Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 42

Thread: NFLPA and League Looking to Increase 2012 Cap

  1. #21
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Jersey shore
    Posts
    2,069
    [QUOTE=DDNYjets;4383151]They should change the practice rules while they are at it. The "no pads" has killed the Jets.[/QUOTE]

    +1 I'm begining to think it may hurt the quality of football as we know it.

  2. #22
    [QUOTE=cant wait;4383164]that would be awesome... 2012 cap increase + [B]trade cromartie [/B]+ trade scott + cut smith = helloooo mario williams LOL[/QUOTE]

    :huh: Why?

  3. #23
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    The Big Apple, USA
    Posts
    22,222
    [QUOTE=C Mart;4383463]:huh: Why?[/QUOTE]


    have to agree... why would you trade away one of the best corners in the NFL in the prime of his career?

  4. #24
    [QUOTE=sg3;4383473]have to agree... why would you trade away one of the best corners in the NFL in the prime of his career?[/QUOTE]

    Definitely not one of the best Corners in the league. Horrible tackler (cost is the Giants game) and doesn't make as many big plays as he used to. Plus he gets called for a lot of penalties.

    I'd say he is in the top 25%, which makes him a middle of the pack #1 CB, and one of the best #2s in the league. Not bad, but not top 5 or something.

  5. #25
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    The Big Apple, USA
    Posts
    22,222
    why would you trade one of "the best #2s in the league" in a league where you need at least two and usually 3 or more good corners to cover recieivers under the new rules that don't allow defensive backs to breathe near them after 5 yards and allow offensive lineman to hold, tackle and bulldog defensive players without ever receiving a holding penalty

  6. #26
    [QUOTE=sg3;4383479]why would you trade one of "the best #2s in the league" in a league where you need at least two and usually 3 or more good corners to cover recieivers under the new rules that don't allow defensive backs to breathe near them after 5 yards and allow offensive lineman to hold, tackle and bulldog defensive players without ever receiving a holding penalty[/QUOTE]

    Exactly!

    People should read this

    [B][SIZE=2]Jets' Antonio Cromartie finally turning a corner, and just at the right time[/SIZE][/B]

    [URL]http://www.nj.com/jets/index.ssf/2011/12/jets_antonio_cromartie_finally.html[/URL]

  7. #27
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    20,821
    LOL @ trading Cro. He is nowhere near what the problem is with this team. He is a bargain at $8MM a year. He got killed with ticky-tack penalties in the Oakland game but outside of that he has been very good. People need to stop comparing him to Revis.

    Not to mention if Cro even managed to get things right between his ears and play more disciplined he would probably be on par with Revis coverage wise. His ceiling is that high.

  8. #28
    [QUOTE=C Mart;4383463]:huh: Why?[/QUOTE]

    Cap purposes only, I'm just hypothetically thinking about what moves could be made to make room for Williams

  9. #29
    Hall Of Fame
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Manalapan, NJ/Boca Raton, Fl
    Posts
    15,569
    [QUOTE=Gastineau99;4383477]Definitely not one of the best Corners in the league. Horrible tackler (cost is the Giants game) and doesn't make as many big plays as he used to. Plus he gets called for a lot of penalties.

    I'd say he is in the top 25%, which makes him a middle of the pack #1 CB, and one of the best #2s in the league. Not bad, but not top 5 or something.[/QUOTE]

    He was ranked as one of the top CBs in the league. That's without taking into account how often he is thrown to given whos on the other side of the field.

    Add in how much Rex counts on his corners, getting rid of Cro would be pointless and hurt the team.

    No matter how hard you try and make sense out of this, it makes no sense to get rid of him.

  10. #30
    [QUOTE=JB1089;4383168]+100

    THIS.


    The league is only considering this because the Steelers are almost $30 million over the cap right now. The league would prefer that one of its flagship franchises not be forced to gut their team.[/QUOTE]

    steelers are actually 10 million under right now so not sure where you get your information from the only team thats really in salary cap hell is the raiders

  11. #31
    Hall Of Fame
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Somewhere
    Posts
    10,506
    [QUOTE=JETranger 206B;4383403]+1 I'm begining to think it may hurt the quality of football as we know it.[/QUOTE]

    I believe that only applied to the 2011 training camp, not a permanent rule.

