alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets?hl=enalt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* Nice article: Ten logical cap casualties for 2010... - 3 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/8ebb60190d19b6f7?hl=en
* New Jets blog worth checking out... - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/beb609a05e58837e?hl=en
* Jets sign S Brodney Pool... - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/a73a619bb35a9f1a?hl=en
* Tanny on the radio re: TJ - 11 messages, 9 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/72dd339ad71bbefe?hl=en
* Washington - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/5cbcd8f7b52cb99d?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Nice article: Ten logical cap casualties for 2010...
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/8ebb60190d19b6f7?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 8:28 am
From: MZ
Remy McSwain wrote:
> "MZ" <mark@nospam.void> wrote in message
> news:YvmdnT20acWS-QfWnZ2dnUVZ_ternZ2d@giganews.com...
>> Remy McSwain wrote:
>>> "Johnctx" <jc@spamtx.net> wrote in message
>>> news:H8-dnR24SbLuyQfWnZ2dnUVZ_jadnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>>> Remy McSwain wrote:
>>>>> "buRford" <buRford@buR.ford.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:7h4gp590ur41v69ul3kaq8jo15t7d4j60v@4ax.com...
>>>>>> Well, VG made another Top Ten list ;)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ten logical cap casualties for 2010
>>>>>> By Bill Barnwell
>>>>>> Football Outsiders
>>>>>>
>>>>>> While NFL owners appear willing to lock out their players in
>>>>>> 2011, they already have one
>>>>>> advantage that none of the owners in other professional sports
>>>>>> have: nonguaranteed
>>>>>> contracts. While a team in virtually any other sport is stuck
>>>>>> paying an underperforming
>>>>>> player for the full length of his contract, NFL organizations
>>>>>> can choose to cut a player,
>>>>>> and avoid paying any future bonuses and base salaries due to
>>>>>> him.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Normally, there's a downside to that move. Players receive the
>>>>>> cash from a signing bonus
>>>>>> immediately upon signing a deal, but teams are allowed to
>>>>>> spread the cap hit from a
>>>>>> signing bonus across the length of a contract.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For example, a $10 million signing bonus on a five-year deal
>>>>>> results in a cap hit of $2
>>>>>> million in each of those five seasons (in addition to a
>>>>>> player's base salary, incentives
>>>>>> and other bonuses). When a player is released or traded, the
>>>>>> bonus money assigned to the
>>>>>> cap in future years is accelerated onto the current year's
>>>>>> cap, forcing the team to devote
>>>>>> a portion of its precious cap space to players who are no
>>>>>> longer on the roster. That's
>>>>>> commonly known as "dead money."
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This year, though, things are different. Because this is an
>>>>>> uncapped year, teams can
>>>>>> release players with onerous base salaries and large signing
>>>>>> bonuses without having to
>>>>>> worry about cutting corners on this year's roster. That
>>>>>> presents teams with a
>>>>>> once-in-a-generation opportunity to erase their mistakes for
>>>>>> good. Assuming there will be
>>>>>> a salary cap on the other side of any lockout, there are
>>>>>> plenty of examples of bad
>>>>>> contracts teams would be wise to get rid of. We've identified
>>>>>> 10 below, listed
>>>>>> alphabetically.
>>>>> This guy is obviously confused about whatever point he's trying
>>>>> to make. He talks about how NFL teams get to save money
>>>>> because of non-guaranteed contracts as though bonuses don't
>>>>> exist, but then, because they do exist, marginalizes them
>>>>> because the cap consequences of those bonuses get to be spread
>>>>> over multiple years. What does how the bonuses get cost
>>>>> accounted have to do with whether or not they exist?
>>>>>
>>>>> What is oft misunderstood about the NFL and it's non-guaranteed
>>>>> contracts is that they only exist because, given the cap and
>>>>> how it's designed, that's the way the players want it anyway.
>>>>> Take the case of a player who signs a $40MM five year deal with
>>>>> $25MM to be guaranteed. He has a simple choice. Take the
>>>>> $25MM in the form of $5MM per year in guaranteed money, or take
>>>>> the whole $25MM up front in the form of a signing bonus. Which
>>>>> would you take? Sure, you could make the case that the whole
>>>>> $40MM should be guaranteed, but that would be a case for
>>>>> increasing the total amount of money to be paid to players, and
>>>>> not a case for guaranteed contracts. If the total amount of
>>>>> money to be paid to players remained the same, and all
>>>>> contracts had to be guaranteed, then that $40MM would never
>>>>> have been the deal in that case to begin with.
