Other Resources My Cup of Joe » 2013 NFL Offseason Thread Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, the bear, DerekL, alicefoeller Reply
 
 
of 6
 
 
2013-02-27 12:33 PM
in reply to: #4639104

User image

Master
1585
1000500252525
Folsom (Sacramento), CA
Subject: RE: 2013 NFL Offseason Thread

pitt83 - 2013-02-27 9:54 AM
pitt83 - 2013-02-25 2:05 PM
JoshR - 2013-02-25 1:58 PM There's no way they give up a 1st. I'd guess a conditional pick with top end being a 2nd.
33rd pick overall isn't a bad trade for Smith. That leaves KC with 1st overall and a second (albeit the very best second rounder possible) for Smith. But, I'd guess that Reid wants Nick Foles from Philly. He always had a thing for him and that's his project.
You may all bow at the feet of my brilliance... http://m.espn.go.com/nfl/story?storyId=8995035

 

Except for the part where you predicted it would Foles....



Edited by uclamatt2007 2013-02-27 12:35 PM


2013-02-27 12:51 PM
in reply to: #4639182

User image

Champion
16151
50005000500010001002525
Checkin' out the podium girls
Subject: RE: 2013 NFL Offseason Thread
uclamatt2007 - 2013-02-27 1:33 PM

pitt83 - 2013-02-27 9:54 AM
pitt83 - 2013-02-25 2:05 PM
JoshR - 2013-02-25 1:58 PM There's no way they give up a 1st. I'd guess a conditional pick with top end being a 2nd.
33rd pick overall isn't a bad trade for Smith. That leaves KC with 1st overall and a second (albeit the very best second rounder possible) for Smith. But, I'd guess that Reid wants Nick Foles from Philly. He always had a thing for him and that's his project.
You may all bow at the feet of my brilliance... http://m.espn.go.com/nfl/story?storyId=8995035

 

Except for the part where you predicted it would Foles....



Never said I was a master editor. If so; I'd be in politics
2013-02-27 12:51 PM
in reply to: #4639133

User image

Subject: RE: 2013 NFL Offseason Thread
JoshR - 2013-02-27 8:09 AM 

I underestimated KC's desire for a QB.  I think it's a bad call. I think they should have done the Pete Carroll route. Stick with your crappy QB and build the rest of the team this year. Next year there are two very good QB's probably going 1,2. If you suck bad enough then you can get one. 

I agree.  And crappy QBs don't look so crappy when you put better players around them.  Just look at Alex Smith.  KC at least did one good thing and got a good coach.  Because good coaching can help make crappy players look not as crappy too.



Edited by tri808 2013-02-27 12:53 PM
2013-02-27 1:10 PM
in reply to: #4639178

User image

Elite
4564
200020005002525
Boise
Subject: RE: 2013 NFL Offseason Thread
uclamatt2007 - 2013-02-27 11:32 AM
JoshR - 2013-02-27 10:09 AM

pitt83 - 2013-02-27 10:54 AM
pitt83 - 2013-02-25 2:05 PM
JoshR - 2013-02-25 1:58 PM There's no way they give up a 1st. I'd guess a conditional pick with top end being a 2nd.
33rd pick overall isn't a bad trade for Smith. That leaves KC with 1st overall and a second (albeit the very best second rounder possible) for Smith. But, I'd guess that Reid wants Nick Foles from Philly. He always had a thing for him and that's his project.
You may all bow at the feet of my brilliance... http://m.espn.go.com/nfl/story?storyId=8995035

 

I underestimated KC's desire for a QB.  I think it's a bad call. I think they should have done the Pete Carroll route. Stick with your crappy QB and build the rest of the team this year. Next year there are two very good QB's probably going 1,2. If you suck bad enough then you can get one. 

Would that be like a team sticking to a crappy QB last year with the plans to draft a very good Matt Barkley with the 1st pick this year?

I think Manziel and Bridgewater (some say Tajh Boyd too, I'm not totally sold on him yet) will be much better than Barkley. Even if you don't like them, there is tons of talent next year. Clowney, Marquise Lee, Austin Sefarian Jenkins (I'd love the Seahawks to snag him somehow), Jake Adams. That's just off the top of my head, but next years draft is loaded and Smith might make KC a mediocre team so they play themselves out of a top pick.

