As fun as being one of the few realists with Fowler is, I am on vacation and the family is up now so I will leave the rest to you all. Have fun.

---

I'd be interested to see some data on that statement.

Sorry I missed this one but it's quick. There are studies all over the place google is your friend. The risk of injuring the ACL the first time is pretty low. The odds of injuring it a second time are roughly 1/3. That's huge.

Maybe post some credible sources on that because I find it hard to believe.

---

Coughlin when asked if winning will be a focus: "What the hell else is there? This is nice and dandy, but winning is what all this is about."

In a weird spot where I'm not prepared to give him the option but also not prepared to sell low on him. I'd need a first or something like a 2nd and 3rd to trade him.  

Keep him over summer and see how he develops , see how he plays over the first few weeks of the season then either trade or try get an extension done. If he's not producing much we might be able to convince him to sign a cheapened deal.

His value is highest now though. If we keep him through the year, we risk losing him and getting nothing, but a compensatory pick. To me, if we get anything better than a 3rd rounder (which is the max we'd get in a compensatory pick), it would be a win. Even if he has an off year, I see no way we get him to sign anything less than a $12 million per year deal and that is gonna put us in a bind as well. This is kinda why I didn't want to spend any money in free agency this year, because I didn't want to have to start making tough decisions like this. In the end, we need Norwell much more than we need Fowler, so I guess his signing was worth it as long as Norwell pans out. We cannot afford to keep everyone though. This is the price you pay for spending money in free agency and keeping a veteran QB. Eventually, the bill is gonna have to get paid.

---

Thats why I said I'd need a first or something like a 2nd and 3rd to trade him. If I'm not getting that back I'd rather keep him and see how things pan out.  

Then you can either work things out with him or trade him during the trade deadline.

---

As fun as being one of the few realists with Fowler is, I am on vacation and the family is up now so I will leave the rest to you all. Have fun.

---

Sorry I missed this one but it's quick. There are studies all over the place google is your friend. The risk of injuring the ACL the first time is pretty low. The odds of injuring it a second time are roughly 1/3. That's huge.

Maybe post some credible sources on that because I find it hard to believe.

Yeah, I did some searching on that and posted an article about Sam Bradford which basically said your overall odds aren't any worse and usually the repaired one is less likely to tear. 

Not sure where those numbers he said are from.

---

IT WAS ALWAYS THE JAGS

His value is highest now though. If we keep him through the year, we risk losing him and getting nothing, but a compensatory pick. To me, if we get anything better than a 3rd rounder (which is the max we'd get in a compensatory pick), it would be a win. Even if he has an off year, I see no way we get him to sign anything less than a $12 million per year deal and that is gonna put us in a bind as well. This is kinda why I didn't want to spend any money in free agency this year, because I didn't want to have to start making tough decisions like this. In the end, we need Norwell much more than we need Fowler, so I guess his signing was worth it as long as Norwell pans out. We cannot afford to keep everyone though. This is the price you pay for spending money in free agency and keeping a veteran QB. Eventually, the bill is gonna have to get paid.

---

What if Calais has another monster season and Fowler's stats dip? Then, we lose one of our top defensive players and we'd be on the hook for $14.2 million in 2019 for keeping Fowler. I don't like that at all.

What if Calais slows down and Fowler lights it up?

---

You def. pick up the option and make a decision at the end of the year like we did with Bortles

It's a risk either way. 

We had a lot more cap money when we picked up Bortles' option. Now, picking up the option for Fowler, likely means cutting ties with a key defensive player. I don't wanna do that.

---

What if Calais slows down and Fowler lights it up?

---

You def. pick up the option and make a decision at the end of the year like we did with Bortles

It's a risk either way. 

We had a lot more cap money when we picked up Bortles' option. Now, picking up the option for Fowler, likely means cutting ties with a key defensive player. I don't wanna do that.

Fowler is a young ascending defensive player that keeps improving  I'm going with upside instead of aging players

---

I hope they keep him. He has cut down significantly on mental errors and looks like he will continue to get better.

---

It's a risk either way. 

We had a lot more cap money when we picked up Bortles' option. Now, picking up the option for Fowler, likely means cutting ties with a key defensive player. I don't wanna do that.

Fowler is a young ascending defensive player that keeps improving  I'm going with upside instead of aging players

I'll always go with the most productive player, no matter what the age.

---

Fowler is a young ascending defensive player that keeps improving  I'm going with upside instead of aging players

I'll always go with the most productive player, no matter what the age.

What's the least amount you'd trade him for this offseason.

---

DANTE FOWLER IS 23 YEARS OLD !!!

---

DANTE FOWLER IS 23 YEARS OLD !!

Sssssshhhhh, dont say that out loud

---

DANTE FOWLER IS 23 YEARS OLD !!!

Which is why if I'm Dante, I'm prepping my behind off for this upcoming season and busting out big time and cashing in FA. Jags can't keep everyone. Signing Ngakoue to likely the highest paid DE in NFL would make it hard to do the same to Fowler. Jack will cash.

---

Why do we, the fans, obsessively want to trade guys as soon as they're good?

Keep Fowler around as long as we can. If we let him walk after next season, he's the same late third-round pick that he would be if traded this year.

