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
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Offseason 2021 - Trades, Free Agency, QB Carousel

1235713

Comments

  • Posts: 0 ✭✭✭✭ Macie Small Loudspeaker


    Shedite27 wrote: »

    Guys like brees (who has been a head of the nflpa) have said that it's bad for the league if guys take paycuts and it affects them come.negotoation time. As far as I'm aware brady just doesn't care about the nflpa (likely because his wife is worth around 400 million dollars)


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,148 ✭✭✭letowski


    Widely rumoured now that the salary cap with by at $182.5m


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,207 ✭✭✭The_Honeybadger


    letowski wrote: »
    Widely rumoured now that the salary cap with by at $182.5m

    Ugh, was hoping they’d work something out to bring it up over $190m at least. My Steelers are going to get absolutely eviscerated.

    How the fook are the Saints re-signing all these guys with the situation they are in, they even tagged Marcus Williams


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,212 ✭✭✭✭ELM327


    The low cap year is going to be interesting. I wouldnt like to be hitting FA at the end of my rookie contract this year.


  • Posts: 0 ✭✭✭✭ Macie Small Loudspeaker


    ELM327 wrote: »
    The low cap year is going to be interesting. I wouldnt like to be hitting FA at the end of my rookie contract this year.

    Equally for a team with a lot of cap this could be ideal


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,212 ✭✭✭✭ELM327


    Agreed.
    Makes the deal for Watt even more outstanding.


    Steelers and Saints are going to be in rebuild mode.


  • Posts: 0 ✭✭✭✭ Macie Small Loudspeaker


    So here's an interest question
    Jags are taking lawrence and have a lot of cap. Are they better off using it to build an offence around their young qb or a defence so he can get more used to winning.

    Secondaraly if it's offence do you build a strong run game for him or a deep passing game or somewhere in between


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,049 ✭✭✭boccy23


    ELM327 wrote: »
    Agreed.
    Makes the deal for Watt even more outstanding.


    Steelers and Saints are going to be in rebuild mode.

    I assume you mean from Watt's side. This will not be the case for the Cardinals. But they are definitely a "kick the can down the road" team where it comes to Cap management. Just look at their Larry Fitzgerald contract management over the years.

    There is a growing 2 tier philosophy of this or keeping all flat contracts and not having dead money coming back to bite a team. I see a conversation in Giants circles at the moment over Dave Gettleman's commenting on this. He was referencing, not directly, the Eagles situation.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,207 ✭✭✭The_Honeybadger


    So here's an interest question
    Jags are taking lawrence and have a lot of cap. Are they better off using it to build an offence around their young qb or a defence so he can get more used to winning.

    Secondaraly if it's offence do you build a strong run game for him or a deep passing game or somewhere in between

    They already have some good receivers in Chark and Shenault, and Robinson at RB. They’ve drafted DLine heavily in recent years so presumably it’s secondary and OLine that will be their focus in the rest of the draft and FA

    They could be very good in a year or two if they manage this opportunity well.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,638 ✭✭✭phatkev


    So here's an interest question
    Jags are taking lawrence and have a lot of cap. Are they better off using it to build an offence around their young qb or a defence so he can get more used to winning.

    Secondaraly if it's offence do you build a strong run game for him or a deep passing game or somewhere in between

    After seeing this situation play out so many times for the Jets, I'm surrounding a rookie QB with as much offensive pieces as I can, starting with the oline. You can have all the talent you want on defense, but if your young QB is getting bashed at every opportunity he's never going to progress


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,212 ✭✭✭✭ELM327


    If you have a good defense and a good running game - incl o line and RB - then the QB should be fine.
    Look at Brady's original early years, and the case of HOF QBs on the decline, eg Manning, Elway etc. In their last SB run they were off a cliff but had a great D and a running game.

    Anyone making it to the NFL at QB has some level of special talent so should thrive in that scenario. How QBs get burned is throwing them in behind a crap line with no running game and no defense.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,156 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    eagle eye wrote: »
    You've said basically nothing in all that post. You still haven't explained what type of QB the game has moved away from
    Now you throw in bad pocket presence and footwork it seems.

    Football is evolving away from non-elite pocket passers with no mobility to scramble or move outside of the pocket. Athleticism and mobility have been my point since your comparison between Herbert and Trask.
    Trask is good in the pocket. He's an intelligent QB who's very accurate in the short and medium range. He has an arm too, there's just question marks over his accuracy on deep balls. Based on what I've seen from him he can make it in the NFL.

