2018-19 NFL Thread.

[Badger]

1 hour ago, unclevlad said:

 

Maybe but completely unrestricted free agency is not, IMO, a good idea for football.  And it's not like the franchise tag is *cheap* for a team, or that they can apply it willy-nilly.

 

Maybe, but it definitely should at least be a case where you can use it only once on a player.  Not into perpetuity.

[unclevlad]

1 hour ago, Old Man said:

Bell's main problem with the tag is that it's a one-year deal with no protection if he gets injured.  Running backs' careers are over by age 30; Bell is 26.  Had he played this year and gotten hurt, Pittsburgh would have cut him, he'd have had to rehab on his own, and would then have been forced to take a one-year minimum deal with another team at the age of 28.  This is what happened to Earl Thomas last month.

 

I get that, but it was part of the conditions of the contract he signed.  Plus, it's not that simple that the Steelers could cut him should he get injured and thereby not pay him at all.  This is one article that tries to cover it, while also expressing a proviso that the league obfuscates stuff like this as best it can:

 

https://www.windycitygridiron.com/2017/8/29/16221826/chicago-bears-nfl-waiver-rules-weird-waived-injured-reserve-released-cut-pre-season-53-man-roster

 

Another site asserted that a 5 year vet's contract for the season becomes fully guaranteed if that player's on the 53 man as of opening day.  That was a 2014 article, tho, and it's possible things changed, as well as being inaccurate to some degree.  But I see enough there to think Bell was trying to have his cake and eat it too...or that his agent's a greedy SOB who manipulates his players in the name of getting the best for them.  You know the type...the one that'll push the kid to sign with him and leave school early because he's sure to be a 1st...mid 2nd round pick at WORST.  Then he's finally picked up in the 5th round...his consensus draft evaluation.

 

That also points out one thing we don't know.  In any contract talks that took place, who was overplaying their hand?  Steeler lowball, or Bell excess?  There's the core dichotomy in football, and particularly with running backs, between the player's desire for security...and the owner's desire to mitigate risk.  I suspect it's also heavily seasoned by restrictions on what can and cannot be written into the contracts, due to team shenanigans and rules circumvention in the past.

[unclevlad]

1 hour ago, Badger said:

 

Maybe, but it definitely should at least be a case where you can use it only once on a player.  Not into perpetuity.

 

Ah, but we're talking exclusive tags, so:

 

--first year is average of the 5 highest salaries at the position, AND it's fully guaranteed for the year.

--second year is 20% raise over the first year.  So if first year was 10M, second tag year is 12.

 

Oh, and check the salaries of backs.  Bell was gonna make 40% more than ANY back in the league.  Plus he was offered 3 years for about $40M...which still would've been much higher than anyone else.  

 

He's now another one I would never want on my team.  Not the kind of direct toxicity of a Terrell Owens, but my gut says still hard to trust.  When's he gonna pull this BS again?  He's clearly playing for himself first, second, and third.  And we know his salary demands are gonna be sky high...but will he be able to deliver, in a new offense?

 

[Old Man]

It's important to remember that Bell was looking for long-term guaranteed money over just dollars, which was his entire problem with the tag.  Sure, the tags pay well for one year, but there is no commitment from the team at all after that.  Bell wants a long term deal as some protection in case he gets hurt.

[Badger]

1 hour ago, unclevlad said:

 

Ah, but we're talking exclusive tags, so:

 

--first year is average of the 5 highest salaries at the position, AND it's fully guaranteed for the year.

--second year is 20% raise over the first year.  So if first year was 10M, second tag year is 12.

 

Oh, and check the salaries of backs.  Bell was gonna make 40% more than ANY back in the league.  Plus he was offered 3 years for about $40M...which still would've been much higher than anyone else.  

 

He's now another one I would never want on my team.  Not the kind of direct toxicity of a Terrell Owens, but my gut says still hard to trust.  When's he gonna pull this BS again?  He's clearly playing for himself first, second, and third.  And we know his salary demands are gonna be sky high...but will he be able to deliver, in a new offense?

 

 

When I mention the franchise tag like I did, I wasn't talking about the money.  At least in theory, there could be something to be said, of a player wanting to leave a incompatible organization/city.  Heck, there was a little talk of Washington thinking about tagging Cousins for a 3rd straight year, if I remember in the spring.

 

Anyway, that is part of why I dislike the franchise tag.