2013-02-27 1:15 PM
in reply to: #4634940

User image

Elite
4564
200020005002525
Boise
Subject: RE: 2013 NFL Offseason Thread
CBS Sports has an article suggesting SF might go after Revis now with their insane amount of picks. I'd love to see the Sherman/Revis intra-NFC West beef.
2013-02-27 1:22 PM
in reply to: #4639261

User image

Master
1585
1000500252525
Folsom (Sacramento), CA
Subject: RE: 2013 NFL Offseason Thread

JoshR - 2013-02-27 11:15 AM CBS Sports has an article suggesting SF might go after Revis now with their insane amount of picks. I'd love to see the Sherman/Revis intra-NFC West beef.

While Revis would make the 49ers defense deadly, I am still not convinced he will play without a contract extension and I don't want to see the 49ers give him the contract he wants. It would be the kind of contract that cripples a team's salary cap options.

Plus, I am tired of cornerbacks running their mouths. Shut up and play football. That includes Culliver.



2013-02-27 1:22 PM
in reply to: #4634940

User image

Subject: RE: 2013 NFL Offseason Thread

I don't see next year as being "stacked" with QB talent, but high draft picks are a huge luxury now with the rookie salary structure.  More teams are willing to reach for QB talent in the first round now that they know they won't be stuck with a $40-75 million contract.

 

2013-02-27 1:25 PM
in reply to: #4639276

User image

Champion
16151
50005000500010001002525
Checkin' out the podium girls
Subject: RE: 2013 NFL Offseason Thread
uclamatt2007 - 2013-02-27 2:22 PM

JoshR - 2013-02-27 11:15 AM CBS Sports has an article suggesting SF might go after Revis now with their insane amount of picks. I'd love to see the Sherman/Revis intra-NFC West beef.

While Revis would make the 49ers defense deadly, I am still not convinced he will play without a contract extension and I don't want to see the 49ers give him the contract he wants. It would be the kind of contract that cripples a team's salary cap options.

Plus, I am tired of cornerbacks running their mouths. Shut up and play football. That includes Culliver.



I agree. Even if Darrell is a homie, he's got to quit whining every 18months and quit bankrupting his team. But then again; the Jets? Why not! They've not been the most rational front office the past 5 years or so.

Revis could learn something from Curtis Martin or Larry Fitzgerald as to conduct becoming of an alumnus.

Edited by pitt83 2013-02-27 1:26 PM
2013-02-27 1:29 PM
in reply to: #4639276

User image

Elite
4564
200020005002525
Boise
Subject: RE: 2013 NFL Offseason Thread
uclamatt2007 - 2013-02-27 12:22 PM

JoshR - 2013-02-27 11:15 AM CBS Sports has an article suggesting SF might go after Revis now with their insane amount of picks. I'd love to see the Sherman/Revis intra-NFC West beef.

While Revis would make the 49ers defense deadly, I am still not convinced he will play without a contract extension and I don't want to see the 49ers give him the contract he wants. It would be the kind of contract that cripples a team's salary cap options.

Plus, I am tired of cornerbacks running their mouths. Shut up and play football. That includes Culliver.

 

I wouldn't trade for Revis either. He's going to want top QB money but he'll be an almost 30 year old CB, not a QB. It might be enough to nudge SF to a Superbowl win though. That is if they can win the NFC West this year.

 

I have to say I haven't looked forward to an upcoming division matchup anywhere near as much as I'm looking forward to SF/Sea in 2013.

2013-02-27 1:31 PM
in reply to: #4639074

User image

Champion
6056
500010002525
Menomonee Falls, WI
Subject: RE: 2013 NFL Offseason Thread
tri808 - 2013-02-27 11:37 AM

Andy Reid does have a good track record in working with QBs, and KC did have 5 pro bowlers...so maybe this will work out.





Wo, wo, wo. Let's slow the roll a second.

