Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Vegas Odds


Squirrel

Recommended Posts

The last I saw were 25-1. Wouldn't be surprised to see that dip down to 30-1 or so before the season starts. 

 

 

Edit...just did some quick Googling and I'm seeing 28-1 at Bovada. Unless we have an amazing draft, I see it continuing to fall with the perceived (arguable if good or not) offseason we've had. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going back in two weeks which will be my fourth trip in 12 months.

Current odds has us right in the middle at 50/1. Seems reasonable and a good value.

The NFC Championship is at 25/1 which is good for 10th in the conference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50-1 is insane value. Get it NOW. The fact is all of our key young core is back and will only be better. We also get the current odds on favorite at home @10 AM PST in a rematch of a game where preventing a late fumble would have given us the #1 seed and perhaps the Lombardi last year.

With Cam and our D we have far more than a punchers chance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50-1 is insane value. Get it NOW. The fact is all of our key young core is back and will only be better. We also get the current odds on favorite at home @10 AM PST in a rematch of a game where preventing a late fumble would have given us the #1 seed and perhaps the Lombardi last year.

With Cam and our D we have far more than a punchers chance.

 

Public perception is we are house cleaning on offense.  Spring cleaning is the better term. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Congratulations do they know who the father is?
    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
×
×
  • Create New...