>>>>>
>>>>> The whole "non-guarenteed contract" in the NFL is a bad thing
>>>>> argument is bogus on its face.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> There are some guaranteed salaries. The Jets have used it a few
>>>> times.
>>>>
>>>> With Vilma it was smart. They had cap space & they knew they
>>>> wouldn't cut him so you get more of the guaranteed portion out
>>>> of the way. We did the same thing with Gholston and that doesn't
>>>> look too smart now.
>>>>
>>>> The non-guaranteed portion is a two edged sword & has value for
>>>> player & team.. If Greene doesn't step up & play so well at the
>>>> end of the year then Jones makes $6MM and is a FA. Instead he
>>>> will make $5MM at the back end of his career.
>>> All of which provides further proof that there is no rule against
>>> non-guaranteed contracts, and that it's a natural consequence of
>>> the way the salary cap was designed.
>> I don't think the author says otherwise. I think all he said was
>> that it's allowed in the NFL and apparently not in other leagues.
>
> I agree that the author didn't say otherwise. It's just a pet peeve
> I have about how the whole issue of non-guaranteed contracts are
> misperceived in many circles.
Yeah, I've seen some people say that it's unfair to the players. They
fail to recognize that contracts have adapted with this in mind and that
bonus money and the overall guaranteed money of the contract tends to be
lower when the entire thing is guaranteed.
In the end, as far as fairness goes, it doesn't really matter. It's
still an open market and players can still negotiate the best possible
deal. The exception to this is the franchise/transition tags, RFA/ERFA,
and the draft. If the NFLPA was really interested in "fairness", they'd
demand that tagging and restricted free agency is eliminated. But I
haven't heard that that's even on the table.
== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 9:33 am
From: "Ray O'Hara"
"Remy McSwain" <Paradis70080@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:OPGdnUUKoNLA9QfWnZ2dnUVZ_r2dnZ2d@giganews.com...
>
> "Ray O'Hara" <raymond-ohara@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:hndojg$qc8$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>
>> "Remy McSwain" <Paradis70080@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:au-dne80zbqL_AfWnZ2dnUVZ_o-dnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>>
>>> "Johnctx" <jc@spamtx.net> wrote in message
>>> news:H8-dnR24SbLuyQfWnZ2dnUVZ_jadnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>>> Remy McSwain wrote:
>>>>> "buRford" <buRford@buR.ford.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:7h4gp590ur41v69ul3kaq8jo15t7d4j60v@4ax.com...
>>>>>> Well, VG made another Top Ten list ;)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ten logical cap casualties for 2010
>>>>>> By Bill Barnwell
>>>>>> Football Outsiders
>>>>>>
>>>>>> While NFL owners appear willing to lock out their players in 2011,
>>>>>> they already have one
>>>>>> advantage that none of the owners in other professional sports have:
>>>>>> nonguaranteed
>>>>>> contracts. While a team in virtually any other sport is stuck paying
>>>>>> an underperforming
>>>>>> player for the full length of his contract, NFL organizations can
>>>>>> choose to cut a player,
>>>>>> and avoid paying any future bonuses and base salaries due to him.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Normally, there's a downside to that move. Players receive the cash
>>>>>> from a signing bonus
>>>>>> immediately upon signing a deal, but teams are allowed to spread the
>>>>>> cap hit from a
>>>>>> signing bonus across the length of a contract.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For example, a $10 million signing bonus on a five-year deal results
>>>>>> in a cap hit of $2
>>>>>> million in each of those five seasons (in addition to a player's base
>>>>>> salary, incentives
>>>>>> and other bonuses). When a player is released or traded, the bonus
>>>>>> money assigned to the
>>>>>> cap in future years is accelerated onto the current year's cap,
>>>>>> forcing the team to devote
>>>>>> a portion of its precious cap space to players who are no longer on
>>>>>> the roster. That's
>>>>>> commonly known as "dead money."
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This year, though, things are different. Because this is an uncapped
>>>>>> year, teams can
>>>>>> release players with onerous base salaries and large signing bonuses
>>>>>> without having to
>>>>>> worry about cutting corners on this year's roster. That presents
>>>>>> teams with a
>>>>>> once-in-a-generation opportunity to erase their mistakes for good.
>>>>>> Assuming there will be
>>>>>> a salary cap on the other side of any lockout, there are plenty of
>>>>>> examples of bad
>>>>>> contracts teams would be wise to get rid of. We've identified 10
>>>>>> below, listed
>>>>>> alphabetically.
