Jets will exercise fifth-year option on Sheldon Richardson

[Jetfan13]

The Jets will exercise the fifth-year option on defensive lineman Sheldon Richardson’s rookie contract by the May 2 deadline before determining their next move with the 2013 first-round pick (13th overall), Manish Mehta of the New York Daily News reports.

Richardson’s fifth-year option will be for about $8 million in 2017 — the average salaries of the third to 25th highest-paid players at his position— per terms of the NFL’s collective bargaining agreement.

The Jets’ decision to pick up the option is a sound, low-risk move for a player that they believe can be a part of the core of the Todd Bowles’ defense for years to come.

The option is guaranteed only for injury until March 2017, so the Jets could theoretically release Richardson before the start of the 2017 league year without any future financial ramifications unless he suffered an injury this year that sidelined him for the entire 2017 season.

Richardson, who served a four-game marijuana suspension last season, might be subject to further league discipline stemming from a high-speed road race in Missouri last summer. He received two years’ probation, community service and a small fine for the incident on a plea deal in January.

If Richardson, who is scheduled to make $1.78 million this season, proves he can stay on the straight and narrow path, the Jets ultimately would like to secure a long-term deal for the budding star.

[Larz]

they made the same mistake with wilkerson, and will have to tag or lose sheldumb.   the texans had the right idea with watt.  they did the option then worked out a long term deal 5 months later

this d-line is slowly going to crap

[Jetsfan80]

3 minutes ago, Larz said:

they made the same mistake with wilkerson, and will have to tag or lose sheldumb.   the texans had the right idea with watt.  they did the option then worked out a long term deal 5 months later

this d-line is slowly going to crap

JJ Watt didn't commit 5 crimes in one day.

[Beerfish]

2 minutes ago, Larz said:

they made the same mistake with wilkerson, and will have to tag or lose sheldumb.   the texans had the right idea with watt.  they did the option then worked out a long term deal 5 months later

this d-line is slowly going to crap

Watt showed a LOT more in his early years than either of these guys.  Richardson is a character risk, Mo Wilk had not put up his great 12 sack year at the time some people wanted to extend him.  Mo Wilk was a very promising, good young player that had put up great half seasons before this past one but not sure he was wort5hy of a huge money extension.  I don;t have a big issue with the way the Jets have handled things.  I like Mo wilk and would like to retain him, I also think they spent too much on the secondary but I really don't mind them waiting on either of these guys extension wise.

[Larz]

1 minute ago, Jetsfan80 said:

JJ Watt didn't commit 5 crimes in one day.

then lets all enjoy the last year of a d-line that is somewhat decent.  if they trade mo, next year sheldumb is gone than is leo and the scrubs

[Jetsfan80]

Just now, Larz said:

then lets all enjoy the last year of a d-line that is somewhat decent.  if they trade mo, next year sheldumb is gone than is leo and the scrubs

You mean that D-Line that still can't get pressure on the QB, that one?  Just how many first rounders do we need to make that happen?

[LWC611]

2 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

You mean that D-Line that still can't get pressure on the QB, that one?  Just how many first rounders do we need to make that happen?

Good point!!!! You would think by now the Jets would be able to get some kind of pressure without having to blitz.....

[Il Mostro]

11 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

JJ Watt didn't commit 5 crimes in one day.

 

What crime?  According to Manish, it was a "high speed road race".   Sheldon was just exercising his God-given right to be a sportsman, now you guys try to make him seem like a criminal.  It's not like he had a gun or a kid in the car, or was smoking dope or something.

[pointman]

Why do we compare anyone to Watt? 

[UnitedWhofans]

16 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

JJ Watt didn't commit 5 crimes in one day.

List them.

Remember speeding is a violation, not a crime

[slats]

Weed or not, he's arguably the best player on the team. Exercising the option demonstrates that the Jets are optimistic that he's not gonna screw up again. That's a good thing. The man seemed genuinely remorseful, and hasn't tested positive since. I like this move a lot. 

[sirlancemehlot]

4 hours ago, UnitedWhofans said:

List them.

Remember speeding is a violation, not a crime

Eluding, endangering the welfare of a child, possession of a controlled dangerous substance, possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime, destruction of evidence/hindering.  Then of course there were the motor vehicle violations. 

[Miss Lonelyhearts]

4 hours ago, Beerfish said:

Watt showed a LOT more in his early years than either of these guys.  Richardson is a character risk, Mo Wilk had not put up his great 12 sack year at the time some people wanted to extend him.  Mo Wilk was a very promising, good young player that had put up great half seasons before this past one but not sure he was wort5hy of a huge money extension.  I don;t have a big issue with the way the Jets have handled things.  I like Mo wilk and would like to retain him, I also think they spent too much on the secondary but I really don't mind them waiting on either of these guys extension wise.