    Trask's tape is littered with poor decisions, he has limited to no mobility, his arm is weak for an NFL starting QB - he has great highlight type touches in the short and medium range but limited velocity and even throws outside of the numbers become floaters, forget about stretching the field. His strengths simply aren't elite enough to overcome his obvious weaknesses.
    And this thing about being out in the right system applies to pretty much every QB. If you put a running QB into a team that can't run block he's in big trouble. If you put a pocket passer into a team that can't pass block he's in trouble. And that's not even considering the weapons available.

    You're the one that is advocating for a non-elite QB with very poor mobility, not me. I'd similarly push back if someone was claiming a non-elite running QB with very poor throwing was being hyped by someone as being comparable with Herbert.

    You've claimed the game hasn't evolved but twice you've been unable to provide a list of recent successful draft picks that fit Trasks traits (a weak NFL arm and no mobility). How many of these recent picks who became starters fit those traits - Mahomes, Watson, Allen, Murray, Herbert? Even those that are seen as average to good starters have stronger arms and/or much more mobility than Trask - Jones, Hurts, Lock, Jackson. The guys that fit Trasks profile have been failures or backups that are expected in later round QBs.

    Look, I've agreed Trask can make it in the NFL - what I disagree strongly with is your claim that 'there isn't much between' Trask and Herbert - the 6th pick last year who then went on to win rookie of the year. What I can say is that I hope he stays far away from the 49ers unless they want to throw a dart in the 4th round, we already have a QB with limited mobility who's arm strength means the throws he can make are limited.

    We're going around in circles so we might as well leave it there - we'll see if Trask bucks the trend and ends entering the league to be rookie of the year, like your comparison, or take the career path of Haskins or White.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,156 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    Shedite27 wrote: »
    Enjoy the Pro bowls Dak

    Well Dak averaged $1m a year for his rookie deal and the Cowboys weren't winning any Super Bowls. The guy deserved to get paid and would have been a lot cheaper if the Jones family didn't drag it out


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,156 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    Equally for a team with a lot of cap this could be ideal

    I'm not sure if that is necessarily how it'll play out.

    Sure, some players will take a discounted deal for long term security but I'd expect most upper tier talent will accept short term deals so they won't miss out on big paydays when the cap likely explodes, with fans back and the new TV deals. For short term deals most players will likely want to go to contenders to look their best and very few of them are those teams with big cap space.

    Even for longer deals, most teams can offer similar sort of deals to the high cap teams - just backloaded contracts with guarantees.

    Where the high cap teams can likely clean up is in the mid-lower talent levels, they be squeezed hard but few of those type of players will suddenly turn a team into contenders.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,073 ✭✭✭Blut2


    Foxtrol wrote: »
    Sure, some players will take a discounted deal for long term security but I'd expect most upper tier talent will accept short term deals so they won't miss out on big paydays when the cap likely explodes, with fans back and the new TV deals. For short term deals most players will likely want to go to contenders to look their best and very few of them are those teams with big cap space.
    I think for any top tier player under 28 hitting FA there will be a lot of attraction to taking a 1 or 2 year deal, at a relatively discounted rate, at a potential title contender. Chiefs/Bills/Packers/Bucs/Rams/Ravens/Browns should all be very attractive for this. Not that most of them have much cap space, mind you..

    After 1/2 years, and potentially winning a ring, those players can then hit the market again and get a longer term deal when the salary cap has gone back well over $200mn. It'll probably work out the same financially as inking a long term, but lower value deal this year.
    Think copper and Zeke have no garintees past this year though right? I'd wager cooper gone and a major restructure for both at the very least

    Both Amari and Zeke's 2022 salaries are fully guaranteed on March 21st of this month if they're still with the team. So the earliest they can cut either is 2023 realistically.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 38,930 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    Foxtrol wrote:
    You've claimed the game hasn't evolved but twice you've been unable to provide a list of recent successful draft picks that fit Trasks traits (a weak NFL arm and no mobility). How many of these recent picks who became starters fit those traits - Mahomes, Watson, Allen, Murray, Herbert? Even those that are seen as average to good starters have stronger arms and/or much more mobility than Trask - Jones, Hurts, Lock, Jackson. The guys that fit Trasks profile have been failures or backups that are expected in later round QBs.

    Why would I need to pick out recent draft picks. I'll just go to the top table.
    Last five years, Tom Brady has won three Superbowls, Nick Foles has one and Patrick Mahomes. That's one mobile QB winning a Superbowl in the last five years.
    What about their opponents, well Tom Brady, Jimmy Garappolo, Jared Goff, Matt Ryan and Patrick Mahomes have one loss apiece. Again that's one mobile QB and the same one who has a win that have been in Superbowls in the last five years.