>>>>>
>>>>> This guy is obviously confused about whatever point he's trying to
>>>>> make. He talks about how NFL teams get to save money because of
>>>>> non-guaranteed contracts as though bonuses don't exist, but then,
>>>>> because they do exist, marginalizes them because the cap consequences
>>>>> of those bonuses get to be spread over multiple years. What does how
>>>>> the bonuses get cost accounted have to do with whether or not they
>>>>> exist?
>>>>>
>>>>> What is oft misunderstood about the NFL and it's non-guaranteed
>>>>> contracts is that they only exist because, given the cap and how it's
>>>>> designed, that's the way the players want it anyway. Take the case of
>>>>> a player who signs a $40MM five year deal with $25MM to be guaranteed.
>>>>> He has a simple choice. Take the $25MM in the form of $5MM per year
>>>>> in guaranteed money, or take the whole $25MM up front in the form of a
>>>>> signing bonus. Which would you take? Sure, you could make the case
>>>>> that the whole $40MM should be guaranteed, but that would be a case
>>>>> for increasing the total amount of money to be paid to players, and
>>>>> not a case for guaranteed contracts. If the total amount of money to
>>>>> be paid to players remained the same, and all contracts had to be
>>>>> guaranteed, then that $40MM would never have been the deal in that
>>>>> case to begin with.
>>>>>
>>>>> The whole "non-guarenteed contract" in the NFL is a bad thing argument
>>>>> is bogus on its face.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> There are some guaranteed salaries. The Jets have used it a few times.
>>>>
>>>> With Vilma it was smart. They had cap space & they knew they wouldn't
>>>> cut him so you get more of the guaranteed portion out of the way. We
>>>> did the same thing with Gholston and that doesn't look too smart now.
>>>>
>>>> The non-guaranteed portion is a two edged sword & has value for player
>>>> & team.. If Greene doesn't step up & play so well at the end of the
>>>> year then Jones makes $6MM and is a FA. Instead he will make $5MM at
>>>> the back end of his career.
>>>
>>> All of which provides further proof that there is no rule against
>>> non-guaranteed contracts, and that it's a natural consequence of the way
>>> the salary cap was designed.
>>>
>>
>> There weren't any guaranteed contracts before the cap.
>
> Yes, and instead of the NFL following suit with, for instance, MLB, and
> going to a system of no cap, but guaranteed contracts, they, with the
> players, wisely chose to go in a different direction. IMO, this lead to
> the rise of the NFL to heights of well above where it would otherwise
> exist today.
>
Yes it has allowed the owners to prosper
the players don't see it as good for themselves.
I'm betting on a strike/lockoutfor 2011
== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 10:42 am
From: Johnny Morongo
Ray O'Hara wrote:
> "buRford" <buRford@buR.ford.com> wrote in message
> news:cvbjp55v08h5rh6h65km0qtsehgk6th37q@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 21:41:15 -0500, "papa.carl44"
>> <papadotcarl@nospamverizon.net> wrote:
>>
>>> "Glenn Greenstein" <lexa695@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:25c24de0-d058-4672-a2d1-845cd9a5938b@33g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
>>> On Mar 11, 12:05 pm, "papa.carl44" <papadotc...@nospamverizon.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>> "Johnctx" <j...@spamtx.net> wrote in message
>>>>
>>>> news:k--dnTm2Vro6nQTWnZ2dnUVZ_gWdnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Ray O'Hara wrote:
>>>>>> "Johnctx" <j...@spamtx.net> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:y4CdnRXeBJZNZQXWnZ2dnUVZ_g8AAAAA@giganews.com...
>>>>>>> Ray O'Hara wrote:
>>>>>>>> "buRford" <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:7h4gp590ur41v69ul3kaq8jo15t7d4j60v@4ax.com...
>>>>>>>>> Well, VG made another Top Ten list ;)
>>>>>>>>> Ten logical cap casualties for 2010
>>>>>>>>> By Bill Barnwell
>>>>>>>>> Football Outsiders
>>>>>>>> 2010 is an uncapped year.
>>>>>>>> and more importantly its a year with no minimum.
>>>>>>>> teams can dump players with no consequences.
>>>>>>>> the players and agents see uncapped and think the sky is the limit.
>>>>>>>> the owners see no minimum and the floor is the limit.
>>>>>>>> big stars will get their money.
>>>>>>>> the average guy and rookies will get screwed.
>>>>>>> for the 100th time dead money hits the team in the first capped
>>>>>>> year.
>>>>>>> teams will cut if the salary is unreasonable but won't load up on
>>>>>>> dead
>>>>>>> cap space.
