Looking back on Maccagnan's decision to retain Mo and let Snacks walk

[jetscrazey]

Hindsight is 20/20, obviously.  Snacks was seen as the more replaceable player I guess.  That's true on most teams, however when you have Richardson and Leonard Williams already, Mo was a redundant luxury.  Character was overlooked here.  Mo got paid and started loafing it.  Snacks, being a "rags to riches" story, didn't take anything for granted and is having his best season now.  Looks we got another average-at-best GM on our hands here.

[BigRy56]

I was 100% on board with letting Mo walk and retaining Snacks but it's hard to call it a full-blown mistake after one year, as the entire unit is underperforming.

Once we get rid of Sheldon (who the entire defense performs better without), Mo will get another shot to really show his stuff. If he continues to dog it, this was a disastrous contract and we need to find a way out ASAP.

[drdetroit]

I admit it.  I was one of the 1% of posters who said Snacks was more valuable to our defense than Mo.

[j4jets]

1 hour ago, BigRy56 said:

I was 100% on board with letting Mo walk and retaining Snacks but it's hard to call it a full-blown mistake after one year, as the entire unit is underperforming.

Once we get rid of Sheldon (who the entire defense performs better without), Mo will get another shot to really show his stuff. If he continues to dog it, this was a disastrous contract and we need to find a way out ASAP.

Load of crap. If Mo needs Sheldon on the sidelines to perform, then it's Mo who is the problem, not Sheldon. And the notion that D performs better without Sheldon is also a load of crap. Mo has ALWAYS taken plays off. I've seen him do it every single game his entire career. F him and F Revis. 

[CanadaSteve]

1 hour ago, jetscrazey said:

Hindsight is 20/20, obviously.  Snacks was seen as the more replaceable player I guess.  That's true on most teams, however when you have Richardson and Leonard Williams already, Mo was a redundant luxury.  Character was overlooked here.  Mo got paid and started loafing it.  Snacks, being a "rags to riches" story, didn't take anything for granted and is having his best season now.  Looks we got another average-at-best GM on our hands here.

Yeah that hindsight thing is just wonderful.  If ONLY I would have invested in Apple stock when it first went on the market.  You can if/only yourself to death in this world.

People here eight months ago were SCREAMING for Mo to be signed long term, and to let Sheldon go because of his character.

Now, everyone is screaming at Mac for signing him long term.  You can't win as a GM.

[Maxman]

2 hours ago, jetscrazey said:

Hindsight is 20/20, obviously.  Snacks was seen as the more replaceable player I guess.  That's true on most teams, however when you have Richardson and Leonard Williams already, Mo was a redundant luxury.  Character was overlooked here.  Mo got paid and started loafing it.  Snacks, being a "rags to riches" story, didn't take anything for granted and is having his best season now.  Looks we got another average-at-best GM on our hands here.

Mo can rebound next year. He was hurt all offseason and missed the program. He has been a high character guy, missed meetings aside.

Sheldon is the guy you don't lock up long term.

If you let Mo walk, sign Snacks and Sheldon gets suspended that is not where you want to be.  

I am not writing of Mo just yet, this year aside.

[BurnleyJet]

1 hour ago, drdetroit said:

I admit it.  I was one of the 1% of posters who said Snacks was more valuable to our defense than Mo.

Me to.

[LIJetsFan]

Tagging/signing Mo and the Fitz signing were the two major mistakes made by Mac so far.  I've said it then and I'll say it now.  Hope he learns from his mistakes but I wonder why it seemed so clear to me and not to him.....seriously.  

[CrazyCarl40]

37 minutes ago, LIJetsFan said:

Tagging/signing Mo and the Fitz signing were the two major mistakes made by Mac so far.  I've said it then and I'll say it now.  Hope he learns from his mistakes but I wonder why it seemed so clear to me and not to him.....seriously.  

I can sit here and name ten worse deals/moves than the Fitz signing. It didn't work out but there is no reason to make it seem like it killed the 2016 season. That fault lies at the feet of more players than just the quarterback. He's an easy scapegoat for the lazy, but it's growing old and you won't have him to kick around anymore next season. Good thing Bowles will still be around to cast blame on next season. 

[NoBowles]

42 minutes ago, LIJetsFan said:

Tagging/signing Mo and the Fitz signing were the two major mistakes made by Mac so far.  I've said it then and I'll say it now.  Hope he learns from his mistakes but I wonder why it seemed so clear to me and not to him.....seriously.  

Explain how not signing Fitzpatrick changes his season at all? Unless you want to go to bat for Geno, it's hard to come up with a scenario where not signing Fitzpatrick changes anything at all. Oh, yeah, we'd have an extra 5 mil to spend next year for a sh*t team.

