Except any UFA you sign (with the probable except of Maclin because of his injury concerns, which is why I'm interested) will demand MUCH more than a 2-3 year deal. That mentality was what got us into this clusterfuck of the past three years.
Right, because players sign 9 year contracts every day, that's definitely how it works. What's the difference if you sign a good player and give them a 4 year deal? The Jets have cap room and several holes, it's in their interest to lock up a good player in a position of need for a few years. Makes a lot more sense than talking about extending 3 rookies only 1 of whom has truly proven himself so far and acting like Maclin is the only UFA that is even mildly interesting when he isn't even the best WR let alone TE, G, OLB, or S available. The window was open for the Jets in '09 and '10 but they fell a little bit short. Then it closed because of big contracts given to poor performers. Now the window is opening again for the next 3 years with an infusion of young talent and surprise no-names exceeding expectations by a lot. Beyond 3 years either Geno will mature into a true franchise QB and the team doesn't have anything to worry about, or he won't and it doesn't matter what they do the process has to start over again. There's no reason to not take the best chance to win in '14-'15 by bringing in the best FA that is realistically affordable, i.e. not Graham or Byrd.
Would love to grab Earl Thomas. But I think Seattle lets Browner go before Thomas. No way we cut Cro. If anything we trade him. He has value.
Earl Thomas is going nowhere, you don't just let your first round safety, who in my opinion is the best safety in football, walk out the door. Sherman gets the headlines but Thomas is their most important defender
Pitta, Finley if he recovers, Nicks, Decker, Tate, Orakpo, TJ Ward, Asamoah all would fill gaping needs. There are quite a few options out there and Idzik should absolutely bring in at least one. You think you can get Nicks, Decker (who is extremely overrated with Peyton throwing him the ball going up against 3rd CBs), Ward (who is almost sure to re-sign with CLE, and if not, that means he's demanding a TON of money), Finley, or Pitta for 2-3 years? Please. Stop with the bullshit hyperbole. When did I say 9 years? Miami won the free-agent contest last year. How are they doing? Tampa? You develop your own talent. All of those players are past their prime. Asamoah will be good for awhile, but do we really want to invest UFA money into a guard? I don't think so.
lol @ past their prime. 5 of those guys are 26 or under and the other 2 are 27. Greeeaaaat point. Well how long is MUCH more than 3 years? 4? Somebody is full of bullshit hyperbole in this discussion, not me, but someone. So you went from Maclin is the only UFA worth anything, to 26 is way over the hill in the NFL, what nonsense do you feel like pulling out next?
if howard is not extended before f.a. starts i don't think idzic gets into a bidding war. with the amount of picks we have and cap space he may feel he can get adequate performance for lesser money plus another comp pick. also idzic so far seems pretty conservativeso the thought of bringing in premium f.a. seems far fetched. competition is the theme and you don't get competition when a guy comes in with 20-30 million guarenteed. i have said it before, expectidzic to sit on his hands through the first wave of f.a. and then hit the bargain shelves when the money dries up. turn over the roster till you have the right combination to compete. just like he did with the guards this offseason
Do me a favor and please look up how many years the top FAs in each class get. Please, make my day. All of those players you listed are the top FAs in this class. Nicks is a better receiver than Mike Wallace. You want to give Nicks a 5 year 60 million dollar deal? How about Jermichael Finley? Want to take a 26 year old TE that just had spinal surgery that has been a huge disappointment in GB? A 28 year old Dennis Pitta who is going to command way more than he's worth? You want to be the guy to pay Eric Decker after padding his stats with Peyton Manning? Think Holmes is overpaid? Wait until you see what Decker gets. Brian Orakpo, who just came off a horrific injury, and is getting up there in age for an OLB? Tate is also going to get a lot of money, and RBs are pretty plug-and-chug in this current league. Unless you have an elite one, which Tate isn't, it isn't worth paying UFA money for one. TJ Ward is almost certainly getting resigned, and if he isn't, it's because he wants way too much money. At that point, not worth it. I also don't think it's worth it paying Asamoah UFA money. Not for a guard. Please though, keep ignoring all my points and not responding with football-based facts/opinions, and just keep calling me a dumbass. It'll get you real far. Also, I NEVER said Maclin was the only one worth anything. I said given our situation, Maclin is the only player I'd even be slightly interested in pursuing (and I'd still rather not sign him, just he's the only one that even slightly peaks my interest).
