Reshad Jones: I want to be recognized as one of the premiere safeties in this league

I keep seeing this idea that we were dumb not to extend him when we spent so much money this offseason.

I know the media is obviously ******ed but that couldn't make any less sense.

This is the Brian Hartline situation all over.

We could have locked up Hartline a lot cheaper if we resigned him prior to the 2012 season, but we waited and it cost us a lot more $$$. This is going to be the same exact situation.

Moves like this are what separate the teams like the Packers and Patriots and teams like us.

"UCF FINatic wrote:

This is the Brian Hartline situation all over.

We could have locked up Hartline a lot cheaper if we resigned him prior to the 2012 season, but we waited and it cost us a lot more $$$. This is going to be the same exact situation.

Moves like this are what separate the teams like the Packers and Patriots and teams like us.

Wake me when the upcoming season is half over and Jones is on pace to having a Pro bowl season and is still unsigned.

"Den54 wrote:

Wake me when the upcoming season is half over and Jones is on pace to having a Pro bowl season and is still unsigned.

Even still if we resign him while he is on pace to make the Pro Bowl in the middle of the season it would cost more than now. Jones played the whole season at a high level last year, I don't know why we wouldn't lock him up now. His price is only going to go up if he production stays the same or improves (which typically happens to 4th year players).

"UCF FINatic wrote:

This is the Brian Hartline situation all over.

We could have locked up Hartline a lot cheaper if we resigned him prior to the 2012 season, but we waited and it cost us a lot more $$$. This is going to be the same exact situation.

Moves like this are what separate the teams like the Packers and Patriots and teams like us.

White people problems...

"UCF FINatic wrote:

This is the Brian Hartline situation all over.

We could have locked up Hartline a lot cheaper if we resigned him prior to the 2012 season, but we waited and it cost us a lot more $$$. This is going to be the same exact situation.

Moves like this are what separate the teams like the Packers and Patriots and teams like us.

No it's not. They aren't resigning players earlier, or somehow prescient. The Dolphins identified that Hartline was going to be good in the new offense ahead of time, and made a good attempt. His injury issues caused issues with that. Reshad Jones I'm not quite sure what you're expecting

"Disgustipate wrote:

No it's not. They aren't resigning players earlier, or somehow prescient. The Dolphins identified that Hartline was going to be good in the new offense ahead of time, and made a good attempt. His injury issues caused issues with that. Reshad Jones I'm not quite sure what you're expecting

Look at when the Packers locked up Jordy Nelson; in the middle of the season for a lot less than what he could have gotten after the season. We could have done the same with Hartline last year. Look at how the Patriots resigned Hernandez and Gronk; both were locked up (no pun intended) after their 2nd seasons in the NFL. The key to having a consistently good NFL team is managing and manipulating the cap. Thus far Ireland has done a good job of that (have to give him credit where credit is due), but if I was in his shoes I would still be doing everything in my power to lock up Jones now, before he gets to the open market.

"UCF FINatic wrote:

Look at when the Packers locked up Jordy Nelson; in the middle of the season for a lot less than what he could have gotten after the season. We could have done the same with Hartline last year. Look at how the Patriots resigned Hernandez and Gronk; both were locked up (no pun intended) after their 2nd seasons in the NFL. The key to having a consistently good NFL team is managing and manipulating the cap. Thus far Ireland has done a good job of that (have to give him credit where credit is due), but if I was in his shoes I would still be doing everything in my power to lock up Jones now, before he gets to the open market.

And he's only got what like 8 months to get it done? And he's given us what reason to think he won't?

He still hasn't cured cancer yet either. I say we protest. Oh wait..

"slickj101 wrote:

And he's only got what like 8 months to get it done? And he's given us what reason to think he won't?

He still hasn't cured cancer yet either. I say we protest. Oh wait..

I forgot why I don't post as often... I try to make a valid point regarding something that I am concerned about, but instead just get bashed and have my concerns compared to curing cancer. I wasn't being testy in my posts, just was simply trying to add my own insight to the situation.