>>>>>> How do you know that? What's yor source that the dead money is just
>>>>>> saved
>>>>>> for the future?
>>>>>> a deal has to be negotiated and everything is open to negotiation.
>>>>> Ray it has been posted before...if i have time I will look for it.
>>>> It's really not an uncapped year then....a delayed year or something
>>>> maybe....but the league should consider becoming The National Financial
>>>> League...forget about football. :-)
>>> If you think this is bad, try following the NBA.
>>> Wow, that was a great trade in terms of freeing up cap space. Who were
>>> the players involved again?
>>>
>>> When somebody said that league is thugs in short pants they were mostly
>>> right....that game has become unwatchable to me. Curling was more fun to
>>> watch.
>>>
>> Yeah, it breaks me heart.
>> Always loved watching the NBA... can't watch anymore, but more because it
>> aint Basketball
>> anymore, with all the uncalled traveling & palming that goes on these
>> days.
>
> it's not travelling it's a "jump stop".
> I blame Pat Riley for the mug & thg ball it's become. he started that crap
> when he coached the Knicks.
>
Fixed.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: New Jets blog worth checking out...
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/beb609a05e58837e?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 8:59 am
From: buRford
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 09:24:43 -0500, graybeard <graybeard@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 00:19:03 -0500 buRford <buRford@buR.ford.com> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 17:42:02 -0500, graybeard <graybeard@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 16:30:34 -0500 buRford <buRford@buR.ford.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Nice to see us go International ;)
>>>>
>>>>http://bit.ly/5ZxSaU
>>>
>>>I was going to post something there, but my keyboard won't make those
>>>letters.
>>
>>Linux must have the ability to change keyboards? I mean, even Windows can ;)
>
>By gølly, yøu håve å pøint!
>
>BTW, how did you know that I run Linux? Most people would assume from my
>headers showing Agent that I'm using Windows. Actually, I use Agent
>under WINE in Linux because I have just never found a newsreader that I
>like as much, just as I use Eudora through WINE for email. Maybe I'm
>just a creature of habit.
I have keen powers of observation... actually, you've mentioned it over the years.
AND, I too, still use Agent & Eudora... as well as an old win95 app, to do simple image
editing. For me, a lot of it is I detest bloated software, so I stick with apps that just
do what I need... and of course, there's the habit thang ;)
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Jets sign S Brodney Pool...
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/a73a619bb35a9f1a?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 9:04 am
From: buRford
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 08:56:00 -0600, Johnctx <jc@spamtx.net> wrote:
>Johnctx wrote:
>> buRford wrote:
>>> 1 year... $1.3mil.
>>>
>>> Lots of concussions... we'll see.
>>>
>>> Looks like Tanny is going for the athletes with issues, to fill out
>>> the Roster.
>>> Building a strange team, these days... lots of question marks, with a
>>> lot of upside, if
>>> the issues are in the past. We'll see...
>>
>> Pool & Coles are one knock on the coconut away from being done.
>>
>> buRf, it is the ugly part of this sport and the problem is how many were
>> hidden at the jhs, hs, & college level? It is a one year deal.
>
>btw you need to get over your hatred of anything Texas.
>
>:)
Huh?
Austin's a great town... except if you work for the IRS ;)
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Tanny on the radio re: TJ
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/72dd339ad71bbefe?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 11 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 9:31 am
From: "JK Coney"
"Tutor" <dcat4434@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:028a7310-7b81-4a66-b984-b6603b2e94cf@q23g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
> repotrtedly, Rosenhaus called the Jets and gave them a chanced to
> match the offer from KC and they declined it.
>
> Boomer & Carton asked Tanny and he didnt deny it.
You can't be married to these RB's. Not many Barry Sanders out there that
make something out of nothing. With this line blocking an average NFL back
becomes a star. A really good back goes for 1600 yards. TJ will be back to
2nd or 3rd string by mid season is my guess.
--
JK Sinrod
www.MyConeyIslandMemories.com
== 2 of 11 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 1:20 pm
From: Rich - ® ©
On Mar 12, 9:31 am, Tutor <dcat4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> repotrtedly, Rosenhaus called the Jets and gave them a chanced to
> match the offer from KC and they declined it.
>
> Boomer & Carton asked Tanny and he didnt deny it.
That's very interesting. I wonder why? Is it just cost, or was there
something else at play? LT is gonna cost a few bucks. And we do
need a backup with Shonn Greene being young and Washington coming off
an injury. Hmmmmm.
