CPcavedweller

Khalifa. Crazy batch man...absolutely insane. Like, Amber Heard insane.

It's Stroud guys. The Bryce Young bit is a smoke screen to see if the Texans will bite to trade up to keep the Colts from coming up. The bit included about Richardson is a smoke screen as well because he would be there at 4. So make the Texans think we are interested in Richardson or Stroud, that we would trade down to 4 for Richardson, so the Texans feel compelled to move up to 1 to get Young, meanwhile we still get Stroud at 2. Got it? Good.

Stroud does remind me a lot of Joe Burrow. People tried to say he was a product of his receivers, but it turns out that wasn't necessarily the case. Even when Chase went down this year Joe skipped a beat against the Browns but was good to go from that game on.

There is a big difference between 5-10 and 6-3. I'm 5-10 and anyone 6-5 looks like a giant, but 6-0 tall people are fine. So to a 6-3 person, 6-5 doesn't look gigantic and they would be able to see over them because even when the linemen are hunched over a bit, you will be able to see. At 5-10 those linemen have to be on the ground for you to see. And yes, I've watched enough of Bryce Young to see him scramble because he couldn't see beyond the LOS. If teams would blitz the A gaps, he would have to escape to have field vision whereas Stroud could stand in there and make a timing through because his vision wasn't obstructed. If being 5-10 wasn't a hindrence, it wouldn't have taken until Russell Wilson for more of them to be drafted. As it turns out, Wilson and Brees are really still the only successful short quarterback in the modern NFL. Many others haven't made it because they didn't have the skills to overcome that obstacle. Maybe you don't recall, but what did you have to do to Brees to make him uncomfortable? Double A Gap blitz, muck up the middle of the line, and stand in the lanes. You can't always get away with that when you have a taller, longer QB. With Young scrambling, much like Tua, you have to be worried about him being thrown down like a rag doll. The only two QB's who are about 6 feet tall playing last year were both knocked out cold at one point or another.

I could see Young taking more hits because he thinks he can escape, whereas Stroud will throw the ball away. I also wouldn't underestimate Stroud's mobility. He shows he can do it, he just didn't have a need for it. Young couldn't see over the line so he would have to move more to find lanes which people are wowed by but it isn't really indicative of anything other than the fact that he's short. So give me Stroud who can see over and around the line without having to scramble versus Young who HAS to scramble to even see anything.

Clearly making a comparison to the situation here. Bryce Young would be Mac Jones in this scenario and, I'm guessing, Anthony Richardson is Trey Lance. The only issue with Schefter's theory is that we don't have Jimmy Gorropolo, we have Andy Dalton. Though Andy Dalton was very, very successful in Cincinnati which makes me wonder how his career fell off of a cliff.

Big difference between 5'10 and 205 when you've been lifting hard for four months to get to that weight and 6'1 210 playing weight. Caleb Williams also runs a 4.5 and has elite arm strength. Young's arm won't blow you away, Caleb Williams has the arm of a 6'5 QB in a 6'1 body.

He's saying it's a smoke screen. He seems to think that Mac Jones would be the pick that the staff wants but something changes and they end up taking Richardson, or Stroud (I hope).

It's not terrible as long as he's healthy. But how many running backs stay healthy through all four years of a long contract at age 26? I wonder how much Elliot wants. He would be pretty damn good to pair up with Sanders. Much better than Chubba.

Well, Foreman went to Chicago so moot point. I honestly think they just upgraded in losing Montgomery and getting Foreman so it will be interesting. If Fields can take the next step and play more consistent ball, the Bears could be a dark horse for the NFC North this year. Could be a dark horse to make noise in the NFC, period.

Do we have the Cap Space for Hopkins? What are the Cardinals going to ask for? Obviously having Stroud, Hopkins, Sanders, Terrace Marshall, a slot that can stretch the field vertically, Hayden Hurst, etc. makes our offense very capable of contending this year in the NFC South and maybe the NFC in general. The Eagles lost a ton of players and two coaches, they will be lucky to get to .500 in my opinion. So the conference is wide ass open. Personally, I'd like to nab Nick Hampton out of App State if he's there on Day 3. OLB who can cover in space while also providing some elite bend off the edge to go with Burns on passing downs (6'3 240, which is the same as Will Anderson).

I guess we will see what happens, right? His soccer team is hot garbage right now. No guarantee football won't end up the same way. I have my doubts.

These stats I was reading off were ADJUSTED FOR THE PLAY AROUND THE PLAYER. All of these stats are not adjusted. Foreman averaging double the yards over expectation as Sanders is all I need to know for how effective the player is. And, I'm still saying give me both. Having two guys like this with a rookie QB would not be a bad thing.

So now you're blaming the salary cap? Do you know what football would look like without it? It would look like baseball, which is horrendous. As for "getting closer to their value" look at Deshaun Watson's contract. After this year, his cap hits the next three years are $65 million. That's for a team that was garbage last year, with no draft picks, and with little cap space now. The salary cap isn't a production to reduce player salaries. It's a function of balancing competition within the league. This is something the NFLPA and NFL Owners agree to. Yet, in typical NFLPA fashion, they complain as soon as the CBA is signed. No one is forcing anyone to play football just like no one is forcing me to work where I work. As for Lamar Jackson, his actual value as a percentage of the salary cap is far less than what he is asking for. Why on Earth any human would feel bad for another human for being guaranteed $130 million over three years is beyond me.