Are we talking about the Andy Reid that "developed" Kevin Kolb and Nick Foles? The one who went all in on Michael Vick? I'll give you that he got some good years out of Donovan McNabb but that's one first round draft pick QB who was a success. I'd say the jury is still very much out on Reid's ability to develop QB's. Even in Green Bay, Reid had little to do with the development of Favre.







Edited by scoobysdad 2013-02-27 1:31 PM
2013-02-27 1:35 PM
in reply to: #4639276

User image

Subject: RE: 2013 NFL Offseason Thread
uclamatt2007 - 2013-02-27 9:22 AM

JoshR - 2013-02-27 11:15 AM CBS Sports has an article suggesting SF might go after Revis now with their insane amount of picks. I'd love to see the Sherman/Revis intra-NFC West beef.

While Revis would make the 49ers defense deadly, I am still not convinced he will play without a contract extension and I don't want to see the 49ers give him the contract he wants. It would be the kind of contract that cripples a team's salary cap options.

Plus, I am tired of cornerbacks running their mouths. Shut up and play football. That includes Culliver.

Being that Revis has never gotten the contract he "wanted" while he was in his prime (before tearing his ACL), I seriously doubt he'll ever get the kind of money he thinks he deserves.  It's one thing to "demand" a boat load of money, but at then end of the day, if nobody is willing to pay it to you, then you just have to take what you can get.

FWIW, when Revis held out in 2010, he demanded a $162 million contract over 10 years.  After holding out for 36 days, he ended up getting $46 million over 4 years.

I agree that cornerbacks like Revis need to shut their mouth and play, but just saying that Revis will likely never get the contract he "wants."



2013-02-27 1:43 PM
in reply to: #4639246

User image

Master
1585
1000500252525
Folsom (Sacramento), CA
Subject: RE: 2013 NFL Offseason Thread
JoshR - 2013-02-27 11:10 AM
uclamatt2007 - 2013-02-27 11:32 AM
JoshR - 2013-02-27 10:09 AM

pitt83 - 2013-02-27 10:54 AM
pitt83 - 2013-02-25 2:05 PM
JoshR - 2013-02-25 1:58 PM There's no way they give up a 1st. I'd guess a conditional pick with top end being a 2nd.
33rd pick overall isn't a bad trade for Smith. That leaves KC with 1st overall and a second (albeit the very best second rounder possible) for Smith. But, I'd guess that Reid wants Nick Foles from Philly. He always had a thing for him and that's his project.
You may all bow at the feet of my brilliance... http://m.espn.go.com/nfl/story?storyId=8995035

 

I underestimated KC's desire for a QB.  I think it's a bad call. I think they should have done the Pete Carroll route. Stick with your crappy QB and build the rest of the team this year. Next year there are two very good QB's probably going 1,2. If you suck bad enough then you can get one. 

Would that be like a team sticking to a crappy QB last year with the plans to draft a very good Matt Barkley with the 1st pick this year?

I think Manziel and Bridgewater (some say Tajh Boyd too, I'm not totally sold on him yet) will be much better than Barkley. Even if you don't like them, there is tons of talent next year. Clowney, Marquise Lee, Austin Sefarian Jenkins (I'd love the Seahawks to snag him somehow), Jake Adams. That's just off the top of my head, but next years draft is loaded and Smith might make KC a mediocre team so they play themselves out of a top pick.

Both of those quarterbacks are far from a sure thing. While next years draft is absolutely going to be loaded, you can't start your first year as a coach telling everyone, "Just wait 'til next year."

2013-02-27 1:49 PM
in reply to: #4639304

User image

Subject: RE: 2013 NFL Offseason Thread
scoobysdad - 2013-02-27 9:31 AM
tri808 - 2013-02-27 11:37 AM

Andy Reid does have a good track record in working with QBs, and KC did have 5 pro bowlers...so maybe this will work out.

Wo, wo, wo. Let's slow the roll a second. Are we talking about the Andy Reid that "developed" Kevin Kolb and Nick Foles? The one who went all in on Michael Vick? I'll give you that he got some good years out of Donovan McNabb but that's one first round draft pick QB who was a success. I'd say the jury is still very much out on Reid's ability to develop QB's. Even in Green Bay, Reid had little to do with the development of Favre.

