7m Net Cap savings this year.

[David Harris]

1 hour ago, Larz said:

I looked at over the cap and the only guy they can cut and get any decent savings without making dead money is breno

I wonder if they have a trade partner for mo ?

How long did you look for?

Nick Mangold, 32 year old Center.

2016: $8.6 million dollar cap hit with zero dead money if cut.

[hawk]

I can't believe they gave Powell ~$4 Million per.  

[hawk]

11 minutes ago, 32EBoozer said:

You misread or I mistyped(but it didn't read that way)

I said Brick is $7m Net Cap savings this year.

Right now, Brick would save nearly $11 Million.  

[jgb]

3 minutes ago, hawk said:

I can't believe they gave Powell ~$4 Million per.  

That contract puts Powell in the unenviable position of potentially becoming the next Jeremy Kerley. But for now good for him he's done all that's asked of him and never complained once. Save your money, though, Bilal...

[Sperm Edwards]

20 minutes ago, 32EBoozer said:

You misread or I mistyped(but it didn't read that way)

I said Brick is $7m Net Cap savings this year.

No it's more than that. This one goes up to 11.

We save that which we don't pay him: $8.6M salary and $2.3M bonus. $11M total. The $3M amortized bonus amount hits whether he's kept or cut. 

We can choose whether or not next year's $1.3M amortized bonus amount hits this year or next year, but for the ease of math let's say we choose to make it hit next year. Well, if we kept him that money would have hit next year if kept or cut in March 2017. So this is the same thing: it'll count $1.3M next year, except we'd be cutting him now (or more precisely any time between now and the day before his next bonus check is due). 

So cutting now vs. a year from now, the net savings is $11M this year and $0 next year. Easy peasy lemon squeezy.

[32EBoozer]

59 minutes ago, hawk said:

Right now, Brick would save nearly $11 Million.  

 

45 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

No it's more than that. This one goes up to 11.

We save that which we don't pay him: $8.6M salary and $2.3M bonus. $11M total. The $3M amortized bonus amount hits whether he's kept or cut. 

We can choose whether or not next year's $1.3M amortized bonus amount hits this year or next year, but for the ease of math let's say we choose to make it hit next year. Well, if we kept him that money would have hit next year if kept or cut in March 2017. So this is the same thing: it'll count $1.3M next year, except we'd be cutting him now (or more precisely any time between now and the day before his next bonus check is due). 

So cutting now vs. a year from now, the net savings is $11M this year and $0 next year. Easy peasy lemon squeezy.

Well then! Even better.

Please forward this to Larz and a couple of others who are very concerned about Dead Money being prohibitive and cutting off our nose to spite our face

by getting rid of 2 starters(in name only). I'm with you guys. Time to make a fresh start with fresh players who earn their money

[32EBoozer]

1 hour ago, David Harris said:

How long did you look for?

Nick Mangold, 32 year old Center.

2016: $8.6 million dollar cap hit with zero dead money if cut.

Mangold is still playing at a moderately high level.

I'd save him for renegotiating only if we really needed it.

[David Harris]

3 minutes ago, 32EBoozer said:

Mangold is still playing at a moderately high level.

I'd save him for renegotiating only if we really needed it.

Love the guy.  But he'd be my next cut if, like you say, we need some money.  He's a leader and I don't want to minimize his contributions.  But you can't get much lower than the positional value of a Center.  And we have a 32 year old declining skills one who is getting paid more than we are offering our starting QB (Mangold 8mill, reported Fitz contract offer is 7mill).

It's better to cut a year early than a year late.  This draft is loaded with centers.  How much longer can Mangold hold on? 1-2 years maybe?

[kdels62]

1 minute ago, David Harris said:

Love the guy.  But he'd be my next cut if, like you say, we need some money.  He's a leader and I don't want to minimize his contributions.  But you can't get much lower than the positional value of a Center.  And we have a 32 year old declining skills one who is getting paid more than we are offering our starting QB (Mangold 8mill, reported Fitz contract offer is 7mill).

It's better to cut a year early than a year late.  This draft is loaded with centers.  How much longer can Mangold hold on? 1-2 years maybe?

We've lost every game Mangold has missed since he was a rookie. 

 

There have only been maybe 4 of those games but we lost all of them behind terrible o-line play. Including that Ravens game where Sanchez threw a pick six after getting hit on a 3 step drop.

[David Harris]

1 minute ago, kdels62 said:

We've lost every game Mangold has missed since he was a rookie. 

 

There have only been maybe 4 of those games but we lost all of them behind terrible o-line play. Including that Ravens game where Sanchez threw a pick six after getting hit on a 3 step drop.

Interesting.  I think that illustrates just how good Mangold once was and how pretty good he still is.  It also illustrates how bad the backup centers we've had have been.

