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!

     

It's Derrick Brown, right?


Jeremy Igo

Recommended Posts

Just now, Jeremy Igo said:

Simmons will be off the board.

Brown will be by far the bpa and also fills a huge need.

 

Best possible scenerio 

If Okudah is still there I would take him, but honestly I would be fine with Derrick Brown as the pick too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah it's Brown.

Burrow, Young, Okudah, Tua, Simmons all off the board when we pick.

Need + Talent + Value all line up here.

Unless someone falls in love with Herbert or Love and offers us alot, then it's Brown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wilfs would be better if he is there but that sadly isn't happening. Plenty of DTs later in the draft that fill our needs.

I will be interesting to see what direction they go in and if the new staff believes he is better than other options. It's about time to peek behind the curtain and stop talking about what we think these guys will do. If it's a QB I will laugh my butt off. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gettleman is the wildcard.  The Giants need help about everywhere like us.  The Lions are about as close to a shoo-in for Okudah as there could be, leaving the Giants going with OT, DT or LB.  An OT or Simmons have been the hot commodities of late, but some people are still mocking Brown to the G-men.  If Brown gets past the Giants and they drafted Simmons, then yes, Brown is unquestionably the pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, saX man said:

What if...

1. CIN-Burrow

2. Skins-Young

3. Lions-Simmons

4. LAC (from NYG)-Tua

5. MIA-Herbert

6. NYG (from LAC)-Wirfs

7. You have to go Okudah right?

Yes, but will that happen though?  Pretty far fetched that the Lions who are completely depleted at corner intentionally skips out on the top guy at the position in the draft.  Okudah and Simmons grade out similarly, so it's not a BPA scenario for Simmons.  The Lions would have to really like Simmons more than Okudah is what that boils down to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Waldo said:

Wilfs would be better if he is there but that sadly isn't happening. Plenty of DTs later in the draft that fill our needs.

I will be interesting to see what direction they go in and if the new staff believes he is better than other options. It's about time to peek behind the curtain and stop talking about what we think these guys will do. If it's a QB I will laugh my butt off. 

Got to go with you this one...there are just as good....not better...but good DT's that can team with KK and give us a good run stopping line and also decent pass rushers up the middle.  They think you need a "SUPERSTAR!"  Tell how many Superbowls Ndamukong Suh won?

 

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...