Jump to content

p lynch


kmnj

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Sperm Edwards said:

For all the risk concern they wanted him and wanted to trade up to get him; it's not some idea plucked from out of the sky. The Meadowlands weather wasn't this big oh-noes for Pennington, Fitzpatrick, or visiting QBs. It's also not nearly as much a limiting factor as just being a bad or inaccurate QB. Also there's a difference between not having an elite arm and having a super-weak arm. Ryan's arm is adequate enough. The number of times the Meadowlands winds would combine with him to cause a loss for us (but would not affect the other team) is so minimal it was a dumb concern. 

The cascade of events that followed was tremendous. It's nothing to yeah-whatever over:

  1. Drafting Gholston, who came with an old-CBA rookie contract
  2. Paying Favre $13m
  3. Trading a 3rd round pick for Favre
  4. Trading a 1st rounder for Sanchez
  5. Trading a 2nd rounder for Sanchez
  6. Trading away our starting DE for Sanchez
  7. Trading away Elam - who did have some trade value at the time - for Sanchez
  8. Signing Sanchez to an old-CBA rookie contract
  9. Extending Sanchez
  10. Using a high 2nd round pick to draft Geno
  11. Picking up Fitzpatrick
  12. Re-signing Fitzpatrick
  13. Using a 2nd round pick to draft Hackenberg

Literally none of these things would have happened.

Everything changes if we draft Ryan.  Everything from needs to the picks we traded being worth less that what we traded for the 5th pick or for Favre.  Only point, doesnt need to be debated.  

If Matty could play most of his games outside in inclement weather.  That was the knock on his arm.  His poor record outside of Atlanta suggests it might have been true

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 240
  • Created
  • Last Reply
20 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Well it was said they were obvious moves.

First off, I don't know how much letting go of Moore was a good move, let alone an obvious one. Keller and Greene weren't cuts; they were FAs the Jets couldn't match. You are purely guessing they'd have outright cut both Scott and Pouha. The rest weren't making enough money to be concerned with getting them off the books.

The obvious cut was Tebow. BFD.

I'm saying that parting ways with all of those players was not so obvious unless the plan was to clean house even if it meant a losing, mulligan first season for a new, incoming GM.

Fair enough.  With this explanation of what really happened, I think it's safe to say that Idzik in fact, did absolutely nothing right as a GM.  Nothing at all.  Since he clearly wasnt responsible for the one thing everyone gives him credit for (creating all that cap space) and it just happened naturally, why are people crediting him for having this supposed plan? Apparently, he didnt do anything other than cut Tebow and trade his best player.  #plan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jet Nut said:

Everything changes if we draft Ryan.  Everything from needs to the picks we traded being worth less that what we traded for the 5th pick or for Favre.  Only point, doesnt need to be debated.  

If Matty could play most of his games outside in inclement weather.  That was the knock on his arm.  His poor record outside of Atlanta suggests it might have been true

Alumni Stadium isn't in San Diego, nor is it a dome.

He's got a 90 passer rating outdoors, with a 63% completion rate, averaging 260+ yds with a 2:1 ratio.

Also those games are 100% on the road, so it's already not an apples and apples comparison to his home/dome games. Further. the whole Atlanta team moves outdoors from a dome, not just the QB. The ball feels harder and is harder to catch - particularly on longer passes thrown harder - and you are putting all this solely on one player. It's just not the same when a team changes from its comfort zone in a climate controlled home game in familiar settings to road games in a different environment.

There's a short list of number of QBs who have elite passing stats in inclement, super-windy cold weather. Frankly, in addition to Pennington and Fitz, Sanchez didn't have a rocket arm himself, nor did Brady as he was winning those first few SBs *wins.

I get how all other things being equal you'd prefer a cannon arm, and totally agree. But that is never better than having a good QB overall. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, JiF said:

Fair enough.  With this explanation of what really happened, I think it's safe to say that Idzik in fact, did absolutely nothing right as a GM.  Nothing at all.  Since he clearly wasnt responsible for the one thing everyone gives him credit for (creating all that cap space) and it just happened naturally, why are people crediting him for having this supposed plan? Apparently, he didnt do anything other than cut Tebow and trade his best player.  #plan

The difference was I don't assume everyone else would have done the same. His own predecessor said flat-out he wouldn't have, and that they could have made these players fit.

