#71
|
|||
|
|||
There is no way I would take Hunt over Bell. Bell is a man that wants money. Hunt is a punk that beats up women. Having said that Ballard has a track record of giving guys second chances if he thinks they have turned a corner. I may end up having to root for the punk.
|
#72
|
|||
|
|||
I'd need more than 30 seconds
Not because I'm so great It would just take longer than that for me to prepare her for the disappointment |
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to southside asshole For This Useful Post: | ||
Oldcolt (12-14-2018), Pez (12-14-2018), Racehorse (12-14-2018), smitty46953 (12-15-2018), VeveJones007 (12-14-2018) |
#73
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
You can't guarantee that. I guarantee Bell would have been tagged a third year if his production was consistent and their Superbowl window remained open. My statement has just as much relevancy and maybe more since mine has a pattern of behavior to back it up. Two years is a long time for a player that is not a QB. QB's can wait for that escalation to force a front office's hand. A non-QB player may have missed his second contract window, or have the time shorten his next contract. Quote:
I don't think it is a new trend to have a dual-threat RB. Dual-threat RB's have been around awhile, just lately more have come out of the draft. There has been a lack of talent at the position and the position was devalued in recent years by the committee approach. That led to lower contracts, money allocated to multiple RB's instead of one elite back. There has been a reemergence of good dual-threat RB's in recent years. They have also achieved more relevance in schemes. This has been reflected in the stats of these players and RB's being picked high in the draft again. Hence the market will adjust and pay these backs more money. Gurley's contract is the start of that and the difference between his contract and Freeman's illustrates the value placed on elite backs. Elliot will be next and he will start at 15 million using Gurley's contract as a base. However, the league is not filled with them, just like elite QB's, there are the elite backs and the average backs. Quote:
That's fine, I think it irrelevant to the discussion. Quote:
Yes, the next escalation will be expensive. Bell could make 25 million with another one year tender. The team will have to decide if it is worth it to them. If you thought you could win another Superbowl would you pay that 25 million? It is difficult to measure how much a Superbowl win gains a franchise, but I would think it is more than 25 million. I think you would make that back if you won. It also depends on if the team can afford it, the Colts could as they are currently constructed. So no, I don't think it is out of the realm of possibility if the money and opportunity is there. |
#74
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#75
|
|||
|
|||
Looks like Kelly will play but T.Y.'s status will be decided tomorrow. Hopefully he can go, we need him.
|
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to chicagocolt For This Useful Post: | ||
#76
|
||||
|
||||
Wow, these posts are getting long. I'll limit my response to those points that are more substantial, rather than disputes over wording or the content of prior posts:
Quote:
As far as guarantees are concerned, I was trying to state a practical reality. Yes, of course it's technically possible that some rogue team could tag a non-QB like Bell for three years in a row, but I think it's pretty far-fetched. And I think that player would be delighted, given that they'd now be paid on par with the top five QBs in the game. Here's a list of the top cap hits in 2018 per Spotrac: https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/rankings/ Notice anything about the top of that list? It's all QBs. The top 14 are all QBs. And consider that several other top QBs can't even be on this list because they're still on their rookie contacts. Incidentally, the top RB in this chart (which includes Gurley, by the way) is LeSean McCoy at just under $9 million - and isn't he one of those all-purpose backs that was doing the kind of things Bell does long before Bell came in the league? The bottom line is that I simply don't think it's reasonable to think that anybody is going to pay top-five QB money to a RB or any other non-QB - particularly on a one-year fully guaranteed contract - and that's exactly what they'd have to do under the CBA if they tagged a non-QB for a third year. It hasn't happened yet, and I don't think it ever will. And before you complain that I used a "cap hit" chart instead of a "salary" chart, the truth is that I couldn't find a dependable salary chart since salaries are so fluid in the NFL - influenced by signing bonuses, non-guaranteed amounts, playing incentives, etc. - so this was the best I can find on short notice. Quote:
Quote:
As far as your current post, your making a lot of assumptions and are getting fairly deep into a scenario that I'm not sure is true. Because Bell thinks he's entitled to more than Gurley means that a $14.5 million tag is unfair? Setting this aside, and at this risk of going even deeper, I'll just say this: it's a zero sum game. If you're now going to say that the cap figures for RBs are too low because they don't account for a gathering RB storm on the horizon, then the counterweight to that position is that another position is overpaid and the cap figure for that position is too high. What position is this? You're going to have to rob Peter to pay Paul. In any event, as I said, the system certainly allows for some temporary (1-2 year) inefficiencies, but even during those periods the tagged player is going to be paid under a fully guaranteed contract at a level near the top of his position. And, again, this is what Bell agreed to under the collective bargaining agreement. Quote:
Last edited by Chaka; 12-15-2018 at 05:31 AM. |
#77
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
Quote:
You know the reason Bell did not sign the tender for the reason you stated is because he didn't sign the tender? huh That is like me seeing someone get on the freeway and I say: "Oh that guy must be going to see the doctor." My wife asks, "How do you know he is going to see the doctor, all he did was get on the freeway?" I reply, "Because he got on the freeway!" ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Quote:
Cool link! So QB's are the highest paid players in the NFL. Wait, what does that have to do with anything? Everyone knows QB's are the highest paid players. This is a cap hit chart, it doesn't prove your point. Team's spread contracts around so they can pay more money some years and less money other years. I know you know this. That is why Gurley is below McCoy there. A better way to look at is just to take the amount of their contract and divide it by the number of years. It doesn't need every penny laid out. I believe LeSean McCoy makes around 8 million a year, that is a very reasonable number for his services, but of course, he is older, this was made in 2015, and he has a ton of wear and tear. Now the question is he better than say Gurley and Bell? I will say no. The question for you is will Bell and Elliot sign contracts that pay them more in line with McCoy's salary or Gurley's salary? One other thing to point out the top 7 RB's of 2015 according to SI: Marshawn Lynch Bell Demarco Murray Eddie Lacy Jeremy Hill Jamaal Charles Arian Foster Only one dual threat on that list, and only one that is still relevant today. McCoy isn't even in the top ten on that list. Top 7 RB's today (subjective, but I think it is fair): Todd Gurley Le'Veon Bell Ezekiel Elliott Saquon Barkley Alvin Kamara David Johnson Kareem Hunt Very different style of runners in the second list. To date, running backs are on a pace to shatter the league records in a season for both receptions and touchdown catches. They have caught 77.5 percent of their targeted passes, a rate 12 percentage points higher than receivers and tight ends, and higher than in any full season since at least 2001. -http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/25459151/nfl-2018-offensive-scoring-explosion-numbers See if I was a douche canoe, I would just up that link of yours two years to the 2020 season where David Johnson is making 14.2 million and Gurley is making 17.2 to illustrate a point. But I'm not a douche canoe. Just a prick. Use the average. [QUOTE=Chaka;98038]The bottom line is that I simply don't think it's reasonable to think that anybody is going to pay top-five QB money to a RB or any other non-QB - particularly on a one-year fully guaranteed contract - and that's exactly what they'd have to do under the CBA if they tagged a non-QB for a third year. It hasn't happened yet, and I don't think it ever will. This is the problem, it doesn't matter whether you or I think it is reasonable or not. It only matters what will happen. As I stated above, if the need is great enough, someone will. Quote:
Quote:
As for elite dual-threat RB's not getting paid. Whelp, Gurley just signed a 4 year 57 million deal, with 45 guaranteed and averaged over 14 a year. I wonder what Ezikiel Elliot and Bell will get paid? Kamara? Hunt? McCaffrey? I think it is already being proven. And since you have pretty much no evidence to prove otherwise besides your opinion. I would say this point is closed. YDFL Commish is right, this idea has been around for quite a while. You do not need an elite RB to win a Superbowl. Guess what you also don't need; an elite QB, an elite WR, an elite TE, an elite defense to win a Superbowl. But you do need some form of them combined to win. Do you think the Rams needed Faulk, or the Cowboys needed Smith? This is what you need, a defense that is above average at least. You need offensive weapons that can create mismatches. That can be WR's, TE's, or even running backs. And it really helps if you have a franchise QB. If you don't have a franchise QB your other areas need to be near perfect. But YDFL's statement really has little to do with this argument. Quote:
Quote:
Why are you introducing yet another strawman argument into this? I never said another position is getting overpaid and never made a leap of logic that ridiculous. The cap is not an either/or situation. First of all, for this to even be an issue, each team would have to be spending the max at the cap. That would mean everyone is getting money from the exact same amount. Then, there would have to be a position group that was underperforming as a whole but getting overpaid as a whole. This isn't the case. If elite dual-threat RB's are taking money from somewhere, maybe a team feels it doesn't need a great 2nd receiver or great TE. There is only one football to go around. But for what you suggested, no. However, there will occasionally be players that supersede the play of their position group. It's these guys that will be hurt by the averages at their position, coincidentally, they are also the likely players to attract the franchise tender. And technically I didn't say RB's are underpaid, just that Bell's tender is substantially under what he is asking for. That should not be the case. NFL average and above average running backs are getting about what they deserve. But young dual-threat running backs are coming off their rookie contracts and are going to make more money because they are more important to their offense. Quote:
Quote:
The tag may be used on QB's but it rarely is. It's all the other players that have to deal with it the majority of the time. The odds are that it will be some lower paid position because that is like 95% of the guys it is used on. And since it is a lower cap hit, it will be an easier pill for that team to swallow. It will likely be an extraordinary player that supersedes his position group. That is why I think it needs some fine-tuning. To illustrate this, below is the list of guys tagged the last five years. I think I counted 6 QB's total the last 11 years. 2018 Franchise-tagged players[15] Chicago Bears – Kyle Fuller, CB (Transition): Signed 4-year contract for $56 million Dallas Cowboys – DeMarcus Lawrence, DE (Non-Exclusive) Detroit Lions – Ezekiel Ansah, DE (Non-Exclusive) Los Angeles Rams – Lamarcus Joyner, CB (Non-Exclusive) Miami Dolphins – Jarvis Landry, WR (Non-Exclusive): Signed 5-year contract for $75.5 million 2017 Franchise-tagged players[16] Arizona Cardinals – Chandler Jones, LB (Non-Exclusive) Carolina Panthers – Kawann Short, DT (Non-Exclusive): Signed 5-year contract for $80.5 million Los Angeles Rams – Trumaine Johnson, CB (Non-Exclusive) Pittsburgh Steelers – Le'Veon Bell, RB (Exclusive) Washington Redskins – Kirk Cousins, QB (Exclusive) 2016 Franchise-tagged players [17] Baltimore Ravens – Justin Tucker, K (Non-Exclusive): signed 4-year contract for $16.8 million Buffalo Bills – Cordy Glenn, OT (Non-Exclusive): signed 5-year contract for $65 million Carolina Panthers – Josh Norman, CB (Rescinded April 20, 2016) Chicago Bears – Alshon Jeffery, WR (Non-Exclusive) Denver Broncos – Von Miller, OLB (Exclusive): signed 6-year contract for $114.5 million Kansas City Chiefs – Eric Berry, S (Non-Exclusive) Los Angeles Rams – Trumaine Johnson, CB (Non-Exclusive) New York Jets – Muhammad Wilkerson, DE (Non-Exclusive): signed 5-year contract for $86 million Washington Redskins – Kirk Cousins, QB (Non-Exclusive) 2015 Franchise-tagged players [18] Dallas Cowboys – Dez Bryant, WR: signed 5-year contract for $70,000,000 Denver Broncos – Demaryius Thomas, WR (Non-Exclusive) Kansas City Chiefs – Justin Houston, LB (Non-Exclusive) Miami Dolphins – Charles Clay, TE (Transition) New England Patriots – Stephen Gostkowski, K (Non-Exclusive) New York Giants – Jason Pierre-Paul, DE (Non-Exclusive). 2014 Franchise-tagged players Carolina Panthers – Greg Hardy DE[19] Cleveland Browns – Alex Mack C (Transition)[20] New Orleans Saints – Jimmy Graham TE (Non-Exclusive)[20] New York Jets – Nick Folk K (Non-Exclusive)[21] Pittsburgh Steelers – Jason Worilds DE (Transition)[20] Washington Redskins – Brian Orakpo OLB (Non-Exclusive)[22] 2013 Franchise-tagged players [23][24] Buffalo Bills – Jairus Byrd S (Non-Exclusive) Chicago Bears – Henry Melton DT Cincinnati Bengals – Michael Johnson DE Dallas Cowboys – Anthony Spencer LB Denver Broncos – Ryan Clady OT Indianapolis Colts – Pat McAfee P Kansas City Chiefs – Brandon Albert OT (Non-Exclusive) Miami Dolphins – Randy Starks DT |
#78
|
||||||
|
||||||
Dude, I don't know if I'm not explaining myself well, or whether you're just intentionally missing my points. Are you just trying to test me to see how long I will continue responding to you? If so, you're making headway.