This revisionist history about Wilkerson not being that good until his contract year is just salve for the sore butt Macstupid gave our salary cap.

http://grantland.com/the-triangle/the-all-22-all-star-team-muhammad-wilkerson-and-the-new-versatility/

 

[no psls]

He'll be in jail before 2018

[SenorGato]

18 minutes ago, Miss Lonelyhearts said:

This revisionist history about Wilkerson not being that good until his contract year is just salve for the sore butt Macstupid gave our salary cap.

http://grantland.com/the-triangle/the-all-22-all-star-team-muhammad-wilkerson-and-the-new-versatility/

 

Wilkerson only had 5 sacks in 2012. Maybe Grantland is gone because they think he's JJ Watt or Reggie White? Lolz

[Beerfish]

22 minutes ago, Miss Lonelyhearts said:

This revisionist history about Wilkerson not being that good until his contract year is just salve for the sore butt Macstupid gave our salary cap.

http://grantland.com/the-triangle/the-all-22-all-star-team-muhammad-wilkerson-and-the-new-versatility/

 

At what point did anyone say him not being that good?  If you actually read the post you would see that it was stated that he was good, just not 12 sack good and just not consistently through the year sack wise good.  His other big sack year, 2013 he had 10.5 sacks, only 3.5 the 2nd half of the year.  He most of the time started off well and then his production fell until last year when it went 5/7.

I'll stick with my point that people wanting to bring up the failure of an extension now are being influenced by his past year when at that time he did not have his best year.  Like it or not sack totals and consistency bring the big dollars. 

[SenorGato]

Quote

just not 12 sack good

Not a thing

The most impressive aspect of Wilkerson's 2015 isn't even the sacks. Sacks are overpriced, overvalued, and overrated in impact. Easily more impressive is that a 300+ pounder asked to play DE, DT, and NT took 89.32% of the team's defensive snaps.

[New York Mick]

6 hours ago, Jetsfan80 said:

JJ Watt didn't commit 5 crimes in one day.

Lmao

[Sperm Edwards]

6 hours ago, Beerfish said:

Watt showed a LOT more in his early years than either of these guys.  Richardson is a character risk, Mo Wilk had not put up his great 12 sack year at the time some people wanted to extend him.  Mo Wilk was a very promising, good young player that had put up great half seasons before this past one but not sure he was wort5hy of a huge money extension.  I don;t have a big issue with the way the Jets have handled things.  I like Mo wilk and would like to retain him, I also think they spent too much on the secondary but I really don't mind them waiting on either of these guys extension wise.

Agree a little, since his legendary prowess is a bit overblown, but he was considered one of the best players in football before this year. I forget which now, but one of them had him as top 15 (at any position) at a time most non-Jets fans were barely familiar with him.

He's a super player. I just don't think he's worth the $16M or $18M or whatever he's seeking, while we have Richardson and Williams already here. He's not a $16M upgrade over either of those 2 as much as some other beast would be a $16M upgrade over whatever we're fielding at OLB. It's not like we can't afford him either, because his huge hits wouldn't hit the cap until 2 seasons from now, and we don't even have $30M carved into stone for 2018. Keeping everyone including Revis we're barely at $60M.

I'm comfortable keeping those 2 for 2 more years, then if/when Sheldon becomes a "pay me $25M/year" player, tag him for 1 more year like with Mo now, and draft another. Though if he reaches his potential, I still think Sheldon's ceiling is higher than Mo's. 

[SenorGato]

Quote

I'm comfortable keeping those 2 for 2 more years, then if/when Sheldon becomes a "pay me $25M/year" player,

We don't just want J.J. Watt money. We want it all. We want (Ndamukong) Suh money. Hopefully everybody wants that type of bread in this league."

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000496370/article/richardson-give-muhammad-wilkerson-suhtype-deal

Pretty much a given that Richardson's situation will play out as an even bigger sh*t show than this one.

[pointman]

3 hours ago, slats said:

Weed or not, he's arguably the best player on the team. Exercising the option demonstrates that the Jets are optimistic that he's not gonna screw up again. That's a good thing. The man seemed genuinely remorseful, and hasn't tested positive since. I like this move a lot. 

He showed some stuff in 2014, where was he last year to get this "arguably the best player on the team" accolade? What makes you say he seemed genuinely remorseful? 