[Larz]

if mo wilk was a giant and snacks was here, we would be trying to figure out how to cut snacks and pissed how mo wilk is going to the playoffs,  players see the jets as a place to collect checks because there is basically no leadership or QB. its ******* romper room

c'mon peeps

[sourceworx]

6 hours ago, Maxman said:

Mo can rebound next year. He was hurt all offseason and missed the program. He has been a high character guy, missed meetings aside.

Sheldon is the guy you don't lock up long term.

If you let Mo walk, sign Snacks and Sheldon gets suspended that is not where you want to be.  

I am not writing of Mo just yet, this year aside.

I think Mo is not 100% healthy, and hasn't been all year. Maybe his leg hasn't fully healed (which would totally explain the loss of explosiveness getting off the ball), or maybe there's another injury that he's fighting through that we aren't aware of. But I think there is more to it than him simply dogging it. 

Prior to this season, he was a model citizen. No off-field issues, and no public complaints about getting a new contract. He showed up to every practice and played his butt off on gamedays. It doesn't seem like him to give a half-assed effort.

[rangerous]

hmmmm....sheldon misses the first game and the jets simply waylaid the red ryder.  sheldon comes back and they can't seem to find a way to get a sack. coincidence?  sacks aside there is an interaction between the secondary and the dline.  if the secondary coverage stinks it kind of doesn't matter how good the dline is.  just about every qb knows how to get rid of the ball quickly.  the jet secondary has been slow to react, out of position, bad tacklers, and usually out of position.  wr's are allowed to run free.  rarely do you see the opposing qb throw into double coverage because their receiver is soooooo open.

the point is wilk was a monster last season.  he had a broken leg and it could be he's still not 100% right.  imo richardson was also a bad influence on him. since he can't be easily traded then we are forced to give him the benefit of the doubt and hope he comes back strong.

as for snacks, they brought in mcclendon.  he has been pretty good but injured. but snacks was motivated by the game and those guys are hard to find.  maybe the best move would've been to give fitz's money to snacks and go into the season with geno.  imo the whole fitz scenario coupled with richardson's attitude really pulled this team apart more than bowles would have expected. fitz should've signed in the spring instead of waiting until the day before training camp.

[Beaver]

I will admit I was happy with the Mo resigning at the time.   I never thought the Jets should cave and give him top money, but wanted him resigned.   I will say I was never for the Fitzpatrick resigning.   Snacks I thought could be replaced.   I like Snacks and miss but still think we Jets didn't need to resign him at top money.

[20andOut]

1 hour ago, sourceworx said:

I think Mo is not 100% healthy, and hasn't been all year. Maybe his leg hasn't fully healed (which would totally explain the loss of explosiveness getting off the ball), or maybe there's another injury that he's fighting through that we aren't aware of. But I think there is more to it than him simply dogging it. 

Story in today's Post says exactly this. broken leg has been nagging him all year. Should have sat to start the season.

[FidelioJet]

2 minutes ago, 20andOut said:

Story in today's Post says exactly this. broken leg has been nagging him all year. Should have sat to start the season.

Sounds like damage control to me. 

[RoadFan]

I cannot point the finger on this one. Usually I can.  I did not have a preference of Mo or Snacks.  Apparently there was a clear choice and only a few knew it was Snacks, and I wasn't one of them.

Although, people in that building should have known if one of them was lazy and the other wasn't.

[Matt39]

Was still the right move.

[Savage69]

10 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

Sounds like damage control to me. 

+1 Mo said he was fine during rehab because he wanted the big contract and lying was ok to get it..Mo also has a history of turf toe which doesn't get better by playing..

[Integrity28]

Snacks may have been the most important locker room guy on roster last year. Plus he's great at his position.

SOJ

[jack48]

Did he chooe to retain Mo or was he just not able to get anything for him?  He did have a broken leg.

[Beerfish]

I was not totally sold on the Mo deal but the decision was the correct one as far as player value goes imo. 

 

[dbatesman]

I was a cheerleader for the Mo extension, and I still think, like others, that the leg has a lot to do with his diminished production this season. The missing meetings stuff is really bad though, and it's even worse that Maccagnan signed him to the deal knowing he was an inconsistent effort guy. With the benefit of hindsight, we should have traded him, even if all we could get was a 2.

That said, not giving $24 million guaranteed to a two-down player was and is the right move, especially considering our run defense didn't skip a beat until McLendon got hurt.

[LIJetsFan]

2 hours ago, NoBowles said:

Explain how not signing Fitzpatrick changes his season at all? Unless you want to go to bat for Geno, it's hard to come up with a scenario where not signing Fitzpatrick changes anything at all. Oh, yeah, we'd have an extra 5 mil to spend next year for a sh*t team.

*I was a 3QB roster Geno supporter, yes.