Quote:
I did not give a reason why he balked, because I don't have a clue. I only know that he didn't sign the tender, so he didn't go the Cousins path for some reason. I think that was a mistake for all the reasons I've stated previously. Quote:
1. So you're point is that it's not impossible that a team could use the tag on a non-QB for three years in a row? Of course that's true, and I never said otherwise. But as a practical matter, I just don't think it's ever going to happen for the reasons I've stated. I won't repeat them again. That's what it comes down to. 2. As to your fixation on my use of the term "guarantee", it's an expression of strong belief, ok? It doesn't even mean what you seem to think it means, so look it up. And, if we're going to be microanalyzing every word, you may want to look back at my original post because I actually said "virtually guarantee" in recognition of the possibility that the Raiders or some organization like that could do something stupid. 3. QB salaries obviously have everything to do with our discussion. Please go read the language of the CBA if you don't believe me - particularly Article 10, Section 2(a)(ii). Here's a link for your convenience: https://nfllabor.files.wordpress.com...-2011-2020.pdf Bottom line: No matter what position they play, if you tag a player three times in a row they will be paid - at a minimum - the average of the top 5 players at the most expensive position (so, QB). This means that if you tag a non-QB a third time, you automatically make him one of the top 2 or 3 paid players in the entire league (because the top 5 are all QBs - are you following my logic now?). And that salary is 100% guaranteed. Again, I don't see any team doing this. 4. Cap hit v. Salary - I note that you don't provide a better chart in response. I'm assuming that's because you can't find one. You're proposal is to take the contract and divide it by the years? Are you kidding? That only works if its 100% guaranteed, and there are very few such contracts out there - probably none for RBs. And even that's not enough unless you know what the contract is specifically guaranteed against. There are many, many articles out there which outline why this is. As to your speculation about what the younger RBs will be paid when the reach free agency, we'll see - but regardless of the amount, I think the salaries of QBs will keep pace well ahead of the RB salaries. 5. Re "Douche Canoe" - go ahead and cite to the 2020 versions of Gurley and David Johnson. Even at those salaries, and assuming neither is cut or renegotiates their deal, Gurley is 28th and Johnson is 58th overall in salary for that year. And they will fall down the list further as new contracts are put in place over the next two offseasons. Quote:
As to Gurley's newly-signed "guaranteed" contract, here's a link to Over the Cap which gives a bit more detail about those so-called guarantees: https://overthecap.com/player/todd-gurley/3858/ Essentially, only the $22 million is truly guaranteed at signing. The other payments appear to be guaranteed on a rolling basis as each season arrives. So if Gurley tears his knee up, well, those later "guarantees" probably don't amount to much. This is a good example of why you can't just take the contract amount and divide it by the years. Quote:
As to Bell getting "hosed", I'll go back to my original points - I don't think getting paid a fully guaranteed $14.5 million is getting 'hosed". More importantly, if everyone in your mind is entitled to be paid 100% of their open market value, then why have a CBA at all? Just let everyone become a free agent! No - the teams and the players negotiated a deal which is far more complicated, and has many more pulleys and levers than simply the franchise tag. To get the franchise tag, rest assured the owners had to concede to the players on other issues which benefit the players. So don't vilify the Steelers for making use of a term they all agreed to. Quote:
Quote:
See above. There is a massive difference between using a tag twice on a player, and using it three times. It is apparent the players union would tolerate it twice, but made it so difficult to do a third time that no team is likely to attempt it except in the most extreme situations (i.e. top QB). |
#79
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
Hey, it's your world. I'm just gonna play in it for a while. |
#80
|
|||
|
|||
Agreed except I think it is more than a PR nightmare. Beating a woman like that show a deep character flaw that takes real commitment and work to heal. How many of you guys would hang with a guy who does shit like that? How many of the female fans would? If he is sincere and gets help (and I will have to trust Ballard/Reich to make that call as there is zero way I'll be able to know his mind) maybe, but I'd rather take a chance with Bell, injury and Irsay's money or a draft pick.
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Oldcolt For This Useful Post: | ||
Racehorse (12-16-2018) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|