Yes...that's exactly what I'm saying.  Mike Vick is a bad example though because Vick is not the type of QB that is capable of running Reid's ideal system, but you can't deny that for about 15 games, Vick was playing the best football of his career under Reid.  And I would be pretty confident in saying that Vick would not have as much success as he's had under any other random coach.  He'd likely be out of the league already.

But to your other examples.  McNabb was a consistan pro bowler under Reid, and when he left, he was absolute crap.  Kolb looked like a stud for a few games under Reid, got a huge contract, and now he looks like crap.  Foles also looks pretty promising, but we have yet to see what he will be like without Reid.  After Jeff Garcia left SFO, he struggled with Detroit and Cleveland, and came to Philly as a back up.  When McNabb went down, Garcia stepped in and looked solid (going 5-1). 

Reid's track record shows that he can take a QB, and make the most out of him.  Granted, the Eagles had other players around that QB...which also makes a big difference.  When was the last time Reid coached a QB that looked like absolute garbage?  Of course you can argue with Vick last year...but it's more a product of what you get with Vick and a horrid offensive line.

2013-02-27 1:55 PM
in reply to: #4639321

User image

Elite
4564
200020005002525
Boise
Subject: RE: 2013 NFL Offseason Thread
uclamatt2007 - 2013-02-27 12:43 PM
JoshR - 2013-02-27 11:10 AM
uclamatt2007 - 2013-02-27 11:32 AM
JoshR - 2013-02-27 10:09 AM

pitt83 - 2013-02-27 10:54 AM
pitt83 - 2013-02-25 2:05 PM
JoshR - 2013-02-25 1:58 PM There's no way they give up a 1st. I'd guess a conditional pick with top end being a 2nd.
33rd pick overall isn't a bad trade for Smith. That leaves KC with 1st overall and a second (albeit the very best second rounder possible) for Smith. But, I'd guess that Reid wants Nick Foles from Philly. He always had a thing for him and that's his project.
You may all bow at the feet of my brilliance... http://m.espn.go.com/nfl/story?storyId=8995035

 

I underestimated KC's desire for a QB.  I think it's a bad call. I think they should have done the Pete Carroll route. Stick with your crappy QB and build the rest of the team this year. Next year there are two very good QB's probably going 1,2. If you suck bad enough then you can get one. 

Would that be like a team sticking to a crappy QB last year with the plans to draft a very good Matt Barkley with the 1st pick this year?

I think Manziel and Bridgewater (some say Tajh Boyd too, I'm not totally sold on him yet) will be much better than Barkley. Even if you don't like them, there is tons of talent next year. Clowney, Marquise Lee, Austin Sefarian Jenkins (I'd love the Seahawks to snag him somehow), Jake Adams. That's just off the top of my head, but next years draft is loaded and Smith might make KC a mediocre team so they play themselves out of a top pick.

Both of those quarterbacks are far from a sure thing. While next years draft is absolutely going to be loaded, you can't start your first year as a coach telling everyone, "Just wait 'til next year."

 

That's what Pete did for us. Kept an aging Hasselback as the starter and drafted Okung, Thomas and Chancellor (3 pro bowlers now) also signed two maligned players in Clemons (33.5 sacks in 3 years since) and Marshawn Lynch. Next year he took a flyer on Tjack, who sucked but again, Pete/John drafted/signed Sherman, Browner, KJ Wright. Finally in year 3 they found a guy they liked in Flynn and also took a flyer on Wilson and here we are now with top 5 Superbowl odds going into 2013.

2013-03-01 10:43 AM
in reply to: #4639343

User image

Champion
6056
500010002525
Menomonee Falls, WI
Subject: RE: 2013 NFL Offseason Thread
Atlanta blew an entire draft to get Julio Jones because he was viewed as the "missing piece" they needed to win the Superbowl. They haven't even made it to the NFC championship.

Today, they cut aging veterans and former stars John Abraham, Michael Turner and Dunta Robinson and, as of now, have few young players to replace them partly because of the picks they gave up for Jones.

Did their window just close?

