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!

     

Saints Safety Vaccaro to IR


Cary Kollins

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, TN05 said:

So if they lose to Atlanta and we win out, we win the division right? Any chance of a bye?

the only way we get a bye is to get the 2 seed which means the following teams will have to lose one of their remaining 2 games and we would have to win our remaining 2 games : 

  • Saints
  • Rams
  • Vikings

I think the Saints could lose to the Falcons if the Falcons find a way to shut down their run game. Rams could lose to the Titans because the Titans might miss the playoffs if they lose to the Rams on Sunday. 

The problem is the Vikings, they have a cupcake schedule the rest of the way . Green bay is pretty much a dumpster fire without rodgers and now TD knocked out Davantee Adams as well.And Hundley is   1-3 at Home, this game should be a terrible blowout. Then they close the season out with the Bears who I highly doubt will beat them either. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Jeremy Igo said:

Aren't they missing Klein also. Those are big losses.

And both times we played them they were missing their whole starting secondary...still shut us down. Its not their defense, it's their offense outscoring us and putting us in predictable situations

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, brandon_87 said:

And both times we played them they were missing their whole starting secondary...still shut us down. Its not their defense, it's their offense outscoring us and putting us in predictable situations

Eh the last time we faced them I can honestly say we beat ourselves. 

I think having Olsen back really pays huge if we face em in the playoffs. Will always be a 50/50 tho wit em

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Saca312 said:

Eh the last time we faced them I can honestly say we beat ourselves. 

I think having Olsen back really pays huge if we face em in the playoffs. Will always be a 50/50 tho wit em

I'm hoping 3rd times a charm if we meet again, I want to see the ferocious D we had for Minnesota and not the scared poo from last week, blitz Brees and don't give a cushion for short dumpoffs and I feel like we would succeed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

we won't lose to them 3 times.

we're clicking on both sides of the ball for the most part. QBs are getting pressured and the secondary is disrupting. we're creating plenty of turnovers as well. quite a few in the last 2-3 games and i don't think that's going to slow down any time soon.

 

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...