Trading Revis was the right move at the time, and if I'm going to criticize anyone for not getting value I have to credit someone for getting it (especially when the list of trade partners was narrowed to 1; he played chicken and won).  Revis was miserable, and the only reason he was showing up at all was that if he held out even one day it would have removed his ability to opt out of 3 more years at $5m per. He wanted $16m per when he could barely run. Tampa gave it to him and regretted the move even without any of it being guaranteed. Far cry from NE renting him for 1 year at $11.5m after he was done healing.

None of this means or suggests Idzik was a good GM, because he wasn't. Just that these moves that were made weren't so obvious.

The plan was to horde draft picks for the following season, and he picked up 4 compensatory picks on top of an extra 1st rounder for Revis. The bad news, and ultimately the reason he was fired, is he blew most of those picks on crappy players. Then in a last-ditch effort to save his own skin he abandoned his plan and mid-season traded for Harvin (who wasn't making chump change) and extended Kerley, following all of his TE/WR draft picks laying eggs. The only one that eventually panned out (Enunwa) spent the year on the PS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

The difference was I don't assume everyone else would have done the same. His own predecessor said flat-out he wouldn't have, and that they could have made these players fit.

Huh? Tannenbaum was on WFAN as soon as Idzik was hired and played out all the cuts Idzik was going to make, and specified the contracts were designed for that exact reason, for that exact season. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, NoBowles said:

Huh? Tannenbaum was on WFAN as soon as Idzik was hired and played out all the cuts Idzik was going to make, and specified the contracts were designed for that exact reason, for that exact season. 

Huh yourself. Just like he "planned" on having 3 WRs (including both of his top 2) hit free agency at the same time, backing himself into a corner that resulted in guaranteeing Santonio Holmes $20m. Even those initial cuts still left the team up against the cap.

Tannenbaum was the first one to say he'd keep Revis by extending him and that there was plenty of room that could be cleared by restructuring with an enormous extension, so he would have doubled-down on that '13 season. He also expected Idzik to do what he would have done, for better or worse. Except Idzik was looking more towards long term where Tannenbaum was more of a year to year guy and whatever happens in the future happens.

The one time Tannenbaum thought he was getting something long term cheaply was when he extended Sanchez. But even that was equally done to lower Sanchez's $14m cap number so he could spend still more that spring. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JiF said:

Never said the first part but you're completely wrong on the 2nd and that's cool.  My points werent actually made to convince you otherwise, we all know that wont happen but it was more so to say, this is stupid.  A lot of words to say that but that was the point.  All these dudes sucked.  Comparing their suckiness is pointless. 

Despacito is a pure work of art.  I was in Mexico last week scoring some epic surf and this song was playing everywhere I went.  Its impossible not to dance to that song.  Impossible.  Especliamente cuando muy borracho...te hace querer bailar.  By the time the trip was over, I was busting out freestyles in espanol over that beat.  The loc dogs loved it.

 

If I fractured the tibia in both of your hairless legs using a ball peen hammer, I'd bet you wouldn't be able to dance. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

For all the risk concern they wanted him and wanted to trade up to get him; it's not some idea plucked from out of the sky. The Meadowlands weather wasn't this big oh-noes for Pennington, Fitzpatrick, or visiting QBs. It's also not nearly as much a limiting factor as just being a bad or inaccurate QB. Also there's a difference between not having an elite arm and having a super-weak arm. Ryan's arm is adequate enough. The number of times the Meadowlands winds would combine with him to cause a loss for us (but would not affect the other team) is so minimal it was a dumb concern. 

