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!

     

Greg Little (Now Off) PUP


mrcompletely11

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Okung is the starter at LT. Little has become a project at this point. Sucks to trade up in the 2nd for a project.

I thought/think the hope was that he could get some valuable time in to build some experience up whether backing okung up or playing guard (which I never understood why).  Now calling him a project seems like a best case scenario with him.  I may be mistaken but wasnt being motivated a knock on him coming out?   Freaking hurney and his trading up.

But again the to the bigger issue is that the basic depth on the oline is already evaporating. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did anyone read the article??

They said it's the active PUP and that it wouldn't be long-term. Okung and Moton are the starters and this year was going to be Little's year to learn from Okung and back him up. All of the talk of Little going to LG or RG was silly. 

This announcement doesn't do anything to Teddy, CMC, the offense, etc. Just slows down a "growth/learning curve" year for Little for the early part of the season....if that even happens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the OL will end up this way--if we play any games---

Reed C (Shocking prediction--but Paradis sucks)

Miller G

Schofield G

Moton T

Okung T

Depth:  Daley (G/T),  Larsen (C/G), Paradis (C), Horton (G), Bowen (T,) Little (T)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

I think the moral of the story is dont draft offensive lineman that have reported motivation issues.  Damnit Hurney

Do not draft any player with motivational issues--but these OL who do not report in shape get hurt easily.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

    Always the same story on the Huddle. When someone tells you a player like Little has serious motivation issues, people just attack the poster and call him negative and biased. Now, when it becomes obvious, folks act like there was no way to see it coming...lol. 
 

    Same as the Gano situation. That outcome was predicted by people on here during that whole process. But once again, just deemed “negative” when in reality it was absolutely correct.   
 

    Is “negative” a new slang word for being right. It sure seems to be how things play out on here. I’m just glad it doesn’t matter to me anymore except for laughter. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

I think the OL will end up this way--if we play any games---

Reed C (Shocking prediction--but Paradis sucks)

Miller G

Schofield G

Moton T

Okung T

Depth:  Daley (G/T),  Larsen (C/G), Paradis (C), Horton (G), Bowen (T,) Little (T)

I keep forgetting we got rid of Turner. Our interior line is going to be the worst we’ve ever had I think.

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...