Jump to content

NFL General Discussion


Mr. Brightside

Recommended Posts

On 17/04/2022 at 12:12, Rano Pano said:

I think he's ok, he's improved the team year on year. I just wonder if he has the grit/mentality to go on to become a great head coach. The way his teams tend fade in the second half of the season stands out.

Not sure I'd have given him a 6 year extension, but the fear is the alternative could be quite worse, especially as the Cards are never going to be a fashionable team to attract a bigger name.

What's your take on Patrick Peterson's claim that the real reason Kyler is creating a scene is the Cards aren't interested in winning and he wants out?

Personally I think that's a bizarre claim. I see no evidence that the organisation isn't trying to win, because they aren't shy in bringing in Free Agents (even if you could argue about the value of some of those they have signed), traded for one of the very best WR's in the NFL, and even went QB with their 1st in back-to-back drafts in an effort to make the team competitive under Center. The Cards ownership had a reputation for being miserly decades ago, but that predates the FA era and I don't see anything that suggests it's still the same.

What I do see is a young, immature QB and his agent who, rather than taking the lead in trying to create a winning culture, are doing everything they can to toxify the situation themselves. If it's true, and this isn't just about money, then they are going about things in a totally bizarre way. Why would you down tools and demand an improved contract if you have no faith that the organisation is truly interested in winning?, unless the truth is that you aren't all that bothered about winning either and simply want to cash in before you get found out. Forget the 'money' bullshit and just demand a trade if you are genuinely concerned about the culture.

I think something that is being overlooked is that the team started last season 10-2, then collapsed down the stretch, in large part due to Murray himself playing like absolute shit. Maybe he needs to concentrate on rectifying his own performance rather than indulging in a load of contract histrionics, regardless of the reason for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Got to admit, I think binning AJ is a bit silly. The going rate for #1 WR's now seems to be around that 20million per mark, and he's much younger than Davante Adams, Mike Williams, and Tyreek Hill. 

If he wanted the market rate, why not just pay him?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Boo Khaki said:

Got to admit, I think binning AJ is a bit silly. The going rate for #1 WR's now seems to be around that 20million per mark, and he's much younger than Davante Adams, Mike Williams, and Tyreek Hill. 

If he wanted the market rate, why not just pay him?

I know. It makes no sense.

It also means, with no decent WR's, we are a complete 1 trick pony, using the running game with Henry. I guess the silver lining of the cloud is that Tannehill won't be throwing the ball.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think they just thought they could get a younger, cheaper like-for-like with Burks being sat there for them, but when you look at how many genuine #1 WRs there are in the NFL, or at least, proven guys who have the tools to put up top 10 numbers year after year in the right circumstances, there really aren't that many, perhaps 15-20, so shifting one of them on for a totally unproven rookie is enormously risky, especially when you still had control of his contract and could probably find the money to give him what he wants.

If AJ was 30 and at the end of his first big contract and making noises about another one, I could understand it, but he's not, he's 24 going on 25, productive, and as far as I'm aware he's not a ball-ache or cancerous presence, so it just doesn't make all that much sense, especially when you are talking about one of the positions that is hardest of all to draft because of the rate that college WR's just don't work out in the Pros. When you get good ones you should generally hang on to them unless they are a total nuisance and negative presence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is from a few days ago, so the chat about Deebo being traded for #1's is obviously outdated, but Leaf makes a couple of valid points that I think are worth bearing in mind. He's right about the paucity of ProBowl/All-Pro level WR's or position players who have kicked up a tantrum about money, got out of a place, and then replicated or surpassed their former production, whether that's on their drafting team or in a new home. There aren't that many, which is why I think his point about not going out handing huge money to other team's cast off WR's is also relatively true. As I said, if you have good ones, it's in your own interest to keep them happy before it gets to the trouble stage, but I do think this phenomenon we are seeing with players creating a stink while still on their rookie contracts needs looked at. 

 

Edited by Boo Khaki
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is from a few days ago, so the chat about Deebo being traded for #1's is obviously outdated, but Leaf makes a couple of valid points that I think are worth bearing in mind. He's right about the paucity of ProBowl/All-Pro level WR's or position players who have kicked up a tantrum about money, got out of a place, and then replicated or surpassed their former production, whether that's on their drafting team or in a new home. There aren't that many, which is why I think his point about not going out handing huge money to other team's cast off WR's is also relatively true. As I said, if you have good ones, it's in your own interest to keep them happy before it gets to the trouble stage, but I do think this phenomenon we are seeing with players creating a stink while still on their rookie contracts needs looked at. 
 
Deebo will most likely play out his rookie contract. I believe he'll be a UFA next year,.(happy to be corrected if that's wrong). Even if he gets tagged in 2023 with a view to being traded, they won't get any value for him. The same goes for Kyler Murray.

I'm all for players (even rookies) getting contracts their play deserves. If teams don't want to deal, then fair enough, that's their perogative. But they risk being in the same situation Miami got into with Jarvis Landry. He wanted a contract Dolphins delayed for a year and when they were ready to talk he didn't want to know. Dolphins ended up with a 4th and a 7th for arguably their best offensive player at the time.

I can only speak about the Dolphins (because that's all I really look into in any depth), but I'm sure other franchises are equally keen to shakedown players when it suits them. Dolphins re-negotiated Jakeem Grant's contract down, then traded him. They also re-negotiated McKinney's contract then cut him. That's two examples just from 2021. There are plenty more.

Football is a business and both sides are just looking out for themselves and trying to get the best value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, magic sign said:

Football is a business and both sides are just looking out for themselves and trying to get the best value.
 

Of course, and I don't in any way grudge deserving players the money they get paid. It was skewed in the owners/teams favour for far too long prior to FA and CBA rewrites, but in saying that, the changes to rookie contracts were designed to protect teams from being screwed by handing huge contracts to wasters like Jamarcus Russell, but at the same time giving young players taken high the security of a multi-year contract with escalating salary. The fact so many players are now downing tools and creating a toxic ballache two or three years into that contract is a betrayal of their own union and renders moot the attempts to negotiate a CBA that was fair to all. 

I honestly don't believe that 2nd and 3rd year players are justified in throwing a tantrum in an attempt to extort more money, regardless of performance and production. I do think though that the fact they are becoming more willing to do so means the CBA rookie contract terms need looked at. I'd be inclined towards perhaps shortening the length of the contracts by one year and escalating the salary rises so the players are earning more, earlier in the deals, but I'd want that mitigated by a provision that if a player downs tools and forces a trade, there would be a prohibitive level of statutory compensation possibly based on production, and there should be some sort of provision that means the player can't actually earn a massive new contract until the rookie deal expires anyway. Again, I don't want to deny deserving players their money, but it works both ways. You can't pander to uppity 23 year old gobshites with mediocre production demanding to be paid like 10 year vet probowlers, and to their credit even the PFA seems to understand this.

Edited by Boo Khaki
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Mr. Brightside said:

Bad news for Matt Ryan, from one team where he is running for his life on every down, to another.

Whit?  We managed to keep Phillip Rivers on his feet in the pocket.  Wentz's average release time of 8.2675 hours per throw and an inability to find the open receivers yet sacked 32 times in the season doesn't point to a dodgy line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...