The cascade of events that followed was tremendous. It's nothing to yeah-whatever over:

  1. Drafting Gholston, who came with an old-CBA rookie contract
  2. Paying Favre $13m
  3. Trading a 3rd round pick for Favre
  4. Trading a 1st rounder for Sanchez
  5. Trading a 2nd rounder for Sanchez
  6. Trading away our starting DE for Sanchez
  7. Trading away Elam - who did have some trade value at the time - for Sanchez
  8. Signing Sanchez to an old-CBA rookie contract
  9. Extending Sanchez
  10. Using a high 2nd round pick to draft Geno
  11. Picking up Fitzpatrick
  12. Re-signing Fitzpatrick
  13. Using a 2nd round pick to draft Hackenberg
  14. Tanking on purpose for the 2nd time in 5 years, so we could hopefully get a high draft pick for a QB next year

Literally none of these things would have happened.

Just to be clear; you can't used step 4 as a negative.  Yeah, we traded a first rounder, no. 17, but we got the 1st.  In effect, we traded our 2nd rounder, Kenyon Coleman,  Abram Elam and Brett Ratliff.  To move up from 17 to 5, we paid VERY LITTLE.  Unfortunately, we traded up for Mark Sanchez...:)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, CanadaSteve said:

Just to be clear; you can't used step 4 as a negative.  Yeah, we traded a first rounder, no. 17, but we got the 1st.  In effect, we traded our 2nd rounder, Kenyon Coleman,  Abram Elam and Brett Ratliff.  To move up from 17 to 5, we paid VERY LITTLE.  Unfortunately, we traded up for Mark Sanchez...:)

 

I can and do say that. They parted with a 1st rounder, a 2nd rounder, Coleman, Elam, and Ratliff for Mark Sanchez. They didn't part with only the balance of the trade-up, which you're trying to imply and thereby lessen the impact by mincing words. They had 5 things and they moved the 5 things off the team for Sanchez and a $10m/yr rookie contract. Since the #17 pick wouldn't make anywhere near that, at 4 yrs $12m total), one could rationalize they lost the ability to sign yet another $6-7m/yr starter for him. 

Your suggestion is that they didn't part with a 1st rounder for Sanchez because it wasn't an extra 1st rounder. It makes no sense. If they didn't use a 1st rounder on Sanchez they'd have still had it to use on another player. Had they used it the prior year to trade up, it wouldn't have happened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I can and do say that. They parted with a 1st rounder, a 2nd rounder, Coleman, Elam, and Ratliff for Mark Sanchez. They didn't part with only the balance of the trade-up, which you're trying to imply and thereby lessen the impact by mincing words. They had 5 things and they moved the 5 things off the team for Sanchez and a $10m/yr rookie contract. Since the #17 pick wouldn't make anywhere near that, at 4 yrs $12m total), one could rationalize they lost the ability to sign yet another $6-7m/yr starter for him. 

Your suggestion is that they didn't part with a 1st rounder for Sanchez because it wasn't an extra 1st rounder. It makes no sense. If they didn't use a 1st rounder on Sanchez they'd have still had it to use on another player. Had they used it the prior year to trade up, it wouldn't have happened.

Interested; I say and do certain things and get called on them, even though they are my opinion.  Technically yes, we traded a first rounder.  But we got a first rounder back.  The additional cost was a 2nd, and 2 scrubs and Ebram.  If I trade my car in, I don't look at it that it cost me my car and an additional 10K.  The new car cost me 10K after the trade in.

Semantics I guess, but hey, its the off-season.

The next question is why are we even arguing this?  Tanny and Idzik are long gone.  I liked Tanny, but not how he constantly dumped salary into the future.  I also liked Mangini, but whatever...they are long in the past.  We have the team we have, no matter how we got it.  What are they going to do this year, and next year, how will they look and what will they do. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, CanadaSteve said:

Interested; I say and do certain things and get called on them, even though they are my opinion.  Technically yes, we traded a first rounder.  But we got a first rounder back.  The additional cost was a 2nd, and 2 scrubs and Ebram.  If I trade my car in, I don't look at it that it cost me my car and an additional 10K.  The new car cost me 10K after the trade in.

Semantics I guess, but hey, its the off-season.