  12. #32
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    20,821
    [QUOTE=ratliff5;4383609]steelers are actually 10 million under right now so not sure where you get your information from the only team thats really in salary cap hell is the raiders[/QUOTE]

    Last I heard the Steelers were still in rough shape even after all the cuts they made.

    It doesnt surprise me that you two guys are $40MM off in estimations b.c the hardly anybody ever gets the cap predictions correct.

    Even if they are $10MM under they are still effed bc they have a lot of spots to fill on the roster.

    Also it is no secret that the NFL FO has it's favorites. Certain teams enjoy preferential treatment. And if there was ever a team the NFL was going to amend something to help out it would be the Steelers.

  13. #33
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    20,821
    [QUOTE=jetman67;4383920]I believe that only applied to the 2011 training camp, not a permanent rule.[/QUOTE]

    I hope you're right but I think it is part of the new CBA. Worst part of the new CBA if you ask me. It makes it almost impossible for an OL to gel together. Especially an OL like the Jets which is likely to have a new piece or two.

  14. #34
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    6,890
    [QUOTE=TurkJetFan;4383137]not for nothing, the jets cap is tight also.

    [/QUOTE]

    Only if you call $7.7 million dollars under the cap tight.

  15. #35
    [QUOTE=CanadaSteve;4383998]Only if you call $7.7 million dollars under the cap tight.[/QUOTE]

    it's tight if you are trying to sign mario williams

  16. #36
    [QUOTE=CanadaSteve;4383998]Only if you call $7.7 million dollars under the cap tight.[/QUOTE]

    you don't? 1/2 of that is allocated to rookies and your nose tackles and safeties are not signed and you don"t have a #2 receiver.

    Plus last year's escalators have not been formulated.

  17. #37
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP

    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    19,374
    [QUOTE=patman;4384118]you don't? 1/2 of that is allocated to rookies and your nose tackles and safeties are not signed and you don"t have a #2 receiver.

    Plus last year's escalators have not been formulated.[/QUOTE]

    That's without restructuring fairly restructurable (if that's even a word) contracts. If the jets needed room, they could restructure mangold (and others)fairly easily, I'm sure.

    The Jets will be fine to do what they want/need. Now, that is a pretty modest goal, but anyone who thinks they are going after Mario w is fooling themselves.

  18. #38
    [QUOTE=CanadaSteve;4383998]Only if you call $7.7 million dollars under the cap tight.[/QUOTE]

    It is when you consider how many teams have alot more than that to play with in freeagency. (Chiefs, Bengals, Broncos etc) Thats chump change that 7.7 million compare to those teams.

  19. #39
    [QUOTE=Raider9175;4384137]It is when you consider how many teams have alot more than that to play with in freeagency. (Chiefs, Bengals, Broncos etc) Thats chump change that 7.7 million compare to those teams.[/QUOTE]

    The teams who have a lot of cap space will end up spending a lot more to secure top free agents. The players will know they can go to team X and get paid 5 mil more a year because they are 50 mil under.

    Its certainly good to have 50 mil of cap space, but it won't be spent optimally.

    Teams with lower cap space will have to be more intelligent about the contracts they offer. The jets have been victims of free agency in the last couple of years (Pace and Scott IMO) because they had money to spend...

  20. #40
    [QUOTE=NPTJET53;4384151]The teams who have a lot of cap space will end up spending a lot more to secure top free agents. The players will know they can go to team X and get paid 5 mil more a year because they are 50 mil under.

    Its certainly good to have 50 mil of cap space, but it won't be spent optimally.

    Teams with lower cap space will have to be more intelligent about the contracts they offer. The jets have been victims of free agency in the last couple of years (Pace and Scott IMO) because they had money to spend...[/QUOTE]

    I don't think you can say that, you can hope if its a team in your divison with that much cap space, they don't spend wisely.

    The Facts are there are some players in free agency that can help any team. The Carl Nicks(Going into his prime) don't want to see any of my team divisional rivals picking up. BH Grubbs, and Paul Soliai etc. You going to spend big in freeagent . Make sure that player is an impact player in his prime.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us