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!

     

Hurney will not shoot fireworks next Thursday.


Catufb85

Recommended Posts

19 hours ago, Adb6368 said:

If things shake out like that then Harold Landry should be the no-brainer pick. DE is a vastly more important position and will be a bigger need in 1 year. Have to think long-term here. DBs are easier to find than pass-rushers.

Landry is barely bigger than Luke

He is a 34 OLB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Adb6368 said:

He’s also the same size as Mario Addison. He’s played DE throughout college. I’m not concerned about his size with his speed and ability. 

No way I would spend my first round pick on another Mario Addison.  Guys also play LB at 210 in college, but not the pros.

Disagree on this one

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, as long as he doesn't shoot a blank, I'm fine. Personally, I don't  think Alexander would be a blank.

The thing is though, I do think that either Ridley or Moore is going to be available. I will also tell you that Christian Kirk could be a strong wildcard in all of this. Basically what I am saying is that we likely will get our sexy pick. Landry sure ain't stopping us. I am not sure he is a good fit, is smallish for a DE, and he is somewhat of a project. He needs work.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sbnation.com/platform/amp/nfl/2018/4/13/17159106/harold-landry-breakdown-2018-nfl-draft

Moreover, unless people think that the rumors originate out of gamesmanship---basically, lies---or because it would just be too easy, or that fairy tales just don't exist, the Cowboys really like Courtland Sutton.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, WOW!! said:

If he trades up for Moore and give away a pick to get a WR in this draft .. I will literally throw something at the TV ..

I thought that you put a lot of faith in Norv. If we would make such an aggressive move, it would only be at the behest of Norv, and faith that he can use the guy effectively and relatively quickly (meaning, the plan would be to get him in an impact role by September).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, top dawg said:

I thought that you put a lot of faith in Norv. If we would make such an aggressive move, it would only be at the behest of Norv, and faith that he can use the guy effectively and relatively quickly (meaning, the plan would be to get him in an impact role by September).

  I have no problem with taking Moore at 24. But he’s the ONLY WR I would consider there. And sure don’t want to trade up. If anything, we need a 5th pick in the top 100, or two in the top 40. 

  As long as we don’t take Ridley. Period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Toomers said:

  I have no problem with taking Moore at 24. But he’s the ONLY WR I would consider there. And sure don’t want to trade up. If anything, we need a 5th pick in the top 100, or two in the top 40. 

  As long as we don’t take Ridley. Period.

So, I see you're in the ranks of the few that are perhaps severely underrating Ridley. Dude really could be a better version of Amari Cooper after all is said and done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, top dawg said:

So, I see you're in the ranks of the few that are perhaps severely underrating Ridley. Dude really could be a better version of Amari Cooper after all is said and done.

   I’ve watched almost every snap of his career. And I shared that same opinion after his FR year. But he hasn’t gotten any better and in fact has gotten much worse. Doesn’t attack the ball, hands are inconsistent, and avoids contact like it’s the plague. The most impressive play of his FR year was when he blocked a GA DB into the water coolers. I was sold then. But that player doesn’t exist anymore. If he has been “protecting” himself for two years, then that brings up an entirely different set of issues. I may be underrating him. But it’s not from a lack of knowledge on his game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Catufb85 said:

Patriots: #23 - LT Kolton Miller - No one is sure what the Patriots will do and their elusive drama continues.  No one knows whether they will go weapons for Brady, protection for Brady (losing Solder), or replacement for Brady.  I went with Kolton Miller LT from UCLA as the team has met with multiple times.
 

I have a question. What is the realistic thing that could happen for Pats to go a top 5 QB in first round and deal him to 49's as a trade to get Garoppolo back? My son seems to believe this to happen and is a fact and he claims that yesterday that the NFL news was talking about this happening. No telling what Pats will be up to since it was brought up about them being elusive and what their agenda really is in the draft and what they will do.

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...