They get anywhere from 2-5 years, what is so hard to understand? Didn't realize that Finley and Pitta are better TEs than Graham, guess they're both the top FAs in their class, and it must be about a 10 way tie for top WR too. Ward is certainly the top FA at S, not Byrd. Also I was talking about Tate the WR not HB. With Finley and Orakpo coming off injuries there will be a discount in size and length of contract accordingly, this makes them more interesting not less. And if Asamoah isn't worth being paid because he's a guard, do you think the Chiefs should just offer him no more than a veteran minimum contract and then maybe he can just retire instead? It's a wonder any team signs any FAs, ever. Sure, Decker will probably be inflated off of Manning stats, he's probably the least interesting of the bunch. The point is that there are a lot of good players with a lot of different situations and stories heading to FA in positions of need for the Jets. It would be foolish for a contending team to not show interest in some of them and hopefully try to end up with one. If it doesn't work out then fine, but there are a lot of possible options out there, not few.
Instead of constantly trying to argue when you're putting words in my mouth (apparently you take top FAs into meaning the singular top... if you wan't to get into a battle of semantics you're in the wrong place) I'll just say we'll have to agree to disagree. About the bolded- I'm the one that does the hyperboles. Right. And I'm sorry for the confusion about Tate. If you're talking about the WR, that'd be a pretty low-level FA signing. Idzik likely knows him well, so if he think he can help the team I'm all for it. That being said, I don't think he's very good, but Idzik certainly knows more than I do.
There's a difference between being facetious and unintentionally hyperbolic. Yes, the WRs might not be a match made in heaven but in the end it comes down to the contracts. Nicks isn't lighting it up this year although Maclin is so they might turn out to be closer than you're portraying it. The TEs or G should be more affordable so that certainly makes them interesting to me at least and while Ward would be expensive he'd complete the defense. Orakpo would also make a big difference for a few years. Tate could be a good stop-gap creating competition for playing time between Hill and a 1st/2nd rd WR then phasing out whoever is worse between Hill and Tate long term. If all of the young players really do go on and warrant big contracts and a top level FA is added this year, it wouldn't be the end of the world to let one of them walk for a nice comp pick when it's turn for their payday. Winding up with too many quality players isn't a bad problem to have, but that's looking ahead 2-3 years. If the FAs production goes downhill fast it would definitely hurt, but you run a similar risk as soon as you give your own players a big contract or rely on mid/lower round picks to plug holes. If nobody ever had success after signing a big FA then nobody would do it, but that isn't the case so teams do every year.
If you pay a young to mid-prime free agent top dollar to come play for you had better be prepared to overpay for your own guys as well. Look at the Steelers and Ravens caps over the years and you begin to understand the value of not paying for veteran talent that was developed outside the organization. Your own homegrown guys are easier to manage when you didn't just rock the boat by bringing in an expensive merc. As an example: let's say the Jets go get T.J. Ward and pay him top of the market in the process, say $8M a year. $8M? For T.J. Ward? Yeah, probably in that vicinity if a bidding war develops. Ok, so now Muhammad Wilkerson is looking at that and any chance the Jets have to get him at a hometown discount evaporate. $10M a year to play for the Jets when they just spent $8M on Ward? Not likely. Now his price is going to be $13-14M a year and maybe higher than that. So by spending top dollar to go outside the organization the Jets just made several negotiations with homegrown players more difficult and more costly. Much better to let the young safeties develop and eventually maybe pay one of them, hopefully with a bit of a hometown discount. If you have to have another safety for the window then you go draft one high next year and pay him instead of the guy coming in from outside. Group dynamics is very important in terms of setting your roster and pecking order. Talent is more important but if you ignore the group dynamics all the talent in the world won't save you. That's what happened to the Bucs this season.
