If you could buy a Super Bowl, even once, most any team would do it. The Jets most certainly would do it. But even if you back load all your contracts and pay for the best free agents money can buy, there is no guarantee. Thats why what Tannenbaum did with the cap felt good for a few years but set back the Jets for a better part of 5-10 seasons. My point was with so many guys at the twilight of their careers and with a highly ranked defense the Jets could be in the mix and should look to get those final pieces in place this year to make the push. Guys like NCJets disagree. I really dont care one way or another and have stated that I think Mac is doing a good thing not chasing players and letting the market come to him.
I've heard that, but it doesn't make much sense to me. Why sign a guy of RGIII's quality and then draft a top prospect with the #2 pick to boot? I can see where they would want that floating around in order to get a better deal for a trade up though.
Raiders have a VERY young roster and to start the offseason they had a boat load of cap space to go along with it. Their core players have yet to hit their prime while all our core players are near the end or past their primes. We're not in the same boat.
either geno or trade for glennon with tampa bay. if you can trade wilkerson to trade up for wentz, then do that.
I agree with everything except the bold. Tanny's bad contracts did not set us back for the better part of 5-10 seasons. We were in AFCCG in just a shade over 5 years ago. Contrary to popular belief Tanny is not responsible of every single bad thing associated with this franchise since that game. The best remedy for bad contracts is good drafting and/or landing that elite franchise QB. Until a GM accomplishes any of those things, we will continue to blame back loaded contracts for our woes.
Idzik and Rex had an opportunity to start the transition towards a new beginning and they screwed up royally.
Off the top of my head, I'd say the following: Broncos Saints Jets Steelers Cardinals Chiefs Bills Seahawks Panthers Patriots Bengals Texans Cowboys Based on this offseason, I'd probably add the Giants. I can see how someone may want to add the Raiders and Jags solely based on the money they just spent this offseason. However, being that they are so young, I think they probably still have a year or two to add a piece here or there before they go to full blown win now mode.
I define a "win now" team as a team whose core players are in their prime or near the end. Core players are the guys you depend on to play well week to week in order for to win; guys that are not easily replaceable despite how much their play may or may have not declined. Think about that from a Jets perspective. That list includes a whole bunch of very old players: Mangold, Brick, Revis, Harris, Mo, Marshall and Fitz. As much we love to villainize Tanny, most of our core players are guys he drafted; the first 4 were drafted 10+/- years ago. It speaks to what a great job he did early on in his career, and how poorly he and and his successors have drafted collectively from that point.
It's not based on results. They are, at least were, trying to win now; it just didn't pan out. Check out this article prior to last season:
It's funny, the first times I remember NC on this forum, he was whining like a girl about personal attacks. Fast forward a couple of years, and that is his new basic strategy. 74 fucking nailed it. NC comes in and gives his basic and mostly incorrect rebuttal of a post and belittles the poster and tells them they need to learn about football. The poster replies with a good answer that often includes a link that completely destroys NC's rebuttal. NC apologizes and totally denies any personal attacks. NC finds a new post, rinse, repeat. It's so much fun to watch.
My definition of "win now" sort of coincides with Football Outsiders "snap-weighted age" metric, which measures the average age of the players on a team based on which players actually played that season. For example, a player with 1,000 snaps counts twice as much as a player with just 500 snaps. That metric has shown that getting older/younger doesn't necessarily make a team better or worse. However, it does allow you determine the teams relying more on veteran players; hence being in a more "win now" mode on paper.
It was a previous post by 74 to the one in the link, in response to the insults directed at himsef, that was really funny
Why not all 3, if we can't re-sign Fitz? That would be a nice group: Petty and Geno young with upside, while McCown can be a decent stop gap until a young guy emerges. I hope they get a deal done with Fitz, but if not, Petty/Geno/McCown would be a solid group to go into the season with (with the hope that Petty can win the job)
