Of course there is, because the article was written by Cimini and he takes a shot at Gholston in about 90% of the articles he writes. My thing is, if you can't put a name on a quote, it doesn't deserve to be in the article.
Even if you doubt the legitimacy of unnamed source, does it really surprise anyone that people are pissed that Jones was released? He was unquestionably the leader of the offense, and he was unquestionably our most productive offensive player. I'm not saying that it was a mistake to cut him loose, but there will obviously be repercussions for dropping a guy like that.
I have to disagree with this. If you watched how the Damon situation unfolded, the yankees ended up giving him a contract that was longer (2 years) than the other contracts he was offered. If teams did offer him 2 years, it was less money than the yankees. He signed with DET because it was the most money he could get for 1 year out of all the contracts (yanks 2 year contract was 6-7 mil a year when it was being offered, DET was 8). Borus convinced Damon to get greedy and it didn't work out for him. The only real difference in this (albeit a big one) is how contracts aren't guaranteed in the NFL. Tanny said "we want you to take a pay cut, or we are releasing you," which is a common scenario for aging, declining NFL vets nearing the end of their contracts. What we will not ever know is how much of a paycut Tanny wanted him to take, but regardless Jones and his agent declined. I bet Jones makes less money next year in his new contract than he was supposed to make this year. Both Managers believed that both players were on the decline, and were not going to put up the stats that the amount of money they were demanding would require for it to be a good deal. I agree with Tanny more than Cashman, but I agree with both none-the-less.
When you have 50 people on a roster and someone leaves there will always be someone unhappy. As long as Tanny keeps signing their paychecks they will play hard.
Although I hate to lose a team emotional leader like Jones there comes a time that you have to part with aging players. You can't "reward" them by paying out large contracts for past performances. It would be irresponsible by the GM's involved. The name of the game is putting the best team on the field without going broke. Tannenbaum did it last year with Laverneus Coles and appeared to have it right. I personally thank Thomas Jones for the past few years and wish him luck down the road but to have a guy make a ton of money to be a part of a three man running back rotation is silly.
while i liked TJ, i'm curious... how does this affect the final 8 rule? if he gets signed by another team, does this give us leeway to grab a FA? if not, i think its stupid... if so, i think its Tanny working it.
It doesn't affect the final 8 rules, players that are cut have no bearing on who we can sign. 6 million for Jones is a lot and I can understand why the Jets would like to spend that money elsewhere.
Very true Mambo. Jets tried to keep him, but he wasn't ready to restructure. And yes, he wasn't going to take a reduced playing time either. Too much ego there as we saw in the media lately that he wasn't too happy about his role in the playoffs. Look, he was in his 30s playing a very very long season. He can hardly play 16 games, we had him play 23 games including the preseason. His age was showing up late in the season. Im sure he can still rush for some yards, but just not sure if he can withstand a 24 games season including preseason and playoffs (superbowl is the ultimate target isn't it?)
i would love for them to cut gholston ...pay for it in the uncapped year.....and be that much lower if the cap comes back
It's hardly surprising that the anonymous player says that you should reward a player for performance, but that's the stupidest thing a GM can do. A GM tries to reward players for future performance, not past performance. It seems to me very likely that the Jets told Jones that he was going to be the third string back, and it wouldn't surprise me at all if they offered him a little more money than a third string back would normally get, but he wants to be a starter, and wants starter money. That was just not going to happen here.
Alright, so let's do the Pros and Cons of the TJ cut and see where it leaves us. Pros - He's definitely aging some. He's expensive for a RBBC. 5.8 million is a lot to pay a guy that you hope will get only 150-200 carries next season. The Jets can get younger at RB by going out and aggressively finding a solid young back to replace him in the RBBC. This should not be hard to do given the fact that RB is a position in which people routinely emerge from humble origins. Getting rid of a player a year early instead of a year late is generally a sound strategy in the NFL. Successful teams tend to do this. Cons - Shonn Greene and Leon Washington are both fragile at this point and the Jets don't even know for a fact that they have Leon for next season. The Jets overall depth is somewhat weak at this point and they probably need to focus resources in several other areas this off-season. The Jets have restrictions in place that prevent them from going after prime free agents - which exacerbates the depth problem. The Jets don't have a full slate of draft picks - another factor in the depth issue. Overall I think it's a very dicey decision on the part of the Jets. They could come out of it well in the end but it will take very strong management skills on their part to do this, and not of the type that have been on display over the last few seasons. The checkbook isn't going to resolve depth issues this year and trading up in the draft for quality won't either.
my other posts scattered around this board agree with the business decision. But saying TJ was bad in 07 isn't correct because he did very well with the worst line in the AFC. That's the one part I was arguing about.
TJ was a great player for the Jets. He did say he would do anything to help the team. If that meant restructuring or playing for less $ and a lesser role and he wasn't happy--it is what it is. He's gone. I do wish he was still on the team though. I do not think SG will be able to carry the load.
The problem wasn't paying them or keeping them past their prime. The problem was we had a coach who built his starting roster based on how much the players made.
Something no one is mentioning here is that Jones was due a roster bonus if he was still a Jet on Friday. The Jets saved some money that can now be put to better use (perhaps on a draft pick?) It's always easy to spend someone else's money, but the Jets' coffers aren't bottomless, cap or no cap. Keep in mind this is the same team still begging people to buy their PSLs. It hurts to lose a guy like TJ who gave us what he had, but he had nothing left. RBs fall off a cliff after that magic 30. His time is up. Hell, LaDanian Tomlinson is currently unemployed. It happens to all of them. Greene and Washington are going to be a nice duo. And far cheaper. You'll appreciate that when Mangold and Revis get their new paydays.
The jury is out on the decision. Personally, I'm fine with it. For what we want Jones to do, he's replaceable, and the players will get over it. Winning cures anything and everything. And I don't want to hear part of the reason he's such a great runningback was because he ran for 1000 yards behind a crappy offensive line in 2007. He had 1 touchdown on 310 carries and averaged 3.6 yards per carry. The offensive line gets a lot better, and he's setting Jets' records for touchdowns and averaging a full yard better. The NFL proves time and time again it's about the offensive line, not necessarily the person running behind it.
