Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

NFL Offseason 2020

Options
12357…10

Comments

  • Options
    #122
    BonnieSituation
    Registered Users Posts: 18,921 ✭✭✭✭BonnieSituation


    The_Honeybadger wrote: »
    I don’t actually think he is the worst fit in Chicago, Foles is streaky but he’s a good option if Trubisky continues to disappoint. If the fourth rounder was going the other way I’d be fine with it.

    TBF to Foles, he didn't get a proper run of it in JAX. So I would give him the benefit.

    He's definitely the sort of guy, like Tannehill seemed to be, that you want waiting in the wings to allow you to have confidence in the other guy, if you know what I mean.

    Plus, he's such a likeable bollóx as well.


  • Options
    #123
    Itssoeasy
    Registered Users Posts: 39,438 ✭✭✭✭Itssoeasy


    If I was a bears fan(I'm not) I'd be happy to get nick foles. He's not streaky either he's just in recent seasons never got a full run and that's not helpful. I mean when given the chance he has proven how good he is. I mean Carson wentz got the eagles most of the way to the super bowl but folks got motoring and he played a huge part in that championship season. Does this mean that Mitch is on borrowed time ?

    I can believe that Brady left NE but I'd never have said tampa bay would be the team he'd go to. The AFC east will be interesting next season for the first time in years. Who's in the frame to go to the pats ?


  • Options
    #124
    The_Honeybadger
    Registered Users Posts: 4,154 ✭✭✭The_Honeybadger


    Itssoeasy wrote: »
    If I was a bears fan(I'm not) I'd be happy to get nick foles. He's not streaky either he's just in recent seasons never got a full run and that's not helpful. I mean when given the chance he has proven how good he is. I mean Carson wentz got the eagles most of the way to the super bowl but folks got motoring and he played a huge part in that championship season. Does this mean that Mitch is on borrowed time ?

    I can believe that Brady left NE but I'd never have said tampa bay would be the team he'd go to. The AFC east will be interesting next season for the first time in years. Who's in the frame to go to the pats ?

    When I said streaky what I mean is that he has been very up and down over his career as a whole, he was absolutely dreadful at times and was talking about retiring at one point before he joined the eagles. You kind of don’t know what you are going to get when you put him out there in the way that you would with a steady eddy like Dalton.


  • Options
    #125
    raze_them_all_
    Registered Users Posts: 6,744 ✭✭✭raze_them_all_


    Chris Godwin and Mike Evans for Brady to throw to? He will love having wrs


  • Options
    #126
    D9Male
    Registered Users Posts: 1,644 ✭✭✭D9Male


    I think the Hopkins trade was weird, and I would definitely opine that the Cardinals look like they got the better side of the transaction.

    That said, there were clearly clashes between the player and coaches. And if there is a good year to be drafting a QB, this is it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #127
    StringerBell
    Registered Users Posts: 14,019 ✭✭✭✭StringerBell


    Have heard that the Bucs are going to take on AB also, just came from word of mouth through a buddy of mine in the states. Haven't checked into it yet, they are not that insane are they? Even if Brady was wanting him he is just too big a risk for an organisation surely?

    "People say ‘go with the flow’ but do you know what goes with the flow? Dead fish."



  • Options
    #128
    The_Honeybadger
    Registered Users Posts: 4,154 ✭✭✭The_Honeybadger


    StringerBell wrote: »
    Have heard that the Bucs are going to take on AB also, just came from word of mouth through a buddy of mine in the states. Haven't checked into it yet, they are not that insane are they? Even if Brady was wanting him he is just too big a risk for an organisation surely?

    Not sure AB is a good idea, too many egos in one WR room and not enough targets to go around. That’s leaving aside the fact the league still have not dealt with whatever suspension he is going to get if he signs somewhere, or the fact that Arians was not overly complimentary of him as a person after their time together with the Steelers.

    That said, if AB was on a short leash with no guaranteed money and understood that Evans is the No. 1 it might work, AB can do everything, I doubt there is anybody better in the slot even though he is known mainly as an outside guy so they could probably work him in, and it would give them plenty of cover in case somebody gets injured.

