|
Post by choon328 on May 5, 2016 17:36:01 GMT -5
Anyone see the Bleacher Report story from yesterday. Fitz reportedly looking for $12MM plus incentives. I would not normally begrudge a guy for trying to get the best deal he can, but where does he think his money is coming from. Because of our cap situation, its got to come from his teammates. I wonder who Fitz would like the Jets to cut, or which of his teammates he would to ask to take a pay cut so he can get his $12MM. Doesn't sound like the team first guy he ws portrayed as last season. Link to the story/video is below (I could not get the vid to embed). bleacherreport.com/articles/2637941-insider-buzz-fitzpatrick-standing-strong-on-demands-believes-jets-will-give-inThey would and will have to, no matter what his cost is, restructure players. That doesn't mean they would have to take a pay cut. The players would actually get more money up front. That is not a big deal.
|
|
|
Post by Sonny Werblin on May 5, 2016 18:20:29 GMT -5
Anyone see the Bleacher Report story from yesterday. Fitz reportedly looking for $12MM plus incentives. I would not normally begrudge a guy for trying to get the best deal he can, but where does he think his money is coming from. Because of our cap situation, its got to come from his teammates. I wonder who Fitz would like the Jets to cut, or which of his teammates he would to ask to take a pay cut so he can get his $12MM. Doesn't sound like the team first guy he ws portrayed as last season. Link to the story/video is below (I could not get the vid to embed). bleacherreport.com/articles/2637941-insider-buzz-fitzpatrick-standing-strong-on-demands-believes-jets-will-give-inThey would and will have to, no matter what his cost is, restructure players. That doesn't mean they would have to take a pay cut. The players would actually get more money up front. That is not a big deal. It is a big deal. The converted up front bonus money used to lower the salaries for the 2016 cap, gets spread out over the life of the contracts, increasing dead money if players are cut in the future and as a result making it more difficult to cut them. Bottom line is that it eliminates a lot of future flexibility with the cap. This team's future is not now. So, anything that hurts it in the future is a very very bad thing.
|
|
|
Post by choon328 on May 5, 2016 18:25:12 GMT -5
They would and will have to, no matter what his cost is, restructure players. That doesn't mean they would have to take a pay cut. The players would actually get more money up front. That is not a big deal. It is a big deal. The converted up front bonus money used to lower the salaries for the 2016 cap, gets spread out over the life of the contracts, increasing dead money if players are cut in the future and as a result making it more difficult to cut them. Bottom line is that it eliminates a lot of future flexibility with the cap. This team's future is not now. So, anything that hurts it in the future is a very very bad thing. Not really. The 2 guys who would be candidates are Marshall and Mangold. 2 years left on their deal with very little guaranteed money. You're just pushing money for players that will definitely play out their contracts and any financial impact would be short term. Not a big deal at all.
|
|
|
Post by yankeejet22 on May 5, 2016 18:29:52 GMT -5
I think that if it was totally up to Big Mac, he'd cut the cord in Fitz. I also believe that Bowles has some input and would like Big Mac to bring him back for at least another season to ride the Fitz train until it breaks down.
Hopefully Big Mac sticks to his guns... one year, no more than 8 mil. Take it or leave it.
|
|
|
Post by The Tax Returns Are in Kenya on May 5, 2016 19:00:49 GMT -5
This team's future is not now.
|
|
|
Post by 2foolish on May 5, 2016 19:12:21 GMT -5
Not going anywhere with Fitz anyway, it would be the best thing that could happen to wake ownership up, oh wait he is awake, damn we're fucked, oh wait...... what year did u go to joes camp...up at Williams...