    As for Trask, you are giving your opinion on him which I disagree with. We'll see in time and it favours you as less make it than succeed.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,156 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    Comp picks have been announced. Looks like all of the media got the minority candidate hire rules incorrect, for example 49ers have 2 3rd round comp picks this year rather than what was reported previously (they said they'd have a 3rd round pick for 3 years in a row).

    Will definitely impact how teams approach FA.

    https://twitter.com/TomPelissero/status/1369734213205979138?s=20


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,156 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    eagle eye wrote: »
    Why would I need to pick out recent draft picks. I'll just go to the top table.
    Last five years, Tom Brady has won three Superbowls, Nick Foles has one and Patrick Mahomes. That's one mobile QB winning a Superbowl in the last five years.
    What about their opponents, well Tom Brady, Jimmy Garappolo, Jared Goff, Matt Ryan and Patrick Mahomes have one loss apiece. Again that's one mobile QB and the same one who has a win that have been in Superbowls in the last five years.

    As for Trask, you are giving your opinion on him which I disagree with. We'll see in time and it favours you as less make it than succeed.

    It looks like you're falling into that 'QB wins' trap again - giving way too much credit for team victories on the QB.

    Even taking QB wins as being valid, I'm not sure how that list specifically counters my point. I never said you can't win with a pure pocket passer, I said the game is evolving away from them aside from the very elite ones. All but one on the list I'd call either elite, has mobility, or the team is open to or has already moved away from (I might be generous in even giving you 1).

    Brady - elite in many areas outside of mobility and Patriots decided not to pay him
    Foles - moved twice and has rotated between backup and a poor starter
    Mahomes - mobile and elite in many other areas
    Jimmy - his lack of mobility and arm strength arguably cost the team the Super Bowl and the team has been looking for an upgrade the last 2 off-seasons
    Goff - team gave away picks to trade him away (actually pretty mobile)
    Ryan - probably the closest to the point you're trying to make but he's had 3 losing seasons where his limitations have showed (his team will potentially pick his successor in the draft despite the cap implications)

    Looking at recent drafts is much better at showing how the QB position is evolving - if it wasn't you'd still see the same number of non-mobile, non-elite pocket passing QBs being drafted and becoming starters as we did in the past.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,212 ✭✭✭✭ELM327


    QB is an interesting spot and there's no denying the game is evolving. Ignoring Mahomes who - running for his life in the SB aside - is actually a top level passer and mobile QB.
    You have Brady who's a top tier non mobile QB and you have Lamar Jackson on the other side, top tier of what he does, an RB who throws occasionally. Which one of those is winning the big game?

    Foles - a mediocre passer and not very mobile, has more SBs than Lamar. And the same amount as Mahomes.

    You can win your division and win a few games in the post season but you're not winning a ring unless you have a good to great pocket passer back there.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,156 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    ELM327 wrote: »
    QB is an interesting spot and there's no denying the game is evolving. Ignoring Mahomes who - running for his life in the SB aside - is actually a top level passer and mobile QB.
    You have Brady who's a top tier non mobile QB and you have Lamar Jackson on the other side, top tier of what he does, an RB who throws occasionally. Which one of those is winning the big game?

    Foles - a mediocre passer and not very mobile, has more SBs than Lamar. And the same amount as Mahomes.

    You can win your division and win a few games in the post season but you're not winning a ring unless you have a good to great pocket passer back there.

    Aside from hyping Foles due to the SB win, I agree with all of that. I'm not saying mobility is more important than passing - it is clearly a passing league.

    Teams have however embraced how much mobility can mask other issues within the team and they are drafting that way.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 11,156 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    Foxtrol wrote: »
    Comp picks have been announced. Looks like all of the media got the minority candidate hire rules incorrect, for example 49ers have 2 3rd round comp picks this year rather than what was reported previously (they said they'd have a 3rd round pick for 3 years in a row).

    Will definitely impact how teams approach FA.

    https://twitter.com/TomPelissero/status/1369734213205979138?s=20

    So apparently it was the NFL that didn't know the rules and accidentally awarded an extra pick to 49ers and have now taken it back...


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,156 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    Carnage to get below the cap continues - Chiefs cut both of their tackles.