2013-03-01 10:48 AM
in reply to: #4642025

User image

Austin, Texas or Jupiter, Florida
Subject: RE: 2013 NFL Offseason Thread

scoobysdad - 2013-03-01 10:43 AM Atlanta blew an entire draft to get Julio Jones because he was viewed as the "missing piece" they needed to win the Superbowl. They haven't even made it to the NFC championship. Today, they cut aging veterans and former stars John Abraham, Michael Turner and Dunta Robinson and, as of now, have few young players to replace them partly because of the picks they gave up for Jones. Did their window just close?

Eh, I don't think so.  

They have decent backfill for those positions, they'll also likely get supplemental draft picks if one of those guys was a franchise tag guy this year.  

 



2013-03-01 10:52 AM
in reply to: #4642035

User image

Elite
4564
200020005002525
Boise
Subject: RE: 2013 NFL Offseason Thread
GomesBolt - 2013-03-01 9:48 AM

scoobysdad - 2013-03-01 10:43 AM Atlanta blew an entire draft to get Julio Jones because he was viewed as the "missing piece" they needed to win the Superbowl. They haven't even made it to the NFC championship. Today, they cut aging veterans and former stars John Abraham, Michael Turner and Dunta Robinson and, as of now, have few young players to replace them partly because of the picks they gave up for Jones. Did their window just close?

Eh, I don't think so.  

They have decent backfill for those positions, they'll also likely get supplemental draft picks if one of those guys was a franchise tag guy this year.  

 

 

Not to mention it freed up $18M in salary for replacements. I don't think they are going to get to the superbowl this year though. It's coming through the NFC West for sure.

2013-03-01 8:19 PM
in reply to: #4634940

User image

Elite
4564
200020005002525
Boise
Subject: RE: 2013 NFL Offseason Thread
Rumor is FLacco 6 years $120M. Sucks for the Ravens.
2013-03-01 8:21 PM
in reply to: #4642924

User image

Master
1585
1000500252525
Folsom (Sacramento), CA
Subject: RE: 2013 NFL Offseason Thread
JoshR - 2013-03-01 6:19 PM Rumor is FLacco 6 years $120M. Sucks for the Ravens.
Enjoy your Superbowl Baltimore.... it may be a while.
2013-03-02 5:52 AM
in reply to: #4642928

User image

Champion
16151
50005000500010001002525
Checkin' out the podium girls
Subject: RE: 2013 NFL Offseason Thread
uclamatt2007 - 2013-03-01 9:21 PM

JoshR - 2013-03-01 6:19 PM Rumor is FLacco 6 years $120M. Sucks for the Ravens.
Enjoy your Superbowl Baltimore.... it may be a while.


This.makes.me.happy! 52 minimum wagers and 1 overpaid Blue Mud hen. Good luck with that.
2013-03-02 9:14 AM
in reply to: #4643168

User image

Champion
6056
500010002525
Menomonee Falls, WI
Subject: RE: 2013 NFL Offseason Thread
Baltimore just did the nearly impossible. They signed one player and made 31 teams better.


2013-03-03 9:14 PM
in reply to: #4634940

User image

Champion
34263
500050005000500050005000200020001001002525
Chicago
Subject: RE: 2013 NFL Offseason Thread
So ... Cowboys picking up a groomable quarterback in the 3rd or 4th rounds this year?

I'd be OK with that.
2013-03-04 1:11 PM
in reply to: #4643294

User image

Champion
7821
50002000500100100100
Brooklyn, NY
Subject: RE: 2013 NFL Offseason Thread
scoobysdad - 2013-03-02 9:14 AM

Baltimore just did the nearly impossible. They signed one player and made 31 teams better.