|
|
|
Post by Lithfan on May 5, 2016 19:14:40 GMT -5
It is a big deal. The converted up front bonus money used to lower the salaries for the 2016 cap, gets spread out over the life of the contracts, increasing dead money if players are cut in the future and as a result making it more difficult to cut them. Bottom line is that it eliminates a lot of future flexibility with the cap. This team's future is not now. So, anything that hurts it in the future is a very very bad thing. Not really. The 2 guys who would be candidates are Marshall and Mangold. 2 years left on their deal with very little guaranteed money. You're just pushing money for players that will definitely play out their contracts and any financial impact would be short term. Not a big deal at all. Right now, we are $2MM under the top 51 cap. Draft class will cost about $5MM, so we need another $3MM to sign our draft class. plus $7 - $12MM if we agree to terms with Fitz. On top of that, we probably need another 2 to 3 mil for street free agents once the season starts. And in season, we will have to fit 53 players plus 10 practice squad players under our cap, which probably means another couple of million. Even if we pay Fitz $7MM, we still need to free up about $13-15 million minimum. I am sure Macc has a plan for that or else he would not have offered the reported $7 MM to Fitz. I don't like the idea of restructuring guys who are in their 30s, you never know when time starts to catch up with them. Both Marshall and Mangold have one year left on their deals. Maybe you can free up $3MM to $4MM each by converting salary to bonus without extending them, but that would still leave us short of what we need. Personally, I would prefer to restructure younger guys like Skrine & Decker, potentially extend them and spread the salary over their new years. I still think it will be very hard to free up $15 - $20MM cap space we would need to fit Fitz in under the cap at a price closer to his asking price. Without trading Mo, Macc is going to have some very tough decisions to make.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2016 21:55:42 GMT -5
Not going anywhere with Fitz anyway, it would be the best thing that could happen to wake ownership up, oh wait he is awake, damn we're fucked, oh wait...... what year did u go to joes camp...up at Williams... Quinnipiac college...1979?
|
|
|
Post by bxjetfan on May 5, 2016 22:07:24 GMT -5
Not really. The 2 guys who would be candidates are Marshall and Mangold. 2 years left on their deal with very little guaranteed money. You're just pushing money for players that will definitely play out their contracts and any financial impact would be short term. Not a big deal at all. Right now, we are $2MM under the top 51 cap. Draft class will cost about $5MM, so we need another $3MM to sign our draft class. plus $7 - $12MM if we agree to terms with Fitz. On top of that, we probably need another 2 to 3 mil for street free agents once the season starts. And in season, we will have to fit 53 players plus 10 practice squad players under our cap, which probably means another couple of million. Even if we pay Fitz $7MM, we still need to free up about $13-15 million minimum. I am sure Macc has a plan for that or else he would not have offered the reported $7 MM to Fitz. I don't like the idea of restructuring guys who are in their 30s, you never know when time starts to catch up with them. Both Marshall and Mangold have one year left on their deals. Maybe you can free up $3MM to $4MM each by converting salary to bonus without extending them, but that would still leave us short of what we need. Personally, I would prefer to restructure younger guys like Skrine & Decker, potentially extend them and spread the salary over their new years. I still think it will be very hard to free up $15 - $20MM cap space we would need to fit Fitz in under the cap at a price closer to his asking price. Without trading Mo, Macc is going to have some very tough decisions to make. Fuck Fitz, cut Giaccomini and we are good.
|
|
|
Post by GreenBloodBlitz on May 5, 2016 23:53:08 GMT -5
Cut Breno and winters...sign Slausen..
|
|
|
Post by GreenBloodBlitz on May 5, 2016 23:57:16 GMT -5
Trade for Anthony Davis from 49rs..
|
|
|
Post by GreenBloodBlitz on May 6, 2016 0:04:02 GMT -5
Let petty and hack battle it out
|
|
|
Post by Paradis on May 6, 2016 1:02:54 GMT -5
Geno Time.