== 3 of 11 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 1:53 pm
From: Dano58
On Mar 12, 4:20 pm, Rich - ® © <Rhe...@infi.net> wrote:
> On Mar 12, 9:31 am, Tutor <dcat4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > repotrtedly, Rosenhaus called the Jets and gave them a chanced to
> > match the offer from KC and they declined it.
>
> > Boomer & Carton asked Tanny and he didnt deny it.
>
> That's very interesting. I wonder why? Is it just cost, or was there
> something else at play? LT is gonna cost a few bucks. And we do
> need a backup with Shonn Greene being young and Washington coming off
> an injury. Hmmmmm.
I think it's easier to have a new guy come in as a back-up - even an
LT - than it is to tell the current #1 guy he's now the back-up to the
old #2 guy and not have it be awkward... Still, maybe TJ is the one
who said he didn't want to be the back-up.
Dan D
Central NJ USA
== 4 of 11 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 2:01 pm
From: MZ
Dano58 wrote:
> On Mar 12, 4:20 pm, Rich - ® © <Rhe...@infi.net> wrote:
>> On Mar 12, 9:31 am, Tutor <dcat4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> repotrtedly, Rosenhaus called the Jets and gave them a chanced to
>>> match the offer from KC and they declined it.
>>> Boomer & Carton asked Tanny and he didnt deny it.
>> That's very interesting. I wonder why? Is it just cost, or was there
>> something else at play? LT is gonna cost a few bucks. And we do
>> need a backup with Shonn Greene being young and Washington coming off
>> an injury. Hmmmmm.
>
> I think it's easier to have a new guy come in as a back-up - even an
> LT - than it is to tell the current #1 guy he's now the back-up to the
> old #2 guy and not have it be awkward... Still, maybe TJ is the one
> who said he didn't want to be the back-up.
>
> Dan D
> Central NJ USA
Or they've got a couple guys high on their draft radar.
== 5 of 11 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 4:08 pm
From: "Nunya Bidnits"
JK Coney said:
> "Tutor" <dcat4434@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:028a7310-7b81-4a66-b984-b6603b2e94cf@q23g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
>> repotrtedly, Rosenhaus called the Jets and gave them a chanced to
>> match the offer from KC and they declined it.
>>
>> Boomer & Carton asked Tanny and he didnt deny it.
>
>
> You can't be married to these RB's. Not many Barry Sanders out
> there that make something out of nothing. With this line blocking an
> average NFL back becomes a star. A really good back goes for 1600
> yards. TJ will be back to 2nd or 3rd string by mid season is my guess.
The Chiefs didn't bring him in to be the first. Familiarize yourself with
Jamaal Charles who put up damn near a thousand yards for the Chiefs after
taking over as feature back for just the last 8 games, after they finally
cut Larry Johnson.
Jones is there to be a change-up and short yardage guy, and it's a win win
because it gives the Chiefs two strong backs with completely different
styles, and it extends Jones' career because he won't be taking the pounding
of a feature back.
MartyB in KC
== 6 of 11 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 4:31 pm
From: "papa.carl44"
"JK Coney" <jkconey@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:hndtod$d2$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>
> "Tutor" <dcat4434@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:028a7310-7b81-4a66-b984-b6603b2e94cf@q23g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
>> repotrtedly, Rosenhaus called the Jets and gave them a chanced to
>> match the offer from KC and they declined it.
>>
>> Boomer & Carton asked Tanny and he didnt deny it.
>
>
> You can't be married to these RB's. Not many Barry Sanders out there
> that make something out of nothing. With this line blocking an average NFL
> back becomes a star. A really good back goes for 1600 yards. TJ will be
> back to 2nd or 3rd string by mid season is my guess.
>
>
> --
> JK Sinrod
> www.MyConeyIslandMemories.com
So how did the Bears do after he left? He has something most don't...he is
consistent and he doesn't break every other series.
== 7 of 11 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 4:49 pm
From: Johnny Morongo
Nunya Bidnits wrote:
> JK Coney said:
>> "Tutor" <dcat4434@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:028a7310-7b81-4a66-b984-b6603b2e94cf@q23g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
>>> repotrtedly, Rosenhaus called the Jets and gave them a chanced to
>>> match the offer from KC and they declined it.
>>>
>>> Boomer & Carton asked Tanny and he didnt deny it.
>>
>> You can't be married to these RB's. Not many Barry Sanders out
>> there that make something out of nothing. With this line blocking an
>> average NFL back becomes a star. A really good back goes for 1600
>> yards. TJ will be back to 2nd or 3rd string by mid season is my guess.