[detectivekimble]

7 hours ago, Larz said:

they made the same mistake with wilkerson, and will have to tag or lose sheldumb.   the texans had the right idea with watt.  they did the option then worked out a long term deal 5 months later

this d-line is slowly going to crap

Sheldon is the one they wanted to extend long term.  But Sheldon sort of screwed things up.

[Sperm Edwards]

1 hour ago, SenorGato said:

We don't just want J.J. Watt money. We want it all. We want (Ndamukong) Suh money. Hopefully everybody wants that type of bread in this league."

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000496370/article/richardson-give-muhammad-wilkerson-suhtype-deal

Pretty much a given that Richardson's situation will play out as an even bigger sh*t show than this one.

Which is ridiculous -- that money is for Woody!

[SenorGato]

42 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Which is ridiculous -- that money is for Woody!

Hopefully some sucker will give up a 4th for him by then. With some luck Sheldon's walk year will be a strong schedule year so we can tack on some sacks afterwards. Woody's gotta eat!

[Joe Jets fan]

6 hours ago, sirlancemehlot said:

Eluding, endangering the welfare of a child, possession of a controlled dangerous substance, possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime, destruction of evidence/hindering.  Then of course there were the motor vehicle violations. 

Please show the link saying he was charged with any of these crimes. 

Lmao.  You really just made up stuff for a post. 

[sirlancemehlot]

13 minutes ago, Joe Jets fan said:

Please show the link saying he was charged with any of these crimes. 

Lmao.  You really just made up stuff for a post. 

LMAO that wasn't the question.  It was how many crimes did he commit.  Not how many was he charged with.  Also I made up nothing.  Those are the specific crimes he was accused of.  I'm a detective and I charge criminals on a regular basis.  Prosecutors will merge or downright dump charges if it looks like it'll mean a trial, particularly against high powered lawyers.  The county i work in is notorious for this. So...

Endangering the Welfare of a Child: by knowingly and recklessly putting a minor in a situation that is likely to cause harm or death to that child, the statute is applicable.

The defense to this is that, due to the fact that the original offense is a motor vehicle offense, rather than an indictable, it could be argued that the related danger does not meet the standard as only certain enumerated crimes, ie: assault, neglect, etc. are applicable.  In NJ, if you went grocery shopping and left your your child in the car because he was sleeping, you could be charged with Endangering the Welfare of a Child, regardless of the temperature or whether or not the vehicle is locked.  Which is far less dangerous than traveling at speeds of over 100mph with a kid in the back seat.

Eluding: by purposely attempting to avoid law enforcement (by hiding in a driveway of someone unknown to him) following a high-speed pursuit, the statute is satisfied.

Possession of a Controlled Dangerous Substance: by possessing illegal drugs the statute is satisfied.  All reports state his car had an overwhelming smell of burnt marijuana.  Police believe he ditched it during the pursuit, therefore he was not charged.

Destruction of evidence/Hindering:  see above

Possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime: obvious

the defense is that the marijuana was not recovered and that the eluding charge, which could be as high as a second degree, would take some argument by a prosecutor as pursuing officers lost sight of the vehicle during the chase.  Without a constant visual, there is the issue of identification, in other words, he could state that it was another car committing the offense and that he was stopped for that "other" vehicle's speeding.  Nonsense of course, but a legal loophole that nearly always works.  Which is why a drunk driver is usually not charged if he makes it home and into his house.  He can claim he downed a bottle of vodka in the ten minutes that elapsed before the police arrived and there is no way of arguing against that.

So: I made up nothing.  Those are the crimes committed.  Not the crimes charged.

 

 

[Sperm Edwards]

3 hours ago, SenorGato said:

Hopefully some sucker will give up a 4th for him by then. With some luck Sheldon's walk year will be a strong schedule year so we can tack on some sacks afterwards. Woody's gotta eat!

Most likely they'll be sacks that occur after we're already up by 3 TDs or more, but totally agree! Wood-y! Wood-y! Wood-y!

[SenorGato]

9 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Most likely they'll be sacks that occur after we're already up by 3 TDs or more, but totally agree! Wood-y! Wood-y! Wood-y!

Can those even be called sacks? Gosh even the thought of that makes me want to +5 sacks all the other true sack artists out there who see all of their sacks turn all the games. Only the JETS would draft the other kind, amirite or amirite?! 

[Sperm Edwards]

11 minutes ago, SenorGato said:

Can those even be called sacks? Gosh even the thought of that makes me want to +5 sacks all the other true sack artists out there who see all of their sacks turn all the games. Only the JETS would draft the other kind, amirite or amirite?! 