The next question is why are we even arguing this?  Tanny and Idzik are long gone.  I liked Tanny, but not how he constantly dumped salary into the future.  I also liked Mangini, but whatever...they are long in the past.  We have the team we have, no matter how we got it.  What are they going to do this year, and next year, how will they look and what will they do. 

hqdefault.jpg 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, CanadaSteve said:

Yeah, because you are the leading example of credibility.

Since reading comprehension is difficult, let me help.  Devin Smith, Lorenzo Mauldin, and Deon Simon were all good picks WHERE THEY WERE PICKED.  Read that line twice if you need help.

Smith had three devastating injuries.  I know you think that's Mac's fault, but I can't help you with that.

Mauldin played well in year one, and not so well in year two.  Lets see what happens in year 3.

Simon was a 7th round pick....Might want to read that one again as well.  7th ROUND PICK.  He has played pretty good for a 7th round pick, making it a good pick.

 

Mauldin, Simon, Petty Jenkins are JAGs at best.  They are bad to mediocre players it doesn't matter round 1 or 7 and btw a couple of them were 3rd round picks which is actually pretty high 

 

And in Devin Smith and Christina Hackensack's case they were 2nd round picks who are terrible.  Darron Lee is a crappy first round pick. There is no way you can rationalize them into being good picks on any level

 

Zip, zero, nada

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Huh yourself. Just like he "planned" on having 3 WRs (including both of his top 2) hit free agency at the same time, backing himself into a corner that resulted in guaranteeing Santonio Holmes $20m. Even those initial cuts still left the team up against the cap.

Tannenbaum was the first one to say he'd keep Revis by extending him and that there was plenty of room that could be cleared by restructuring with an enormous extension, so he would have doubled-down on that '13 season. He also expected Idzik to do what he would have done, for better or worse. Except Idzik was looking more towards long term where Tannenbaum was more of a year to year guy and whatever happens in the future happens.

The one time Tannenbaum thought he was getting something long term cheaply was when he extended Sanchez. But even that was equally done to lower Sanchez's $14m cap number so he could spend still more that spring. 

Spermy and Idzik sitting in a tree.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, thadude said:

Mauldin, Simon, Petty Jenkins are JAGs at best.  They are bad to mediocre players it doesn't matter round 1 or 7 and btw a couple of them were 3rd round picks which is actually pretty high 

 

And in Devin Smith and Christina Hackensack's case they were 2nd round picks who are terrible.  Darron Lee is a crappy first round pick. There is no way you can rationalize them into being good picks on any level

 

Zip, zero, nada

Yeah, Jenkins played all of one year and he's a JAG.  Smith blew his knee out three times, but he sucks.  Simon will compete this year for starting time, but he blows.  We get it, you should be the GM.  Wonder who you'll want to replace you in two more years after you bitch about yourself and all the sh*tty deals you make.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

For all the risk concern they wanted him and wanted to trade up to get him; it's not some idea plucked from out of the sky. The Meadowlands weather wasn't this big oh-noes for Pennington, Fitzpatrick, or visiting QBs. It's also not nearly as much a limiting factor as just being a bad or inaccurate QB. Also there's a difference between not having an elite arm and having a super-weak arm. Ryan's arm is adequate enough. The number of times the Meadowlands winds would combine with him to cause a loss for us (but would not affect the other team) is so minimal it was a dumb concern. 

The cascade of events that followed was tremendous. It's nothing to yeah-whatever over:

  1. Drafting Gholston, who came with an old-CBA rookie contract
  2. Paying Favre $13m
  3. Trading a 3rd round pick for Favre
  4. Trading a 1st rounder for Sanchez
  5. Trading a 2nd rounder for Sanchez
  6. Trading away our starting DE for Sanchez
  7. Trading away Elam - who did have some trade value at the time - for Sanchez
  8. Signing Sanchez to an old-CBA rookie contract
  9. Extending Sanchez
  10. Using a high 2nd round pick to draft Geno
  11. Picking up Fitzpatrick
  12. Re-signing Fitzpatrick
  13. Using a 2nd round pick to draft Hackenberg
  14. Tanking on purpose for the 2nd time in 5 years, so we could hopefully get a high draft pick for a QB next year

Literally none of these things would have happened.