*It isn't 5m, it's:

1. not having to sign Mo and extend (was it skine or Gilchrist?) a player to make the Fitz cap room

2.  So 12m last year that could have been spent elsewhere or carried over plus 5m this coming year.  

The season might have been exactly the same w/o Fitz or perhaps better (per the Geno/weapons argument/debate).  Plus the extra roster spot plus the additional reps for the other 2 QB on the roster who would be moving up on the depth chart.   

[NoBowles]

9 minutes ago, LIJetsFan said:

*I was a 3QB roster Geno supporter, yes.

*It isn't 5m, it's:

1. not having to sign Mo and extend (was it skine or Gilchrist?) a player to make the Fitz cap room

2.  So 12m last year that could have been spent elsewhere or carried over plus 5m this coming year.  

The season might have been exactly the same w/o Fitz or perhaps better (per the Geno/weapons argument/debate).  Plus the extra roster spot plus the additional reps for the other 2 QB on the roster who would be moving up on the depth chart.   

1) There is no reason at all to think that Fitzpatrick had anything at al to do with signing Mo, zero, this is pure fantasy. They signed Mo because they put a price tag on him that they could not get, plain and simple.

2) So sick of this argument, if you have a sh*t team, and a sh*t QB, $12 million is going to do nothing at all to change it. Unless you believe Geno was magically going to be a  legitimate QB, we would be in the exact same boat with Geno and have a mysterious $12 million player that we don't have now. Unless you can give me that player that was going to fundamentally change this team this year, I am not buying it.

Extra reps for the other QB's is a coaching issue, NOT a Fitzpatrick issue. If Geno is healthy right now, its highly unlikely anything would have gone any differntly.

People need to stop living in some fantasy world.

[section314]

29 minutes ago, Beerfish said:

I was not totally sold on the Mo deal but the decision was the correct one as far as player value goes imo. 

 

Absolutely correct. Mo was 39 on the top 100 list as voted by the players. Snacks was not even on the list. I can't even imagine the reaction here if Macc let a guy who just got 12.5 sacks walk to keep a run stuffer.

[LIJetsFan]

2 minutes ago, NoBowles said:

1) There is no reason at all to think that Fitzpatrick had anything at al to do with signing Mo, zero, this is pure fantasy. They signed Mo because they put a price tag on him that they could not get, plain and simple.

2) So sick of this argument, if you have a sh*t team, and a sh*t QB, $12 million is going to do nothing at all to change it. Unless you believe Geno was magically going to be a  legitimate QB, we would be in the exact same boat with Geno and have a mysterious $12 million player that we don't have now. Unless you can give me that player that was going to fundamentally change this team this year, I am not buying it.

Extra reps for the other QB's is a coaching issue, NOT a Fitzpatrick issue. If Geno is healthy right now, its highly unlikely anything would have gone any differntly.

People need to stop living in some fantasy world.

Obviously I disagree on every point but I see no reason to prolong this discussion.  We're all entitled to our opinions.  

[NoBowles]

8 minutes ago, LIJetsFan said:

Obviously I disagree on every point but I see no reason to prolong this discussion.  We're all entitled to our opinions.  

Of course we are all entitled to our opinions, but thats the point of message boards. If we all sat around and had a circle jerk agreeing with each there, what fun would it be? Except for the Mods? Still not sure how NOT signing Fitzpatrick avoids this disaster of a season, which was your claim.

[UnitedWhofans]

12 hours ago, jetscrazey said:

Hindsight is 20/20, obviously.  Snacks was seen as the more replaceable player I guess.  That's true on most teams, however when you have Richardson and Leonard Williams already, Mo was a redundant luxury.  Character was overlooked here.  Mo got paid and started loafing it.  Snacks, being a "rags to riches" story, didn't take anything for granted and is having his best season now.  Looks we got another average-at-best GM on our hands here.

Pass rush more important than run stuffing. That's the reason

[LIJetsFan]

4 minutes ago, NoBowles said:

Of course we are all entitled to our opinions, but thats the point of message boards. If we all sat around and had a circle jerk agreeing with each there, what fun would it be? Except for the Mods? Still not sure how NOT signing Fitzpatrick avoids this disaster of a season, which was your claim.

No, my claim is that is wouldn't/couldn't have been any worse w/o Fitz, it might have been better in 2016, and most definitely would have been better in 2017.  

[PepPep]

12 hours ago, jetscrazey said:

Hindsight is 20/20, obviously.  Snacks was seen as the more replaceable player I guess.  That's true on most teams, however when you have Richardson and Leonard Williams already, Mo was a redundant luxury.  Character was overlooked here.  Mo got paid and started loafing it.  Snacks, being a "rags to riches" story, didn't take anything for granted and is having his best season now.  Looks we got another average-at-best GM on our hands here.