Yes, youarrite. Totally. Especially the way those useless+coverage sacks differ from those others who are truly sack "artists" in the way they've honed their crafts. And not re-signing either would be totally consistent with Woody's history of never paying players. He has traded & let high priced veterans hit free agency, in an endeavor to skirt overall spending requirements, like no other owner has done over the past 15 years. Frankly I'm amazed that so few, like yourself, are onto his ruse. 

[Powpow]

15 hours ago, Jetsfan80 said:

JJ Watt didn't commit 5 crimes in one day.

Tell that to the QB's he sacked and terrorized last year.  Lions and tigers and bears and JJ Watt Oh My!

[Irish Jet]

17 hours ago, Jetsfan80 said:

You mean that D-Line that still can't get pressure on the QB, that one?  

They did though. A lot.

[PatsFanTX]

Most likely they'll be sacks that occur after we're already up by 3 TDs or more, but totally agree! Wood-y! Wood-y! Wood-y!

Sacks should have a stipulation like saves do in MLB.

If you have a 14+ lead in the 4th quarter, they shouldn't count.

[section314]

1 minute ago, PatsFanTX said:

Sacks should have a stipulation like saves do in MLB.

If you have a 14+ lead in the 4th quarter, they shouldn't count.

Yeah.,No team has ever come back from 14 pts down in the 4th Q of an NFL game.

[PatsFanTX]

Yeah.,No team has ever come back from 14 pts down in the 4th Q of an NFL game.

It was a joke.

[Joe Jets fan]

 

9 hours ago, sirlancemehlot said:

LMAO that wasn't the question.  It was how many crimes did he commit.  Not how many was he charged with.  Also I made up nothing.  Those are the specific crimes he was accused of.  I'm a detective and I charge criminals on a regular basis.  Prosecutors will merge or downright dump charges if it looks like it'll mean a trial, particularly against high powered lawyers.  The county i work in is notorious for this. So...

Endangering the Welfare of a Child: by knowingly and recklessly putting a minor in a situation that is likely to cause harm or death to that child, the statute is applicable.

The defense to this is that, due to the fact that the original offense is a motor vehicle offense, rather than an indictable, it could be argued that the related danger does not meet the standard as only certain enumerated crimes, ie: assault, neglect, etc. are applicable.  In NJ, if you went grocery shopping and left your your child in the car because he was sleeping, you could be charged with Endangering the Welfare of a Child, regardless of the temperature or whether or not the vehicle is locked.  Which is far less dangerous than traveling at speeds of over 100mph with a kid in the back seat.

Eluding: by purposely attempting to avoid law enforcement (by hiding in a driveway of someone unknown to him) following a high-speed pursuit, the statute is satisfied.

Possession of a Controlled Dangerous Substance: by possessing illegal drugs the statute is satisfied.  All reports state his car had an overwhelming smell of burnt marijuana.  Police believe he ditched it during the pursuit, therefore he was not charged.

Destruction of evidence/Hindering:  see above

Possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime: obvious

the defense is that the marijuana was not recovered and that the eluding charge, which could be as high as a second degree, would take some argument by a prosecutor as pursuing officers lost sight of the vehicle during the chase.  Without a constant visual, there is the issue of identification, in other words, he could state that it was another car committing the offense and that he was stopped for that "other" vehicle's speeding.  Nonsense of course, but a legal loophole that nearly always works.  Which is why a drunk driver is usually not charged if he makes it home and into his house.  He can claim he downed a bottle of vodka in the ten minutes that elapsed before the police arrived and there is no way of arguing against that.

So: I made up nothing.  Those are the crimes committed.  Not the crimes charged.

 

 

Ok, I will agree that you did not make it up, you were explaining your personal thoughts.

First off you do understand that the incident in question did not occur in the state of NJ so your statutes would not apply.  With that said I do not know the statutes in the state of Missouri but in NYS marijuana is not classified as a "Controlled Dangerous Substance".  

NYS does not have an Eluding charge on the books so this charge would not apply, I have no idea if Missouri does. 

NYS does have a statute called Tampering with physical evidence, but in order to charge this statute there has to be probable cause that the evidence was tampered with.  Smelling marijuana in a vehicle does not constitute evidence that there was marijuana in the vehicle that was tampered with to prevent it from becoming evidence.

As for the "Possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime" there was no crime committed, so his legal firearm would in no way be anything he could be charged with. 

 

Look, the idiot got in a race and tried to not get caught.  He was not doing any drugs as shown by him not failing a NFL drug test or the police charging with anything related.  It was stupid and he got UTT's for it as he should.  In my opinion he will not get suspended for it as he has had zero issues since.