What moves can be made when you look at our Cap situation.... Bleak!

[Tinstar]

2 minutes ago, joewilly12 said:

Cutting Geno makes no sense he's the best QB on the roster. 

It makes perfect sense if it's personal

[joewilly12]

9 minutes ago, Tinstar said:

It makes perfect sense if it's personal

No it doesn't.

[Snell41]

Wilk to a long term deal doesn't help. He's looking for pretty much the same amount per year that the tag costs.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[32EBoozer]

1 minute ago, Snell41 said:

Wilk to a long term deal doesn't help. He's looking for pretty much the same amount per year that the tag costs.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's all about the guaranteed money. Signing Mo to LT deal allows you to move the $ around according to your Cap. Like he would get a large SB and low salary to spread the SB out and keep his Cap # at around $6m this yr. freeing up $9m in Cap Space in 2016\

That's a big help!

[Snell41]

It's all about the guaranteed money. Signing Mo to LT deal allows you to move the $ around according to your Cap. Like he would get a large SB and low salary to spread the SB out and keep his Cap # at around $6m this yr. freeing up $9m in Cap Space in 2016\

That's a big help!

Sure it does. But if you think you can make a JJ Watt level contract cost 6m a year against the cap then you out of your mind. That's just not physically possible. A 36m signing bonus alone cost 6m a year against the cap for a 6 year deal. Cut down the signing bonus and guarantee salary and he'll still be hitting our cap for 13-17m a year. You're not saving money by signing Mo.

[jamesr]

4 minutes ago, Snell41 said:

Sure it does. But if you think you can make a JJ Watt level contract cost 6m a year against the cap then you out of your mind. That's just not physically possible. A 36m signing bonus alone cost 6m a year against the cap for a 6 year deal. Cut down the signing bonus and guarantee salary and he'll still be hitting our cap for 13-17m a year. You're not saving money by signing Mo.

Look up Malik Jackson's contract ... it's $5m less in Year 1 than in the remaining years. It can be done.

If we had Mo on the same deal, we save $5.7m cap room this year.

[Larz]

just cut brick and we're golden

[Savage69]

1 hour ago, Irish Jet said:

I know it's tough to take, but just accept that our best player isn't going anywhere.

He such a great player look at all the teams that wanted him and Mac just won't let him go..

[Larz]

1 minute ago, Savage69 said:

He such a great player look at all the teams that wanted him and Mac just won't let him go..

there were 18 d-lineman taken in the first 67 picks.  it was an amazing draft for d-line help.  if mo was an udfa, he would get more than malik jackson got

 

 

[BurnleyJet]

Breno gone, Restructures abound. It's the Mo miss management that's an issue, and I think the FO are trying to save face.

[Irish Jet]

7 minutes ago, Savage69 said:

He such a great player look at all the teams that wanted him and Mac just won't let him go..

I love how you seem to know exactly he was valued and what we were offered. My sauces told me we turned down two first round picks, JJ Watt and Wembley Stadium.

When he gets his new deal try not to be too upset. You'll only have to endure about 5 more years of this JAG.

[Tinstar]

Maybe I missed it so can someone fill me in. How was the Mo Wilkerson situation mismanaged ?

[rex-n-effect]

1 hour ago, j4jets said:

However, this whole cap situation doesn't free the blame off Mac for the mismanagement. How does a GM go from 50 mil in cap space one year to trying to squeeze a few mil the next year?

Several factors:

1. Several of the contracts that are paying out this year and next from the Tannenbaum era are backloaded due to the constant renegotiations on massive contracts. So we are tight on space in places we shouldn't be (like $5MM in dead money on an RT).

2. The lack of young talent from the past two front offices meant holes had to be filled from FA to field a team that in any way pretended to be a professional team. I do not think Woody gave Mac authority to have another sh*t year just to not spend money. 

3. Mac had to spend some of that money on secondary--too much even. Bowles is a secondary-minded coach. It wouldn't make sense to bring him in and not give the secondary priority. Consider some of that to be the cost of bringing in a head coach. Had we brought in an offensive coach we would have likely overspent at some offensive position.

4. Mac was asked to do more than he could afford. Coming into 2015 we did not have a great team. We had a great DL, Folk, Decker, Ivory, Amaro (maybe) and a decent OL. Mac had a third of the salary cap and draft picks to build a functional secondary, look at LB and TE, round out the receiving corp and running backs, pick up a vet QB and start getting some young guys on the OL. Secondary and WR are huge money pits and we were extremely fortunate to luck into Marshall. Had Idzik's drafts gone halfway successful we'd probably have already resolved the QB and Wilkerson situations with room to spare.

[Be_a_Jet]

Whats with all the Revis hate. 

[Obrien2Toon]

We're going to be bad this year, should've been bad last year, but Woody had to cave to the Fire Idzick crowd and make the team competitive last year.