>
> The Chiefs didn't bring him in to be the first. Familiarize yourself with
> Jamaal Charles who put up damn near a thousand yards for the Chiefs after
> taking over as feature back for just the last 8 games, after they finally
> cut Larry Johnson.
>
> Jones is there to be a change-up and short yardage guy, and it's a win win
> because it gives the Chiefs two strong backs with completely different
> styles, and it extends Jones' career because he won't be taking the pounding
> of a feature back.
>
> MartyB in KC
>
This is why, Marty, that the pick up was such a good move for the
Chiefs. Not everyone will know who Jaamal is, but he'll be on my
fantasy team next year, especially if they do some heavy lifting on
their O-line.
Jones will be OK there. Lower work load, expectations and spotlight.
Good move for him too. But his time as a Jet had run its course.
== 8 of 11 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 5:57 pm
From: MZ
Johnny Morongo wrote:
> Nunya Bidnits wrote:
>> JK Coney said:
>>> "Tutor" <dcat4434@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>> news:028a7310-7b81-4a66-b984-b6603b2e94cf@q23g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>>> repotrtedly, Rosenhaus called the Jets and gave them a chanced to
>>>> match the offer from KC and they declined it.
>>>>
>>>> Boomer & Carton asked Tanny and he didnt deny it.
>>>
>>> You can't be married to these RB's. Not many Barry Sanders out
>>> there that make something out of nothing. With this line blocking an
>>> average NFL back becomes a star. A really good back goes for 1600
>>> yards. TJ will be back to 2nd or 3rd string by mid season is my guess.
>>
>> The Chiefs didn't bring him in to be the first. Familiarize yourself with
>> Jamaal Charles who put up damn near a thousand yards for the Chiefs after
>> taking over as feature back for just the last 8 games, after they finally
>> cut Larry Johnson.
>>
>> Jones is there to be a change-up and short yardage guy, and it's a win
>> win
>> because it gives the Chiefs two strong backs with completely different
>> styles, and it extends Jones' career because he won't be taking the
>> pounding
>> of a feature back.
>>
>> MartyB in KC
>>
>
> This is why, Marty, that the pick up was such a good move for the
> Chiefs. Not everyone will know who Jaamal is, but he'll be on my
> fantasy team next year, especially if they do some heavy lifting on
> their O-line.
>
> Jones will be OK there. Lower work load, expectations and spotlight.
> Good move for him too. But his time as a Jet had run its course.
His time as a Jet had only run its course because there are two younger
very good running backs on the roster. That's the only reason. If they
didn't have Leon AND Greene, Jones would still be a Jet. There aren't
many teams in the league that have a Leon Washington *and* a Shonn Greene.
The Jets, apparently, are betting that they only need two (good) backs
this year. A little risky, but not crazy risky. They may also have
something lined up in the draft at RB, or they might actually let
Sanchez throw the ball this year. Lots of possibilities. Under the old
regime I would have just chalked this up to stupidity, but there might
actually be a valid reason for letting him go for so cheap.
== 9 of 11 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 6:33 pm
From: graybeard
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 17:01:45 -0500 MZ <mark@nospam.void> wrote:
>Dano58 wrote:
>> On Mar 12, 4:20 pm, Rich - ® © <Rhe...@infi.net> wrote:
>>> On Mar 12, 9:31 am, Tutor <dcat4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> repotrtedly, Rosenhaus called the Jets and gave them a chanced to
>>>> match the offer from KC and they declined it.
>>>> Boomer & Carton asked Tanny and he didnt deny it.
>>> That's very interesting. I wonder why? Is it just cost, or was there
>>> something else at play? LT is gonna cost a few bucks. And we do
>>> need a backup with Shonn Greene being young and Washington coming off
>>> an injury. Hmmmmm.
>>
>> I think it's easier to have a new guy come in as a back-up - even an
>> LT - than it is to tell the current #1 guy he's now the back-up to the
>> old #2 guy and not have it be awkward... Still, maybe TJ is the one
>> who said he didn't want to be the back-up.
>>
>> Dan D
>> Central NJ USA
>
>Or they've got a couple guys high on their draft radar.
Supposed to be a very good crop of RB's this year. Wouldn't surprise me
if they picked one up in the later rounds.