[unclevlad]

I get it, but I'm also fed up with sports greed.  Perhaps you were right before...change it so the exclusive tag can only be used once, then you *have* to go to the non-exclusive.  If the team really is low-balling the player, then let's find out.  Is some other team willing to pony up both the FAT contract and the compensatory picks?

 

And, consider the implications of more players getting more and more guaranteed money, in a salary-cap structure.  Even if the cap itself is arcane.  What you'll see is many more mid-level, experienced players getting dumped to save salary to allow for all those elite contracts.  AND, the fear factor will explode...injuries will now mean large, long-term cap hits.  (If Kirk Cousins gets hurt this year, the Vikes are going to be CRUSHED by that guarantee.)  The gap between a team's top 10-15 players and the bottom 25 will widen;  it has to.

 

So, ok, what Bell's trying to do might be right for Bell;  certainly seen that opinion stated.  But it may be very bad for the game.

[Badger]

Yeah, not a fan of the greed either.  To be honest, I grew up with a frugal impulse, so I cant even imagine being able to spend all that money.  So, I don't know if I was good enough at sports, what I'd do*.  But, I also realize players really got screwed over before free agency (I know baseball's version best, but it probably was similar dirtiness in the other sports)

 

Note: I probably go to Kirk Cousins because of my living location,  I end up having to read a lot about them and the Panthers in the local paper.   Never seemed quite right the way he got treated.    Seemed the coach hated him, the owner hated him, but yet it was easier for them to keep tagging him instead of actually going through the trouble of finding a QB that actually did like.   (and whenever trouble commenced on the team, Cousins made for the perfect scapegoat for them.*)

 

*Also, ironic I had to read in the paper endless articles this summer, how the team was happy now that they finally had a real QB in Alex Smith (who the writers practically made into Joe Montana for a couple months).   

[Badger]

1 hour ago, unclevlad said:

I get it, but I'm also fed up with sports greed.  Perhaps you were right before...change it so the exclusive tag can only be used once, then you *have* to go to the non-exclusive.  If the team really is low-balling the player, then let's find out.  Is some other team willing to pony up both the FAT contract and the compensatory picks?

 

And, consider the implications of more players getting more and more guaranteed money, in a salary-cap structure.  Even if the cap itself is arcane.  What you'll see is many more mid-level, experienced players getting dumped to save salary to allow for all those elite contracts.  AND, the fear factor will explode...injuries will now mean large, long-term cap hits.  (If Kirk Cousins gets hurt this year, the Vikes are going to be CRUSHED by that guarantee.)  The gap between a team's top 10-15 players and the bottom 25 will widen;  it has to.

 

So, ok, what Bell's trying to do might be right for Bell;  certainly seen that opinion stated.  But it may be very bad for the game.

 

Course, I have to admit when it comes to the Steelers, I've kind of enjoyed the drama,  since I really don't care for the lot of them (except when they play the Patriots).  ABout the only player of theirs I like is the OL, Villanueva.  As I tend to have a soft spot for service academy players who make it to the top.

[Pariah]

Just out of curiosity, does anyone know when the current CBA expires? I expect there are going to be a LOT of changes the Player's Union is going to want, this perhaps being one of them.

[Badger]

THe NFL players union doesn't have a history of being good negotiators in comparison to the other sports.

[unclevlad]

Very easy to google "nfl cba."

 

It expires after the 2020 season.  Things have been quiet this year, but have to fear that the players are going to push for a number of things...curbs on Goodell's power, the way the owners tried to quash the anthem protests (whether you like them or not), revenue sharing stuff.  If what Bell is trying to do looks to become a trend, then the franchise tag system could come up for reconsideration.

 

I'm also sure rules changes are going to be a shouting point, but honestly I don't see it being a real stumbling block.  NFLPA should recognize the safety issue.  What would be more amusing is to see if they can eliminate TNF, or quash the money grab of going to 18 games.  I HATE that one.  

