Jump to content

NFL - 2022 Draft and Onward


Maithanet
 Share

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, briantw said:

This is the complete opposite of the Baker situation where the Browns had zero incentive to cut him because his contract was fully guaranteed. 

No, it's not the complete opposite at all.  First, whether they cut or trade him before the season, I would expect them to reinvest at least a substantial portion of that this year anyway.  Second, again, if they do trade him they're almost certainly gonna have to eat a substantial portion of this year's salary anyway.  Third, if they keep him and trade him during the season whatever portion of his salary that is paid by the other team can still be rolled over, prorated of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, briantw said:

The issue with keeping him is that's all cap they can't rollover.  This is the complete opposite of the Baker situation where the Browns had zero incentive to cut him because his contract was fully guaranteed.  The Niners essentially have to cut him before week one to roll that cap over into next year, and as a wannabe contender in a pretty weak, top-heavy NFC, they're going to need that money.

My understanding is if they kept him and let him walk for nothing the impact on next year's cap would be minimal. I haven't seen anything arguing the opposite otherwise he'd already be gone.

Also, not sure why you think they're wannabes. I wouldn't even call the NFC top heavy. Rams have a real QB problem and are boom or bust, Packers and Cowboys took serious steps backwards, the Cards and Bucs are probably frauds and Philly has the best overall roster, but their QB deserves all the slights Jackson is wrongly receiving. Lance just needs to be decent without making too many mistakes for the Niners to come out of the NFC.

Kind of wild to think the team that finishes fourth in the AFC West could win the NFC...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

My understanding is if they kept him and let him walk for nothing the impact on next year's cap would be minimal. I haven't seen anything arguing the opposite otherwise he'd already be gone.

 

The idea is the Niners need to cut Jimmy so they can get $25 million under the cap and it's necessary to roll that cap space over to next season to keep all their guys in 2023.  But that isn't accurate at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Philly has the best overall roster, but their QB deserves all the slights Jackson is wrongly receiving.

So you’re saying Philly should trade for him…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, briantw said:

It also sounds like Wilson's injury wasn't all that serious, and he's only expected to miss around a month.  Not sure why they'd take on that salary to cover maybe two weeks of Wilson being out.

This is so... ugh... 

First, roll with Flacco. He's not good no more (his ceiling was always being the worst of the good QBs) he's not even alright no more (that's what most of his career was. Alright at the highest pricetag in the league). 

What he is now is Sssuuuuper limited. He can't move, he don't like getting it, and he was never particularly accurate or fast getting the ball out of his hands... That being said, I thought he played well the last couple of years, considering. 

Look, you're not going to the playoffs with flacco unless you're the Bucs. But you're not going to the playoffs with Garappolo unless you're like, already a playoff team. The Jets aren't that. Flacco will play as well as you can protect him plus-or-minus some hideous inaccuracies on otherwise good plays. You can do a lot worse than that. 

You're only gonna win five or six games, but if you can pass pro Flacco will run a professional looking offense that will allow you to develop and scout your other young players. 

I view him the same as Brissette, though Brissette is younger and sturdier but I like Flacco's experience better. I'd take Flacco, honestly. The guy has beaten NE in the playoffs. That's worth something. (Mark Sanchez nothwithstanding) 

Meanwhile, the Zack kid. Don't kid yourselves. He's gonna rush himself back from a serious operation (cutting into your flesh and carving around cartilage is a big deal no matter how your publisher spins it to the twitterverse), and he's probably gonna look ok for the first week or two. But the knee isn't going to heal, it's going to be subjected to the NFL grind.

Maybe he makes it the whole year without another surgery, but he'll miss games because of 'pain' that eventually can't be managed no matter how much they dope him up. 

He shouldn't practice again until October, earliest. For his own good. But his good isn't what everyone in the world is interested in. So this kid will ruin himself trying to appease a bunch of loudmouth assholes.

In the words of A GReat PresIDENT. SOME PEOPLE, IM HEARING PEOPLE SAY THe greatest presidENT, okay? But in HIS WORDS, the GREATEST WORDS FROM A president, but they're really My wordS really, but they don't tell you that MY really great words. They don't tell YOU THAT, IN the mainstream mAss... Media...

"SAD!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Rhom said:

So you’re saying Philly should trade for him…

Lol, no. I wouldn't want either of them and no smart team should ever trade for a QB that's bottom half unless they're taking a gamble on players like Minshew or Love. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Firebrand Jace said:

Mark Sanchez nothwithstanding) 

Hey now, he's got more playoff wins than all but five active NFL QBs with Flacco oddly being one of them.

Also, If Brady's career began when he was 37, he'd still have the most playoff wins. Absolutely fucking nuts...

Edited by Tywin et al.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd want Mainshew. 

I have a fantasy that Matty Ice gets iced off in week three, Reich gets fired. Brian Flores is hired and brings Minshew over via FA. 

I'd organize a visit with my family for Thanksgiving to see Minshew starting in a Colts uniform. 

