The Weird, Wacky and Awesome World of the NFL - General Banter thread V3

MileHighGuy · 20-02-2019 05:09PM

Foxtrol wrote: »

I would like to see an addition that if a player gets a long-term injury while on the tag the tag is automatically rolled forward at the same rate for the next season (if the player wants it). This would equalize some of the risk/reward. Yeah, I doubt the union fights too hard about the tag, at most maybe pushing for minor tweaks.

Agreed, the slice of pie for players is a set % of the league revenue. The franchise tag actually allow for (marginally) more cash to the majority of players by placing an artificial cap on the amount the top players can earn.

Tweaks to the franchise tag might include limiting it to a single season or rolling the third year compensation down to the second year, making it possible but unfeasible for a team to tag a player two years in a row.

They might want to take a look at the 5th year option, which seems so lop-sided in favour of the owners and delays a players chance of hitting FA (or even being tagged)

Foxtrol wrote: »

Like most unions they’ll once again shaft the future rookies to get more money for veterans. The franchise tag can suck for a player, but it is outrageous how long rookie deals last in the league compared to how long an average career is, especially given how low they are paid.

I think the union realised (after the fact) that the rookie payscale actually hit veterans in the long run, whereby teams are now filling their rosters with drafted and undrafted rookies, squeezing out those mid-to-lower tier $ players.

I have to say, I like the idea of the rookie payscale, but it went a bit too far, and teams actively tank now to try and acquire draft capital like never before.

j8wk2feszrnpao · 20-02-2019 05:23PM

MileHighGuy wrote: »

They might want to take a look at the 5th year option, which seems so lop-sided in favour of the owners and delays a players chance of hitting FA (or even being tagged)

I'm ok with the franchise tag. It's a really big pay day. It has risks obviously, but huge rewards as well.
But it's the above that I would like to see changed. The 5th year option really ties players down; and just a guess without checking it out, is probably used a lot more than the franchise tag.

The Reservoir Dubs Anchorman · 20-02-2019 05:26PM

munstermagic11 wrote: »

I'm ok with the franchise tag. It's a really big pay day. It has risks obviously, but huge rewards as well.
But it's the above that I would like to see changed. The 5th year option really ties players down; and just a guess without checking it out, is probably used a lot more than the franchise tag.

The franchise tag is entirely team friendly. The players union should rail against it and the players should really be pushing to have all of the contract guaranteed.

MileHighGuy · 20-02-2019 05:41PM

The Reservoir Dubs Anchorman wrote: »

The franchise tag is entirely team friendly. The players union should rail against it and the players should really be pushing to have all of the contract guaranteed.

Not necessarily, it is friendly to the vast majority of players in the league, as it does not negatively impact them, and provides more of the available cap space throughout the roster.

It is also fan friendly, no leverage for owners would see the best players from every team hop around the league collecting payday after payday. Look at the NBA in this regard. The tag incentivises the player to try and get a deal done with his current team. I agree it's a bit draconian in it's implementation at the moment though, not to mention it seems to antagonise today's players more (or at least we get to see it thanks to social media)

Fully guaranteed contracts will only ever be a luxury for the top players, and even then, it will be at the expense of extra years - Cousins contract is fully guaranteed for 3 years, no team could eat a fully guaranteed $200m 7 year contract and see their QB go down after year 1 with a career ending injury. It would cripple the team competitively for years.

The contracts players sign already contain guaranteed money, that is the figure they are really signing up to, everything else is just accounting for the cap, player/team options or some other window dressing.

The Reservoir Dubs Anchorman · 20-02-2019 06:04PM

MileHighGuy wrote: »

Not necessarily, it is friendly to the vast majority of players in the league, as it does not negatively impact them, and provides more of the available cap space throughout the roster.

It is also fan friendly, no leverage for owners would see the best players from every team hop around the league collecting payday after payday. Look at the NBA in this regard. The tag incentivises the player to try and get a deal done with his current team. I agree it's a bit draconian in it's implementation at the moment though, not to mention it seems to antagonise today's players more (or at least we get to see it thanks to social media)

Fully guaranteed contracts will only ever be a luxury for the top players, and even then, it will be at the expense of extra years - Cousins contract is fully guaranteed for 3 years, no team could eat a fully guaranteed $200m 7 year contract and see their QB go down after year 1 with a career ending injury. It would cripple the team competitively for years.