    Nothing would surprise me at this stage.


  • Options
    #129
    Realt Dearg Sec
    Registered Users Posts: 10,823 ✭✭✭✭Realt Dearg Sec


    Itssoeasy wrote: »
    If I was a bears fan(I'm not) I'd be happy to get nick foles. He's not streaky either he's just in recent seasons never got a full run and that's not helpful. I mean when given the chance he has proven how good he is. I mean Carson wentz got the eagles most of the way to the super bowl but folks got motoring and he played a huge part in that championship season. Does this mean that Mitch is on borrowed time ?

    I can believe that Brady left NE but I'd never have said tampa bay would be the team he'd go to. The AFC east will be interesting next season for the first time in years. Who's in the frame to go to the pats ?
    My problem with the trade isn't foles, he's an ok QB that had worked with most of our coaching staff at one point or other, and he's an improvement on trubisky. The problem is his huge bloated contract, that we actually gave up a pick for. We're not in a good position in terms of cap. It's clearly a "win now" move because longer term it leaves us in a bad position. But I don't think we are good enough to win now.

    But hey, we have Jimmy Graham right? Be grand.


  • Options
    #130
    the baby bull elephant
    Registered Users Posts: 1,328 ✭✭✭the baby bull elephant


    Realt Dearg Sec wrote: »
    My problem with the trade isn't foles, he's an ok QB that had worked with most of our coaching staff at one point or other, and he's an improvement on trubisky. The problem is his huge bloated contract, that we actually gave up a pick for. We're not in a good position in terms of cap. It's clearly a "win now" move because longer term it leaves us in a bad position. But I don't think we are good enough to win now.

    But hey, we have Jimmy Graham right? Be grand.

    Thought I read the Bears would only have 5m dead cap from Foles in any future moves?


  • Options
    #131
    adrian522
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 16,093 Mod ✭✭✭✭adrian522


    If this is right then its not too bad. Jaguars are still on the hook for the signing bonus.

    Cap hit over the next 3 years is $15m, $20m, $20m

    All the guaranteed money is in year one. Seems like they could move on without penalty after 2020 if they need to.

    https://overthecap.com/player/nick-foles/773/


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #132
    D9Male
    Registered Users Posts: 1,644 ✭✭✭D9Male


    That looks like a good move for the Bears, or at least one that justifies the spend of a 4th round pick.


  • Options
    #133
    Realt Dearg Sec
    Registered Users Posts: 10,823 ✭✭✭✭Realt Dearg Sec


    adrian522 wrote: »
    If this is right then its not too bad. Jaguars are still on the hook for the signing bonus.

    Cap hit over the next 3 years is $15m, $20m, $20m

    All the guaranteed money is in year one. Seems like they could move on without penalty after 2020 if they need to.

    https://overthecap.com/player/nick-foles/773/

    I know people always say don't just lookat the number, wait and see the details, but I never learn.

    That is better.

    Also while it's a fourth rounder, it's a compensatory pick, so more like a high fifth.

    Still though, Jimmy Graham. I'm holding on to that part of my rant.


  • Options
    #134
    Foxtrol
    Registered Users Posts: 11,007 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    Realt Dearg Sec wrote: »
    I know people always say don't just lookat the number, wait and see the details, but I never learn.

    That is better.

    Also while it's a fourth rounder, it's a compensatory pick, so more like a high fifth.

    Still though, Jimmy Graham. I'm holding on to that part of my rant.

    Jags were probably going to eventually cut him but his price on the open market would likely have been higher than what they'll pay now, which is important given their cap situation. Though I don't rate him at all, if they believe he is their guy then it was a good trade-off, comp for cap space.

    Graham was terrible though, whatever way you look at it.


  • Options
    #135
    The_Honeybadger
    Registered Users Posts: 4,154 ✭✭✭The_Honeybadger


    Foxtrol wrote: »
    Jags were probably going to eventually cut him but his price on the open market would likely have been higher than what they'll pay now, which is important given their cap situation. Though I don't rate him at all, if they believe he is their guy then it was a good trade-off, comp for cap space.