|
|
|
Post by eboozer32 on May 6, 2016 5:36:16 GMT -5
Not really. The 2 guys who would be candidates are Marshall and Mangold. 2 years left on their deal with very little guaranteed money. You're just pushing money for players that will definitely play out their contracts and any financial impact would be short term. Not a big deal at all. Right now, we are $2MM under the top 51 cap. Draft class will cost about $5MM, so we need another $3MM to sign our draft class. plus $7 - $12MM if we agree to terms with Fitz. On top of that, we probably need another 2 to 3 mil for street free agents once the season starts. And in season, we will have to fit 53 players plus 10 practice squad players under our cap, which probably means another couple of million. Even if we pay Fitz $7MM, we still need to free up about $13-15 million minimum. I am sure Macc has a plan for that or else he would not have offered the reported $7 MM to Fitz. I don't like the idea of restructuring guys who are in their 30s, you never know when time starts to catch up with them. Both Marshall and Mangold have one year left on their deals. Maybe you can free up $3MM to $4MM each by converting salary to bonus without extending them, but that would still leave us short of what we need. Personally, I would prefer to restructure younger guys like Skrine & Decker, potentially extend them and spread the salary over their new years. I still think it will be very hard to free up $15 - $20MM cap space we would need to fit Fitz in under the cap at a price closer to his asking price. Without trading Mo, Macc is going to have some very tough decisions to make. Get Mo under contract and $8m gets freed up immediately. Expect Qvale or another of our "endless" list of 4th/5th rd. OL to make Breno expendable and save $4.5m Marshall/Mangold reworked deal saves another $4m each. Those moves alone free up $20m We'll be OK as long and Mo gets signed. If Mo proves difficult in getting his contract done, thenhe plays under the Tag and Fitz is a goner. Other moves stay in play to get our picks signed and have flexibility to sign Camp Cuts and make in-season moves
|
|
|
Post by Lithfan on May 6, 2016 6:46:44 GMT -5
Right now, we are $2MM under the top 51 cap. Draft class will cost about $5MM, so we need another $3MM to sign our draft class. plus $7 - $12MM if we agree to terms with Fitz. On top of that, we probably need another 2 to 3 mil for street free agents once the season starts. And in season, we will have to fit 53 players plus 10 practice squad players under our cap, which probably means another couple of million. Even if we pay Fitz $7MM, we still need to free up about $13-15 million minimum. I am sure Macc has a plan for that or else he would not have offered the reported $7 MM to Fitz. I don't like the idea of restructuring guys who are in their 30s, you never know when time starts to catch up with them. Both Marshall and Mangold have one year left on their deals. Maybe you can free up $3MM to $4MM each by converting salary to bonus without extending them, but that would still leave us short of what we need. Personally, I would prefer to restructure younger guys like Skrine & Decker, potentially extend them and spread the salary over their new years. I still think it will be very hard to free up $15 - $20MM cap space we would need to fit Fitz in under the cap at a price closer to his asking price. Without trading Mo, Macc is going to have some very tough decisions to make. Get Mo under contract and $8m gets freed up immediately. Expect Qvale or another of our "endless" list of 4th/5th rd. OL to make Breno expendable and save $4.5m Marshall/Mangold reworked deal saves another $4m each. Those moves alone free up $20m We'll be OK as long and Mo gets signed. If Mo proves difficult in getting his contract done, thenhe plays under the Tag and Fitz is a goner. Other moves stay in play to get our picks signed and have flexibility to sign Camp Cuts and make in-season moves A couple of really big assumptions you are making. Is Mo even part of our long term plans? I would love to see him sign long term, but if it was part of Macc's plan, it probably would have gotten done already. If we are going to sign him long term, we would probably be looking at a deal similar to Vernon -- 5 years/ $50+ million guaranteed. Even with a low base for 2016, I think they would be hard pressed to get him under contract for a $7.7MM cap hit. They can save some cap $$$ by signing him, but I would want to do that only if that is part of Macc's plan. You don't commit $50MM+ to a DE that you were not planning on retaining so you can sign a mediocre journeyman QB for a season or two. As far as Breno, that was kind of my original point, you may need to cut someone to fit Fitz under contract at his $12MM asking price. I would not be heart broken to see Breno go, but if they are going to do that, I would rather that it happen at the end of the pre-season after we give Qvale a chance to prove that he is ready to start. I would not mind if we cut ties with him now, but we would have to bring in a low price veteran in case Qvale is not ready to be a starter, or as insurance if he gets hurt in pre-season.
|
|