The reason, I even mentioned my point and concern is because the article suggests that we might not lock up Jones, despite previously alluding to the fact we would try to. Additionally, I mentioned it because of how this whole situation is eerily similar to the Hartline situation last year:
1.) We wanted to lock up Hartline
2.) His injury took place and we stopped trying to get him locked up
3.) Hartline started the beginning of the season and predictably did very well
4.) IIRC we approached Hartline early to midseason about locking him up to a long-term deal, but wisely his agent told him not to because he would get more money on the open market
5.) We had to pay significantly more money to resign Hartline than if we would have locked him up prior to the season.

Yes, I know the injury situation was different but you pay the Doctors on staff for their medical opinions and go from there. Obviously his injury hasn't had long term implications and I have little doubt the Doctors would have told the staff otherwise.

As of now, I see the Jones situation playing out very similar to the one listed above.

"UCF FINatic wrote:

I forgot why I don't post as often... I try to make a valid point regarding something that I am concerned about, but instead just get bashed and have my concerns compared to curing cancer. I wasn't being testy in my posts, just was simply trying to add my own insight to the situation.

The reason, I even mentioned my point and concern is because the article suggests that we might not lock up Jones, despite previously alluding to the fact we would try to. Additionally, I mentioned it because of how this whole situation is eerily similar to the Hartline situation last year:
1.) We wanted to lock up Hartline
2.) His injury took place and we stopped trying to get him locked up
3.) Hartline started the beginning of the season and predictably did very well
4.) IIRC we approached Hartline early to midseason about locking him up to a long-term deal, but wisely his agent told him not to because he would get more money on the open market
5.) We had to pay significantly more money to resign Hartline than if we would have locked him up prior to the season.

Yes, I know the injury situation was different but you pay the Doctors on staff for their medical opinions and go from there. Obviously his injury hasn't had long term implications and I have little doubt the Doctors would have told the staff otherwise.

As of now, I see the Jones situation playing out very similar to the one listed above.

I think the underlining tone is that he deserves the benefit of the doubt considering the offseason he had, how the cap is managed currently, and what he has shown to do since he's had full control, without the underlining tone of criticism..Basically, does he really deserved to be criticized in this case?

Using Grink and Hernandez as examples is not making your case don't ya think?

"UCF FINatic wrote:

I forgot why I don't post as often... I try to make a valid point regarding something that I am concerned about, but instead just get bashed and have my concerns compared to curing cancer. I wasn't being testy in my posts, just was simply trying to add my own insight to the situation.

The reason, I even mentioned my point and concern is because the article suggests that we might not lock up Jones, despite previously alluding to the fact we would try to. Additionally, I mentioned it because of how this whole situation is eerily similar to the Hartline situation last year:
1.) We wanted to lock up Hartline
2.) His injury took place and we stopped trying to get him locked up
3.) Hartline started the beginning of the season and predictably did very well
4.) IIRC we approached Hartline early to midseason about locking him up to a long-term deal, but wisely his agent told him not to because he would get more money on the open market
5.) We had to pay significantly more money to resign Hartline than if we would have locked him up prior to the season.

Yes, I know the injury situation was different but you pay the Doctors on staff for their medical opinions and go from there. Obviously his injury hasn't had long term implications and I have little doubt the Doctors would have told the staff otherwise.

As of now, I see the Jones situation playing out very similar to the one listed above.

What if they sign him long term and last year turns out to be a fluke?

"UCF FINatic wrote:

I forgot why I don't post as often... I try to make a valid point regarding something that I am concerned about, but instead just get bashed and have my concerns compared to curing cancer. I wasn't being testy in my posts, just was simply trying to add my own insight to the situation.

The reason, I even mentioned my point and concern is because the article suggests that we might not lock up Jones, despite previously alluding to the fact we would try to. Additionally, I mentioned it because of how this whole situation is eerily similar to the Hartline situation last year:
1.) We wanted to lock up Hartline
2.) His injury took place and we stopped trying to get him locked up
3.) Hartline started the beginning of the season and predictably did very well
4.) IIRC we approached Hartline early to midseason about locking him up to a long-term deal, but wisely his agent told him not to because he would get more money on the open market
5.) We had to pay significantly more money to resign Hartline than if we would have locked him up prior to the season.