--
graybeard
== 10 of 11 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 8:46 pm
From: buRford
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 20:57:00 -0500, MZ <mark@nospam.void> wrote:
>Johnny Morongo wrote:
>> Nunya Bidnits wrote:
>>> JK Coney said:
>>>> "Tutor" <dcat4434@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:028a7310-7b81-4a66-b984-b6603b2e94cf@q23g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
>>>>
>>>>> repotrtedly, Rosenhaus called the Jets and gave them a chanced to
>>>>> match the offer from KC and they declined it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Boomer & Carton asked Tanny and he didnt deny it.
>>>>
>>>> You can't be married to these RB's. Not many Barry Sanders out
>>>> there that make something out of nothing. With this line blocking an
>>>> average NFL back becomes a star. A really good back goes for 1600
>>>> yards. TJ will be back to 2nd or 3rd string by mid season is my guess.
>>>
>>> The Chiefs didn't bring him in to be the first. Familiarize yourself with
>>> Jamaal Charles who put up damn near a thousand yards for the Chiefs after
>>> taking over as feature back for just the last 8 games, after they finally
>>> cut Larry Johnson.
>>>
>>> Jones is there to be a change-up and short yardage guy, and it's a win
>>> win
>>> because it gives the Chiefs two strong backs with completely different
>>> styles, and it extends Jones' career because he won't be taking the
>>> pounding
>>> of a feature back.
>>>
>>> MartyB in KC
>>>
>>
>> This is why, Marty, that the pick up was such a good move for the
>> Chiefs. Not everyone will know who Jaamal is, but he'll be on my
>> fantasy team next year, especially if they do some heavy lifting on
>> their O-line.
>>
>> Jones will be OK there. Lower work load, expectations and spotlight.
>> Good move for him too. But his time as a Jet had run its course.
>
>His time as a Jet had only run its course because there are two younger
>very good running backs on the roster. That's the only reason. If they
>didn't have Leon AND Greene, Jones would still be a Jet. There aren't
>many teams in the league that have a Leon Washington *and* a Shonn Greene.
>
>The Jets, apparently, are betting that they only need two (good) backs
>this year. A little risky, but not crazy risky. They may also have
>something lined up in the draft at RB, or they might actually let
>Sanchez throw the ball this year. Lots of possibilities. Under the old
>regime I would have just chalked this up to stupidity, but there might
>actually be a valid reason for letting him go for so cheap.
TJ's big selling point is that he's consistent, and generally healthy.
But, he was also pretty consistent at piling up the yardage, in the 2nd half, after their
OL tired opponents.
I think Jet Management has a very *cocky* edge now. They seem to believe they can get any
player they really target. I suspect they think that LT still has something left, with a
change of scenery... & an OC he's familiar with, together with the opportunities & big
stage of the Apple, he could fill the role they seek - - steady change of pace back, that
can receive, and a big name to the new stadium.
== 11 of 11 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 9:57 pm
From: "JK Coney"
"Nunya Bidnits" <nunyabidnits@eternal-september.invalid> wrote in message
news:hnekvq$4k9$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> Jones is there to be a change-up and short yardage guy, and it's a win win
> because it gives the Chiefs two strong backs with completely different
> styles, and it extends Jones' career because he won't be taking the
> pounding
> of a feature back.
>
> MartyB in KC
>
You could be right, but get back to me when he keeps getting stuffed
for 1 & 2 yards a pop running right into your linemen. You'll be pulling
your hair out.
--
JK Sinrod
www.MyConeyIslandMemories.com
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Washington
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/5cbcd8f7b52cb99d?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 10:41 am
From: Johnny Morongo
Johnctx wrote:
> Harlan Lachman wrote:
>> In article <y4CdnRreBJa_ZQXWnZ2dnUVZ_g-dnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>> Johnctx <jc@spamtx.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Harlan Lachman wrote:
>>>> In article <wrqdnQMmx6ffEgrWnZ2dnUVZ_ukAAAAA@giganews.com>,
>>>> Johnctx <jc@spamtx.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Harlan Lachman wrote:
>>>>>> In article <Z-qdneNvzM7R5gvWnZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>>>>> Johnctx <jc@spamtx.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Harlan Lachman wrote:
>>>>>>>> In article <-6CdnT_lHd8BZgnWnZ2dnUVZ_qydnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>>>>>>> Johnctx <jc@spamtx.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> My first reaction was that we should have tendered him a # 1
>>>>>>>>> but there could be some logic in tendering teh #2. Someone may
>>>>>>>>> sign him & eliminate the prolem of negotiating with his
>>>>>>>>> inexperienced agent. Who may quite possibly be stupid.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The Jets know who they are negotiating with & have decide to
>>>>>>>>> let the market set the price. They couldn't get him to take
>>>>>>>>> their money last summer. So the jets have a value in mind & if
>>>>>>>>> Washington comes in at that level or lower they sign him. If
>>>>>>>>> not & he signs elsewhere we have his contract to use on a FA we
>>>>>>>>> can want.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Washington will make $1.79 MM with the Jets. If he doesn't get
>>>>>>>>> paid significantly more than that he will just come back and
>>>>>>>>> that is an outcome no one has considered.
