|
|
Post by Peebag on Feb 23, 2016 15:16:35 GMT -5
who's the other suiters in this romance?
|
|
|
|
Post by Touchable on Feb 23, 2016 15:20:46 GMT -5
I've heard Oakland and the Giants
|
|
|
|
Post by Chesapeakejet on Feb 24, 2016 12:17:13 GMT -5
Franchise Tag?
|
|
|
|
Post by jetstream23 on Feb 24, 2016 12:19:56 GMT -5
This! Although I continue to believe the Tag should/could be used on Snacks and that it would be more economical that way. Signing Mo long-term, franchising Snacks and having both Richardson and Leo Williams still on economical rookie deals would make the cost/benefit of that DLine something sick! We could then potentially look for a way to deal Sheldon in a future year. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton on Feb 24, 2016 13:13:56 GMT -5
re-signed
|
|
|
|
Post by Brady's a catcher on Feb 24, 2016 13:36:31 GMT -5
This! Although I continue to believe the Tag should/could be used on Snacks and that it would be more economical that way. Signing Mo long-term, franchising Snacks and having both Richardson and Leo Williams still on economical rookie deals would make the cost/benefit of that DLine something sick! We could then potentially look for a way to deal Sheldon in a future year. That would be pretty ideal. Let's hope that Mo and the Jets are closer than the media reports indicate. Seems like they're far about on money. |
|
|
|
Post by Peebag on Feb 24, 2016 14:05:56 GMT -5
But who's out there that can afford/wants Wilk? It seems that he's gonna be expensive but I'haven't heard of anyone wanting to pay that type of coin for a DL.
|
|
|
|
Post by Touchable on Feb 24, 2016 14:33:04 GMT -5
But who's out there that can afford/wants Wilk? It seems that he's gonna be expensive but I'haven't heard of anyone wanting to pay that type of coin for a DL. Oakland And if they'd cough up #14 and maybe a mid round pick, I'd send his ass out to the Bay in a heartbeat. That extra 1st rounder plus the additional $16 million in cap space could go a long way. |
|
|
|
Post by Lithfan on Feb 24, 2016 14:43:50 GMT -5
This! Although I continue to believe the Tag should/could be used on Snacks and that it would be more economical that way. Signing Mo long-term, franchising Snacks and having both Richardson and Leo Williams still on economical rookie deals would make the cost/benefit of that DLine something sick! We could then potentially look for a way to deal Sheldon in a future year. Does not appear to make economic sense to tag Snacks. There is no distinction between a nose tackle and DT for the purposes of the tag. NFL.com is projecting the tag for DT to be at $13.4MM. Snacks is not likely to get anywhere near $13.4 million per year in free agency. From NFL.com www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000636218/article/estimated-2016-franchise-tag-figuresQuarterback: $19.6 million Defensive end: $15.4 million
Wide Receiver: $14.4 million Linebacker: $14.0 million Cornerback: $13.7 million Offensive line: $13.5 million Defensive tackle: $13.4 million Running back: $11.5 million Safety: $10.6 million Tight End: $9.0 million Kicker/Punter: $4.5 million |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2016 15:07:51 GMT -5
Mo will be re-signed.
Snacks will be re-signed.
Fitz will be re-signed.
All of this panic is for naught, it's all about these reporters and columnists needing something to write about.
Right now, before they cut or restructure anyone else, the Jets have what....an estimated 21 million cap space?
If the franchise tag on Mo is $15.4 million, you figure they can negotiate a contract where his cap hit this year is around $10 million
Likewise, you can negotiate a contract where Snacks' cap hit this year is about $5 million
Fitz's cap hit on a new contract for this year could be around $3-5 million.
That fits under the space we have right now, without any other cuts or restructures and its based on the "conservative" estimate that the cap will be $155
They'll be back....don't you worry.
|
|
|
|
Post by carlito1171 on Feb 24, 2016 17:01:08 GMT -5
But who's out there that can afford/wants Wilk? It seems that he's gonna be expensive but I'haven't heard of anyone wanting to pay that type of coin for a DL. Oakland And if they'd cough up #14 and maybe a mid round pick, I'd send his ass out to the Bay in a heartbeat. That extra 1st rounder plus the additional $16 million in cap space could go a long way. I like Mo but that def would be tempting if Sheldon wasn't one spliff away from Bye Bye Football for a year.... |
|
|
|
Post by jetstream23 on Feb 24, 2016 17:15:36 GMT -5
This! Although I continue to believe the Tag should/could be used on Snacks and that it would be more economical that way. Signing Mo long-term, franchising Snacks and having both Richardson and Leo Williams still on economical rookie deals would make the cost/benefit of that DLine something sick! We could then potentially look for a way to deal Sheldon in a future year. Does not appear to make economic sense to tag Snacks. There is no distinction between a nose tackle and DT for the purposes of the tag. NFL.com is projecting the tag for DT to be at $13.4MM. Snacks is not likely to get anywhere near $13.4 million per year in free agency. From NFL.com www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000636218/article/estimated-2016-franchise-tag-figuresQuarterback: $19.6 million Defensive end: $15.4 million
Wide Receiver: $14.4 million Linebacker: $14.0 million Cornerback: $13.7 million Offensive line: $13.5 million Defensive tackle: $13.4 million Running back: $11.5 million Safety: $10.6 million Tight End: $9.0 million Kicker/Punter: $4.5 million Okay. If you're correct than I'm way off. My understanding (I forget where I heard it) was that NT's had about a $5M franchise number. |
|
|
|
Post by yankeejet22 on Feb 24, 2016 18:39:50 GMT -5
This! Although I continue to believe the Tag should/could be used on Snacks and that it would be more economical that way. Signing Mo long-term, franchising Snacks and having both Richardson and Leo Williams still on economical rookie deals would make the cost/benefit of that DLine something sick! We could then potentially look for a way to deal Sheldon in a future year. Does not appear to make economic sense to tag Snacks. There is no distinction between a nose tackle and DT for the purposes of the tag. NFL.com is projecting the tag for DT to be at $13.4MM. Snacks is not likely to get anywhere near $13.4 million per year in free agency. From NFL.com www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000636218/article/estimated-2016-franchise-tag-figuresQuarterback: $19.6 million Defensive end: $15.4 million
Wide Receiver: $14.4 million Linebacker: $14.0 million Cornerback: $13.7 million Offensive line: $13.5 million Defensive tackle: $13.4 million Running back: $11.5 million Safety: $10.6 million Tight End: $9.0 million Kicker/Punter: $4.5 million I believe we will re-sign God-damn Snacks. Something like 5 years 20mil with around 10mil guaranteed. |
|
|
|
Post by maury77 on Feb 24, 2016 19:00:48 GMT -5
But who's out there that can afford/wants Wilk? It seems that he's gonna be expensive but I'haven't heard of anyone wanting to pay that type of coin for a DL. Oakland And if they'd cough up #14 and maybe a mid round pick, I'd send his ass out to the Bay in a heartbeat. That extra 1st rounder plus the additional $16 million in cap space could go a long way. I don't even need the mid round pick, I'd trade him straight up for pick 14. |
|
|
|
Post by Hotman on Feb 24, 2016 19:59:38 GMT -5
Oakland And if they'd cough up #14 and maybe a mid round pick, I'd send his ass out to the Bay in a heartbeat. That extra 1st rounder plus the additional $16 million in cap space could go a long way. I don't even need the mid round pick, I'd trade him straight up for pick 14. That's bad business my friend. Why give things away? |
|
