Reddick Hires Drew Rosenhaus

[SpankyJohnson]

42 minutes ago, Joe W. Namath said:

Joe D is done w/ the Jets.  Hes not even the acting GM anymore.  He will officially leave right after the season.

JD is getting extended and Doug Pederson will be the coach of the Jets next season.   

[RevisIsland610]

43 minutes ago, Joe W. Namath said:

Joe D is done w/ the Jets.  Hes not even the acting GM anymore.  He will officially leave right after the season.

What happened to the best young coach and GM getting huge extensions? Just like all of your other posts. Wrong. 

[Be_a_Jet]

I don’t mind (don’t like it that much it but oh well) giving Reddick a contract for a couple years but I think he has to show up. Like in person. And come to practices and then give him the contract after a couple days. Even if it’s all for show, they need to make him come in before he signs. You can’t give him money while he’s on the couch 

[EM31]

23 minutes ago, Dcat said:

agreed.  And the jets had an salary increase for him ready to go.  Maybe now, he can take that deal without looking like an a-hole.  Love the black gloves, mafia like strong arming a business partner.  Yep...  that's the guy we should have.   

Yeah but that deal was one or two weeks ago and he has had additional fines since then,  The contractual gymnastics they needed to do in order to get him back to even on his fines would now be even more extreme. 

[slats]

41 minutes ago, bitonti said:

yes and if he showed up and broke his leg in training camp he gets nothing

No, he would’ve received his entire 2024 salary. 

[NYJCAP2]

14 minutes ago, jgb said:

The biggest disconnect in sports is that when a player holds out he’s “violating the contract!” But when a team cuts a guy or trades him off to some hellhole like Cleveland it’s “well, that’s just business.”

A contract is not a sacred document. It’s just a pre-negotiated agreement of the consequences if things go bad. That’s why they exist. 

I don’t find this to be true.

When a team trades for a guy, they’re also trading for the contract. It’s precisely how the value is determined.

The only thing changing is the color of the uniform.

[EM31]

1 minute ago, slats said:

No, he would’ve received his entire 2024 salary. 

I guess that Bitonti is going down the road of if you are going to be wrong then be spectacularly wrong.

[jetspenguin]

1 hour ago, jetsons said:

Haason would like to be a New York Jet for years to come

[jgb]

1 minute ago, NYJCAP2 said:

I don’t find this to be true.

When a team trades for a guy, they’re also trading for the contract. It’s precisely how the value is determined.

The only thing changing is the color of the uniform.

K.

[EM31]

I think he needs to take some time to cool down and think through his position, say the rest of the season and we will see him in camp next year.

[Biggs]

3 minutes ago, Gaffneycatch81 said:

Like Bitonti — there’s a nugget of truth at the core of your argument, but your rhetoric is so extreme that you undercut, and make a mockery of, your own stance. 

The NFL owners will not make one less dime for overpaying a player or a group of players.  The players on the other hand are negiotating against each other.   The owners are a single entity who share revenue.  The players are represented with a Union that has pitted the players against each other in negiotations. 

I'm sorry you find my rhetoric extreme.  I'm simply amazed that the average fan, working people will sh*t all the players and defend the system that's designed to create multi-generational wealth for a handful of owners. 

[The Crusher]

7 minutes ago, RevisIsland610 said:

What happened to the best young coach and GM getting huge extensions? Just like all of your other posts. Wrong. 

I'm convinced that W in the middle of his screen name is for Wrong, not Willie. 

[Biggs]

17 minutes ago, Gaffneycatch81 said:

Like Bitonti — there’s a nugget of truth at the core of your argument, but your rhetoric is so extreme that you undercut, and make a mockery of, your own stance. 

We can disagree without you using a tactic to disqualify my POV based on blather.  

[jgb]

6 minutes ago, The Crusher said:

I'm convinced that W in the middle of his screen name is for Wrong, not Willie. 

I think it stands for “Wool” as in dyed in the wool Homer. He’s just optimistic beyond the operation of any reason. I was that type of fan once but then I went through puberty.

[Be_a_Jet]

Also would be hilarious if he comes back and somehow gets 10 sacks in 10 games or somethin triggering the compensation to a second rd pick . Imagine after all this 

[jgb]

1 hour ago, bitonti said:

Well let's review  - JJ injury took away all the leverage the Jets had 

Reddick was traded he didn't choose to be here - he signed that contract with Philadelphia 

this is like Michael Scott Paper company - Reddick has the leverage now and he doesn't have to wait forever he just has to wait until the Jets are desperate

Saleh got fired and Joe is probably next

at 2-4 after tonight they will be desperate 

NFL players don't have the same rights as most workers (OSHA, anti-trust etc) but the one thing they can do is not show up

 

Because the right to withhold personal services is guaranteed by the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution. NFL and NFLPA couldn’t agree to remove that right even if they both wanted to.

[Gaffneycatch81]

15 minutes ago, Biggs said:

The NFL owners will not make one less dime for overpaying a player or a group of players.  The players on the other hand are negiotating against each other.   The owners are a single entity who share revenue.  The players are represented with a Union that has pitted the players against each other in negiotations. 

I'm sorry you find my rhetoric extreme.  I'm simply amazed that the average fan, working people will sh*t all the players and defend the system that's designed to create multi-generational wealth for a handful of owners. 

Yeah, you did a good job of explaining the core truth of your argument that I mentioned in my original post. And you’re preaching to the choir on that — NFL owners are all making bank together, and the CBA makes sure they are all pulling the same direction, which benefits them all. I’m on record a number of times on this board arguing the same point. However, going several steps further and saying that NFL teams are “not separate entities” in any respect just undercuts what was a good point. If that were the case, the Jets would not consistently suck as bad as they do.

No offense intended, btw. I just am of the opinion that smart posters on this board should not feel like they can only make their arguments with extreme statements. Makes for better discussion when they don’t.

[Biggs]

5 minutes ago, Gaffneycatch81 said:

Yeah, you did a good job of explaining the core truth of your argument that I mentioned in my original post. And you’re preaching to the choir on that — NFL owners are all making bank together, and the CBA makes sure they are all pulling the same direction, which benefits them all. I’m on record a number of times on this board arguing the same point. However, going several steps further and saying that NFL teams are “not separate entities” in any respect just undercuts what was a good point. If that were the case, the Jets would not consistently suck as bad as they do.

No offense intended, btw. I just am of the opinion that smart posters on this board should not feel like they can only make their arguments with extreme statements. Makes for better discussion when they don’t.

Reddick's contract with the Eagles apparently transfers to the Jets with a trade doesn't it?

All I'm saying is using a lawyers trick to undermine my argument isn't a cogent argument.  There is nothing extreme in saying NFL owners are partners in a single entitity called the NFL.  

[i remember shea]

28 minutes ago, The Crusher said:

I'm convinced that W in the middle of his screen name is for Wrong, not Willie. 

You give him more credit than I do. I figured he would have used an “R” for wrong. 

[Gaffneycatch81]

24 minutes ago, Biggs said:

We can disagree without you using a tactic to disqualify my POV based on blather.  

I wasn’t trying to disqualify your argument — to the contrary, I pointed out that there is a core truth to your argument. And, I don’t think what I posted was “blather.” I actually agree with you, and have made similar points in many posts on this board (see the discussion about the Jets not insuring Rodger’s contract, for example — I’m convinced there is a wink-wink agreement by NFL owners to use insurance only sparingly, if at all, given that in the current CBA insurance is a loophole that would allow teams to circumvent the cap and funnel more money to the players). So, apologies if I offended you — I just prefer informed discussions than having to wade through absurdly (imo) extreme statements on this board.

[Biggs]

1 minute ago, Gaffneycatch81 said:

I wasn’t trying to disqualify your argument — to the contrary, I pointed out that there is a core truth to your argument. And, I don’t think what I posted was “blather.” I actually agree with you, and have made similar points in many posts on this board (see the discussion about the Jets not insuring Rodger’s contract, for example — I’m convinced there is a wink-wink agreement by NFL owners to use insurance only sparingly, if at all, given that in the current CBA insurance is a loophole that would allow teams to circumvent the cap and funnel more money to the players). So, apologies if I offended you — I just prefer informed discussions than having to wade through absurdly (imo) extreme statements on this board.

I still have no idea what position I have expressed that's extreme?

[Gaffneycatch81]

12 minutes ago, Biggs said:

Reddick's contract with the Eagles apparently transfers to the Jets with a trade doesn't it?

All I'm saying is using a lawyers trick to undermine my argument isn't a cogent argument.  There is nothing extreme in saying NFL owners are partners in a single entitity called the NFL.  

Well, that wasn’t how I read your post that I responded to. I think you said that NFL teams are not separate entities — and I took that to mean in any respect. Which clearly would be an extreme way of pointing out that they are partners in a number of important respects, but also separate entities in a number of other important respects. But perhaps I misinterpreted what you meant. If so, my bad.

[JetsFanatic]

I expect a resolution in the Reddick situation in short order 

[Green Ghost]

46 minutes ago, EM31 said:

Yeah but that deal was one or two weeks ago and he has had additional fines since then,  The contractual gymnastics they needed to do in order to get him back to even on his fines would now be even more extreme. 

Not just you in particular, but why do so many of you refer to not receiving the game checks he hasn’t shown up for as fines?

[LockeJET]

Trade him to the Lions for a 2nd round pick. 

[JETSxWRATH™]

I have had a feeling this situation with his former agent was a "you didn't dump me, I dumped you" situation. They probably found out that he was searching for other representation so they "dropped"  him before he fired them, then leaked the stories about him being unreasonable(whether true or not). Him getting a new agent this quickly makes me believe it even more

[BigRy56]

Reddick has proven himself to be a dope over the last few months, but all will be forgiven if he reports and is putting QBs on their back game in and game out. In the end, that's really all that matters here

[MykePM]

48 minutes ago, Be_a_Jet said:

Also would be hilarious if he comes back and somehow gets 10 sacks in 10 games or somethin triggering the compensation to a second rd pick . Imagine after all this 

Funny thought, but Reddick needs to get 10 sacks AND play 67.5% of the snaps to trigger the escalation to a 2nd rounder.  Since he's already missed 6 games out of a 17 game season, he probably wouldn't get to 67.5% if he came back next week and played every defensive snap the rest of the year - which he won't.

[JohnnyLV]

2 hours ago, jetsons said:

 

 

“We look forward to working with the Jets to get this resolved as soon as possible,” Rosenhaus told Schefter. “Haason would like to be a New York Jet for years to come and our goal is to make that happen.”

 

I asked my wife, yeah Morgan Fairchild, that's the ticket and she said that this is just a complete lie and that people lie all the time.

[MykePM]

2 hours ago, slats said:

2 hours ago, jetsons said:

“Haason would like to be a New York Jet for years to come and our goal is to make that happen.”

Might be something of an impasse, as the Jets are only really interested in having him for the remainder of the season. 

It is a little disconcerting that the new agency is clearly not backing off the multi-year deal demand.  Assuming that the Jets absolutely don't want to be committed to him beyond this season, all that would be left would be a smoke-and-mirrors type contract that would appear to be a multi-year extension, but in reality gives the Jets a reasonable out next year - so Reddick can save some face. 

[Larz]

Make it end !

seeing Reddick and Adams on Halloween would be scary!

[DJF71]

2 hours ago, Saul Goodman said:

The team is too flawed to consider caving now. I wouldn’t even offer to offset the fines. If he wants to come back and get paid for the games going forward, that should be our best and only offer. 

Exactly.  Not a penny more. Jets hold all the leverage. if JD caves he deserves to be fired.   He already has one foot in the grave. 

[DJF71]

4 minutes ago, Larz said:

Make it end !

seeing Reddick and Adams on Halloween would be scary!

Problem is we would be 2-6 possibly so who would care. 

[Bugg]

2 hours ago, bitonti said:

Everyone is treating reddick like a jerk (and he certainly is) but the bottom line here is that the Jets are asking this player to risk his health without any long term money 

And That's fine if you're no one... Like the chazz surrats of the league. Reddick is a ten snack guy worth apparently a third Rd pick on the free market, he has the right to want longer term money 

So did Huff really 

The problem here is that the Jets traded for this dude and then made it into some labor vs capital thing as woody is want to do 

 

Except at his age, there probably isn't a big $ long term contract in his  future, which is why the Iggles were looking to dump him. So he's simply hired another agent to engage in more delusional thinking. Rosenhaus has been pretty notorious for deals that involve 1 big payday in year 1,posing with a Happy Gilmore-like huge ass cardboard check,  and then out years that are unguaranteed and never happen when the player gets cut lose in the off season. But Rosenhaus doesn't get dime 1 until Reddick shows up with some kind of contract. 

[Larz]

3 minutes ago, DJF71 said:

Problem is we would be 2-6 possibly so who would care. 

Do you have a crying pillow for the games ?