The Swamp

Posted: **Tue Sep 04, 2018 1:59 pm**

So you can't win with a player making 11%+ of your cap unless its a Manning.

Posted: **Tue Sep 04, 2018 4:21 pm**

mister d wrote: ↑Tue Sep 04, 2018 1:59 pm So you can't win with a player making 11%+ of your cap unless its a Manning.

The saints should have paid Archie more!

Posted: **Tue Sep 04, 2018 4:25 pm**

A_B wrote: ↑Tue Sep 04, 2018 4:21 pm The saints should have paid Archie more!

Great boxer, but I don't see how he would have helped a football team.

Posted: **Tue Sep 04, 2018 4:57 pm**

brian wrote: ↑Tue Sep 04, 2018 1:53 pm Not like the money is guaranteed either. Like gunpowder alluded to, this is basically a three-year deal until Trubisky's rookie deal is done. The Rams essentially made the same/similar moves to win now during Goff's rookie deal and got lauded for it.

I'm not accusing anyone here of this mind you, so this is a highly generalized complaint but very few people who call themselves big NFL fans really understand anything about the CBA or how the contracts/cap actually work.

Yeah, I just looked up and saw a couple different sites that list them as between $6 and $9 million left in cap space for this year and that Mack is now the only cap hold on the roster beyond 2021. Maybe it's still the shock of them spending on name players.

I'm not mad at them making the move for Mack, but I think I would feel like this was less of a reach if Trubisky had shown more as a rookie, even though his hands were tied last season and is now in a new (better) offense with vastly improved talent around him. Again, I feel like this is also a bit of a "job security" move by Pace, especially in that, by replacing draft picks with a superior known quantity, he's not going to get second-guessed unless Mack has a series of significant injuries and/or his quality of play tanks.

Posted: **Tue Sep 04, 2018 5:12 pm**

A_B wrote: ↑Tue Sep 04, 2018 4:21 pm

The saints should have paid Archie more!

Everyone thinks it was Jughead, but it was Reggie that powered those teams.

Posted: **Tue Sep 04, 2018 6:37 pm**

HaulCitgo wrote: ↑Tue Sep 04, 2018 12:32 pm Do great players win Superbowls? Even if he is the best defensive player in the NFC the next 3 years, there is a price you shouldn't pay because of the impact on salaries you can pay to the rest of the team. Between the contract and lack of rookie deals the danger is not being able to fill in with impossible combination of depth and quality.

The Broncos wouldn't have won their recent Super Bowl without Von Miller.

Posted: **Tue Sep 04, 2018 6:46 pm**

sancarlos wrote: ↑Tue Sep 04, 2018 6:37 pm
HaulCitgo wrote: ↑Tue Sep 04, 2018 12:32 pm Do great players win Superbowls? Even if he is the best defensive player in the NFC the next 3 years, there is a price you shouldn't pay because of the impact on salaries you can pay to the rest of the team. Between the contract and lack of rookie deals the danger is not being able to fill in with impossible combination of depth and quality.
The Broncos wouldn't have won their recent Super Bowl without Von Miller.

Or the Seahawks without Earl Thomas

Posted: **Tue Sep 04, 2018 8:26 pm**

Von Miller is a good example less so thomas. Both on rookie deals and signed a big contract after Superbowls. Has either team missed out on resigning its own guys or been left out of free agency acquisitions because of that contract? Seahawks kind of a unique situation with Wilson though.

In Mack's case you also need to consider the lost draft picks and the loss of those potential talents at rookie wages. As a general matter just seems like you need quality depth as much as quality starters in the NFL cause I'd say 40% of depth ends up starting at some point.

Posted: **Wed Sep 05, 2018 10:10 am**

You also have to remember that most of these guys go early in the draft, so they are going to shitty teams. Would Calvin Johnson have kept New England from winning a Super Bowl if he happened to go there? I doubt it. They managed to winwith Revis.

Posted: **Wed Sep 05, 2018 10:12 am**

DSafetyGuy wrote: ↑Tue Sep 04, 2018 4:57 pm
brian wrote: ↑Tue Sep 04, 2018 1:53 pm Not like the money is guaranteed either. Like gunpowder alluded to, this is basically a three-year deal until Trubisky's rookie deal is done. The Rams essentially made the same/similar moves to win now during Goff's rookie deal and got lauded for it.

