Peon Awesome

Context matters. I don't necessarily say I agree with the thought process but it seemed pretty clear that Rhule felt pinning a young Jets team with a rookie qb deep near their endzone would be more advantageous that kicking a long field goal, especially with how dominant our defense played. Does that mean he thought Santoso was incapable of making a 50 yarder? Doubtful. I think he hoped Charlton would've placed those better, gotten the Jets inside the 10, forced a 3 and out, and gotten the ball back with a fresh set of downs near mid field. Didn't quite happen but that seemed to be the thought process.

Perhaps a backup MLB and possibly TE if they cut Ian Thomas and aren't sold on Thompson or Ricci as TE3. Outside of that, I don't see the need or value in picking up a team's castoff right before the season is starting. Honestly, we should only be talking about filling out the bottom of the roster. Put to rest the idea of finding a starting LT or C from the waiver wire.

Not sure what to think about Bonnafon. He has done some good things for us but not seeing him on the field has him as an afterthought now. And Hubbard seems to have made him expendable as they serve the same role. I'm not necessarily sold on Brown. I think he's the guy who shows flashes when playing against bottom of the roster players in the preseason but will probably routinely get stuffed when up against starters. I see him on the practice squad and us rolling with CMC, Hubbard and Cannon, with Bonnafon making it if we want 4 RBs. I don't see Tecklenberg making the 53. If we really want him, we can cut and then resign him after shifting Shi Smith to IR. But seems like he's destined for PS. I agree with cutting (or trading) Ian Thomas but not sure if the team agrees. I don't see the downgrade from Thomas to Thompson being worth $2 million. I think safety will be the hardest group to predict. Franklin, Chandler, Robinson and Hartsfield all have good cases to be made. Hartsfield might get an edge for positional versatility. I think whoever gets cut is a lock for the PS and call up for injury. But honestly if you can't make our 53 with out limited depth, probably not someone worth shedding tears for.

You seem to be missing nuance here. I'll admit I'm not an expert on the penal code; it's possible that Watson didn't do anything strictly illegal; I honestly don't know. But he sure as hell did something unethical and what would appear to meet criteria for a sexual harassment civil suit. It's one thing to ask for a blow job. It's another to do it with a woman you've hired to perform a service for you and have brought into your home. It's akin to asking your kid's 18 year old babysitter if she'll give you a blowjob after putting the kids to bed. Maybe it's not illegal but it definitely makes you a scumbag and open to civil litigation. Especially if you also do it with 20 other babysitters.

Now that over the cap has published some of the structuring of the contract, looks like there's only about $3 million in dead cap if we cut him after next season. So for those still worried about DJ's extension, when it actually comes into play, we have an easy out on Robby's contract with minimal cap hit. I personally don't think it matters regardless because we can structure DJ's extension so more money comes in the latter part of it, but that should at least put to rest the idea thought there's any impact at all on our ability to resign DJ.

A great punter can make a huge difference. I still remember a wildcard playoff game from about 8 or so years ago where a Chargers team that was double digit underdogs beat a Colts team on the back of their punter who boomed like multiple 60+ yard net punts and kept pinning the Colts inside their 10. We're fortunate to have a top tier punter.

I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt for a few reasons: 1. As others have said, an o line is the one unit that needs time to gel. Our starting line saw one half of action in the preseason and has had limited reps together even in practice with Erving banged up. Give them at least the Jets game, against a team already decimated by injuries on defense, to get right and build more chemistry before writing them off. 2. We're making judgments mostly off watching our backups make plays against 3rd stringers/practice squad players. Hell they very well may be better than our starters but we have to acknowledge that Rhule and Co. have a better sense for the skill and execution of the o linemen watching them day in and day out in practice. 3. For the most part we haven't seen the current regime irrationally attached to poorly performing players when better options were clearly available. The main exception was probably Whitehead but even he eventually got benched for Carter. We just jettisoned a clearly well-liked Slye for a kicker we just picked up like 2 days earlier. If members of the line seem overmatched even after getting more opportunities to gel, I don't see Rhule sitting pat. I suspect there'll be a short leash after a game or two.