Foreman was better than Sanders last year so I don't know what you're talking about. Foreman was at double of Sanders in yards over expectation. He also had PJ Walker, Baker Mayfield, and Sam Darnold as his QB while Sanders had Jalen Hurts. Football is a team game and it's difficult to evaluate individual production but, by most advanced metrics, Foreman was better. So give me Foreman and give me Sanders and I'll be happy. Not sure why you'd be cozy going with Sanders, Hubbard, and Blackshear (fuging puke). We could've signed Foreman for half the amount and had twice the production as well. 4 years and $25 million is such a Panthers thing to do for a guy like Sanders who is, by all accounts, average on his own.

I think Trevor made a big difference for Trevor. He is a generational talent and that showed several times this season. He tooks JAGs at receiver and TE and turned them into stars, and he's only in Year 2.

Our run blocking was one of the best in the NFL. Pass blocking is where our line broke down. So we should be fine to ground and pound. Just get Foreman with Sanders and we will be good to go.

Not sure how long you've been a Panthers fan but running back contracts and reasonable are not two things that we usually hear. Now if we can get Foreman to also sign, we may have one of the best running back tandems in the NFL.

Here is the thing though, why is it better for Lamar to get what he's worth while other guys will have to take a pay cut or leave Baltimore entirely? That'd the zero-sum game here and why owners don't need to collude against guaranteed contracts. It's a zero-sum game for them. They are spending the money either way, it just comes down to how much of that pie he wants to take up. Also, when you are fully guaranteed, what incentive do you have to do everything that usually comes with a bonus? I know the idea of meritocracy is dead or dying with young people and they just want what they want, but it really shouldn't. Lamar's new contract is about his projection of output over the life of the contract, not something that happened 4 years ago. The past two years he has declined statistically and has been injured. So what does that say about the next four years of the life of a mobile QB? Jalen Hurts had an AC joint injury so if I'm the Eagles I'm also wary of a huge contract there. We saw what that can do with both Cam and Andrew Luck. Both were never the same after they suffered those injuries.

I have three kids. It doesn't make me a homebody to be at home at 9 AM, taking care of them. It's not like I can go to bars, take them golfing, or do whatever it is you think makes you less of a home body. Perhaps your wife takes a more active role with your kids that allows you to do those things? Maybe you don't have kids? Either way, you're making a lot of assumptions about me because I said that Pat McAfee makes College GameDay better; a show that's been on for 20 or 30 years now.

He should take a job cut... Maybe that's just me.. I love the potential of Tremble with Reich but don't really see where Ian Thomas is any better than a rookie we could draft late on Day 3.

I'd be fine with both Foreman and Williams. With the RB market, we should be able to afford both.

The most common criticisms by people seem to be the talent that Stroud played with. I'd agree if it looked like he danced around and just waited for guys to pop open but if you watch him, you see a lot of timing, 1-2-3 and the ball is out, and smart decisions, particularly when he was playing UGA. He also played 30 games in college which, as it turns out, matters when it comes to the NFL. Brock Purdy was a 4 year starter at Iowa State and it showed.

You know, as I sit here watching ESPN, with their NFLPA Representatives who happen to also be advising Lamar on what he needs to demand from the Ravens, say that owners are colluding, I wonder a few things. Is this not a "Zero-Sum Game" for owners? Everyone in the NFL is under the same Salary Cap. Not everyone spends every cent of their space but many owners spend most of it. This isn't baseball where Lamar is just demanding cash that has zero impact on the calculus of the rest of the roster (looking at you Yankees). He is literally demanding a higher guaranteed percentage of that pie that will hamper the ability of the owner and GM to build a team. So why would there be "collusion"? Owners don't want to open the box of guaranteed contracts for star players? Bottom of the roster guys don't have any leverage to demand this, only the NFLPA during the CBA negotiations has the ability to negotiate such a demand on behalf of all players. So this will only open the flood gates for star players, and most likely only quarterbacks unless you're talking about a guy like Micah Parsons or Myles Garret. With the understanding that only transendent talents could demand a fully guaranteed contract (absent some CBA change which would reduce the overall value of contracts paid out and would have to include some injury clause as an out I'd imagine) what "flood gates" are going to open? There isn't. It's a strawman argument by the NFLPA through media to make this seem like some watershed moment that it isn't. The facts are this: Lamar is a running QB whose statistical output has declined every year since he won an MVP He has missed as many playoff games as he has won with injury The shelf life of mobile QB's, as defined by Mike Vick and Cam Newton, is not very long. Going on their longevity, you could say that Lamar is likely on the back 9 of his ability to be prolific, whether it's defenses figuring out how to play him or injuries Signing Lamar to a fully guaranteed contract at the level of the Browns will harm any team that does so because he plays a style that leads to injuries (missed 5 and 6 games the past two seasons) and the contract amount itself would require a restructure each off-season to sign free agents resulting in a larger cap hit each subsequent year (Check the Browns and Deshaun's restructure this year) Teams may not feel that Lamar is good enough, and that the risk is too high of injury, that they can't build a roster like the Chiefs did with 9 rookies and still compete for a Superb Owl In short, it's a zero-sum game with the salary cap, Lamar isn't good enough to make-up the difference in lack of talent due to his cap hit, and he has declined the past two years while also ending up injured. There is no collusion because it's a no brainer that offering a fully guaranteed contract to a guy who can't get you to the Super Bowl because he's either injured or he can't make up the talent gap of other positions is not worth any amount of cash. My supposition is that he should've signed a contract two years ago. He's already lost millions in potential income in retirement by not taking his cash in 2021 because the value of the dollar has plummeted since his negotiations first began. While his money could've been growing at a rate greater than inflation in investments, he bet on future dollars which aren't guaranteed. Basic business principal is that a dollar today is worth more today than tomorrow. Zero-sum game for owners. Just hurts the club to try to take up more of the pie regardless of whether you're healthy or not.

Gardner Minshew is still available. If I'm the Jets, I'm on the phone yesterday with him. He's an upgrade over Wilson and Mike White.