The contracts players sign already contain guaranteed money, that is the figure they are really signing up to, everything else is just accounting for the cap, player/team options or some other window dressing.

That's not exactly how it works. Team's pay for insurance on players to cover that type of scenario.

The franchise tag gives nothing to the player. Just stating that it doesn't effect the majority of players does not really counter balance an argument that the Franchise tag is only team friendly.

eagle eye · 20-02-2019 06:09PM

The Reservoir Dubs Anchorman wrote:

That's not exactly how it works. Team's pay for insurance on players to cover that type of scenario.

He is talking about the salary cap.

The Reservoir Dubs Anchorman · 20-02-2019 06:12PM

eagle eye wrote: »

He is talking about the salary cap.

Look if anyone had the opportunity to tie up Mahomes for 7 years and 210 million right now they'd be crazy not to , he should have the same protections. Fully guaranteed.

I'm sure they would change salary cp rules if fully guaranteed contracts were across the board. They would have to.

MileHighGuy · 20-02-2019 06:26PM

The Reservoir Dubs Anchorman wrote: »

Look if anyone had the opportunity to tie up Mahomes for 7 years and 210 million right now they'd be crazy not to , he should have the same protections. Fully guaranteed.

I'm sure they would change salary cp rules if fully guaranteed contracts were across the board. They would have to.

I had seen it floated that the first true franchise QB to hit FA in his prime (let's say a Luck for example) might have a team dangle a fully guaranteed contract in front of them, in essence gambling the future of the franchise for a shot at winning now - going "all in" as it were.

Salary cap was introduced in return for Free Agency. You can't have everything.... no salary cap, guaranteed contracts, no franchise tag....it's all a balance that keeps the league fairly competitive (New England Patriots aside

) The cap is calculated as % of revenue......the amount the players receive every year is fixed, so guaranteeing contracts would not lead to players making more money.

If they mandated fully guaranteed contracts, the vast majority of contracts terms would be a single year or some such.

MileHighGuy · 20-02-2019 07:02PM

Seeing as it's the offseason, how about a 60 minute exploration of punting since 2000 filled with charts and statistical analysis.

j8wk2feszrnpao · 20-02-2019 07:35PM

The Reservoir Dubs Anchorman wrote: »

Franchise tag is only team friendly

That's not true. Ask Kirk Cousins. For the Pats, if they used it on Trey Flowers, he'd get close to $18m. It's not typically what players want, but it can work to their advantage as well.

Knex* · 20-02-2019 08:51PM

Colin Cowherd saying today that Wilson wants to move to NY, mainly because of his wife, Ciara. All seems more than a bit spoofy. I can see Wilson wanting to be a 1 Franchise QB.

https://twitter.com/TheHerd/status/1098289179853606912

jack presley · 20-02-2019 09:02PM

Colin Cowherd is a tool.

Billy86 · 20-02-2019 09:19PM

When I read "5 Reasons to Replace Russell Wilson" I've already made my mind up before even beginning the first one. You just don't trade someone like Russell Wilson, my guess is it's a nonsense story in the quiet season.

Fromvert · 20-02-2019 11:04PM

I've only been watching the NFL for a few years so feel free to slate the idea but is there any argument to not have an elite QB on a huge guaranteed contract, even the QB's below elite level have huge contracts, instead you use that money on the rest of the team and go for a rookie QB or a competent veteran that can work in your system?

If the Seahawks were to trade to Wilson, what could they possibly get for him in his final year of his contract?

thomond2006 · 20-02-2019 11:49PM

That's essentially what the Rams are doing. Goff's rookie contract saves them 20m a year and they have been very aggressive in trading and signing free agents.

21-02-2019 12:35AM

There's an argument to be made for it. Seahawks and eagles both won superbowls off it and the rams got to one this year. The lroblem is if you don't draft well and get a good qb on a rookie deal you end up dog****. Also If the qb is a success elsewhere its a bad look. Imagine the grief the charger would get for reading brees if they didn't have rivers

brinty · 21-02-2019 08:58AM

Landon Collins on the way out of new York it looks like
I'm all in on my Cowboys doing everything they can to get him and over Earl Thomas, but he might work or too pricey for us

Paully D · 21-02-2019 09:02AM

Cowherd makes Skip Bayless look like Ian Rapoport.