It made Mac waste money on guys like Revis, when we should've been shooting for 2017 championship relevancy. 

[Obrien2Toon]

33 minutes ago, Be_a_Jet said:

Whats with all the Revis hate. 

He single handedly cost us a playoff spot with his performance against buffalo

[Hael]

So many people liked what we did in 2015, but it was sorta a disaster from a financial point of view.   Had we not signed Revis and Cro and used that money to sign Wilkerson and perhaps a couple undervalued mid grade starting level CBs, this team would be much better off from a cap and team building standpoint going forward.

Instead we payed triple premium for a win now team, got a great and unexpected performance from a qb and still weren't even close to being good enough to beat the big teams like NE, Denver, Seattle, Arizona.

Idzik had the right idea, he just didn't draft well at all.  Good teams don't splurge in free agency, instead you patiently build through the draft, sign your young talent, look for cheap value players that are undervalued (think Woodhead) and slowly but surely inch your way into contention.

Unfortunately we are now in a position where we have an aging win now team, that is less good than it was this time last year, with a harder schedule and without a qb.  The really annoying thing is that we will be good enough that we might actually make the playoffs, thus making the eventual  rebuild even more far off in the future.

 

[Jet Nut]

2 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I like Folk just fine. I don't think we save very much by cutting him, unless he's replaced with a rookie or a vet minimum player. Whenever people talk of cutting this or that player, particularly ones who aren't mega-expensive, they always seem to forget the salary cap counts the top 51 after he's gone, not just the remaining top 50. Next in line moves up one slot, and even that's only if he's replaced by nobody.

Wasn't thinking solely of the money they'd save.  Just don't know what he has left.  

[Sperm Edwards]

57 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

Wasn't thinking solely of the money they'd save.  Just don't know what he has left.  

I'm sure he's fine. He only had a quad injury. Not like he severed a knee ligament or his right foot got run over by a taxi.

[Jet Nut]

Just now, Sperm Edwards said:

I'm sure he's fine. He only had a quad injury. Not like he severed a knee ligament or his right foot got run over by a taxi.

Lol, I thought he had a knee.  My bad

[32EBoozer]

1 hour ago, Obrien2Toon said:

He single handedly cost us a playoff spot with his performance against buffalo

Is this really FitzMagic pretending to be Obrien2Toon?

I'm sure Fitzy would like to pass the blame on to someone else!

Watkins in wk 17= 136 yds/0 TD

Revis is not why we lost the game.Fitzy 3 Int's

 

[neckdemon]

5 hours ago, Villain The Foe said:

You dont want to do that. If you ask Revis to restructure and he actually does it then you'll probably be attached to him for another season or two. Take the hit now and you could be done with Revis in 2017. 

Resinding Wilk's franchise tag would make all of this go away. No one wants him to walk, which is why we should have traded him last year, but I think the reason why we tagged him was because we thought we could trade him. That didnt work. Cut your losses (literally) and call it a lesson learned. Unless we can quickly set up an LLC in Deleware for Wilkerson then we can pay him the Vet minimum and funnel 18 million into his new "company"....since the NFL is allowing teams to do that now. lol. 

this is brilliant. 

[neckdemon]

1 hour ago, Obrien2Toon said:

He single handedly cost us a playoff spot with his performance against buffalo

really? fitzpatrick 3 interceptions didn't have anything to do with that???

[bealeb319]

He single handedly cost us a playoff spot with his performance against buffalo

You dont want to do that. If you ask Revis to restructure and he actually does it then you'll probably be attached to him for another season or two. Take the hit now and you could be done with Revis in 2017. 

Resinding Wilk's franchise tag would make all of this go away. No one wants him to walk, which is why we should have traded him last year, but I think the reason why we tagged him was because we thought we could trade him. That didnt work. Cut your losses (literally) and call it a lesson learned. Unless we can quickly set up an LLC in Deleware for Wilkerson then we can pay him the Vet minimum and funnel 18 million into his new "company"....since the NFL is allowing teams to do that now. lol. 

Literally singlehandedly

Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

[Sperm Edwards]

17 minutes ago, bealeb319 said:

 

Literally singlehandedly

Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

Well he doesn't throw with two hands. Duh.

[Be_a_Jet]

4 hours ago, Obrien2Toon said:

He single handedly cost us a playoff spot with his performance against buffalo

Seriously not trying to give him a pass but I honestly put that on Bowles. Aside from the whole is he on decline or not debate (which it sounds like you would have a lot of fun with)  I just think he was having a bad game. Adapting to what you see on the field from the other team as well as form your own team/players, is a big part of the job as a coach. I don't think he adapted well by not giving him help. You can talk all day about how much he gets paid and what he should or shouldn't be able to do - fact is they are all human and players can have a bad game. That game in particular is one that I do not think Bowles adapted well in. 

