I'm not sure why he would unless they pull a Kellen Clemens and tell him he's going to get cut otherwise and his desire for a ring compels him to take it. Conner carried the ball more in college, but there's no way of knowing until we see him used more (and against a team other than Buffalo) in action. That was part of my point, though. Even without LT, a late round or UDFA RB fills our needs fine. I don't recall where the study was done, but a few years ago someone ran a study and demonstrated RB was the best position to get value out of late, rather than in the first round. It has the highest bust potential in the first round of any position. I'm not saying Leshoure will be a bust by ANY stretch. That would be a stupid argument. I'm just saying that we should be get value to fit our needs late in the draft if we lose LT. Even if we don't, we could get a developmental back. Out of the Top 10 backs in the league this season in rushing yardage, you have 4 1st rounders, only one of whom made the postseason. You have 7 out of the top 20, and the number who made the postseason expands to two (Mendenhall and LT). 6 of those Top 20 backs were 7th rounders or UDFAs, including the league's leading rusher. With our offensive line, we should have success running the ball even with a late rounder if need be provided he's a good fit for the zone.
The reason that everyone wants the receivers back is because of Mark Sanchez. This team will only go as far as he takes us. In order for him to reach his maximum potential (which in case you weren't sure, is quite high) he needs the best weapons around him to make him a better player. Once he becomes a better player, he can make the players around him better, but he just completed year 2 (with 2 AFCCG appearances) it's going to be another 2-3 years before he belongs in the top 3-4 conversation. Until then he needs the absolute best weaponry possible. David Harris is a damn good ILB, one of the top 5 in the NFL, but you know what, David Harris is not the guy who is going to win the Jets rings. He will be an excellent complimentary piece of the puzzle, but he won't be the key cog. Hell he just played his worst game in a Jet uniform in the biggest game of his life. So if I have to choose who I am building my team around, i'm building it around Mark Sanchez, not David Harris. If I were Mike Tannenbaum, I would do everything in my power to make the offense as explosive as possible (both on the ground, and through the air.) Rex is a defensive genius for a reason, he also turned something like 4 UDFA players into starters on the Baltimore defense in 5 years. So Rex clearly has the ability to develop talent from anywhere. Rex will keep the defense at the top of its game no matter what happens, or who we lose to injury (Jenks/Leonhard) or to FA. So if you have the confidence in Rex that I do, build that offense until every player there is so damn good, or so damn desperate for a ring it becomes impossible to stop us from having a top 5 offense to go with our perrenial top 5-10 defense. Thats why I want the receivers signed, no matter who we are forced to lose, be it David Harris, Cromartie, or both.
I'd put priority on one of the WR, then Cro, then second WR (from Holmes/Edwards combo). Normally, I'd also choose CB over first WR but Sanchez is still young & I'd like him to have an established big play maker @ WR to start his 3rd season. CB can command a lot of $$ & I'm feeling Cro might be the hardest Jet to resign. Lots of playoff caliber teams looking for CB & even if he's not #1, he makes a good #2 CB. === If Kyle Wilson is ready to step up & be #2 CB on the Jets then Cro can walk. Jets is the hardest team in the league to be #2 CB in the league because nobody goes after Revis. Next season Pats will most likely win 11+ games again, with all the draft picks they're adding to their current 14-win roster. How many games can the Jets risk w/ Kyle on the field figuring it out & still try to win the division?
The Jets can afford to let Harris walk. IMO, they almost have to unless he's willing to sign for 5-6 million a year. While he's a very good player, I'd rather have Holmes, Edwards and the flexibility to add players via FA It's a tough call though...
assuming we have the ability to sign 3 of our 4 guys, it depends entirely on who you would look to bring in if you let harris walk. Are you able to bring in an elite player say a Nnamdi or a Woodley, or maybe a Dawan Landry? Or are you just letting Harris walk and bringing in above average vets at a handful of positions? If the former is the case, its hard to argue you are trading an elite (arguably) talent in Harris for an elite player. In the latter you absolutely take Harris.
Bart scott gets 8 Mil a yr... Harris shouldnt b forced 2 take 5-6 mil to b happy n shut up.. Dude is soft spoken n a great player.. He will b signed. Jets Needs are simple DE/LB WHO CAN RUSH THE PASSER!
Dansby also got paid about 8 million a year. Patrick Willis is at 10 million. Brackett is 6.6 million. Harris isn't signing for 5-7-it'll cost more like 7-8 to sign him.