B******T

Macc wanted to retain Snacks. They were trying to hammer out a deal and it fell through b/c Snacks wanted a big pay off. That's fine. The Giants invested in him. He's having a great season and thats great. We have yet to see if the investment will fully pay off, but so far its looking good. Good for them.

How convenient that you ignore the fact that Macc brought in McLendon on a considerably cheaper deal, who played great before he got hurt. He, along with L.Williams was one of the bright spots on that D-line this year. And McLendon wasn't a household name, even more so than Snacks, who was coming off a great season. Macc took a chance on this one and it worked out (until the injury of course, which nobody can predict).

Charcter was overlooked? WTF??? This was not about character. Wilk was and is the better player, despite his bad season. You will not convince any team (other than the Giants maybe-lol), even AFTER his bad season, that Snacks is the better player. Any team would rather have a player like Wilk than a player like Snacks. Barring maybe some team where the ONLY missing piece on defense is a NT.

F***K hindsight. Wilk was signed to a long term deal. He will be around for a while. I am 100% SURE that he will have a bounce back season next year and be a force for the Jets in the next 2-3-4 years. Wilk was NEVER a character concern. He is still not a character concern. I find it ridiculous how quick fans are to label players. Guy get hurt, he;s injury prone, guy has bad season after a broken leg, having singed an extension- he's a loafer, he's no good. It's SO ridiculous. Wilk has shown throughout his career that he is a good leader, good locker room guy, hard worker and productive player. ONE season after a bad injury cannot erase that. You will either change your tune or eat crow next season, this I guarantee.     

I love how you say character was ignored b/c they resigned Wilk (who has never been a character concern), suggesting that they should have let Wilk go, holding on to Snacks, Richardson and L.Williams. Yet you make no mention of Richardson- a true character concern. If you're going to paint the scenario this way, you need to be clear that the Jets needed to get rid of Richardson and keep both Wilk and Snacks. But that doesn't fit your narrative, does it.

This is B******T, go sit in the corner and think about what you have done. lol.

Merry Christmas, I apologize for all the profanity.    

[NoBowles]

3 minutes ago, LIJetsFan said:

No, my claim is that is wouldn't/couldn't have been any worse w/o Fitz, it might have been better in 2016, and most definitely would have been better in 2017.  

How?? I just don't see it.

[chirorob]

10 hours ago, CanadaSteve said:

Yeah that hindsight thing is just wonderful.  If ONLY I would have invested in Apple stock when it first went on the market.  You can if/only yourself to death in this world.

People here eight months ago were SCREAMING for Mo to be signed long term, and to let Sheldon go because of his character.

Now, everyone is screaming at Mac for signing him long term.  You can't win as a GM.

I wanted Sheldon Gone

I thought Snacks got too much money for a player on the field for only 60% of defensive snaps.

I also wondered what it would look like if we went 4-3, Mo as left DE, Snacks in the middle, Leonard as a 3 technique, trade Sheldon and then draft a right DE.    Harris as the MLB, Wonder kid rookie as a WLB, and one of the others as the SLB.   But, I'm not GM, and that may not have worked at all.

[Warfish]

42 minutes ago, NoBowles said:

1) There is no reason at all to think that Fitzpatrick had anything at al to do with signing Mo, zero, this is pure fantasy. They signed Mo because they put a price tag on him that they could not get, plain and simple.

2) So sick of this argument, if you have a sh*t team, and a sh*t QB, $12 million is going to do nothing at all to change it. Unless you believe Geno was magically going to be a  legitimate QB, we would be in the exact same boat with Geno and have a mysterious $12 million player that we don't have now. Unless you can give me that player that was going to fundamentally change this team this year, I am not buying it.

Extra reps for the other QB's is a coaching issue, NOT a Fitzpatrick issue. If Geno is healthy right now, its highly unlikely anything would have gone any differntly.

People need to stop living in some fantasy world.

Saved me the effort of saying the same thing.

Geno Smith fans live in a fantasy world and always will, just like the old Mark Sanchez fans before them.  

And the only defense they have for their guy's sh*t resume, a guy who IS a complete and total unredeemed failure here, is Fitz had one horribl eyear to go with his good year, both years playing because Geno was 1. stupid and 2. sucked.

God I cannot wait till Geno is sucking deep on someone else's depth chart so this fantasy narrative can finally end.  

[rex-n-effect]

9 minutes ago, Warfish said:

God I cannot wait till Geno is sucking deep on someone else's depth chart so this fantasy narrative can finally end.  

Just like with delusional Sanchez fans, Geno's delusional fans will carry on for years about what-if and if-only until, just like Sanchez, he gets multiple attempts on other teams and does nothing.