“Cowherd is hearing things” - yeah, the voices in his head most likely.

Knex* · 21-02-2019 09:13AM

I genuinely don't believe Collins is worth the money he'll be looking for. 10m a year for a player with one good season isn't great.

His last two pro bowls he got in on the back of his reputation from 2016, but he's declined since. Last year he was horribly inconsistent even in his tackling.

j8wk2feszrnpao · 21-02-2019 09:57AM

Paully D wrote: »

Cowherd makes Skip Bayless look like Ian Rapoport.

“Cowherd is hearing things” - yeah, the voices in his head most likely.

It's the off season, they got to have something to keep talking about.

BizzyC · 22-02-2019 07:24AM

Ah, I think Cowherd is ok... he fills a void of background noise with talk about football.
As long as you in no way respect his own opinions on things, it can be interesting to hear his guests talk...

It's like watching Shannon and Bayliss, Skip is a windbag who always tries to be controversial and makes junk predictions, but that provides Shannon a platform to get all worked up and entertain everyone.

These guys are like cartoon characters, they're not journalists

jack presley · 22-02-2019 12:15PM

BizzyC wrote: »

Ah, I think Cowherd is ok... he fills a void of background noise with talk about football.
As long as you in no way respect his own opinions on things, it can be interesting to hear his guests talk...

It's like watching Shannon and Bayliss, Skip is a windbag who always tries to be controversial and makes junk predictions, but that provides Shannon a platform to get all worked up and entertain everyone.

These guys are like cartoon characters, they're not journalists

I haven’t listened to him on Fox but he was a joke on ESPN. He’d say one thing one day then the next day he’d say the opposite. And whichever one was right, he’d say he had it.

He also used to suck up to ‘stars’. He’d go on a rant about something but then half an hour later a guest would come on with the opposing view and he’d agree with them then and totally renage on his original stance.

And one time he had an argument with a caller saying his opinion was more valid than the caller’s because he has fanous people’s numbers in his phone.

And don’t get me started on Sean Taylor.

Oat23 · 22-02-2019 04:53PM

:pac:

https://twitter.com/wpbf_tiffany/status/1098987506417233920

Knex* · 22-02-2019 05:03PM

8 month investigation with 100 people accused. Mental!

Kraft share prices have dropped 27% already.

jack presley · 22-02-2019 05:04PM

Patriots could probably do with the Mueller report getting released about now.

kmart6 · 22-02-2019 05:11PM

Knex. wrote: »

8 month investigation with 100 people accused. Mental!

Kraft share prices have dropped 27% already.

Pretty sure Kraft Heinz is separate and loss of earnings has led to that.

Itssoeasy · 22-02-2019 05:14PM

Wait what ? It's not what you expect to hear in fairness. I know I said in the NFL protest thread about players and coaches staying out of trouble in the off season but I'd have never picked Robert kraft as a name to getting in trouble.

el Fenomeno · 22-02-2019 05:15PM

Knex. wrote: »

Kraft share prices have dropped 27% already.

Kraft Heinz has nothing to do with Robert Kraft. Just a coincidence that they're both in the news.

Itssoeasy · 22-02-2019 05:15PM

kmart6 wrote: »

Pretty sure Kraft Heinz is separate and loss of earnings has led to that.

Okay but he(Robert kraft) is connected to that brand isn't he ? That's always been my understanding anyway.

el Fenomeno · 22-02-2019 05:23PM

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Okay but he(Robert kraft) is connected to that brand isn't he ? That's always been my understanding anyway.

Nope, that name comes from a guy called James L. Kraft who started J.L. Kraft & Bros Co. in the early 1900's and sold cheese. That later became Kraft Foods Inc, which later split to become Mondelez International and Kraft Foods Group. The latter merged with Heinz to become Kraft Heinz.

James L. Kraft, the 1900's cheese-monger, happens to be my Mastermind subject of choice. Either that, or I googled it. Whichever reality you prefer!

The Weird, Wacky and Awesome World of the NFL - General Banter thread V3

Comments