I remember how he skull fucked Mr High-I'm-a-Fall-Guy Eberflus' defense in week one a few years back. The man can ball. Limitations are everywhere. HE CAN PLAY

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 games.  I guess they wanted to make sure this wasn't considered comparable to other punishments, so they said "hey, nobody's ever been suspended for 11 games before".  Makes as much sense as any other NFL punishment decisions.

I guess I should say that 11 games is better than 6 games? 

That feels like just enough to screw over the Browns, which seems fair given how wholeheartedly they pursued Watson even after all the crimes.  If they are 6-5 at that point then their season is still live, but that would require Jacoby Brissett playing pretty damn well.  Not to mention that Watson will probably need time to get back up to game speed.  In all likelihood the Browns season is over before it begins. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So does this help the Browns financially, if Watson was guaranteed 230 million for 5 years, does the 11 games without pay mean that Browns get to keep 20 to 30 million of that guaranteed money?   Maybe they figured a long suspension into their negotiations and expected to get a chunk back, though the draft picks still sting.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Leofric said:

So does this help the Browns financially, if Watson was guaranteed 230 million for 5 years, does the 11 games without pay mean that Browns get to keep 20 to 30 million of that guaranteed money?   Maybe they figured a long suspension into their negotiations and expected to get a chunk back, though the draft picks still sting.  

No. Watson's contract was structed so he would make much this year that a suspension would impact and even if it wasn't that way the Browns don't get the money back.

 

Anyways, I said it would be 12-14 games so 11 isn't surprising. And to be very clear, there is only one reason the NFL is doing this way and that's so the story dies this year. A full year suspicion continues the headache into next season and the NFL is done talking about this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Leofric said:

So does this help the Browns financially, if Watson was guaranteed 230 million for 5 years, does the 11 games without pay mean that Browns get to keep 20 to 30 million of that guaranteed money?   Maybe they figured a long suspension into their negotiations and expected to get a chunk back, though the draft picks still sting.  

It doesn't really mean much of anything for the Browns financially.  Even if Watson was making a ton this year, suspended players still count against the cap, so they'd be out the money they owed him either way.  The difference is the checks go to the NFL instead of Watson and then are, I believe, donated to charity.

I'd wager that Watson's contract gets restructured next year as well, because I can't imagine they intend on him counting like 55 million against the cap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Anyways, I said it would be 12-14 games so 11 isn't surprising. And to be very clear, there is only one reason the NFL is doing this way and that's so the story dies this year. A full year suspicion continues the headache into next season and the NFL is done talking about this.

Watson also would have taken a full year suspension to court, and the NFL definitely did not want lawyers digging into how much they know about the actions of certain owners they've never or lightly punished, or exactly how complicit the Texans were in Watson's actions.  A lawsuit also would have left open the option that Watson was out there week one, and they obviously didn't want that either.

Edited by briantw
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, briantw said:

Watson also would have taken a full year suspension to court, and the NFL definitely did not want lawyers digging into how much they know about the actions of certain owners they've never or lightly punished, or exactly how complicit the Texans were in Watson's actions.  A lawsuit also would have left open the option that Watson was out there week one, and they obviously didn't want that either.

Yeah, gotta completely disagree here. First, he wouldn’t see the field because he’d be on the exempt list. Second, Watson and the PA would lose a court battle and they wouldn’t get much through discovery. All they’d do is complain about how unfair it is and make the owners uncomfortable, but ultimately nothing would come from it. And lastly if I’m the NFL I make these points clear to him and tell him that if he sues, it’s an indefinite suspicion that will never be lifted. Go play ball in Canada, bro.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, dbunting said:

Other than a total ban this seems about right IF you factor in that he also missed all of last season. By the time this is done he will have missed 28 games. 

He got paid for last season, though.  He wasn't suspended.  

21 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Yeah, gotta completely disagree here. First, he wouldn’t see the field because he’d be on the exempt list. Second, Watson and the PA would lose a court battle and they wouldn’t get much through discovery. All they’d do is complain about how unfair it is and make the owners uncomfortable, but ultimately nothing would come from it. And lastly if I’m the NFL I make these points clear to him and tell him that if he sues, it’s an indefinite suspicion that will never be lifted. Go play ball in Canada, bro.

If it were that easy to just give him an indefinite suspension, they would have done it.  There's a reason they settled with him.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, briantw said:

He got paid for last season, though.  He wasn't suspended.  

 

Didn't say he was suspended or mention money. Said he will miss 28 games. To a competitor that kills you. 28 games of his prime years.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, briantw said:

If it were that easy to just give him an indefinite suspension, they would have done it.  There's a reason they settled with him.  

It is that easy, it's right there in writing. However, other owners are probably worried about the precedent it would set and were against it. Rog does nothing unless 24 owners give him the thumbs up.

At the end of the day @dbunting is right, you either ban him for life or suspend him for a majority of this year and hope with time the story largely goes away for the league. It will never completely go away for Watson, especially when the PoS is still maintaining his innocence. 

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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...