Here's what I think about our offseason so far. Things I Like: 1. Value Signings: Heading into the offseason, we had little cap space relative to the significance of our players hitting the market. We ended up losing Ivory and Snacks, but for the money that they got from the Jags and Giants, we were able to re-sign Powell, sign Forte and Robinson, and sign McLendon and Jenkins. We also re-signed Henderson, and signed Ross and Carter. We did lose some other players (Kerley, Cumberland, Cromartie, Pace, and Davis) but they were deadweight more than anything else. All these players will give us more depth than we had last year. 2. Special Teams Upgrades: Last year, our biggest problems on special teams were punter and kick returner. Most likely Edwards or Hackett will be an upgrade over Quigley, and Ross should be an upgrade over Stacy/Cromartie. Ross should also be able to match Kerley's production on punt returns, which wasn't great but not as bad as some people claim. Considering Bobby April's track record in the NFL, I didn't support his firing, but hopefully Bowles made the right choice in Brant Boyer. Regardless, Boyer will have more to work with than April did. 3. Not Overpaying Fitz: The Texans and Eagles panicked when they gave Osweiler and Bradford big bucks. OTOH we held the line on Fitz and ultimately gauged the market correctly. We still risk losing Fitz to retirement, but at least we won't set the team back by giving him 15M per year. 4. Darron Lee and Jordan Jenkins: Ordinarily I would raise questions about Lee's undersized body and Jenkins's lack of athleticism. But I think Bowles is very good at playing to his players' strengths. Hopefully Lee is the next Deone Bucannon, and Jenkins does what Mauldin did last year. 5. Christian Hackenberg: In all fairness, he's probably not the franchise guy. His stats were bad, and he struggles to hit receivers when he's in shorts. But he has some Carson Palmer in him (playmaking ability, high football IQ, hard worker), which is maybe why we took him (Bowles saw what Palmer's doing in AZ). Say there's a 1/4 chance he becomes a high end starter. For the price of a second round pick, I'd take that chance. Things I Dislike: 1. The Mo Situation: The point of using the franchise tag is to give yourself time to work out a long term deal with the player. If you don't feel you can do that, you work out a trade. We have done neither so far, and more likely than not, Mo will play out the season on the tag after possibly holding out through training camp. Unless we feel like tagging him for 18+M in 2017, we will lose him and collect a compensatory pick. We could have averted this problem by doing what the good organizations do: locking Mo up long before this became a problem. Or trading him like the Pats did with Chandler Jones. Maybe we wouldn't have gotten a first rounder, but it would've been better than this headache. 2. Lack of OL Help: The OL is pretty much the same as last year (read: not very good) except that Clady replaces Brick. If Clady stays healthy, that's a significant upgrade. If not, we have Qvale or Ijalana starting at LT. Yikes. While all the good first round tackles were gone by our turn to pick, we surely could have done more, perhaps by signing a FA tackle. 3. Not Re-signing Fitz: If we re-sign Fitz for <10M, which I expect will happen in the end, disregard this entry. If not, we're risking a dumpster fire 2016, and considering the makeup of our roster, I would prefer to avoid that risk. Offseason Grade: If we head into the season as is: C- If Fitz re-signs or we resolve the Mo situation: B- If Fitz re-signs and we resolve the Mo situation: A-
Maybe this is a dumb question.... But is it possible mo plays for the franchise tender this year, signs a deal next year? I understand why he wouldn't want to but is it IMPOSSIBLE for this to happen? (Honest question)
Possible but unlikely. I don't think we can afford the second year tag, and without it, he'll surely choose to hit the open market. The problem is that because we have Richardson and Williams, he's worth more to a lot of other teams than he is to us. Kind of the opposite of the Fitz situation really.
Really nice analysis..maybe you should train MMehta haha. Forget the shorts, Hack and Petty have get outa diapers and off of Madden. If Fitz screws us I bet they see the field I think Mac tried and continues to try to resolve Mo situation...bet he spends 30% of his time on that 30 on Fitz and the rest with other team matters Its not easy being GM and theres no perfection but man there must something in his Starbucks that's making Mac a better decision maker..jmho
Good job. It's nice to read intelligent thoughts here instead of raging complaints. Especially in the offseason. Ive been clamoring for O-Line help for three years. Just wait until Mangold follows D'Brick. Think back to the year they were drafted - how a great a draft that was now. I remember that year thinking about a Reggie Bush, Vince Young or Jay Cutler scenario but those other positions carry so much risk.