After reading that cascade, I realize I need a drink.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, CanadaSteve said:

Yeah, Jenkins played all of one year and he's a JAG.  Smith blew his knee out three times, but he sucks.  Simon will compete this year for starting time, but he blows.  We get it, you should be the GM.  Wonder who you'll want to replace you in two more years after you bitch about yourself and all the sh*tty deals you make.

 

Quinton Coples, who is considered a bust and was an interior DL, had more sacks in his rookie year than Mauldin and Jenkins have had

 

They both SUCK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

For all the risk concern they wanted him and wanted to trade up to get him; it's not some idea plucked from out of the sky. The Meadowlands weather wasn't this big oh-noes for Pennington, Fitzpatrick, or visiting QBs. It's also not nearly as much a limiting factor as just being a bad or inaccurate QB. Also there's a difference between not having an elite arm and having a super-weak arm. Ryan's arm is adequate enough. The number of times the Meadowlands winds would combine with him to cause a loss for us (but would not affect the other team) is so minimal it was a dumb concern. 

The cascade of events that followed was tremendous. It's nothing to yeah-whatever over:

  1. Drafting Gholston, who came with an old-CBA rookie contract
  2. Paying Favre $13m
  3. Trading a 3rd round pick for Favre
  4. Trading a 1st rounder for Sanchez
  5. Trading a 2nd rounder for Sanchez
  6. Trading away our starting DE for Sanchez
  7. Trading away Elam - who did have some trade value at the time - for Sanchez
  8. Signing Sanchez to an old-CBA rookie contract
  9. Extending Sanchez
  10. Using a high 2nd round pick to draft Geno
  11. Picking up Fitzpatrick
  12. Re-signing Fitzpatrick
  13. Using a 2nd round pick to draft Hackenberg
  14. Tanking on purpose for the 2nd time in 5 years, so we could hopefully get a high draft pick for a QB next year

Literally none of these things would have happened.

 Yikes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, thadude said:

Quinton Coples, who is considered a bust and was an interior DL, had more sacks in his rookie year than Mauldin and Jenkins have had

 

They both SUCK

CAN'T WAIT FOR YOU TO BE HIRED.

YOU WILL MAKE THE JETS GREAT AGAIN!

You're seven picks in your first draft will all be hall of famers.  I KNOW IT!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/22/2017 at 3:21 AM, Fantasy Island said:

After reading that cascade, I realize I need a drink.   

Remember it the next time the Mangenius-GM stuff is tossed around. 

You get a franchise QB when you can get one, and don't worry about one year's 1st rounder we might not have because we're not winning a SB without one anyway. Even more, it's easier to recover from losing one when you've "wasted" an  extra one on a QB because their careers are 10-15 years long.

Hell, we've used our last two 1st rounders on an ILB and a S, and a few years before them used another on a S. In between the safeties, we've taken two 300-lb DEs when we already had the position well filled with young players. Good as they are, they are only incrementally making the team better; either represents far less overall team improvement than filling an outright hole at a premium position, which is why rigidly employing "pure BAP" strategy - regardless of position value and regardless of the existing roster - is stupid. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2017-07-23 at 1:57 PM, Sperm Edwards said:

Remember it the next time the Mangenius-GM stuff is tossed around. 

You get a franchise QB when you can get one, and don't worry about one year's 1st rounder we might not have because we're not winning a SB without one anyway. Even more, it's easier to recover from losing one when you've "wasted" an  extra one on a QB because their careers are 10-15 years long.

Hell, we've used our last two 1st rounders on an ILB and a S, and a few years before them used another on a S. In between the safeties, we've taken two 300-lb DEs when we already had the position well filled with young players. Good as they are, they are only incrementally making the team better; either represents far less overall team improvement than filling an outright hole at a premium position, which is why rigidly employing "pure BAP" strategy - regardless of position value and regardless of the existing roster - is stupid. 