Maybe, but $2.5 million of that savings is from next year, which will still be available as long as we cut him before the 3rd league day of 2022 when his roster bonus kicks in. So you're ultimately deciding if you're better off saving $1 million or keeping him as wr depth. With the injury to Shi Smith, unless it really is a very minor thing, I'd probably keep him this year and cut him next year.

Grier would've been well within his right to have slid when the defender approached him and settled for a decent gain without risking injury. The fact that he instead jukes the defender and rushes it in for a touchdown... props

We may have the best kicking duo in the league: Charlton and Santoso

He looked much better in the last couple series. I think he needed the first several series to settle down and then finally started to get comfortable and make some good reads after getting those jitters out. Hard to complain about that stat line.

Tremble is making it really hard to justify spending $2 million to keep Ian Thomas

Chinn has been showing great instincts and coverage skills at safety. Moving him there full time seems like 100% the right call.

Hell if we were the ones trading the 6th for a 7th, I'd have understood it. We're saving $1 million relative to cutting him while getting rid of a guy who hasn't seen the field because he apparently gets injured as soon as someone breathes on him. And between the arrest and unvaccinated status, he's only brought negative attention. Turning a 7th into a 6th might not be much but given the circumstances, it's a damn coup.

We didn't pay him $12 million this year. So to present it like we are giving him $16.5 million this year is just wrong. We don't know yet the exact specifics of how they designed the extension for cap purposes. The $4.5 million more he got paid this year could've been designated as a signing bonus on the new contract and he only goes up to a $13.5 million cap hit this year. That would make the most sense honestly. And in that scenario, if you want to be a stickler about it, it would be a 3 year $38.5 million contract. But let's humor you and make this deal out to look as bad as possible and call it 3 years, $41.5 million, even though the math with signing bonuses isn't as simple as you presented it. How many receivers with nearly 100 catches and 1100 receiving yards last year would get a new 3 year contract for $13.8 million per year if signing today? Any?

There are some truly awful takes in this thread. Now that I see the details of the contract, it's a great deal. Basically we tore up his current contract (which he clearly outplayed) and signed him to a 3 year, $37.5 million deal. That's exactly what Corey Davis got but he had even more guaranteed money. Meanwhile elite #1s signing contracts now are getting at least $20 million per year. Deandre Hopkins is frickin getting $27+ million. Stop acting like we're paying him #1 money. $12.5 million was #1 money in 2012. And keep in mind, we have a 1a and 1b situation in Carolina. Yeah I think DJ is more talented but objectively their stats were really close last year. If you ask me, I don't know if this deal happens without us drafting Terrace Marshall and him looking like the real deal in preseason. Robby's camp had to see that and think Terrace might make him look dispensable and minimize his leverage. But assuming we're gonna play a lot of 3 WR sets anyway, we can use 3 damn good receivers.

It's obviously WAYYY too early to pass judgement on Sewell. But it's interesting that our 3rd round pick that is also being asked to play RT after playing LT his whole career seems to be playing a fair bit better than Sewell in the preseason. At the very least, that's gotta make you feel good about drafting someone you can say that about when Sewell is supposed to be a generational talent.

I'm erring towards Grier mainly because in comparable situations, Grier looked better than PJ (basically what Gantt said). I mean we all assumed it was just coachspeak that Grier was improving his game but maybe he really did. He was atrocious his rookie year but that was 2 years ago. And he didn't look good in preseason game 1 but he was playing with players that have no business on an nfl roster and still looked better than PJ last night. Not crazy to think he refined his game a little since his rookie year. He was actually good yesterday. Not talking about a qb controversy and we're still screwed if he has to start for us, but I feel better about his ability to turn into a possibly usable backup which I couldn't say before yesterday.