    Graham was terrible though, whatever way you look at it.

    Would he get more on the open market? Very few starting jobs left up for grabs and nobody is paying him that to be a backup imo. Anyway, intriguing camp battle ahead there, Trubisky will probably get the benefit of the doubt to start the season?


  • Options
    #136
    Foxtrol
    Registered Users Posts: 11,007 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    The_Honeybadger wrote: »
    Would he get more on the open market? Very few starting jobs left up for grabs and nobody is paying him that to be a backup imo. Anyway, intriguing camp battle ahead there, Trubisky will probably get the benefit of the doubt to start the season?

    Fair, it impossible to know for definite. I don't think the situation the Bears are in they could low ball him, even if there is minimal interest. Foles knows he has a chance to be starter there so would want low end starter money. They would need to pay a signing bonus and that would then make a cut later more difficult.

    By letting him get on the open market you're also risking a team like the Patriots coming in for him, where they would likely be much more tempting, even if their offer is a lot less.


  • Options
    #137
    The_Honeybadger
    Registered Users Posts: 4,154 ✭✭✭The_Honeybadger


    Foxtrol wrote: »
    Fair, it impossible to know for definite. I don't think the situation the Bears are in they could low ball him, even if there is minimal interest. Foles knows he has a chance to be starter there so would want low end starter money. They would need to pay a signing bonus and that would then make a cut later more difficult.

    By letting him get on the open market you're also risking a team like the Patriots coming in for him, where they would likely be much more tempting, even if their offer is a lot less.

    Yes, Chicago situation is a bit unique. They are probably not far off a championship roster but they have a cost controlled high first round QB they are not sure about. Bringing in Foles behind him makes sense, where it may not work for others. If he plays well it’ll look like a very good move, time will tell.


  • Options
    #138
    Realt Dearg Sec
    Registered Users Posts: 10,823 ✭✭✭✭Realt Dearg Sec


    The_Honeybadger wrote: »
    Yes, Chicago situation is a bit unique. They are probably not far off a championship roster but they have a cost controlled high first round QB they are not sure about. Bringing in Foles behind him makes sense, where it may not work for others. If he plays well it’ll look like a very good move, time will tell.

    Yeah I'm not convinced Foles is the QB to turn us into a championship team. Not by any means. But I definitely think he's a step up from Trubisky. When you're a score down and Trubisky comes on the field you just have no particular reason to feel like something might happen, a three and out always seems more likely. But put Foles in there and you think, well...maybe?


  • Options
    #139
    The_Honeybadger
    Registered Users Posts: 4,154 ✭✭✭The_Honeybadger


    Realt Dearg Sec wrote: »
    Yeah I'm not convinced Foles is the QB to turn us into a championship team. Not by any means. But I definitely think he's a step up from Trubisky. When you're a score down and Trubisky comes on the field you just have no particular reason to feel like something might happen, a three and out always seems more likely. But put Foles in there and you think, well...maybe?

    Not suggesting for a second that Foles puts the Bears over the top, just that the Bears should be eying the playoffs at a minimum. They clearly don’t trust Trubisky so need a quality backup because there is a very good chance he will see the field for reasons other than injury. Other teams can be a little bit more relaxed about it.

    Do you think Foles will be the starter?


  • Options
    #140
    Realt Dearg Sec
    Registered Users Posts: 10,823 ✭✭✭✭Realt Dearg Sec


    The_Honeybadger wrote: »
    Not suggesting for a second that Foles puts the Bears over the top, just that the Bears should be eying the playoffs at a minimum. They clearly don’t trust Trubisky so need a quality backup because there is a very good chance he will see the field for reasons other than injury. Other teams can be a little bit more relaxed about it.

    Do you think Foles will be the starter?

    I would hope he's the starter, just because I have no faith in Trubisky anymore. I don't know that he will be necessarily. Probably they start with Trubs and if he doesn't produce the goods in the first two weeks he's gone by Week 3. That's probably wiser for the coaches, since it means they have a cause for optimism. If they start Foles at the beginning and he's terrible then bringing in Trubisky at that stage is pretty much admitting you're done.