Pretty much agree with all of it.....But I really don't think we risk a dumpster fire without Fitz. Geno SHOULD be improved and Petty COULD be alright. We definitley risk a non-playoff team without him but with our defense I don't ever see a dumpster fire type season even if bad/inconsistent Geno plays....too much talent around the QB as well as solid coaching and a great defense will not give you a dumpster fire
We can afford the second year tag and if Mo plays as good or better than he did last year we should expect that... 18 million but it's a prove it this year in several ways... like if he gets 12+ sack someone will want him know trade... also this gIves us time for Sheldon to prove what he is. Next year we can tag and trade or resign and trade Sheldon.
I wonder what the best offer we received for Mo was, or if we flat out wouldn't even entertain an offer that wasn't a first round pick. It really sucks that his contract year ended up being one of the deepest defensive line drafts in a long long time. It sucks because tagging him and not working out a deal or a trade really handcuffed us in trying to make a move to upgrade the offensive line. The only bif time tackle worth pursuing that wasn't ancient was Osemele. I wonder if we could've been players for him if the Mo situation was resolved. I wonder if we also could've restructured Skrine and perhaps Gilchrist and Carpenter, as we would turn the salary into bonus' and spread them out throughout the life of the contract. The reason I suggest those three players is that they all look like guys who will play out the life of their contract with us, so spreading the money out more wouldn't be the worst thing in the world. As far as I know the Steelers do it all the time in similar situations and haven't been snake bitten by it yet. Granted they have a bona-fide franchise quarterback and are a much better run franchise on the whole than we are. Good post. At this point it looks like next year will be a very heavy off season in terms of upgrading the offense through both free agency and the draft. We created our linebacker pipeline or at least attempted to. We upgraded the speed of the defense in a great defensive draft. Hackenberg is a question mark obviously at this point, but with proper development (ala sitting him til he's ready) he has a chance to become a quality player.
We were players in the Osemele market. He chose a different team. The Mo situation? We have a deep rotation of top tier defensive lineman. I don't mind that situation one bit. If we sign him next year (or if we had this year) I'd think it was a waste of money. You pay for talent, not depth. As talented as Mo is, for us he's depth. The two studs on rookie contracts are talented and cheap and will remain cheap for a few years. Try this to help you get over the pain of losing Mo next year; try and figure out who we might sign with that $16m.
Breaking it down to it's simplest form like that is a nice way to look at it. Depending on how things evolve with our players, that $16m can go a long way towards making us a better team by possibly adding two quality FA's we're in need of. Kind of like what happened with Snacks only better.
After your first 3 points, I liked your post and thought it was going to be a good one, then it when straight into the crapper. 4. You failed to mention that with the NFL being a passing league, teams are moving away from bigger, slower LBs to smaller, faster LBs who are better in coverage. That is a key point in Lee's favor. I also think you're mistaken about Jenkins lack of athleticism. In a scouting report posted by Nesquik I read today about Jenkins, said that he was generally thought of as a very good football player and not so great an athlete, yet he led all front 7 defenders of similar size in vertical leap (36.5 inches) and finished only behind Lee in the 10 yard split (1.58 seconds) the two drills used to determine explosiveness. Both are a part of "athleticism" and trying to ascertain whether a player will succeed in the NFL. 5. Hackenberg. He may not be the franchise guy, but I'd say his chances are a heck of a lot greater than 1 in 4. The biggest determiner of success for QBs in the NFL is not arm strength, mobility, size or accuracy, but rather their ability to read Ds, make good, quick decisions, and audible into better plays if necessary. Hackenberg already does that well and doesn't have to learn how to do that. He has prototypical size, a rocket arm and enough mobility. In addition, he's smart and has a great work ethic, loves the game and has a burning desire to be great. He has some accuracy issues that can be improved with better fundamentals, perhaps working on touch, and perhaps better poise. I like that you say "For the price of a second round pick, I'd take that chance.", but I think you underestimate his talent, and exaggerate his issues/negatives. Things You Dislike: 1. The Mo Situation. You speak as if when a team wants to re-sign a player or trade a player, it's a given that it will happen and is easy. The