Can y'all remind me again, do we want to cut PJ or name him the starter over Darnold? Huddlers have the best takes

https://www.espn.com/nfl/insider/story/_/id/32015903/ranking-every-nfl-team-position-group-1-32-2021-season-top-qb-wr-cb-units-more Have to be an espn insider to read but I'll hit the salient points. They ranked teams 1-32 by each position group factoring in all players, not just starters. Panthers rankings: QB - 31 (Houston 32) RB - 3 (Browns and Vikings are top 2) WR - 11 TE - 30 (Jax, Arizona bottom 2) OL - 31 (Pitt 32) IDL - 21 Edge - 14 Off-ball LB - 15 CB - 20 Safety - 28 Overall - 30 (Jets, Houston bottom 2) My take - I think it's pretty fair for the most part. They seem to have little faith that Darnold will escape the stink of his Jets tenure but our subpar backup qbs don't help the ranking either. OL and TE are appropriately low. Linebackers seem to be rated a bit generously; I wonder if many of them still consider Chinn a LB; otherwise they must like Shaq more than the average huddler. Compared to the NFL.com ranking that had our receivers 18th, 11th seems much fairer especially when you consider the teams ahead of us. Even though we're currently 30th overall, feels like our talent level is better than that. But maybe that's my homerism. If we stay competitive in the playoff race, that has to be a testament to Rhule and the coaching staff.

The list is just comically bad. It feels like a minimally informed casual fan made it. "Oh Green Bay has Davante Adams. They should probably be pretty high!" Keep in mind too that it's a WR specific ranking list, not receiving corps, so Kansas City has no business being that high. Really, San Franciso SIX spots ahead of us? Just awful. I mean honestly ask yourself how many of these teams would you straight up trade our receiving corps for theirs. I realize it's a meaningless list so who cares but it's just embarrassing that a paid staffer for NFL.com came up with this.

While I wouldn't call it blind faith for me personally, I have been hopeful Rhule will right the ship. The commonality between those 3 teams (Temple, Baylor, Carolina) is that their level of talent is/was woefully lacking relative to the best/ranked teams. Great coaching has limits. Belichick showed that last year. One thing you can say about Rhule is that his teams never underachieve. And I think many of us find that a welcome change after suffering years of that.

Well the writing was on the wall for Little. Not worth the $1.1 million in base salary he was owed. So instead of flat out cutting him, we get a 7th round pick. And even though it's kind of pennies in the grand scheme of the cap, we also save an extra $100,000 on our cap compared to cutting him ($100k of his 2021 salary is guaranteed). At the same time, I get it from the Dolphins standpoint. They need line help and are probably hoping that Little's pedigree gives him a shot to turn it around in a new environment. And if he doesn't, they can just cut him and only have to pay $100k and the lost 7th round pick. If he even turns into a serviceable swing tackle and starts a game or two due to injury, it's probably worth it for them. Granted, I seriously doubt he'll do that and is more likely to not even make their 53, but it's a low risk proposition for them.

If PJ is better than Darnold, that's not only a terrible sign for this season and the immediate outlook of this franchise but would make the Darnold trade one of the worst decisions in franchise history. Having said that, PJ is still a reasonable backup. If Darnold gets hurt and we're not looking competitive, we can trot him out, make our games semi-interesting even if largely uncompetitive, and angle for a top draft pick. If Darnold keeps us afloat for a playoff spot leading up to his injury, we can scour the league and buy low on a semi-decent fill in (e.g. Minshew or Foles) and leave PJ as the backup.

It is painfully obvious that you are not understanding this article. I was going to let it go but it's just hurting my brain reading your responses. 1. This is only referencing false negatives, not false positives. They make no comment about the rate of false positives. False positives are also incredibly difficult to ascertain since people can be infected and be asymptomatic. So you can't definitively say it's a false positive just because you do a test the next day and it's negative. Especially if you have no symptoms, your viral loads may be so low that you keep testing negative after your initial positive test. 2. The majority of false negatives in the report are before people develop symptoms or well after they got infected. That's universal for any virus and any test, no matter how good the test is. It's because these are the times when viral loads are the lowest, either because there hasn't been enough time for the virus to replicate in the case of the early testing, or because the immune system has cleared some of the virus as it relates to later testing. Many of the other false negatives are often due to tester error, for instance the nurse not inserting the swab far enough or not leaving it in long enough either because they're doing it wrong or the patient squirmed out of it. Anyhow, I implore you to stop posting articles and misinterpreting the science before I get anymore of a headache. Thanks