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!

     

Playoff Games


Mr. Scot

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Real1zOnly said:

Has there ever been a rb this tall and this big in NFL history?

Brandon Jacobs was big but he wasn't as fast as Henry.

Eric Dickerson was 6'3 230.

Eddie George was 6'3 230 but didn't have the speed.

Derrick Henry is a freak!

 

bettis was as wide as he was tall...lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Jmac said:

I don't believe Henry played that game...he would have had 250+ yards against the sh%tty D and it would have been a loss.

He played. 

If memory serves correctly it was a weird game.   Think he had like 4 rush attempts or something comical the first half.  For no real reason.  Then we got up.  

We didn’t really stop him.  They just didn’t use him 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Real1zOnly said:

Has there ever been a rb this tall and this big in NFL history?

Brandon Jacobs was big but he wasn't as fast as Henry.

Eric Dickerson was 6'3 230.

Eddie George was 6'3 230 but didn't have the speed.

Derrick Henry is a freak!

 

My best RB ever is Dickerson...well that I watched live.  What a fuggin amazing player.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, pantherj said:

Ever see Henry playing in high school?

It had to have been ridiculous. Watching future P5 D1 players in HS is ridiculous. They look like gods among mere mortals. I've seen plenty of P5 D1 guys play in HS and a handful of pros, but never a guy who ended up being a physical freak among physical freaks in the NFL.

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...