Jets have been trying to re-sign Mo for 3 years. Two different GMs have tried. I'm sure that they also tried to trade him, but it was an almost impossible situation. No team wants to give up a high draft pick and then turn around and have to sign the player long term and pay him a ton of guaranteed money. This is even more true when the draft is loaded with great prospects at the same position of the player you're trying to trade. You know as well as I that if the Jets had traded Mo for even a second round pick, the fan base would have been up in arms criticizing Mac claiming he got robbed by the team that traded for Mo. Mac also would have been heavily criticized if he re-signed Mo to a huge deal of which many would have said Mo was not worthy. No smart, successful GM is going to overpay for a position player when he already has two high quality players at the same position. Like it or not, as soon as Leonard Williams fell to the Jets, the writing was on the wall...Mo was a goner. If Sheldon had been the one drafted first, and had the off-field issues he had last year, then it would have been a no-brainer to let Sheldon walk and re-sign Mo next year. That's not how it worked out, however. Everything we've seen of Mac so far is that he is smart, knows how to do his job, is a hard worker, and explores every option available to improve the team. Mac was in a no-win situation. He has done the best he could. There is no shame in that, and there should be no criticism for him imo. 2. Lack of OL Help - You say that we "surely could have done more, perhaps by signing a FA tackle." Is your memory that short? Mac tried to sign two! He tried to sign both Kelechi Osemele and Kelvin Beachum. Both opted to sign elsewhere and got a whole lot more than the Jets could afford. Beachum has shown a lot of potential, but would you have given him more than a $45 million deal even if you could have afforded it? Mac tried to show Brick respect by not going to him early asking for him to take a pay cut. He tried to find money other places. Brick did the team a disservice and put Mac and the team in a bind. I think the move to sign Clady was brilliant. Is there risk, yes, but if Clady can stay healthy, the play at LT could be better than we've had in years. I may be mistaken, but I think he also tried to sign a FA OG (Alex Boone). In addition, Brian Winters showed improvement last year, and the Jets also have several young OL they think have some potential in Brent Qvale, Dakota Dozier, and Jarvis Harrison, then added Brandon Shell via the draft. The Jets couldn't afford to trade up, but Mac tried to steal Laremy Tunsil. He couldn't help it that all of the top OL were taken before the Jets picks. The Jets had other needs as well. Even if some of the better OL were there at the Jets' picks and Mac took them, others would have criticized him for not addressing the need at OLB, for more speed at LB or for not taking a QB. We all knew that Mac couldn't address every need in this draft and that it was going to take at least another offseason or two for all the needs to be adequately addressed. 3. Not re-signing Fitz - Again, this is just ridiculous and looking for something to be critical about. Fitz's value has been clearly shown by the NFL. Not only do the Jets not have the money to pay Fitz what he wants, they shouldn't. Mac is doing his job extremely well in assigning a value to a player and sticking to it (just as he has done with Mo). Good GMs don't panic and overpay. I think your grades are ridiculously low. As things stand now, I think Mac deserves at least a solid B+. If Clady stays healthy and plays anywhere near his old All Pro form, Mac deserves a solid A. If Lee, Jenkins and either Edwards or Hackett make solid contributions and show great potential for the future this season, then Mac deserves an A+.
Well, to what extent were we really players in the Osemele market? I haven't seen any reports, and with our limited cap space I doubt we really had a chance at making a play for him. At this point I'm done with wanting players at $16 million unless they're the Von Miller's of the world that absolutely take over games or a quarterback. Give me Michael Floyd and Kevin Zeitler or David DeCastro at $8-$10 million a piece rather than say Alshon Jeffery at $15 million a year and a backup.
I wasn't saying that we were serious players for Osemele, just that Mac did his due diligence, and we couldn't afford Osemele or Mac thought that Osemele was overvalued. The point is that Mac did everything within reason that he could, and there just weren't cheaper, young options with potential, that we only had so many draft picks, and could only address so many needs. For what it's worth, I agree with your second paragraph, and I think Mac probably does as well. I think the team has enough of a solid foundation, that he will look to use the draft and to sign cheaper, younger FAs, and only sign older, more expensive stop gaps when he absolutely thinks he has no other choice in order to keep the team competitive.
