Popular Post RogerVick1980 Posted March 11, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted March 11, 2021 2 hours ago, jeremy2020 said: You could say the Jamal Adams is directly responsible for Russel wanting out of Seattle. Wilson isn't happy with getting little support due to what he believes are poor personnel decisions and Seattle gave up two 1st round picks for an undersized linebacker who can't cover instead of investing those picks in getting Wilson some help. I remember thinking at the time of the trade why is Seattle going all in by giving up all those assets and flexibility during Wilson’s prime years left for a safety.. If you’re gonna make an all in move do it to help your QB with a weapon or Oline.. Or at the very least a more important defensive position and get a stud pass rusher or shut down corner.. To make your last big move during Russ’ prime be for a glorified LB makes no sense at all.. It’s not even an indictment on Adams as a player he’s a very good player but he plays a position that doesn’t really move the needle on wins and losses.. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chad2coles Posted March 11, 2021 Author Share Posted March 11, 2021 I wonder how much a potential Russel Wilson trade would hold up a Jets trade for Watson. If the Seahawks trade Wilson, it's easy to see that pick being in the 4-8 range. Completely changes the value of what Douglas has to trade. Even the people most against the idea of getting Watson have been open to trading for him if Douglas could keep all of his resources other than #2 and another 1st. Of course, they will probably change their tune if Wilson is traded. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FidelioJet Posted March 11, 2021 Share Posted March 11, 2021 58 minutes ago, Beerfish said: You just answered your own question. You love these guys thus you should draft one of them. I think both have good attributes but both have big questions as well. I'll gladly see what some other team will give me for the #2 overall pick. Also, there is almost ALWAYS someone coming out next year that will be the hot QB we have not talked much about. Last year at this time there was zero talk of zac wilson being worthy of the #2 overall pick. I agree with much of what you're saying. Specifically about Zach Wilson - problem is we won't have the #2 pick next year. But we'll certainly just have to agree to disagree on whether taking a QB, when you need one, at #2 overall is the right move vs. trading down when you can load up on picks - and hope you can find a QB later in the draft a year later. Both have merits. I get your point, just don't agree with it. 4 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted March 11, 2021 Share Posted March 11, 2021 19 minutes ago, BroadwayRay said: This is what everyone who advocates the return of Darnold overlooks. Darnold is the prototypical "project" QB. He's got raw talents, but is lacking in fundamentals and in his processing of the NFL game. You can say that about a lot of QBs entering the draft who end up being day-two picks. What's remarkable about Darnold is that this is who he is going into his fourth year in the NFL. It's really hard to reconcile. One year of elite production (yes against whatever competition) is a worse indicator of good things to come than a 3 year stretch of bad-to-terrible production, which itself came after a disappointing final college season. I'm not seeing it. And that's just measuring against Wilson alone. There are other 1st round QB prospects, too. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcJet Posted March 11, 2021 Share Posted March 11, 2021 2 hours ago, Phillyjet said: It's a bridge deal and is a win-win for both sides. If it doesn't work out, then it will be easy for the Jets to get out of it. IF it does, then we have Darnold at a lower value over a three year window than if he had hit his ceiling. This is about business, not reward. Darnold is 24 years old, arguably being added to a great offensive system for his skill, and way ahead of learning the pro game (and adjusting to the speed) than a rookie quarterback. We may need to agree to disagree, but I see more upside on Darnold plus Chase/Smith/Waddle/Pitts than Wilson, a one-year wonder who noone was talking about last year, without a number 1 wide receiver. It is a fair opinion to have. There's no reason give Sam 30M guaranteed (Bridgewater money) today. We have 3 years of control on the guy. What if he gets hurt or sucks. Let's see Sam in the new offense for cheap this year. Then if he succeeds, franchise him or sign him next year. For right now, I'd rather use that 30M guaranteed on a WR or a OG. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post football guy Posted March 11, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted March 11, 2021 I think many miss the point of a Darnold extension. It's not about rewarding the player, it's about hedging. If you opt-in to Sam's option, you're on the hook for $18.85 million one way or another. If you don't accept the option, you'll be forced to franchise tag him if he plays well, which would cost the team more money. Giving an "extension" merely pays him what he would've gotten paid on the option, plus a little extra, in order to spread out the guaranteed money and prorate it over a number of years, and if he does in fact play well, he's under team control cheaply. That's the crux of it. 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post dcJet Posted March 11, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted March 11, 2021 2 minutes ago, football guy said: I think many miss the point of a Darnold extension. It's not about rewarding the player, it's about hedging. If you opt-in to Sam's option, you're on the hook for $18.85 million one way or another. If you don't accept the option, you'll be forced to franchise tag him if he plays well, which would cost the team more money. Giving an "extension" merely pays him what he would've gotten paid on the option, plus a little extra, in order to spread out the guaranteed money and prorate it over a number of years, and if he does in fact play well, he's under team control cheaply. That's the crux of it. You hedge with Mahomes or Allen or Herbert or Burrow, not a Darnold. It's throwing away money. 5 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetPotato Posted March 11, 2021 Share Posted March 11, 2021 That Jamal Adams trade was already the greatest trade in franchise history. Seattle going all-in on Jamal now may blow up so severely on them that the trade still can improve, TWOFOLD: 1) Increasing the value of the 2022 pick 2) Impacting the 2021 QB offseason availability pool to the benefit of the NYJ on several possible levels. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chirorob Posted March 11, 2021 Share Posted March 11, 2021 38 minutes ago, chad2coles said: I wonder how much a potential Russel Wilson trade would hold up a Jets trade for Watson. If the Seahawks trade Wilson, it's easy to see that pick being in the 4-8 range. Completely changes the value of what Douglas has to trade. Even the people most against the idea of getting Watson have been open to trading for him if Douglas could keep all of his resources other than #2 and another 1st. Of course, they will probably change their tune if Wilson is traded. Totally agree. Look at what happened to Dallas without Dak, I would say Dallas has more overall talent than Seattle, without Wilson, that could easily be 4-8. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chad2coles Posted March 11, 2021 Author Share Posted March 11, 2021 1 minute ago, chirorob said: Totally agree. Look at what happened to Dallas without Dak, I would say Dallas has more overall talent than Seattle, without Wilson, that could easily be 4-8. The Seahawks don't get to play the Giants, Eagles, and WFT 6 times next year. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcJet Posted March 11, 2021 Share Posted March 11, 2021 Back to Russell. Is the trade finalized yet? ? We may have Deshaun Watson and a top 10 pick next year. Holy Moly! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chad2coles Posted March 11, 2021 Author Share Posted March 11, 2021 15 minutes ago, JetPotato said: That Jamal Adams trade was already the greatest trade in franchise history. Seattle going all-in on Jamal now may blow up so severely on them that the trade still can improve, TWOFOLD: 1) Increasing the value of the 2022 pick 2) Impacting the 2021 QB offseason availability pool to the benefit of the NYJ on several possible levels. It's announced that the Seahawks get 3 1st round picks from the Bears for Wilson. Douglas calls John Schneider immediately. "So I hear you guys are in the market for a QB. Sam Darnold could be had for the right price, but you have to understand that the QB position is a lot more important than box safety...." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wonderboy Posted March 11, 2021 Share Posted March 11, 2021 14 hours ago, Smashmouth said: next years first from seattle may turn out pretty nice Who's #1 Who's #1 Who's #1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wonderboy Posted March 11, 2021 Share Posted March 11, 2021 1 hour ago, chad2coles said: I wonder how much a potential Russel Wilson trade would hold up a Jets trade for Watson. If the Seahawks trade Wilson, it's easy to see that pick being in the 4-8 range. Completely changes the value of what Douglas has to trade. Even the people most against the idea of getting Watson have been open to trading for him if Douglas could keep all of his resources other than #2 and another 1st. Of course, they will probably change their tune if Wilson is traded. 