New York Jets: Santonio Holmes Will Likely Stay a Jet in 2012
Holmes will be receiving a total of $15.25 million in guaranteed money over the next two seasons with the Jets and the "deadline" to erase that money was this past Wednesday. Holmes now has his salary guaranteed for 2012 and it certainly appears that there would be no reason why general manager Mike Tannenbaum would waive the receiver as it would make no sense in financial terms.
With Wednesday coming and going, the Jets now have a major challenge presented in front of themselves: Righting the ship with not only the entire locker room but with their No. 1 receiver.
Rex Ryan and the team's coaching stuff will likely be walking on thin ice entering the 2012 offseason as they will be looking to avoid setting off their troubled wide receiver.
The public already has an image of Ryan losing control of his locker room as several players have been very vocal about it to the media. If Holmes were to explode, that would certainly put not only Ryan's job in jeopardy but possibly even Tannebaum's as well.
Holmes may have an attitude issue, but the production is there. Holmes reeled in 51 receptions for 654 yards and eight touchdowns in 16 games last season, but is certainly capable of doing much more. That's where it falls into the hands of Mark Sanchez.
I would assume that Holmes' biggest issues with Sanchez isn't his leadership skills but his ability to get him the ball—something that Sanchez apparently hasn't done enough.
With the Jets missing the playoffs this past season with a mediocre 8-8 record, they have a ton of soul-searching to do in the offseason. So far there haven't been any signs of an overhaul in any part of the organization or roster.
If Ryan is ever going to need luck, it's going to be this season as he has a lot of holes to patch up in New York's locker room while also coaching up his players and resurrecting a winning culture.
Be sure to check out Tony Santorsa's blog: PatriotsPlus
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?