Yes, I know the injury situation was different but you pay the Doctors on staff for their medical opinions and go from there. Obviously his injury hasn't had long term implications and I have little doubt the Doctors would have told the staff otherwise.

As of now, I see the Jones situation playing out very similar to the one listed above.

I think you're exaggerating the "big" difference between the contract offer in middle of the season vs end of the season. You're comparing them to Gronk and it's apples and oranges. Gronk was really good in year 1. Jones is only now good at the end of his contract. I can make similar argument for Hartline, they would have been idiots to pay Hartline a new contract based on previous performances, since they weren't that good.

They are running a business here. A bad contract is way more impactful (negatively) than overpaying for someone who has shown they can play at a high level for more than one year (see Jones hopefully)

"UCF FINatic wrote:

Look at when the Packers locked up Jordy Nelson; in the middle of the season for a lot less than what he could have gotten after the season. We could have done the same with Hartline last year. Look at how the Patriots resigned Hernandez and Gronk; both were locked up (no pun intended) after their 2nd seasons in the NFL. The key to having a consistently good NFL team is managing and manipulating the cap. Thus far Ireland has done a good job of that (have to give him credit where credit is due), but if I was in his shoes I would still be doing everything in my power to lock up Jones now, before he gets to the open market.

Signing players to early contract extension sounds like a good way to save money but it involves risk. And sometimes taking that risk makes you look stupid. You think the Jets are happy they extended Sanchez? Plus in today's NFL if you were to sign a rising star to an affordable contract, its likely that once he attains star status he holds out minimizing the amount of money you save. So is it really worth it to take the risk when the reward may not be fully realized?

Now I'm all four resigning Jones before he hits the open market but there is plenty of time to do that.

Hernandez and Gronk aren't very good examples of signing early to save money as both were paid top dollar (Gronk is the highest paid TE).

W/o knowing what Jones is seeking, it's impossible to say whether they should or should not be locking him up now and impossible to say whether they would save any money over letting him test the market after the season. Many players and agents have inflated opinions of their worth and don't come off their number until they shop around and find no buyers at their price.

This whole "story" is a non-issue in my opinion. Sessler stats that Miami has "failed to extend Jones". Just because they haven't done so yet? I mean, what if they're waiting until after they sign Dion Jordan so they know the terms of his deal for next year so they know how much money they'll have to play around with after extending Jones? Next year's going to be an important offseason with so many free agents - Jones, Clemons, Grimes, Keller, Misi, Soliai, and Starks. Obviously Miami's not going to have the amount of money they had this offseason, so it would seem to me they'd want to get parameters of the deal worked out as exactly as they kid so as not to sink themselves next year if they want to bring back the majority of those free agents they know they'll have.

Jones will get his deal in due time, barring a catastrophic injury. Book it.

"UCF FINatic wrote:

This is the Brian Hartline situation all over.

We could have locked up Hartline a lot cheaper if we resigned him prior to the 2012 season, but we waited and it cost us a lot more $$$. This is going to be the same exact situation.

Moves like this are what separate the teams like the Packers and Patriots and teams like us.

Your faulting us for arguing that theory ?

I'd rather not be the team that throws big money at unproven players... That's not what the Packers, Patriots do at all any way.
Hartline isnt even making as much money as it seems. Regardless...He was near death this time last year, so your using a terrible example.

"Disgustipate wrote:

No it's not. They aren't resigning players earlier, or somehow prescient. The Dolphins identified that Hartline was going to be good in the new offense ahead of time, and made a good attempt. His injury issues caused issues with that. Reshad Jones I'm not quite sure what you're expecting

Look how quick the Patriots locked up Aaron Hernandez to a long term deal. That's how the good teams do it...

"KingMotion wrote:

The contract could be structured to protect against one year of good play.