As stated, I think this was a BIG BIG mistake by Mac, and it might cost him his job.  We had no QB....Paxton Lynch was considered (right or wrong) a top ten pick that slipped to us at 18 and he did not pull the trigger.  Gotta make that move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On July 23, 2017 at 2:00 PM, Larz said:

How is this still a thing?

Paxton lunch?

lol

Originally the thread was intended to tell us how great Paxton Lynch is and then Macagnan apologists took over and it became their lovefest 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, CanadaSteve said:

As stated, I think this was a BIG BIG mistake by Mac, and it might cost him his job.  We had no QB....Paxton Lynch was considered (right or wrong) a top ten pick that slipped to us at 18 and he did not pull the trigger.  Gotta make that move.

You defend some boneheaded moves by Mac -- passing on Lynch wasn't one of them

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, CanadaSteve said:

As stated, I think this was a BIG BIG mistake by Mac, and it might cost him his job.  We had no QB....Paxton Lynch was considered (right or wrong) a top ten pick that slipped to us at 18 and he did not pull the trigger.  Gotta make that move.

If we pass up on a legit 1st round QB at 20th overall, then the player chosen instead had better be a great pick (not merely a not-bust). All we were going to do was tread water without him anyway (ignoring those who misguidedly believed re-signing Fitzpatrick actually made us preseason contenders in 2016). Lynch would get 2 years to show that he's something, and if he is a big 6'7" zero then you go back to the drawing board same as the team chose to do anyway (except with Hackenberg).

So it wouldn't have really cost us a ton to miss on him, considering we weren't truly going anywhere anyhow, and is another major screwup if he panned (pans) out. Plus he'd be walking into a pretty solid receiving corps as a rookie (don't assume Decker misses basically the entire season if he wouldn't be in the exact place/situation again to get injured like he did). It was a good enough duo that they made Fitzpatrick look halfway decent the prior year, and that was before Enunwa took a big leap forward as well. We wasted that setting - and another $12m - on another season of Fitz. Now two of them are gone and Hack gets his chance with the least-experienced receiving corps anyone can remember a team fielding (on top of some questionable OLmen buying him time to throw).

If Hackenberg turns out to be the man somehow, then our career scout GM picked the winner and everyone else was wrong. If Lynch ends up really good, then it's yet another SOJ moment in history. Hopefully he sucks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it is made more obvious by the fact that they took Hackenberg in the 2nd.  The 2 players taken after Hackenberg were tiny linebackers similar to Lee, so it is easy to compare Lee/Hackenberg to Lynch/Jones or Cravens.  It also clearly demonstrates our positional value views.  Small ILBs are not top of the draft guys, but QBs are.  Hell, there are people excited about our UDFA tiny ILB now

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/24/2017 at 10:16 PM, Sperm Edwards said:

If we pass up on a legit 1st round QB at 20th overall, then the player chosen instead had better be a great pick (not merely a not-bust). All we were going to do was tread water without him anyway (ignoring those who misguidedly believed re-signing Fitzpatrick actually made us preseason contenders in 2016). Lynch would get 2 years to show that he's something, and if he is a big 6'7" zero then you go back to the drawing board same as the team chose to do anyway (except with Hackenberg).

So it wouldn't have really cost us a ton to miss on him, considering we weren't truly going anywhere anyhow, and is another major screwup if he panned (pans) out. Plus he'd be walking into a pretty solid receiving corps as a rookie (don't assume Decker misses basically the entire season if he wouldn't be in the exact place/situation again to get injured like he did). It was a good enough duo that they made Fitzpatrick look halfway decent the prior year, and that was before Enunwa took a big leap forward as well. We wasted that setting - and another $12m - on another season of Fitz. Now two of them are gone and Hack gets his chance with the least-experienced receiving corps anyone can remember a team fielding (on top of some questionable OLmen buying him time to throw).

If Hackenberg turns out to be the man somehow, then our career scout GM picked the winner and everyone else was wrong. If Lynch ends up really good, then it's yet another SOJ moment in history. Hopefully he sucks.

I could easily be wrong about this but I think Pax Lynch will be a bum.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...