Jump to content
nyjbuddy

Jets carry over $12.2M

Recommended Posts

Just now, nyjbuddy said:

Thanks.  Not sure why it didn't work.

Thanks for starting the thread.

You just have to click the time stamp on the tweet. If you copy \ paste that URL it will embed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Maxman said:

 

How in the hell is it possible for the colts to carry over 49.1 million. Thought you had to spend a certain amount. That should not be allowed to carry over that much.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There were six teams who had more cap space unused than the Jets last season.  Amongst those teams were the Steelers, Titans, Colts Texans and 49ers.  The new "face" of the NFL had more than four times the unused cap than our Jets. The Cowboys and Jaguars had nearly as much as we did within 1/2 million dollars. Many of these organizations are perceived to be well run by many here, while the Jets are viewed as a mess.  Yet the "rumor and innuendo" cited as fact by many on this board,  maintain that the Jets ownership is somehow "Cheap"  That these unused funds were being surreptitiously stashed in the pockets of the Johnsons.  What say you now, fabricators of fact, in the face of these figures?

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rolloffjet said:

How in the hell is it possible for the colts to carry over 49.1 million. Thought you had to spend a certain amount. That should not be allowed to carry over that much.

Over a 4 year period:

Salary Cap

2017 - $167M

2018 - $177M

2019 - $190M

2020 - $200M

Total: $734M

"Cap Floor" (89%) by end of 2020: $653.26M

Jets $$ on the Books

$143.3M + $174.9M + $112.5M  + $85.9M = $516.6M

 

The 4 year period began in 2017, the 4 numbers above are currently what the Jets have on the books from 2017-2020. The Jets over the next 2 off-seasons will need to spend $136.66M. 

1774469357_ScreenShot2019-02-02at10_54_36PM.thumb.png.3f9214a522a77d04bdaa820298b81aeb.png

  • Upvote 3
  • Post of the Week 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, jetstream23 said:

One idea - If Sam Darnold makes progress and truly looks like a franchise QB maybe the Jets should extend him early and front load some money?

 

You can't extend a first round pick till after their 4th year.

  • Upvote 5
  • Butt Fumble 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, jetstream23 said:

One idea - If Sam Darnold makes progress and truly looks like a franchise QB maybe the Jets should extend him early and front load some money?

When will people learn...🙄

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is well known, and one of the reasons the whole (we have to spend our money whether we like it or not) thing is completely wrong.  No matter what you do, if you write down a bad contract and seriously overpay for a guy, you are directly hurting your future potential..  In a very real sense, we are still paying for the Revis/Mo/Skrine/Marshall blunders.  That's why 2015 was one of the worst years in Jets history, and why I hope we took that cap lesson seriously.

You don't pay for high priced FAs until you have a core group of young, cheap players on rookie contracts, and then only if the future outlook of signing those young players is also taken into account (eg you shouldn't price yourself out of signing Sam Darnold b/c you go on a spending spree this season and hire Brown/Bell/5 OLs and backload their contracts).  There is a trade off between winning now and a teams future potential, and for quite some time Macc has been spending like a drunk sailor on the present rather than the future (the anti-Idzik strategy)

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Hael said:

This is well known, and one of the reasons the whole (we have to spend our money whether we like it or not) thing is completely wrong.  No matter what you do, if you write down a bad contract and seriously overpay for a guy, you are directly hurting your future potential..  In a very real sense, we are still paying for the Revis/Mo/Skrine/Marshall blunders.  That's why 2015 was one of the worst years in Jets history, and why I hope we took that cap lesson seriously.

You don't pay for high priced FAs until you have a core group of young, cheap players on rookie contracts, and then only if the future outlook of signing those young players is also taken into account (eg you shouldn't price yourself out of signing Sam Darnold b/c you go on a spending spree this season and hire Brown/Bell/5 OLs and backload their contracts).  There is a trade off between winning now and a teams future potential, and for quite some time Macc has been spending like a drunk sailor on the present rather than the future (the anti-Idzik strategy)

You don't have to pay Darnold for another 4 years. What they do this offseason will have no impact on their ability to re-sign him then. And Macc has done a wonderful job of structuring contracts with outs for the team after 2-3 seasons. It's bc he front loads the guaranteed money. That's the one thing I don't worry about when it comes to Macc.

  • Butt Fumble 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So is the $12 mill carry over yet to be added to the $90 mill cap space? - Or is it included in the $90 mill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, joenamathwouldn'tcry said:

There were six teams who had more cap space unused than the Jets last season.  Amongst those teams were the Steelers, Titans, Colts Texans and 49ers.  The new "face" of the NFL had more than four times the unused cap than our Jets. The Cowboys and Jaguars had nearly as much as we did within 1/2 million dollars. Many of these organizations are perceived to be well run by many here, while the Jets are viewed as a mess.  Yet the "rumor and innuendo" cited as fact by many on this board,  maintain that the Jets ownership is somehow "Cheap"  That these unused funds were being surreptitiously stashed in the pockets of the Johnsons.  What say you now, fabricators of fact, in the face of these figures?

Probably because all of those teams you cite drafted better than us and have some very skilled players on rookie deals and thus have a lot more talent for similar/less spend. Huge indictment of our GM. If you draft badly, you better be great in FA market. We fall short there, also.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, bla bla bla said:

Over a 4 year period:

Salary Cap

2017 - $167M

2018 - $177M

2019 - $190M

2020 - $200M

Total: $734M

"Cap Floor" (89%) by end of 2020: $653.26M

Jets $$ on the Books

$143.3M + $174.9M + $112.5M  + $85.9M = $516.6M

 

The 4 year period began in 2017, the 4 numbers above are currently what the Jets have on the books from 2017-2020. The Jets over the next 2 off-seasons will need to spend $136.66M. 