I ask this all the time...Every guy we draft that turns out good, someone wants to trade him

---

wow! so many "What If's" in this thread...I would suspect that they try to negotiate a long term deal with Fowler rather than pick up the 5th year option with a front loaded contract to ease the cap hit in following years...Then they start dumping aging free agents who are overpaid, or who are not performing as well...

---

I'll always go with the most productive player, no matter what the age.

What's the least amount you'd trade him for this offseason.

A 2nd rounder. That's more than we'd get from a compensatory pick, but I'd start out demanding a first rounder and act like I'd take nothing less to see if I got any takers.

---

DANTE FOWLER IS 23 YEARS OLD !!!

So?

---

Why do we, the fans, obsessively want to trade guys as soon as they're good?

Keep Fowler around as long as we can. If we let him walk after next season, he's the same late third-round pick that he would be if traded this year.

I ask this all the time...Every guy we draft that turns out good, someone wants to trade him

Because on top of that drafting, we signed high priced free agents who outperformed the guy we drafted and we can't keep everyone. That's just a fact.

---

wow! so many "What If's" in this thread...I would suspect that they try to negotiate a long term deal with Fowler rather than pick up the 5th year option with a front loaded contract  to ease the cap hit in following years...Then they start dumping aging free agents who are overpaid, or who are not performing as well...

And who might that be? If we signed him to an extension it would most likely be no lower than $12 million per year. Which overpriced free agents do we have, that we can cut $12 million from the cap without losing an integral part of the defense?

---

wow! so many "What If's" in this thread...I would suspect that they try to negotiate a long term deal with Fowler rather than pick up the 5th year option with a front loaded contract  to ease the cap hit in following years...Then they start dumping aging free agents who are overpaid, or who are not performing as well...

And who might that be? If we signed him to an extension it would most likely be no lower than $12 million per year. Which overpriced free agents do we have, that we can cut $12 million from the cap without losing an integral part of the defense?

You could start with both safties.

---

Your beliefs become your thoughts,
Your thoughts become your words,
Your words become your actions,
Your actions become your habits,
Your habits become your values,
Your values become your destiny.

Why do we, the fans, obsessively want to trade guys as soon as they're good?

Keep Fowler around as long as we can. If we let him walk after next season, he's the same late third-round pick that he would be if traded this year.

I ask this all the time...Every guy we draft that turns out good, someone wants to trade him

I know what you mean, but in Fowler’s case we’ve reached decision time.

If we plan to keep him we have to either take up the option or work out a long term deal, because I’m certain he will walk at the end of the season if we don’t - like ARob he will find a bigger offer elsewhere.

If we don’t plan to keep him, then we need to look at trading him now, when he has the most value. If we let him go without trading him or trade him halfway through the season, we won’t get as much for him.

And I’m on the side of trying to work out a way to keep him.

If that’s on the fifth year option initially, then I think you take the risk of an injury.

---

And who might that be? If we signed him to an extension it would most likely be no lower than $12 million per year. Which overpriced free agents do we have, that we can cut $12 million from the cap without losing an integral part of the defense?

You could start with both safties.

You wanna get rid of both Safeties at the same time and replace them with rookies? Not a smart idea. Besides, we just added Church and he played well. I could see cutting Gipson. His cap number for 2019 is a whopping $9.050 million. He's good, but he's not great and that cap number reflects a great Safety. As for cutting both Safeties though, no way. I want a veteran back there to play alongside a rookie, so we still have to clear another $3 million just to keep Fowler alone. That's not taking into account contract extensions for other players.

---

You could start with both safties.

You wanna get rid of both Safeties at the same time and replace them with rookies? Not a smart idea. Besides, we just added Church and he played well. I could see cutting Gipson. His cap number for 2019 is a whopping $9.050 million. He's good, but he's not great and that cap number reflects a great Safety. As for cutting both Safeties though, no way. I want a veteran back there to play alongside a rookie, so we still have to clear another $3 million just to keep Fowler alone. That's not taking into account contract extensions for other players.

Yeah....you find the money to pay the pass rusher that's only going to be 24 years old...entering his prime. 

Getting rid of both safeties at the same time wouldn't be a great idea, but if it was the only way to keep Fowler, then I'd do it. 

He has better sack per snap numbers than Yannick and they're both getting better. If they both get new deals, we have two premier pass rushers for probably the next 5 years.

---

Coughlin when asked if winning will be a focus: "What the hell else is there? This is nice and dandy, but winning is what all this is about."

You wanna get rid of both Safeties at the same time and replace them with rookies? Not a smart idea. Besides, we just added Church and he played well. I could see cutting Gipson. His cap number for 2019 is a whopping $9.050 million. He's good, but he's not great and that cap number reflects a great Safety. As for cutting both Safeties though, no way. I want a veteran back there to play alongside a rookie, so we still have to clear another $3 million just to keep Fowler alone. That's not taking into account contract extensions for other players.

Yeah....you find the money to pay the pass rusher that's only going to be 24 years old...entering his prime. 

Getting rid of both safeties at the same time wouldn't be a great idea, but if it was the only way to keep Fowler, then I'd do it. 

He has better sack per snap numbers than Yannick and they're both getting better. If they both get new deals, we have two premier pass rushers for probably the next 5 years.

I don't believe in keeping strength at one position by potentially weakening two others. That's just not a good idea IMO.

---