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!

     

Corn Elder


therealmjl

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, bull123 said:

Yes....but our run defense is going to be horrid as well...our LB could be worst in the league

I believe it will be a complete team effort on how bad our defense will be.  We will have some bright spots but our CB's will get killed by the top rated QB's.  Against the lower rank teams we might hold our own and even have bright spots that will raise hopes, but we will make mistakes that will cost us games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Moo Daeng said:

They will be better than last year. Yall just like to parrot yourselves in every post you make.

The only difference is the age factor and dollar they make.  Young players make mistakes and I am sorry I just don't have a level of confidence that Shaq will be the leader that Luke was.  We will see what happens but I don't worry about the offense.  Can the defense keep us in games is my questionable concern.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Moo Daeng said:

They will be better than last year. Yall just like to parrot yourselves in every post you make.

We were middle of the pack or better in virtually every passing defense category last year. I honestly don't see this secondary doing better than that, especially since we lost by far our best DB from last season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

We were middle of the pack or better in virtually every passing defense category last year. I honestly don't see this secondary doing better than that, especially since we lost by far our best DB from last season.

To be fair I think a strong argument can be made that a lot of teams don't throw the ball a ton when it's easy to hand off to your rb for 8 yards a pop.  Being awful against the run tends to make your secondary look better on paper than perhaps it really is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, 1of10Charnatives said:

To be fair I think a strong argument can be made that a lot of teams don't throw the ball a ton when it's easy to hand off to your rb for 8 yards a pop.  Being awful against the run tends to make your secondary look better on paper than perhaps it really is.

We were above middle of the pack in average net yards per attempt. We were among the league leaders in INTs. 

The run D was absolutely abysmal, but for the most part the secondary wasn't.

We were tied for 20th in the league in terms of pass attempts against us. I was honestly surprised we weren't a lot lower considering you could just line up and run it down our throats at will... and mike and sam for that matter 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Moo Daeng said:

They will be better than last year. Yall just like to parrot yourselves in every post you make.

In what way could they possibly be better? Even tho we sucked last year- we have 0 talent in the secondary and lost luke and our LB corps is awful. DL is wash at best...we lost proven guys like Addison, McCoy, Poe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, LinvilleGorge said:

If we go into the season with this secondary in our division, teams are going to be putting up video game scores on us. Which is okay by me to be honest. I was never under the delusion that we have anything other than draft position to play for this season.

Man, I really wish the NFL would adopt promotion/relegation tiered league format so that all the fans who want to "play for draft position" can just watch the team get demoted. Here's your reward for sucking. ;)

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...