But still, if you need money then you make the tough cut Nick Mangold and save a net of $7.5 million dollars for a position of greater value such as QB, OLB, OT.  IMO you can draft a starting center this year in the 2nd or 3rd round. 

I hate the Pats but they traded away an aging high priced former stud in Logan Mankins before the wheels came off, and shortly thereafter the wheels did come off as they will shortly do with Nick.  His best days are well behind him but he's still getting paid as an elite Center.

[kdels62]

1 minute ago, David Harris said:

Interesting.  I think that illustrates just how good Mangold once was and how pretty good he still is.  It also illustrates how bad the backup centers we've had have been.

But still, if you need money then you make the tough cut Nick Mangold and save a net of $7.5 million dollars for a position of greater value such as QB, OLB, OT.  IMO you can draft a starting center this year in the 2nd or 3rd round. 

I hate the Pats but they traded away an aging high priced former stud in Logan Mankins before the wheels came off, and shortly thereafter the wheels did come off as they will shortly do with Nick.  His best days are well behind him but he's still getting paid as an elite Center.

I definitely don't view Mangold as untouchable but cutting him now doesn't help the team. Guaranteeing him some money this year and next year as well as stability in his role while moving money off the cap does help the team and helps us transition into a future without Mangold. Save some money, make him expendable down the line, and groom his replacement - its a win win for all. 

[Sperm Edwards]

Who is this nonexistent veteran QB we are supposed to be clearing space for by cutting Mangold? Please don't say Fitzpatrick. That makes less than no sense.

Trading Mo, cutting Ferguson, cutting Breno clears $30M. Mangold would be after those 3, should that even prove necessary somehow, not the first one gone.

[Gas2No99]

Cutting Mangold is ridiculous. He's still one of our better performers and better Jets Players in Franchise History. 

You always hear these older vets state that they want to retire with their original team after so many years; maybe he would be amenable to a restructuring. Like Fitz is realizing now, there's not going to be a long line of suitors doling out $$$ for the services (despite how great he was and good he still is) of a 32 year old battle-tested Center. If Mangold, same goes for Brick, want to retire and take one last shot to Win with the Jets they could do what's best for the team and their legacy. 

I understand the business sense and the argument that "WHY should a player capitulate salary for a team's interest?", but the Jets - under Woody - have shown to be loyal and appreciative of Legacy players. those 2 1st round picks from 2006 are True Jets and, IMO or if I were GM, I'd be willing to restructure and compromise a fraction of future cap space to see if there's a shot to Win with them NOW before they head off into the sunset. The remuneration and legendary status Mangold, and Brick, would cement them and would probably be MORE fruitful for them in their post playing careers as NYC & NJ Football stalwarts such as Klecko, Chrebet, Carl Banks, and that Joe Willy guy. 

[Irish Jet]

It would really hurt losing Mangold. Legendary player for the Jets.

 

[jamesr]

8 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

No it's more than that. This one goes up to 11.

We save that which we don't pay him: $8.6M salary and $2.3M bonus. $11M total. The $3M amortized bonus amount hits whether he's kept or cut. 

We can choose whether or not next year's $1.3M amortized bonus amount hits this year or next year, but for the ease of math let's say we choose to make it hit next year. Well, if we kept him that money would have hit next year if kept or cut in March 2017. So this is the same thing: it'll count $1.3M next year, except we'd be cutting him now (or more precisely any time between now and the day before his next bonus check is due). 

So cutting now vs. a year from now, the net savings is $11M this year and $0 next year. Easy peasy lemon squeezy.

Bear in mind - with a June 1st cut (which is what I think you're referring to above?) you don't realise the reduced cap number UNTIL June 1st.  So you can't treat the extra money as being available straight away.

[32EBoozer]

9 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

No it's more than that. This one goes up to 11.

We save that which we don't pay him: $8.6M salary and $2.3M bonus. $11M total. The $3M amortized bonus amount hits whether he's kept or cut. 

We can choose whether or not next year's $1.3M amortized bonus amount hits this year or next year, but for the ease of math let's say we choose to make it hit next year. Well, if we kept him that money would have hit next year if kept or cut in March 2017. So this is the same thing: it'll count $1.3M next year, except we'd be cutting him now (or more precisely any time between now and the day before his next bonus check is due). 

So cutting now vs. a year from now, the net savings is $11M this year and $0 next year. Easy peasy lemon squeezy.

Well in theory we will have $13m more in cap space next yr. w/o him. Why do you say $0 next yr? JC

[Larz]

9 hours ago, David Harris said:

How long did you look for?

Nick Mangold, 32 year old Center.

2016: $8.6 million dollar cap hit with zero dead money if cut.

Lol