NFLPA doesn't have the same leverage as NBA or MLB PAs.  NBA is a star-driven league where 1 player can make a notable difference.  MLB has the longest track record of players asserting their power.  But note that MLB, for example, has no *minimum* spending rules, which means you can have lots of teams making bargain-basement choices.  Rays and A's both have sub-$70M payrolls...or about 1/3 of the Giants and Sox.  One thing the NFLPA has done is fairly heavily flatten total salaries per team much more tightly than MLB or the NBA.  That means there's broader distribution generally.  In football, it's strongly positional, which also relates to the generally perceived value of particular positions:

 

https://sportsaspire.com/average-nfl-salary-by-position

 

Position	Salary (in million)
Quarterback	16 to 16.3
Defensive End	13 to 13.2
Defensive Tackle	9 to 9.7
Running Back	9 to 9.55
Wide receiver	12 to 12.4
Cornerback	11 to 12
Safety	8 to 8.4
Tight End	7 to 7.2
Linebacker	11 to 11.5
Offensive Lineman	11 to 11.7
Punter/Kicker	3 to 3.6

 

Note that QB is notably higher.  And let's discount kickers, as they're fringe at best.  Note that offensive line, linbacker, cornerback, and wide receiver are all quite similar.  Safety and tight end are losing ground in spread offenses, which also suggests there's a glut at those positions simply due to low-ish demand in current offenses.  (As opposed to wideout and CB in particular, where a team needs 4+ of each.)  Defensive tackles are viewed as run-stoppers mostly, and the running game's being downplayed.  That also works for the decline in running back salaries.

[Michael Hopcroft]

If your high school coach suggests you should be a running back, it may be a good idea to take up baseball.

[unclevlad]

Or a punter.  Get paid less but longevity is pretty solid, and you're nowhere near as likely to be all but crippled at 45.

[Badger]

Well, kicker is fringe at best until you realize you have a crappy one. 

[Pariah]

It's interesting that so little attention is paid to place kickers, considering they're likely to be the player that scores the most points for your team. And the player you're most likely to call on to get that last-second win.

[Pariah]

Um, what?

 

Cleveland Browns considering Condoleezza Rice for head coach interview, per report

[Starlord]

Well, would she do worse than Jackson's 3-36-1 record? 

[Brian Stanfield]

32 minutes ago, Pariah said:

Um, what?

 

Cleveland Browns considering Condoleezza Rice for head coach interview, per report

 

As a Chiefs fan, I can attest that John Dorsey doesn’t always make sense. It’s quite possible he may be borderline insane. But it’s undeniable that he does try out different approaches. This would be an odd way around the “Rooney rule” though, even for him. 

[Cygnia]

My husband has a conservative fanboy crush on Rice and he says she's a big football fan, but even he'd prefer someone who has actual coaching experience for the job.

 

Mind you, if Rice took over for Gooddell, on the other hand...

[Pariah]

43 minutes ago, Cygnia said:

Mind you, if Rice took over for Gooddell, on the other hand...

 

I second the nomination.

[unclevlad]

Ouch, speaking of crippled...

 

Poor Alex Smith.  Was off doing some other stuff when it happened, but going, Keenum's in?  Why?  

Saw the hit.  First time, full speed...didn't see it.  Then the closeup when he was on the ground.  And then a tighter shot as it happened.

No, limbs are NOT meant to bend that way, at those points.  

 

EDIT:  just saw report.  Broken tibia AND fibula.  No doctor but I gotta think that makes recovery rather longer.

[unclevlad]

CRIPES.  Stupid Falcons.  How do you give DALLAS 16 points in a quarter?  How do you let them move the ball 50 yards in about 1:20?  The rest was just positioning for the FG attempt...

 

Dan Quinn's job is exceptionally tenuous right now, I suspect.

[Pariah]

55 minutes ago, unclevlad said:

Ouch, speaking of crippled...

 

Poor Alex Smith.  Was off doing some other stuff when it happened, but going, Keenum's in?  Why?  

Saw the hit.  First time, full speed...didn't see it.  Then the closeup when he was on the ground.  And then a tighter shot as it happened.

No, limbs are NOT meant to bend that way, at those points.  

 

At his age, I wouldn't be surprised if that's a career-ending injury.

[unclevlad]

3 hours ago, Pariah said:

 

At his age, I wouldn't be surprised if that's a career-ending injury.

 

The universe is a SICK place if it does.  33 years ago TO THE DAY, Taylor broke Thiesmann's leg.

 

I hate saying this but it easily could too.  Fox postgame, Glaser reported it was emergency surgery to prevent infection.  Yes, well, that says the break ripped through the skin, and that is NEVER good.  And breaks like that, I believe, are more likely to have complications.  Best of luck to him.

[Pariah]

I watched the Broncos beat the Chargers, and I still don't believe it.