  • Options
    #141
    The_Honeybadger
    Registered Users Posts: 4,154 ✭✭✭The_Honeybadger


    Todd Gurley released by the Rams. $20m in dead cap, this is actually costing them $3m more vs the cap for the year than if they kept him.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #142
    rebelyell99
    Registered Users Posts: 394 ✭✭rebelyell99


    Sean Payton tests positive for coronavirus ,1st person in the nfl.I hope this season starts on time where likely not gonna have much else between now and September.


  • Options
    #143
    Foxtrol
    Registered Users Posts: 11,007 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    The_Honeybadger wrote: »
    Todd Gurley released by the Rams. $20m in dead cap, this is actually costing them $3m more vs the cap for the year than if they kept him.

    They made such a mess of things there.

    High risk approach with trades and contracts that has now caught up with them. Wouldn't be a huge surprise if they ended up being bottom of the NFC West next season


  • Options
    #144
    BonnieSituation
    Registered Users Posts: 18,921 ✭✭✭✭BonnieSituation


    Foxtrol wrote: »
    They made such a mess of things there.

    High risk approach with trades and contracts that has now caught up with them. Wouldn't be a huge surprise if they ended up being bottom of the NFC West next season

    It very nearly worked!!!

    But yeah, it doesn't look great.


  • Options
    #145
    The_Honeybadger
    Registered Users Posts: 4,154 ✭✭✭The_Honeybadger


    It’s brutal when you look at the details of that unnecessary early extension. He didn’t play a single snap in the new years of his deal.

    https://twitter.com/bradotc/status/1240747635562237955?s=21


  • Options
    #146
    jack presley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,687 ✭✭✭✭jack presley


    Gurley's signing with Atlanta. Wonder how they'll do the physical.


  • Options
    #147
    kmart6
    Registered Users Posts: 15,172 ✭✭✭✭kmart6


    jack presley wrote: »
    Gurley's signing with Atlanta. Wonder how they'll do the physical.
    Same with every physical that is taking place across the league right now, agreed upon independent doctor carries the physical out and results are shared with the team who will then base decisions off that. Imagine a caveat of a team performed physical will be worked in for when the restrictions are removed.


  • Options
    #148
    Foxtrol
    Registered Users Posts: 11,007 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    kmart6 wrote: »
    Same with every physical that is taking place across the league right now, agreed upon independent doctor carries the physical out and results are shared with the team who will then base decisions off that. Imagine a caveat of a team performed physical will be worked in for when the restrictions are removed.

    I don't think teams can put that caveat into the contract. The pre-contract physical is the physical that the independent doctor is doing and the team is on the hook for whatever guarantees etc there are.

    It is likely part of the reason why Clowney and Gorden aren't seeing much of a market.

    The Gurley deal is only for 1 year so it is a minimal risk for the Falcons.


  • Options
    #149
    Knex*
    Registered Users Posts: 22,477 ✭✭✭✭Knex*


    Probably why nobody is trading for Cam either. Physical for him would be massive.


  • Options
    #150
    Foxtrol
    Registered Users Posts: 11,007 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    BonnieSituation wrote: »
    It very nearly worked!!!

    But yeah, it doesn't look great.

    All of their worst decisions actually came after the Super Bowl appearance - paying Goff & Gurley and trading so much for Ramsey.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #151
    kmart6
    Registered Users Posts: 15,172 ✭✭✭✭kmart6


    Foxtrol wrote: »
    I don't think teams can put that caveat into the contract. The pre-contract physical is the physical that the independent doctor is doing and the team is on the hook for whatever guarantees etc there are.

    It is likely part of the reason why Clowney and Gorden aren't seeing much of a market.

    The Gurley deal is only for 1 year so it is a minimal risk for the Falcons.
    Will be the same for teams looking to draft Tua too really then, won't be able to get a proper look at him.


Advertisement