I'm not accusing anyone here of this mind you, so this is a highly generalized complaint but very few people who call themselves big NFL fans really understand anything about the CBA or how the contracts/cap actually work.
Yeah, I just looked up and saw a couple different sites that list them as between $6 and $9 million left in cap space for this year and that Mack is now the only cap hold on the roster beyond 2021. Maybe it's still the shock of them spending on name players.

I'm not mad at them making the move for Mack, but I think I would feel like this was less of a reach if Trubisky had shown more as a rookie, even though his hands were tied last season and is now in a new (better) offense with vastly improved talent around him. Again, I feel like this is also a bit of a "job security" move by Pace, especially in that, by replacing draft picks with a superior known quantity, he's not going to get second-guessed unless Mack has a series of significant injuries and/or his quality of play tanks.

If Trubisky shows something this year, and you wait, it's probably too late. You lose a year of that rookie deal window and, like, there probably won't be a Khalil Mack available next year.

The Colts ended up having to spend their money on what, Vontae Davis and Andre Johnson? Now Grigson works at an Olive Garden.

Posted: **Wed Sep 05, 2018 12:16 pm**

HaulCitgo wrote: ↑Tue Sep 04, 2018 8:26 pm Von Miller is a good example less so thomas. Both on rookie deals and signed a big contract after Superbowls. Has either team missed out on resigning its own guys or been left out of free agency acquisitions because of that contract? Seahawks kind of a unique situation with Wilson though.

In Mack's case you also need to consider the lost draft picks and the loss of those potential talents at rookie wages. As a general matter just seems like you need quality depth as much as quality starters in the NFL cause I'd say 40% of depth ends up starting at some point.

First-rounders that become depth are generally bad picks. And half of these guys are busts, anyway, depending on the year. What team is one first round bust away from greatness? They didn't give away an entire draft like the Saints or something. There's still 6 more rounds.

Posted: **Wed Sep 05, 2018 1:20 pm**

I hope Leveon Bell goes full heel and refuses to sign his tender until Week 11 (the latest he can sign and still become a free agent next year).

Posted: **Wed Sep 05, 2018 1:56 pm**

And honestly, all kidding aside, I wouldn't blame him if he does. A RB having to play under the franchise tag for two seasons in a row is bullshit, especially in a sport so violent and dangerous where the CBA has almost no protections for players. If I were Bell, that's exactly what I would do if Pittsburgh isn't offering an acceptable long-term deal.

Posted: **Wed Sep 05, 2018 2:44 pm**

I would probably do it as well. You get one shot at big time money as an RB, and a team is artificially restricting him from finding out what that is. Fans say "they offered him a fair contract", to which I'd say 1) maybe, we haven't seen the structure and 2) no actually, since a "fair contract" would be whatever he could get on the actual FA market after paying out a drastically underplaying rookie deal.

Posted: **Wed Sep 05, 2018 2:48 pm**

Funny (?) thing is that Pittsburgh has no recourse if he does that (other than play him the last six weeks I guess). I'm kind of surprised the deadline to sign the tender isn't earlier (like week 4) since in a weird way, the player is more protected in this exact scenario.

I also don't think he would suffer any ill effects on the FA market next offseason for taking such a hardline, anti-team position. There's such demand for elite RBs he'd still be able to name his price more or less unless he gets injured.

Posted: **Wed Sep 05, 2018 2:58 pm**

Agreed. I can't imagine every team in the NFL colluding against a player despite the tremendous positional value he carried.

Posted: **Wed Sep 05, 2018 3:16 pm**

mister d wrote: ↑Wed Sep 05, 2018 2:58 pm Agreed. I can't imagine every team in the NFL colluding against a player despite the tremendous positional value he carried.

I think Kaepernick is probably going to win his collusion lawsuit, but even if he didn't/doesn't, I'm pretty sure Bell could represent himself and still easily win a massive lawsuit against the NFL if he doesn't get a FA deal for next year.

Posted: **Wed Sep 05, 2018 3:23 pm**

brian wrote: ↑Wed Sep 05, 2018 2:48 pm Funny (?) thing is that Pittsburgh has no recourse if he does that (other than play him the last six weeks I guess). I'm kind of surprised the deadline to sign the tender isn't earlier (like week 4) since in a weird way, the player is more protected in this exact scenario.

