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!

     

Thursday Night Football Thread - Rams @ 49ers; It's Pretty Exciting


Saca312

Recommended Posts

Not even kidding. This game has some really nice offense and defense at the same time. From Watkins insane neck-breaking speed, to Garcon's crazy catch on the sideline, this game is exciting. Both offenses are definitely competent with great offensive minds in their coaching staff, and this game's something you want to try and catch up on.

Current score 27-20 in Rams favor. But believe me when I say this game is very close.

Discuss below.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Saca312 said:

Not even kidding. This game has some really nice offense and defense at the same time. From Watkins insane neck-breaking speed, to Garcon's crazy catch on the sideline, this game is exciting. Both offenses are definitely competent with great offensive minds in their coaching staff, and this game's something you want to try and catch up on.

Current score 27-20 in Rams favor. But believe me when I say this game is very close.

Discuss below.

Its kinda depressing seeing two OC's who know what they are doing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, LinvilleGorge said:

Good game. 

Unfortunately, it's making us accept that fact that our hope that the Niners defense is underrated was but a pipe dream. The Rams are just having their way with this D. 

Not really. 49er Secondary is bad as expected, but their front has been giving fits. Rams HC is also an offensive mastermind like Shanahan. It's like a game of chess between these two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Saca312 said:

Not really. 49er Secondary is bad as expected, but their front has been giving fits. Rams HC is also an offensive mastermind like Shanahan. It's like a game of chess between these two.

The Rams have 34 now and it's still in the 3rd quarter. That's more than we have on the season. 

Don't kid yourself dude, this 49ers' defense is fuging

tenor.gif

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, LinvilleGorge said:

The Rams have 34 now and it's still in the 3rd quarter. That's more than we have on the season. 

Don't kid yourself dude, this 49ers' defense is fuging

tenor.gif

 

Or the Rams offense is good? 

If you watched their latest touchdown, their play concept was impossible to defend. Man to man by the 49ers against a double slant concept, which in turns creates a legal "pick" for an impossible to cover easy TD.

They got good play-callers and weapons on the Rams. Nothing you can do about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Saca312 said:

Or the Rams offense is good? 

If you watched their latest touchdown, their play concept was impossible to defend. Man to man by the 49ers against a double slant concept, which in turns creates a legal "pick" for an impossible to cover easy TD.

They got good play-callers and weapons on the Rams. Nothing you can do about it.

Not impossible. Impossible with straight man coverage like the Niners were running. 

34 points through three quarters is just terrible, I don't care if you're facing The Greatest Show on Turf. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Good game. 

Unfortunately, it's making us accept that fact that our hope that the Niners defense is underrated was but a pipe dream. The Rams are just having their way with this D. 

But it means our D is super good though

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • 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.
    • Get any shot you can at humane society, so much cheaper
×
×
  • Create New...