Enviado desde mi GT-P3110 usando Tapatalk 2

Of course it could be. it doesn't mean his agent and him would accept it and it doesn't really seem like they would by the way they're talking.

Couple of fundamental flaws with your argument, UCF Finatic -

Miami made attempts to lock up Brian Hartline. Talks stalled, mainly when he was sidelined with a serious illness that kept him in the hospital. So yeah, this is hindsight to the 10th degree.

Wouldn't Jones be a RFA? So he's not going anywhere. Even if he was a UFA he will get tagged before he leaves this team. The tag on Safeties isn't that high and he would be deserving of a tag.

"Vertical Limit wrote:

Wouldn't Jones be a RFA? So he's not going anywhere. Even if he was a UFA he will get tagged before he leaves this team. The tag on Safeties isn't that high and he would be deserving of a tag.

He will have more than three accrued seasons so no... UFA.

"Fin D wrote:

Of course it could be. it doesn't mean his agent and him would accept it and it doesn't really seem like they would by the way they're talking.

Ireland has failed to sign any of the young players to deals before their rookie deal expires. So I don't expect it to change. The whole point of taking the risk is to save yourself a couple million a year or more. That savings could be the difference in getting another player signed.

Right now if Jones has another season like last...he's going to cost Dashon Goldson money (five years, $41.25 million ($8.25 million per season, $18 million guaranteed) or worse Eric Berry money (6 yr(s) /$50,044,300 Average Salary $8,340,717 Guaranteed: $25,696,200).

We can't even count on the tag being our friend next year because of the Goldson/Berry/Weddle deals pushing the # up for safeties.

Right now I'd take the risk and see if we could sign him for Hartline cash cause outside of injury I have no doubt he'll perform next year. Jones is one of 2 young proven stars on this team (Pouncey the other...hopefully Tannehill joins that list this year) and is the type of guy you lock up early.

"VanDolPhan wrote:

Ireland has failed to sign any of the young players to deals before their rookie deal expires. So I don't expect it to change. The whole point of taking the risk is to save yourself a couple million a year or more. That savings could be the difference in getting another player signed.

Right now if Jones has another season like last...he's going to cost Dashon Goldson money (five years, $41.25 million ($8.25 million per season, $18 million guaranteed) or worse Eric Berry money (6 yr(s) /$50,044,300 Average Salary $8,340,717 Guaranteed: $25,696,200).

We can't even count on the tag being our friend next year because of the Goldson/Berry/Weddle deals pushing the # up for safeties.

Right now I'd take the risk and see if we could sign him for Hartline cash cause outside of injury I have no doubt he'll perform next year. Jones is one of 2 young proven stars on this team (Pouncey the other...hopefully Tannehill joins that list this year) and is the type of guy you lock up early.

can you really blame him? none of them have really been good enough to lock up early

"VanDolPhan wrote:

Ireland has failed to sign any of the young players to deals before their rookie deal expires. So I don't expect it to change. The whole point of taking the risk is to save yourself a couple million a year or more. That savings could be the difference in getting another player signed.

Right now if Jones has another season like last...he's going to cost Dashon Goldson money (five years, $41.25 million ($8.25 million per season, $18 million guaranteed) or worse Eric Berry money (6 yr(s) /$50,044,300 Average Salary $8,340,717 Guaranteed: $25,696,200).

We can't even count on the tag being our friend next year because of the Goldson/Berry/Weddle deals pushing the # up for safeties.

Right now I'd take the risk and see if we could sign him for Hartline cash cause outside of injury I have no doubt he'll perform next year. Jones is one of 2 young proven stars on this team (Pouncey the other...hopefully Tannehill joins that list this year) and is the type of guy you lock up early.

Its baffling to me, that so many people think he's doing contracts incorrectly when we've had numerous players outplay their rookie contracts and we've NEVER been in dire cap situations with him as GM.

We all understand why a person would want to sign someone early. But let's also stop pretending its automatically worth the risk. I mean what's really worse: paying $8.25 million for an excellent safety or paying $6 million a year for a safety that was good for only one year?