Certainly the strong argument against but the tangibility isn't readily quantifiable. Even if a high end FA isn't signed it seems very unlikely Wilkerson signs for 10M/yr. I think "hometown discounts" might be mistaken for the threat of injury and loss of career by holding out the extra year for FA. Sure some players probably take a bit less than they could get if they like the town and club but the effect doesn't seem as significant as it might appear. So in this instance maybe it costs 13M to extend Wilkerson when he might have taken 12 but then when the next crop comes up if they all expect the same you cleave one for compensation and the precedent is pretty well nullified. The Patriots are a team that are usually active in FA and they've had plenty of success, sure Brady is Brady but grabbing high profile players hasn't exactly born much fruit for the Jets just yet.
Who is the last big-name FA the Pats have brought in? Are you going to count an injury-prone Amendola? The move that is regarded as one of the biggest mistakes of FA since they let Welker go just to replace him with Amendola?
Sure, you can count him. How about bringing in Roosevelt Colvin for big money and winning a couple of Super Bowls in a row? Or then a few years later bringing in Adalius Thomas and going undefeated before he should have won the Super Bowl for them? Idk, routinely trading picks for established vets like Randy Moss and Ocho? Good enough?
Why is nobody talking about the big receivers L'Damian Washington and Marcus Lucas? Could draft one of them in the later rounds and sign a guy like Thurmond who's played well over in Seattle for a good price. He's starting for Browner today let's see how he plays.
So you're going to go back to 2003 for Colvin? Also, Adalius Thomas was known as a bust. He never lived up to his Baltimore playing days and his contract. Trades do not equal free agent signings, but okay.
Thomas wasn't a bust until he got injured in his second season, his production was pretty much on par with what he did with the Ravens. In the first season the Patriots went undefeated, Thomas sacked Eli twice in the Super Bowl and forced a fumble, 99 times out of 100 his contribution would have been a big part of the Patriots pulling off an undefeated season without the helmet catch. Are you really disputing the point that the Pats spent big money on an FA twice in 4 years and won two out of three Super Bowls as a result? Is it that important to prove that nobody ever succeeds after making big FA pickups even though it isn't at all true? Plus here we are in 2013 and those decisions haven't exactly undone the franchise yet. Also, trading picks for big name vets isn't exactly the same thing as acquiring them in FA, but it's as close as it gets. I'm sure you would be against doing that also based on your perspective so far, correct me if I'm wrong please. It might not be ideal to pay medium-big money to a guard, but it seems like a better idea to me than watching Colon and Winters get Geno and his confidence killed week after week. The team has more needs than it has high draft picks but they do have some cap space next year so it would be great to bring in at least one above average player to make life a little easier for a couple years. Seems a lot more sensible than letting money go to waste in case the GM just has to make it rain on Milliner and Smith along with everyone else that looks like they might actually warrant it. Think I'd bet on a proven producer in the mean time.
Having a HOF QB helps NE win a couple of SBs. They were also stacked teams that added via FA to push them over the top. We were at that state in 2008-2009ish. We got Bart Scott. That was our window. We have too many holes to count. Trying to plug them with FAs isn't an effective strategy. We are not one (or two, or three, or four, or five) pieces away right now. Would I be against trading for a high-valued player? With our current make-up? Yes. At the moment, we definitely need at least two WRs, a Tight End, at least 1 guard, an OLB, and at least 1 S. Those are huge gaping holes that we need now. We will also likely need a CB and an ILB in the near future. Hell, if Geno keeps playing the way he does, we may need a QB also. We aren't in the position to chase high-priced FAs. If we were one piece away and we had all this cap-room, maybe. When we have 6 absolute definite needs, followed by three probably needs (and those are only starters, not even considering quality depth which is always a need) we aren't in the position to chase high-priced FAs or give up high value for a FA when they're going to be on the decline, and will be past their prime by the time we're ready to contend anyway. We're at least one quality draft (hopefully for our sake, next year) away from going after FAs. We'll likely have 6 picks in the first 4 rounds. We need to get at least 4 long-term starters from those 6 picks. If we can get that, plus a reasonable low-mid level FA (much like Goodson was this year), we'll be in good shape.