    Harsh on them coming off injuries but just another example of the NFL being a business. Chiefs now have 2 huge holes, plus backups to fill, and are still just over the cap.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,898 ✭✭✭✭Xavi6


    Schwartz AND Fisher on the same day, carnage :(


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,123 ✭✭✭cosatron


    Foxtrol wrote: »
    Carnage to get below the cap continues - Chiefs cut both of their tackles.

    Harsh on them coming off injuries but just another example of the NFL being a business. Chiefs now have 2 huge holes, plus backups to fill, and are still just over the cap.

    there is some very good o-lineman available now, whatever team has cap space and doesn't make a decent fist of up grading their roster, someone needs to be sacked.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,426 ✭✭✭Shedite27


    Xavi6 wrote: »
    Schwartz AND Fisher on the same day, carnage :(
    Sure they were grand without them in the Superbowl


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,898 ✭✭✭✭Xavi6


    Schwartz AND Fisher on the same day, carnage :(


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,323 ✭✭✭el Fenomeno


    I've a feeling Fisher will be back on a new, more cap-friendly deal with the Chiefs


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,156 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    I've a feeling Fisher will be back on a new, more cap-friendly deal with the Chiefs

    If he was so interested in coming back he could have just restructured his current deal.

    He might return but I know I wouldn't be hyped to return to a team if I was performing at a high level for them over an extended period and they then cut me when I was injured.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,207 ✭✭✭The_Honeybadger


    Offensive linemen in particular seem to be getting hit hard with these cuts. That is brutal from the chiefs today

    It’s supposedly a deep offensive line draft class, there will be some run on them by the looks of it


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,644 ✭✭✭D9Male


    Makes Jags move on Robinson all the more puzzling.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,337 ✭✭✭✭Itssoeasy


    Foxtrol wrote: »
    Carnage to get below the cap continues - Chiefs cut both of their tackles.

    Harsh on them coming off injuries but just another example of the NFL being a business. Chiefs now have 2 huge holes, plus backups to fill, and are still just over the cap.

    An ESPN reporter had a report about this week and included a quote from a team GM or front office person(I can’t remember which) and they were saying it was going to be “a massacre” and that was when the cap was projected to be higher than it turned out to be. A lot of good players will fall between two stools this week because of the numbers.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,148 ✭✭✭letowski


    It’s a pretty good draft for Tackles but it’s surprising that both starters were cut.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,148 ✭✭✭letowski


    Rumours online the Schwartz will retire due to the back surgery he had.

    Fisher has that achilles of course.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,323 ✭✭✭el Fenomeno


    Foxtrol wrote: »
    If he was so interested in coming back he could have just restructured his current deal.

    He might return but I know I wouldn't be hyped to return to a team if I was performing at a high level for them over an extended period and they then cut me when I was injured.

    I was thinking more along the lines of the Chiefs wanted him to restructure because of the injury, he didn't want to so they cut him. He might get a rude awakening in FA and I don't think interest will be huge given its an achilles, so he might end up resigning with the Chiefs.

    Of course, I could be wrong. It's been known to happen.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,644 ✭✭✭D9Male


    Newton returning to Foxboro for another year.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,156 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    I was thinking more along the lines of the Chiefs wanted him to restructure because of the injury, he didn't want to so they cut him. He might get a rude awakening in FA and I don't think interest will be huge given its an achilles, so he might end up resigning with the Chiefs.

    Of course, I could be wrong. It's been known to happen.

    I get that but personally I wouldn't be happy going back to people who treated me that way.

    Even if he doesn't have a big market initially, he could sit out and recuperate - some team is bound to lose a tackle through injury during camp or early in the year and give him a better deal. They should be able to bring in players for medicals as the summer goes along.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,148 ✭✭✭letowski


    Clever way to reduce the cap hit. It's essentially a 1-year extension, but the cap hit is spread out over 4 years. It saves $19m, so they'll probably be able to keep Shaq Barrett too.

    https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/1370393521987936257


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,156 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    letowski wrote: »
    Clever way to reduce the cap hit. It's essentially a 1-year extension, but the cap hit is spread out over 4 years. It saves $19m, so they'll probably be able to keep Shaq Barrett too.

    https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/1370393521987936257

    Think that is basically the norm at this point for aging QBs when teams are trying to squeeze out the last bit of their window. Patriots did it for the last few years of Brady, Steelers have several voidable years for Ben, and Brees has a few also.

    Very smart but it is like buying things on your credit card, eventually all those void year hit - Patriots found that out last year and Saints will see it this year. It Tampa can be successful again it is obviously worth it.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,363 ✭✭✭✭Oat23




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,337 ✭✭✭✭Itssoeasy


    Drew brees has announced his retirement from the NFL after 20 seasons and 15 with the New Orleans saints.