Thing is, though: if you took a poll of NFL fans and asked them, “Would you take a SB victory even if it meant that you wouldn’t be competitive for the next 5 years?” a majority of them would say yes. If I’m a Ravens fan, I’d rather see a guy like Flacco get rewarded for bringing home a trophy than other guys getting huge contracts up front and not delivering, even if it means my team gets dismantled the following year. Even if you keep your SB-winning team largely intact, there’s still no guarantee that you’ll repeat. Other teams get better, your schedule is harder, and sometimes your star receiver shoots himself in the leg with an unlicensed handgun.
2013-03-04 1:38 PM
in reply to: #4645777

User image

Elite
4564
200020005002525
Boise
Subject: RE: 2013 NFL Offseason Thread

jmk-brooklyn - 2013-03-04 12:11 PM
scoobysdad - 2013-03-02 9:14 AM Baltimore just did the nearly impossible. They signed one player and made 31 teams better.
Thing is, though: if you took a poll of NFL fans and asked them, “Would you take a SB victory even if it meant that you wouldn’t be competitive for the next 5 years?” a majority of them would say yes. If I’m a Ravens fan, I’d rather see a guy like Flacco get rewarded for bringing home a trophy than other guys getting huge contracts up front and not delivering, even if it means my team gets dismantled the following year. Even if you keep your SB-winning team largely intact, there’s still no guarantee that you’ll repeat. Other teams get better, your schedule is harder, and sometimes your star receiver shoots himself in the leg with an unlicensed handgun.

 

That's funny, I just said this to my coworker this morning. The thing that is getting me is how out of control QB costs are becoming. Flacco's deal is ~17% of the Ravens salary cap every year. In basketball that's fine, but in the NFL you need and use most of your roster. If Baltimore can't draft well, they are going to struggle mightily. Looking forward, the Seahawks will ahve to resign Russell Wilson in 2015. How much is it going to take to keep him? Is every decent QB going to command $15-$20m? What abotu Aaron Rodgers? Is he going to get $25m? He's obviously better than Flacco (statistically, even if both have 1 title) and less likely to draw the same surprise for that kind of money.

2013-03-04 2:12 PM
in reply to: #4645777

User image

Champion
6056
500010002525
Menomonee Falls, WI
Subject: RE: 2013 NFL Offseason Thread
jmk-brooklyn - 2013-03-04 1:11 PM

scoobysdad - 2013-03-02 9:14 AM

Baltimore just did the nearly impossible. They signed one player and made 31 teams better.


Thing is, though: if you took a poll of NFL fans and asked them, “Would you take a SB victory even if it meant that you wouldn’t be competitive for the next 5 years?” a majority of them would say yes. If I’m a Ravens fan, I’d rather see a guy like Flacco get rewarded for bringing home a trophy than other guys getting huge contracts up front and not delivering, even if it means my team gets dismantled the following year. Even if you keep your SB-winning team largely intact, there’s still no guarantee that you’ll repeat. Other teams get better, your schedule is harder, and sometimes your star receiver shoots himself in the leg with an unlicensed handgun.



Would I make that trade? Yeah, probably. But I don't see why you have to if you're Baltimore. I realize Flacco played out of his mind during the post-season but he also has along track record of mediocrity before hand. I would still value that player based on his complete record, rather than just the last 8 games, even if one was a Superbowl, unless I really thought the light had clicked on and he had suddenly transformed into an elite talent (not likely.)

Honestly, I think the Ravens hurt themselves by not having a Plan B to begin with. They knew Flacco's contract was coming up last year, and the delayed signing him to an extension because there was a possibility they we're going to just let him walk. Who did they have as a backup? Tyrod Taylor, a sixth-round pick with nearly zero game experience. They had no legitimate successor and, when Flacco went on his hot streak and brought home the Lombardi, no leverage in negotiations.

Or did they? After all, they WON the Superbowl. To me, that works a lot more to their advantage than ALMOST winning one with Flacco. As you point out, there are a lot of factors working against their repeating. I think that the organization could get away with making a generous but fair offer to Flacco, and if he decided to walk instead of accepting it, make the argument to their fans that they were going to improve at other positions rather than get held hostage by one overpaid player. If Flacco got a huge contract somewhere else, the Ravens would also get a high compensatory pick, even a #1, I believe.

All I'm saying is that I don't think Flacco held all the cards and that the Ravens didn't have to given in to such an outrageous contract demand for a less-then-elite player.




New Thread
Other Resources My Cup of Joe » 2013 NFL Offseason Thread Rss Feed  
 
 
of 6