You're incredibly optimistic on every single front. I like what Maccagnan has done, I really do, but has already made what seems to be a couple mistakes. The Wilkerson situation is a bit of a trickle effect as a result of not only overpaying Revis (a corner that's over 30), but specifically jacking up his largest cap hit to the same season in which Wilkerson is a free agent. Either way, it sort of sucks paying Wilkerson all of that money this year, full well knowing that he's a goner next year regardless of the depth. I would've been happy with a second round pick, because at this rate it appears as though we will lose him, and not take the risk in resigning Sheldon, who is one more incident away from being lost for a full season to suspension. Either way though, we still will have a formidable front 7. It just sucks that we'll lose Wilkerson basically because of Revis' contract, and then on top of it not want to retain Richardson at his asking price because he's a moron. Fuck you, Revis. One thing the OP didn't address, is the running back situation. I like Forte. I like Powell. I like the idea of the versatility of our backfield and how it can create mismatches. But I can't for the life of me understand why we signed both of them for essentially the same contract. I've alluded to the fact that it looks like these two will try to mask the deficiencies we have in the slot receiver position. But why not take the $3 million we used on Powell, add a couple million to that and sign Rishard Matthews @ $5 million/year, then target a Tyler Ervin, Kenneth Dixon, Devontae Booker etc. in the 4th/5th round? Maybe a Travis Benjamin at a slightly higher $6 million/year, while also filling KR/PR. Maybe Brian Quick? Jermaine Kearse? We've basically created the same issues at running back that we've had for years. No youth and we simply are still relying on free agency and trades to supply the position. It's not smart because there is no future at the position on the roster and we have over $7 million invested in the position. Not a huge figure, but an unnecessary figure if we didn't resign Powell as well. We could've looked to improve the slot position on the roster with a Forte/Robinson combination instead of re-signing Powell. Don't forget that Forte/Powell will account for $9+ million against the cap next year at age 31 and 28 respectively, and 31 is basically a grave yard age for a running back while Powell is largely injury prone. It's a nice combination, but it's a bit of a risky proposition. The age of our skill positions is scary, especially considering that whether you think he'll pay off or not, Devin Smith will miss his second straight training camp and likely be a so-so contributor for the second year in a row.
I'm confused.... are you saying we should have offered more than the $11.7M/yr he got from the Raiders? The first sentence implies yes. The second implies no. We were players in the market to the extent that we had a number that we were willing to pay. Just like there was a number we were willing to pay to trade up and snag Tunsil. Don't fool yourself with the "we don't have money" b.s. There's always money in the banana stand.
I don't think we could've made an offer substantial enough to compete with what the Raiders gave him, is my point. If we offer him $6.5 million/year and he got nearly $12 million/year, would you really consider us to be players for him?
I really think you should take some time and do some reading about the salary cap and the flexibility that these GMs have in making contracts work out. A quick point: Revis's contract goes down almost $2m next year (the same year Mo will be a free agent) and we're going to have Richardson thru the '18 season and Williams thru '20 with minimal commitment.
That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard. I had to double check who was posting. If you think Mac is going to waste his time making offers far below market value then you must think Mac sucks at his job. edit with some #s: Osemele was expected to get between $9-$11m on the open market. He got $11.7.No way Mac is going to $12m. As we found out with Clady; Mac thinks an OT is worth $10m/yr (I'm not counting Clady's "prove it" year).
Since we have no idea what Mac actually offered, or how close we really were, how is it dumb? I don't know what we offered. Neither do you. If you really think some teams don't offer players significantly less than what they get you're incredibly naive. But as I stated. We have zero clue what the figures were, so why is your speculation so much more informed than mine? I was using that as an exaggerated example. I really don't think we made an offer competitive to what the Raiders offered, and most likely were not near the range of guaranteed money he got. As far as Revis goes his contract crippled us in free agency this year. It was a dumb contract then, and is a dumb contract now. We could've had two players for that price. He's still a good player. But you speak so highly of market value, he does not play like a $17 million/year player.