1774469357_ScreenShot2019-02-02at10_54_36PM.thumb.png.3f9214a522a77d04bdaa820298b81aeb.png

Macc blew 100 million in his first offseason with very minimal return. I’m sure he can figure out a way to do it again. 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, joenamathwouldn'tcry said:

There were six teams who had more cap space unused than the Jets last season.  Amongst those teams were the Steelers, Titans, Colts Texans and 49ers.  The new "face" of the NFL had more than four times the unused cap than our Jets. The Cowboys and Jaguars had nearly as much as we did within 1/2 million dollars. Many of these organizations are perceived to be well run by many here, while the Jets are viewed as a mess.  Yet the "rumor and innuendo" cited as fact by many on this board,  maintain that the Jets ownership is somehow "Cheap"  That these unused funds were being surreptitiously stashed in the pockets of the Johnsons.  What say you now, fabricators of fact, in the face of these figures?

So you’re gloating that woody spent money and still went 4-12?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, jgb said:

Probably because all of those teams you cite drafted better than us and have some very skilled players on rookie deals and thus have a lot more talent for similar/less spend. Huge indictment of our GM. If you draft badly, you better be great in FA market. We fall short there, also.

Didn't say they were good, just that not cheap.

 

3 hours ago, Philc1 said:

So you’re gloating that woody spent money and still went 4-12?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, choon328 said:

You can't extend a first round pick till after their 4th year.

I thought you can extend after your 3rd year? Looking online now - can’t confirm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, KINGDIRK said:

I thought you can extend after your 3rd year? Looking online now - can’t confirm.

You can extend a guy after he completes his third year of accrued service.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

historically the jets have always been generous with the players.  maybe it's the stress of playing in new york.  i wouldn't exactly call woody cheap.  he built a tremendous practice facility and provides other amenities for the players.  he may not be a good owner from an organization standpoint but cheap he is not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, CrazyCarl40 said:

Macc blew 100 million in his first offseason with very minimal return. I’m sure he can figure out a way to do it again. 

He what he spent because Idzik ignored so many positions the year before.  CB for example.  Also the team finished 4 games under .500.  The investment not only fielded a team but a team that won 4 more games and went into week 17 fighting for a playoff spot that in just about any other year they would have qualified for.  

Sorry, I enjoyed having a team compete to the last game, hardly a minimal return given what was on the team

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, CrazyCarl40 said:

Macc blew 100 million in his first offseason with very minimal return. I’m sure he can figure out a way to do it again. 

He had to spend all the money.

Salary Cap

2013 - $127.6M

2014 - $134.1M

2015 - $143M

2016 - $155.2M

 

Total: $559.9M

89%: $498.3M

 

The Jets only spent $122M, $118M, and $75M (2015 on the books prior to Mac) in the first 3 years of the 4 year window, which means when Mac got here he needed to spend $183.3M over 2 years. Seeing as the Jets had aging vets and needed to figure out if Geno was the answer it makes sense IMO to go all in for 2015 to give the QB the best chance to thrive. Unfortunately Geno got popped in the jaw and that was the end of that experiment.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

He what he spent because Idzik ignored so many positions the year before.  CB for example.  Also the team finished 4 games under .500.  The investment not only fielded a team but a team that won 4 more games and went into week 17 fighting for a playoff spot that in just about any other year they would have qualified for.  

Sorry, I enjoyed having a team compete to the last game, hardly a minimal return given what was on the team

100 million to almost make the playoffs and then three straight 5 wins or less seasons. Glad you enjoyed that!

7 minutes ago, bla bla bla said:

He had to spend all the money.

Salary Cap

2013 - $127.6M

2014 - $134.1M

2015 - $143M

2016 - $155.2M

 

Total: $559.9M

89%: $498.3M

 

The Jets only spent $122M, $118M, and $75M (2015 on the books prior to Mac) in the first 3 years of the 4 year window, which means when Mac got here he needed to spend $183.3M over 2 years. Seeing as the Jets had aging vets and needed to figure out if Geno was the answer it makes sense IMO to go all in for 2015 to give the QB the best chance to thrive. Unfortunately Geno got popped in the jaw and that was the end of that experiment.

Oh. Well, if he had to waste the money, that makes so much more sense. Tell me, which was your favorite contract he gave out that year? Also, Geno will forever be bad. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, CrazyCarl40 said:

100 million to almost make the playoffs and then three straight 5 wins or less seasons. Glad you enjoyed that!

Oh. Well, if he had to waste the money, that makes so much more sense. Tell me, which was your favorite contract he gave out that year? Also, Geno will forever be bad. 

Yeah, sucks that what most years is a playoff team didnt qualify that season.  And the money spent had nothing to do with what happened two and three years later.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

He what he spent because Idzik ignored so many positions the year before.  CB for example.  Also the team finished 4 games under .500.  The investment not only fielded a team but a team that won 4 more games and went into week 17 fighting for a playoff spot that in just about any other year they would have qualified for.  

Sorry, I enjoyed having a team compete to the last game, hardly a minimal return given what was on the team

Eh?  Idzik drafted milliner 9th overall and mcdougall in the 3rd round and dixon in the 6th round.  The players sucked for the most part but he did not ignore them at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




Content Partnership

Yes Network

Site Sponsor

MILE-Social - NJ Social Media & SEO company
×
×
  • Create New...