I also don't think he would suffer any ill effects on the FA market next offseason for taking such a hardline, anti-team position. There's such demand for elite RBs he'd still be able to name his price more or less unless he gets injured.

The franchise tag is a shortsighted relic from 20+ years ago that shouldn't exist yet continues to live on without any major adjustments because every GD thing in this stupid league comes down to bargaining chips between the league and the player's union.

Posted: **Wed Sep 05, 2018 3:24 pm**

As long as we agree that's only because "we can't trust him to dress" isn't racist enough for half the fanbase to rally behind, we agree here.

Posted: **Wed Sep 05, 2018 3:38 pm**

Gunpowder wrote: ↑Wed Sep 05, 2018 3:23 pm
brian wrote: ↑Wed Sep 05, 2018 2:48 pm Funny (?) thing is that Pittsburgh has no recourse if he does that (other than play him the last six weeks I guess). I'm kind of surprised the deadline to sign the tender isn't earlier (like week 4) since in a weird way, the player is more protected in this exact scenario.

I also don't think he would suffer any ill effects on the FA market next offseason for taking such a hardline, anti-team position. There's such demand for elite RBs he'd still be able to name his price more or less unless he gets injured.
The franchise tag is a shortsighted relic from 20+ years ago that shouldn't exist yet continues to live on without any major adjustments because every GD thing in this stupid league comes down to bargaining chips between the league and the player's union.

Definitely. The NFLPA is also easily the most impotent union among the four major sports (though the NHLPA isn't TOO far behind) and has been easily broken by management in the past. By now, if I were in charge of the players union I would be funding a massive strike/holdout fund in advance of the next CBA and not even refuse to consider any CBA that doesn't included guaranteed contracts. If I were the NFLPA I'd even be willing to give up some of the players share of league revenues in exchange for guaranteed contracts though I don't think that would be necessary.

Posted: **Wed Sep 05, 2018 3:47 pm**

I don't know how you'll ever get buy-in knowing both the average career length and the percentage of players who ever get a long term contract. At all times like 50%(?) of the league can't even think about missing a season of their career.

Posted: **Wed Sep 05, 2018 4:15 pm**

mister d wrote: ↑Wed Sep 05, 2018 3:47 pm I don't know how you'll ever get buy-in knowing both the average career length and the percentage of players who ever get a long term contract. At all times like 50%(?) of the league can't even think about missing a season of their career.

Definitely. It's not necessarily fair to too harshly criticize the NFLPA given both what you said and that union membership in the NFLPA is largely "rank and file" guys and not the superstars who could afford to sit out for a year or for forever. But that's what the strike fund is for. I can easily say the NFL is the only sports league I would say this for without reservation but I would love to see the union just absolutely stick it to the league office and ownership and blowing up an entire season to do so would be awesome. I would be first in line the season after when the games started back up again.

Posted: **Wed Sep 05, 2018 6:26 pm**

brian wrote: ↑Wed Sep 05, 2018 3:16 pm
mister d wrote: ↑Wed Sep 05, 2018 2:58 pm Agreed. I can't imagine every team in the NFL colluding against a player despite the tremendous positional value he carried.
I think Kaepernick is probably going to win his collusion lawsuit, but even if he didn't/doesn't, I'm pretty sure Bell could represent himself and still easily win a massive lawsuit against the NFL if he doesn't get a FA deal for next year.

A healthy Bell will command a high price on the open market, just as long as he doesn't super-offend the NFL powers by doing something so bad as killing puppies or kneeling for the anthem.

Posted: **Wed Sep 05, 2018 7:07 pm**

I would love to see an owner buck the trend and start handing out guaranteed contracts to his team. I believe players would sign for less if it was all guaranteed and that team would be a destination for FAs. One can dream right?

Posted: **Wed Sep 05, 2018 8:33 pm**

Rich people aren’t rich because they give away money.

Posted: **Thu Sep 06, 2018 10:36 am**

I'd be interested in the coach/GM reaction to losing the ability to do roster churn with the bottom end of the roster when someone's level of play tails off toward the end of the guaranteed deal and they want to bring in someone else.