>>>>>>>> what do you mean no one? I have loved this move from the
>>>>>>>> beginning for exactly that reason.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> h
>>>>>>> H, after reading this I am thinking about few things:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> A. Did they commit to tender him a 2nd if Washington showed up in
>>>>>>> camp & in this way allowing him to see the market because with a
>>>>>>> #1 tender he never sees the market?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> B. The difference between a #1 & #2 is insignificant in a
>>>>>>> uncapped year that they will sign him.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/19044/cbawatch-restricted-fre
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> e-
>>>>>>> age
>>>>>>> nts
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2010 Free Agency
>>>>>>> Restricted Free Agency (4 Accrued Seasons); Draft Class of 2006
>>>>>>> Tender offer & compensation Salary
>>>>>>> 1) ROFR $1,176,000
>>>>>>> 2) ROFR & Original Draft $1,176,000 (or 110 percent of last
>>>>>>> year's compensation)
>>>>>>> 3) ROFR & 2nd $1,759,000 (or 110 percent of last year's
>>>>>>> compensation)
>>>>>>> 4) ROFR & 1st $2,521,000 (or 110 percent of last year's
>>>>>>> compensation)
>>>>>>> 5) ROFR & 1st/3rd $3,168,000 (or 110 percent of last year's
>>>>>>> compensation)
>>>>>>> Restricted Free Agency (5 Accrued Seasons); Draft Class of 2005
>>>>>>> 1) ROFR $1,226,000
>>>>>>> 2) ROFR & Original Draft $1,226,000 (or 110 percent of last
>>>>>>> year's compensation)
>>>>>>> 3) ROFR & 2nd $1,809,000 (or 110 percent of last year's
>>>>>>> compensation)
>>>>>>> 4) ROFR & 1st $2,621,000 (or 110 percent of last year's
>>>>>>> compensation)
>>>>>>> 5) ROFR & 1st/3rd $3,268,000 (or 110 percent of last year's
>>>>>>> compensation)
>>>>>>> *ROFR: Right Of First Refusal
>>>>>> John, I think this was all about Keels. I really think they want
>>>>>> to make it easy for someone to offer Leon a contract. If he
>>>>>> doesn't get a bite, who is Leon going to blame? The Jets. He
>>>>>> wasn't worth a 2nd round choice? How is Keels going to explain his
>>>>>> move to refuse the $4-5 million while Loen gets less than $1.8.
>>>>>> And, unless the CBA changes things, he is still an RFA next year two.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If he gets an offer, we can match. If he signed it, then he has
>>>>>> said what he is worth.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There is some debate about ridiculous poison pills. The owners
>>>>>> voted to end the practice. It will be part of the next CBA if
>>>>>> there is a football league.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is possible no owner is going to offer one and risk the ire of
>>>>>> other owners.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Unlike Papa, I think losing TJ because he was not willing to
>>>>>> negotiate downward with us but was with the Chiefs is fine. Why
>>>>>> should we throw away millions (if ESPN was correct, it may be as
>>>>>> much as $3.3 million).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe we lose Leon too. But I want to see how this plays out.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> harlan
>>>>> I agree on Washington but Jones was cheap insurance until we signed
>>>>> him. He can still play football as well.
>>>> He signed with the Chiefs for 2.8 million, just a fraction short of
>>>> half as much as he wanted from the Jets.
>>>> I disagree. Cheap TJ would not have been.
>>>>
>>>> TJ made a smart move. While he moves behind a weak OL, he will get
>>>> more carries in KC than here and maybe a second year.
>>>>
>>>> H
>>> H, $3MM for a starting RB that you could have traded in pre-season to
>>> someone desperate. It looks like there is plan to use the $ on
>>> Washington so at least unlike Martin we didn't go one season too far.
>>
>> This is getting old. Complete agreement again.
>>
>> h
>
> I am glad saner people than me write in here.
>
> :)
Ahem... Do you mean that you consider yourself sane at all? As far as
the bottom of the sanity barrel goes, you only have one competitor: ME.
==============================================================================
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets"
group.
To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets?hl=en
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/subscribe?hl=en
To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com
==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en
Posts