Nnamdi's name should never be mentioned as a possibility. If it were between Woodley and Harris, that's 110% a no brainer. I think you're far too absolute on the latter situation. I don't think Landry commands a massive contract, so I'd put him in the latter situation as a player we could sign for Harris' price tag and still have room for multiple free agents. I would take Dawan Landry, Alan Branch, and the ability to resign both receivers ANY day over David Harris. Think about what we're looking at. Let's assume the cap remains stable at $140 million with an 18 game season. May even increase to $145 if that happens. With likely cuts (Taylor, Jenkins, Woody, Gholston), we're down below $107 million in active salary and dead money. That leaves us $33 million to deal with. The gold standard this season for WR contracts was $9 million per, obviously backloaded, and that was Andre freaking Johnson. Edwards has already stated he'll take a paycut, and he was at $8 million per on his rookie contract. Say we're able to resign the receivers at an average of $13 million combined. That leaves us $20 million to play with. Given our position and picks, we're looking at about $5 million for rookies. $15 million left over doesn't leave much room. Based on Willis' contract (and I don't think Harris quite matches that), Harris will likely command $7 million on average. Woodley's more likely to see north of $8 million, maybe damn close to 9. At that point, signing one of them, we're operating with $6 - 8 million, which kisses Cro goodbye, we have some of our own FAs left to sign (Coleman, Hunter, Turner), and we're suddenly looking at room for one more good, not great, FA. Say goodbye to LT and you're able to bring in another vet, or two slightly above average ones. Where it gets interesting is if Harris is cut and we're somehow able to sign Woodley. Bryan Thomas counts for almost $4 million against the cap next season and none of it is dead money if he's cut. Someone raised the possibility of moving him inside, but I have doubts that would work. Sign Woodley and draft an OLB and suddenly Thomas is expendable. That $4 million could get us a decent pure run stuffer at the ILB position (maybe even take a flyer on a one year deal for D'Qwell Jackson and see if he can stay healthy. His price tag has to be at a huge low thanks to injury, but it's a risk) and still leave us some extra room. It would be a fantastic situation to be in, albeit unlikely. Still, with backloaded contracts, there's the VERY outside chance of: Edwards Holmes Woodley/Hali Landry Branch Hunter Turner Coleman Ihedigbo P K Go into the draft and hope to grab 6 of the following: OLB, DE, S, WR, CB, NT, RB (assuming no LT). Unfortunately, that leaves 6 spots on the roster, making it rather unlikely that we spend on a FA OLB, but you've got to hope guys like Gilbert are able to contribute and fill the gaps with UDFAs.
If the cap goes up because the season goes to 18 games, it's because the existing contracts will get prorated by 5-15%, so the Jets won't have 33 million.
for starters, I meant if we were to bring in an elite player (regardless of price) by letting Harris go, it would be worth doing, hence the mentioning of Woodley and Scrabble. I don't think either is really an option. Dawan Landry really is the most likely player we could bring in by letting Harris walk. Baltimore has some big time players on that defense and they can't keep everybody (especially since the franchise tag is all but assured to go to Ngata.) I firmly believe that Tamba Hali will be cheaper to sign than Woodley. I actually would prefer Hali for two reasons. The first of course, being that he is cheaper, the second being that I have more faith that he is capable of being a #1 pass rusher. Woodley has Harrison on the other side drawing an enormous amount of attention. Don't get me wrong, woodley is a great pass rusher, but I wonder how effective he will be without another great pass rusher across from him. At least with Tamba Hali his counterpart is Mike Vrabel. No doubt Hali is the #1 pass rusher there, and he has shown continued improvement since he was drafted, he even had more sacks than Woodley this year (14.5 to woodley's 10). But if I am understanding your calculations (and of course going on the assumption that we have that much cap space) by letting Harris and Cro walk, we could bring in Tamba Hali, Dawan Landry and Alan Branch to upgrade our defense in other areas. Which in my opinion would be a pretty solid trade off, and would only leave us with one unknown in the defense a replacement for Harris at the ILB position. But that would immediately become our #1 draft need, and could inspire a trade up to get a guy we covet...
The league won't agree to prorated salaries. That's been stated over and over again by Mark Murphy. They'll only negotiate on the drop in revenue percentage, and if you see that happen, it likely won't be until the 18 game season starts in 2012. In the meantime, the NFLPA will be unlikely to accept a decreased share in the meantime, likely meaning a static cap. You're right, however, that the cap is unlikely to rise next season as well under a negotiated gradual turnover. I still say $33 million is likely for next season.
Pryce just said on first take he thinks Holmes and Edwards will be back. Not sure if that means anything but he said it.
I disagree. I think having both Santonio and Braylon actually is bad for the offense. First, it makes Schotty think he has to use them all the time. Second, it takes away from our core philosophy which is that we should be ground and pound. One alpha dog is enough. We don't need two. We went 3 wide way too often this year, with particular emphasis in the 45-3 game. That's what happens when you try accommodating to the talent. Sanchez should be a hand-it-off/use-play-action-a-lot type of QB, not a spread QB. We should be more like the 90's Cowboys that ran a ton and had a clear alpha receiver. We got away from what we do best because we had two of those guys instead of one. To me, if you want Sanchez to get better, you play to his strengths. Play inside the pocket, have a strong running game and let him throw to TE's and RB's a lot. We take shots downfield with the clear alpha dog. Having a clear offensive philosophy rooted in a ground game is going to help him a lot more than trying some weird spread/west-coast hybrid that Schotty likes so much. Leave that to the Colts and Pats. We're the f***ng New York Jets!
Not really The last topic of the debate was Ochocinco. The host said that Cinco and TO said they wanted to play for the Jets and Trevor Pryce had this surprised look on his face. Trevor said there's no room for either of those guys and the host said "yeah but Holmes and Edwards are free agents". Trevor just said "yeah but I think they'll both be back...one way or the other".
I agree with everything you write until the last sentence. You say static cap, no rise next season, but then that the Jets will have 33 million meaning an increase in the cap to 140 million from 128 in 2009?
The cap increased from $116 million to $128 million from 2008 to 2009, a difference of $12 million, leaving a 'projected' cap of $140 million for the following year. Obviously 2010 was UNcapped, but $140 million was the presumed number most teams were working with, pretending there was a cap. If we don't see adjustments made to the revenue percentage until 2012, the 2011 number will likely be based on that projection and remain static rather than rise based on actual revenue percentage. At that point, you'll likely see a rise in 2012 with the emergence of the 18 game season, but I'd guess the resumption of a percentage based system with a rolled back percentage doesn't come until after the first 18 game season.