[BRONX DUDE]

5 hours ago, Be_a_Jet said:

Whats with all the Revis hate. 

We all love the Meevis!!

[j4jets]

5 hours ago, rex-n-effect said:

Several factors:

1. Several of the contracts that are paying out this year and next from the Tannenbaum era are backloaded due to the constant renegotiations on massive contracts. So we are tight on space in places we shouldn't be (like $5MM in dead money on an RT).

2. The lack of young talent from the past two front offices meant holes had to be filled from FA to field a team that in any way pretended to be a professional team. I do not think Woody gave Mac authority to have another sh*t year just to not spend money. 

3. Mac had to spend some of that money on secondary--too much even. Bowles is a secondary-minded coach. It wouldn't make sense to bring him in and not give the secondary priority. Consider some of that to be the cost of bringing in a head coach. Had we brought in an offensive coach we would have likely overspent at some offensive position.

4. Mac was asked to do more than he could afford. Coming into 2015 we did not have a great team. We had a great DL, Folk, Decker, Ivory, Amaro (maybe) and a decent OL. Mac had a third of the salary cap and draft picks to build a functional secondary, look at LB and TE, round out the receiving corp and running backs, pick up a vet QB and start getting some young guys on the OL. Secondary and WR are huge money pits and we were extremely fortunate to luck into Marshall. Had Idzik's drafts gone halfway successful we'd probably have already resolved the QB and Wilkerson situations with room to spare.

1. Totally wrong. Has absolutely nothing to do with what Mac did. And which RT is carrying the $5mil of dead money? Please elaborate.

2. Partially agree. Mac inherited possibly the best DL and average OL and sh*t tons of cap space along with high draft picks.

3. Mac went overboard with the secondary.

4. This is so out of proportion. You either get a loaded team or a depleted team. Mac got a depleted team with several good players and not total garbage. He also got $50+mil in cap space. He had MORE than enough money to play around with and he chose to save nothing for the future. When it comes to cap management, he's no different than Mike T. He's known for his scouting skills. Kudos to him for the Leo pick. Or the Redskins. Without that one pick falling into his lap, our last year's draft didn't produce anything to write home about.

Jury is still out there. Im not getting on my knees for Mac. You can.

[TuscanyTile2]

Sign some beasts

Cut some beasts

Trade some beasts

Restructure some beasts

[Jet9]

11 hours ago, 32EBoozer said:

Is this really FitzMagic pretending to be Obrien2Toon?

I'm sure Fitzy would like to pass the blame on to someone else!

Watkins in wk 17= 136 yds/0 TD

Revis is not why we lost the game.Fitzy 3 Int's

 

Singlehandedly is obviously hyperbole.

 

That said, you're cool with him giving up 136?  He got killed underneath all afternoon. There's residual effects to giving up to any one player 136 yards, TDs or not. 

[Powpow]

17 hours ago, The Crusher said:

Is that before or after he holds out?

I can see this happening for old times sake.

[32EBoozer]

1 hour ago, Jet9 said:

Singlehandedly is obviously hyperbole.

 

That said, you're cool with him giving up 136?  He got killed underneath all afternoon. There's residual effects to giving up to any one player 136 yards, TDs or not. 

Agreed.

Revis and many other CB's had problems with Watkins, Hopkins and OBJ last yr. Nearly impossible to shut them out.... just try and control the damage.

You give up the underneath stuff sometimes to protect against the double move. Our LB corp were of no help underneath... hopefully that changes.

Having a mobile QB like Taylor makes it a lot tougher by extending plays. Difficult to cover double and triple moves.

Is he slowing down? Yes. Is he still a top 5 CB in the AFC? Yes.

[j4jets]

15 hours ago, Obrien2Toon said:

He single handedly cost us a playoff spot with his performance against buffalo

Yes, because he didn't have 3 ints in one quarter. 

[j4jets]

3 hours ago, Jet9 said:

Singlehandedly is obviously hyperbole.

 

That said, you're cool with him giving up 136?  He got killed underneath all afternoon. There's residual effects to giving up to any one player 136 yards, TDs or not. 

The D gave up 22 points. I don't care how bad Revis was but you don't deserve to be a playoff team if your offense can't score more than 17 points. 

[32EBoozer]

3 hours ago, j4jets said:

The D gave up 22 points. I don't care how bad Revis was but you don't deserve to be a playoff team if your offense can't score more than 17 points. 

Agreed. If Fitzy didn't throw that pick in the end zone, we most likely win that game. Even after the INT we got the ball back with a chance to go ahead and he threw another pick and then the last at the end of the game.

The Defense kept us in it DESPITE no running game and several TOs. Stephen Ridley at RB explains in a nutshell why we were a 1 dimensional offense that day.