    He and his family should plan to be in Ohio in five years time.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,073 ✭✭✭Blut2


    Aaron Jones just signed a 4 year, $48 million contract extension for the Packers. Hes a great player, and thats definitely better value than Zeke or some of the other top tier RBs getting $15m/year, but paying a RB that much still seems a bit of a waste given how easy it is to find cheap replacements these days, and given how injury prone they are. Especially given the cap this and next year.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,765 ✭✭✭Mr. Guappa


    Blut2 wrote: »
    Aaron Jones just signed a 4 year, $48 million contract extension for the Packers. Hes a great player, and thats definitely better value than Zeke or some of the other top tier RBs getting $15m/year, but paying a RB that much still seems a bit of a waste given how easy it is to find cheap replacements these days, and given how injury prone they are. Especially given the cap this and next year.

    It's probably a lot less than that in reality, the initial agent announcement usually paints the rosiest picture possible. It does make the AJ Dillon pick last year even more bizarre.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,156 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    Mr. Guappa wrote: »
    It's probably a lot less than that in reality, the initial agent announcement usually paints the rosiest picture possible. It does make the AJ Dillon pick last year even more bizarre.

    It is like they nearly trying to go out of their way to make those picks that looked bad at the time look even worse. You wouldn't want your GM to make their decisions based on sunk costs but it looks terrible.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,073 ✭✭✭Blut2


    Mr. Guappa wrote: »
    It's probably a lot less than that in reality, the initial agent announcement usually paints the rosiest picture possible. It does make the AJ Dillon pick last year even more bizarre.

    The Dillon pick actually makes some sense - Jamaal Williams is out of contract now and unlikely to return in 2021. Dillon is far closer to a direct replacement (and ideally upgrade) for him than Jones, in terms of being a big bruising RB. And having two good RBs, ideally of contrasting styles, is pretty much a requirement these days.

    The moving up to take Jordan Love pick though...thats the really questionable one from last year.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,156 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    Blut2 wrote: »
    The Dillon pick actually makes some sense - Jamaal Williams is out of contract now and unlikely to return in 2021. Dillon is far closer to a direct replacement (and ideally upgrade) for him than Jones, in terms of being a big bruising RB. And having two good RBs, ideally of contrasting styles, is pretty much a requirement these days.

    The moving up to take Jordan Love pick though...thats the really questionable one from last year.

    I get your overall point about RB room but the way they went about it seems incredibly poor.

    You don't need to pick a complementary RB in the 2nd round, as they can be found throughout the draft and even undrafted, and you certainly dont need to pick one a year before you have the need, as you lose a year of them being cheap.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,073 ✭✭✭Blut2


    Foxtrol wrote: »
    I get your overall point about RB room but the way they went about it seems incredibly poor.

    You don't need to pick a complementary RB in the 2nd round, as they can be found throughout the draft and even undrafted, and you certainly dont need to pick one a year before you have the need, as you lose a year of them being cheap.

    I think the Packers management would argue they saw him as potentially as good as Derrick Henry, so in theory providing them with two top tier RBs this year now. And that he could very easily have gotten more use last year if either of Williams or Jones had been out for long with injuries, which didn't happen but would have had reasonably high odds given how injury prone RBs are.

    And to be fair drafting a new RB you're very high on also makes a reasonable amount of tactical sense when both your RB1 and RB2 are in the final year of their contracts. There was no guarantee either or both of them were coming back for 2021.

    Though eh...yeah, it probably wasn't the best draft move tactically. But it made more sense than Jordan Love at least. We'll see how it turns out.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,234 ✭✭✭VillaMad


    First deal already today with Guard Kevin Zeitler returning to the AFC North and joining the Ravens.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,148 ✭✭✭letowski


    The rumours start flying today.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,156 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    Even before any spending unofficially starting today, some teams were still underwater from a cap perspective (some team might have changed slightly since this post).

    Rams appear like they're going to wait until the last minute to cut guys in the hopes that teams will have spent money early, giving them a better chance of getting guys back on a cheap deal. Again, a move that I can't see players being happy about.

    I'm sure restructuring deals could help but I'd be surprised if they could get that much down

    https://twitter.com/JeffRatcliffe/status/1371255963215347713?s=20


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,073 ✭✭✭Blut2


    Weren't the Saints approx $80mn over the cap to begin with? They've done some very creative accounting there.

    If the cap doesn't jump up a massive amount over the next few seasons thats surely going to hurt them quite a bit.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement