Jump to content

" One reason ($) for the Jets' harmonious offseason " by cimini ~ ~ ~


kelly

Recommended Posts

One reason ($) for the Jets' harmonious offseason

June, 2, 2010

By Rich Cimini

As everybody probably knows by now, CB Antonio Cromartie and WR Santonio Holmes didn't receive contract extensions when they were traded to the Jets. The front office wanted it that way because it felt it reduced the risk for the team and increased the motivation for the players, both entering their final year. But Mike Tannenbaum, continuing a trend he started early in his GM tenure, re-worked those contracts -- and others, including WR Braylon Edwards.

The Jets' objective: Make them happy and hungry. They made them happy by advancing base salary in the form of bonuses (spend money!) and they made them hungry by including workout bonuses in the re-worked deals -- all without adding years to the contracts. Pardon the cynicism, but maybe this is one of the reasons why the Jets, with all their new and dynamic personalties, seem like one, big happy family.

In the case of Edwards and Holmes, there may have been an ulterior motive.

Let's start with Edwards because, as far as I can tell, this hasn't been reported anywhere in its entirety. As a restricted free agent, he received a one-year contract for the required $6.1 million. He signed on March 22, the eve of the off-season program. Instead of straight salary, the Jets broke it up as follows: a $1 million signing bonus, a $500,000 roster bonus, a $250,000 workout bonus and $4.34 million in base salary.

Included in those numbers is a hidden favor. By making the base $4.34 million instead of $6.1 million, it will save Edwards about $100,000 if he receives a one-game suspension from the league for last year's assault in Cleveland. (That's based on the amount of one game check.) The Jets showed Edwards some love and, perhaps as a result, he's the happiest of campers, earning rave reviews from Rex Ryan.

The Jets did a similar deal with Holmes, as previously reported. They lowered his base from $755,000 to $630,000, which will save him a total of about $29,000 over his four-game suspension for violating the league's substance-abuse policy. They also split up a $750,000 roster bonus, giving $500,000 in the form of a roster bonus and $270,000 in a workout bonus.

Cromartie's situation was well-documented. The Jets advanced $500,000 of his $1.7 million salary so he could pay off his child-support debt. You don't see that every day. While the team's unorthodox action raised some moral questions, it seems to have accomplished its No. 1 goal -- making Cromartie a happy employee.

It's classic Tannenbaum: Sweeten the contract without adding sugar. That makes it Sweet 'N Low, I suppose. With apologies to the Beatles, money can buy you love.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By Rich Cimini

Cromartie's situation was well-documented. The Jets advanced $500,000 of his $1.7 million salary so he could pay off his child-support debt. You don't see that every day. While the team's unorthodox action raised some moral questions, it seems to have accomplished its No. 1 goal -- making Cromartie a happy employee.

Yes douchebag, advancing salary to pay off child support is morally questionable. They should have forced the mother to wait.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes douchebag, advancing salary to pay off child support is morally questionable. They should have forced the mother to wait.

Yo always have to remember that Cimini comes from The Daily News, a notorious Jets-are-second-class-citzens rag that is always pro-Giants first

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having 20 players in the last year of their contracts could actually help the Jets. If a new labor deal drastically lowers the salary cap the Jets won't have a lot of huge deals on the books to screw that up and they can negotiate with the 20 players in the new environment of a lower cap. This could actually be a stroke of genius on Tanny's part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand the negatives.

The article states that the team has worked contracts to make the players happy without costing the team money, cap space or leaving us on the hook with long term contracts. The only "negative" I see is that he alleges the players only like the team because of these deals. Should the team give them contracts that make them hate to play here?

Morally reprehensive to front a player money to resolve child support issues? I don't see it. The only "questionable" move is moving money from salary to bonus to reduce the loss during a suspension, but that's the league's problem. If it's legal, **** 'em. Those players would be serving suspensions for actions from prior to their time with the Jets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...