4-8 range? And who's the Seahawk backup that would be next in line? HAHAHAHHAHA Geno Weeeno Smith HAHAHAHHA More like 1-4 range. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PS17 Posted March 11, 2021 Share Posted March 11, 2021 3 hours ago, oatmeal said: Best idea all day and done. No funny s***t but I now have a top 3 member title He said member 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chad2coles Posted March 11, 2021 Author Share Posted March 11, 2021 6 minutes ago, Wonderboy said: 4-8 range? And who's the Seahawk backup that would be next in line? HAHAHAHHAHA Geno Weeeno Smith HAHAHAHHA More like 1-4 range. Douglas buys season tickets for IK Enemkpali right behind the Seahawks bench. The Seahawks have a tough schedule next year. Cardinals and Rams get better, 49ers get healthy, other than Jags, Lions, and Texans, every game looks tough. Home - Bears (with Wilson?), Lions, Jags, Titans, Saints Away - Packers, Vikings, Texans, Colts, WFT. If they don't have Wilson, they are probably a 4/5 win team. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phillyjet Posted March 11, 2021 Share Posted March 11, 2021 1 hour ago, dcJet said: There's no reason give Sam 30M guaranteed (Bridgewater money) today. We have 3 years of control on the guy. What if he gets hurt or sucks. Let's see Sam in the new offense for cheap this year. Then if he succeeds, franchise him or sign him next year. For right now, I'd rather use that 30M guaranteed on a WR or a OG. ok with that too. but depends on what's available. We have cap room this year, say we end up having to overpay for street free agents. You can lower Sam's cap number next year during his option year through say a roster bonus this year and less guaranteed next year, actually saves money next year and makes him more tradeable as well. Comes down to the impacts on cap, etc. I'm still not opposed to just letting him play it out, but would not be surprised to see a bridge deal that could be win/win. Just think I favor Sam plus a bonafide playmaker in early Round 1 as opposed to a crapshoot rookie and no playmaker. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BroadwayRay Posted March 11, 2021 Share Posted March 11, 2021 1 hour ago, football guy said: I think many miss the point of a Darnold extension. It's not about rewarding the player, it's about hedging. If you opt-in to Sam's option, you're on the hook for $18.85 million one way or another. If you don't accept the option, you'll be forced to franchise tag him if he plays well, which would cost the team more money. Giving an "extension" merely pays him what he would've gotten paid on the option, plus a little extra, in order to spread out the guaranteed money and prorate it over a number of years, and if he does in fact play well, he's under team control cheaply. That's the crux of it. And I think the point that many proponents of this plan miss is what a foolish waste of money and cap space it would represent if Darnold continues to play as he has for the past three (really four) years. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flgreen Posted March 11, 2021 Share Posted March 11, 2021 7 hours ago, Jet Nut said: What time is it Pete? Its....... What could go wrong??????? Then "The Prez" breaks his jaw. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doggin94it Posted March 11, 2021 Share Posted March 11, 2021 1 hour ago, dcJet said: You hedge with Mahomes or Allen or Herbert or Burrow, not a Darnold. It's throwing away money. This is so goddamn stupid it's hard to find words to convey the level of stupidity here. Do you just not understand what the word "hedge" means? Is that the issue? 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phillyjet Posted March 11, 2021 Share Posted March 11, 2021 15 minutes ago, BroadwayRay said: And I think the point that many proponents of this plan miss is what a foolish waste of money and cap space it would represent if Darnold continues to play as he has for the past three (really four) years. depends... maybe he eats some extra cap this year, but if the cap hit is lower next year, and the dead money is manageable for year 3, then I'm not sure I agree. You only spend cap money if this year if there is a player worth over-spending on. You don't just spend it to spend it. Sometimes it's good to sign with big roster bonuses, so that future cap hits are lower and that you have a ton of cap room next year and the year after. If he plays like sh*t, there is an exit strategy. If he hits under the new LaFleur system with playmakers, we've got him for reasonable cap numbers and can build around him. Win/win. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet Nut Posted March 11, 2021 Share Posted March 11, 2021 1 hour ago, flgreen said: Then "The Prez" breaks his jaw. Better yet Geno, paranoid after getting punched out by IK and fires a pre emptive shot, breaking "The Prez's" jaw. ? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenFish Posted March 11, 2021 Share Posted March 11, 2021 Jamal might just retire early and claim he had a HoF career. He doesn’t come from losing. So, he’ll just quit when Wilson gets traded. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GaryM Posted March 11, 2021 Share Posted March 11, 2021 8 hours ago, football guy said: I have maintained that its my belief that Darnold will be the QB for the NYJ next season. I've even put percentages on it. Hell I made a circle graph. Nothing has changed. I believe there's a 30% chance that he's traded and Zach Wilson is selected. Unless you're a 2+2=5 guy (likely based on the sensational takes, uninformed opinions, and vitriol posting habits), that would imply I believe there is a much greater that Darnold is back. The point is that Deshaun Watson is not getting traded, and with that there's a better chance Russell Wilson/Sam Darnold are traded. "More likely" does not mean "likely" either, you incompetent swine. Do me a favor and don't quote me, don't at me, don't even mention content I post. You're a skid mark in the underpants of society, and I have no desire for people like you to ruin the fun of football discussion on a message board right before free agency is set to begin. Good day. 100% Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jetsfan80 Posted March 11, 2021 Share Posted March 11, 2021 1 hour ago, GreenFish said: Jamal might just retire early and claim he had a HoF career. He doesn’t come from losing. So, he’ll just quit when Wilson gets traded. Nah he wants to get his bag first. Once he gets paid, he could easily Albert Haynesworth it then retire. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted March 12, 2021 Share Posted March 12, 2021 6 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said: Nah he wants to get his bag first. Once he gets paid, he could easily Albert Haynesworth it then retire. He’s 25 years old, plays ILB, and is already breaking down physically faster than Bob Sanders did. Ge doesn’t even have to dog it to be out of the league by age 30 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pointman Posted March 12, 2021 Share Posted March 12, 2021 11 minutes ago, T0mShane said: He’s 25 years old, plays ILB, and is already breaking down physically faster than Bob Sanders did. Ge doesn’t even have to dog it to be out of the league by age 30 When you have a horseneck, chicken legs and run in dick first every play it doesn't equate to longevity. Plus, he's a DB who can't run or cover. He will be obsolete before Russ Wilson gets to do his bipolar voice in Chicago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pointman Posted March 12, 2021 Share Posted March 12, 2021 Ahh life is good. Jamal about to be on a garbage team. Jamal doesn't have a contract extension. We have a eleventy first round picks. We are about to get our franchise QB. We have heaps of cashola. Not bad being a Jets fan right now. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcJet Posted March 12, 2021 Share Posted March 12, 2021 5 hours ago, Doggin94it said: This is so goddamn stupid it's hard to find words to convey the level of stupidity here. Do you just not understand what the word "hedge" means? Is that the issue? hmmm. I guess so. Hedge is to reduce risk of a future asset price movement. Herbert may cost you 40M down the road, so you sign him for 30M now. Sam may cost you 30M later, why give him 30M now? Are you saying Sam might be a 40M QB? Do you view Sam like Herbert? I'm missing it. Please explain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doggin94it Posted March 12, 2021 Share Posted March 12, 2021 2 hours ago, dcJet said: hmmm. I guess so. Hedge is to reduce risk of a future asset price movement. Herbert may cost you 40M down the road, so you sign him for 30M now. Sam may cost you 30M later, why give him 30M now? Are you saying Sam might be a 40M QB? Do you view Sam like Herbert? I'm missing it. Please explain. Mahomes is a known quantity; the discount (if any) the chiefs got for him wasn't "hedging" - it was buying out current lower priced years of control. Hedging is minimizing risk at the cost of upside. For example, signing a guy now who you think might be worth more than you can pay him now if things break right, but would be worth less if they don't. Signing Sam at 30m isn't a hedge, because it's essentially full price. Extending him at 25 or less is, since his play to date doesn't warrant that but it would be a steal if he develops. Listing a bunch of guys who are known quantities isn't a valid comparison 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philc1 Posted March 12, 2021 Share Posted March 12, 2021 Oh the irony Jamal complains his way out of the New York Jets just to end up with Geno Smith as his qb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.