Posted: **Thu Sep 06, 2018 12:31 pm**

And tons of guys would pack it in once the writing was on the wall. It would impact the product on the field. No one is taking that ass whooping if the check is guaranteed. Guys would just get cut and be dead money. It would probably reduce player salaries, or at least reduce average terms in the long run. I'm all for the player side on this one but the fans wouldn't win.

Posted: **Thu Sep 06, 2018 12:38 pm**

Contracts are guaranteed in every other major sport and I've never heard complaints about players packing it in and not playing hard. I'm not saying it's never happened, but with the exception of someone who is retiring someone is always going to be playing trying to get another deal, even if it's for one year or an invite to a training camp with the hope of earning a deal there.

(Also, that's what benching players is for. If someone isn't playing hard enough for whatever reason -- injury, motivation -- then it's next man up.

Posted: **Thu Sep 06, 2018 12:44 pm**

You're just egging me on

Posted: **Thu Sep 06, 2018 12:45 pm**

Someone say "if you sign a tight end to a long term deal he will murder people".

Posted: **Thu Sep 06, 2018 12:47 pm**

Again, I never said it's never happened. Just that I don't think you're going to see a bunch of DLs standing upright at the snap instead of rushing the QB because they have guaranteed contracts. Seems like kind an infantilization of NFL players to assume if they get their money they're just going to get lazy.

Posted: **Thu Sep 06, 2018 3:25 pm**

HaulCitgo wrote: ↑Thu Sep 06, 2018 12:31 pm And tons of guys would pack it in once the writing was on the wall. It would impact the product on the field. No one is taking that ass whooping if the check is guaranteed. Guys would just get cut and be dead money. It would probably reduce player salaries, or at least reduce average terms in the long run. I'm all for the player side on this one but the fans wouldn't win.

Just look at Bobby Bonilla. The Mets gave him a contract paying $1.19 million a year through 2035, and he hit .160 with 4 homeruns. Bum hasn't gotten a hit for the Mets since 1999!

Posted: **Thu Sep 06, 2018 3:32 pm**

Didn't Jay Cutler kinda pack it in, or did he just suck?

Posted: **Fri Sep 07, 2018 12:34 am**

Albert Haynesworth said "fuck it, I got paid." But that was Snyder's money, so that's cool.

Posted: **Fri Sep 07, 2018 12:58 pm**

Black and White Kaepernick parody picture of Cris Collinsworth with line "Now here's a guy..."

Next to Nike logo at the bottom: "Just shut up."

Posted: **Fri Sep 07, 2018 1:07 pm**

There are some great memes out there!

Posted: **Fri Sep 07, 2018 2:36 pm**

HaulCitgo wrote: ↑Thu Sep 06, 2018 12:44 pm

You're just egging me on

If they had guaranteed contracts, guys like Albert Haynesworth never would have tried and it would have been anarchy.

Posted: **Fri Sep 07, 2018 2:39 pm**

Johnnie wrote: ↑Fri Sep 07, 2018 12:34 am Albert Haynesworth said "fuck it, I got paid." But that was Snyder's money, so that's cool.

Damn it.

Chandler Jones got the same money guaranteed before last season that Haynesworth did. And then he lead the league in sacks.

Posted: **Fri Sep 07, 2018 5:23 pm**

Gunpowder wrote: ↑Fri Sep 07, 2018 2:39 pm
Johnnie wrote: ↑Fri Sep 07, 2018 12:34 am Albert Haynesworth said "fuck it, I got paid." But that was Snyder's money, so that's cool.
Damn it.

Chandler Jones got the same money guaranteed before last season that Haynesworth did. And then he lead the league in sacks.

Oh, I was just giving an example. I agree that the one doesn't mean all. I actually agree with you. It's a nonsense proposition to suggest that paying people correctly means they become lazy.

It's the same bullshit argument Republicans make about service industry minimum wage standards. Suddenly you won't get your food and when you do it'll be full of spit and piss? Nah, son. That's not how it works.

Posted: **Fri Sep 07, 2018 6:16 pm**

Come now. NFL football is not a normal job. Has to be the most dangerous job after mercenary. It is the rational decision to bow out once you have as much as you figure to get. Sure plenty will play for a second or third contract but when you get what you know is your last contract, priorities change. Even if they don't quit it's another thing to play with injuries every week like these guys do. You want me to do what on a Thursday night in December?

The Swamp

2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season

Re: 2018 NFL Season