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!

     

Moton signed to 4 year, $72M deal


AndrewLaskoski
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, TheSpecialJuan said:
walder_seth.png&w=160&h=160&scale=crop

Seth WalderESPN Analytics 

From 2018-2020, Taylor Moton ranked 2nd and 11th among tackles in run block win rate and pass block win rate, respectively. Last season, Moton ranked 9th and 16th in RBWR and PBWR, respectively. (ESPN / NFL Next Gen Stats)

Damn!! too much math today---Top 15% in Run  blocking and top 25% in pass blocking.Thinking Think GIF by Rodney Dangerfield

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

I have said the same thing.  People forget how effective he was in bursts before last year.  A LT needs the ability to match up against all kinds of pass rushers--power and finesse--that is why they are hard to find-

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

It very well could be. We'll have to wait out the details. It very well could be a four year extension on top of the franchise tag which would put him under contract for 5 years.

 

 

I may be wrong but I didn't think this was possible. Thought you could only replace the tag with a long term deal...

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, stbugs said:

I think that’s what it is. You call it a 5 year contract because he has 5 years left with us and it’s really a 4 year extension after this tag year.

A lot of times people, especially agents, like to report it in terms of "new money".  Which is what the 4yr/$72m is most likely.

The average annual amount sounds better that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It's honestly pretty interesting just seeing this pairing play out. Canales’ offenses (Seattle, Tampa) are run-first, under-center, play-action systems built around defined reads and intermediate/deep timing throws. That structure worked when he had QBs like Baker Mayfield or Russell Wilson in a system that created clear launch points and sightlines. His success has always been tied to a credible run game + play-action gravity. You can see that with the Panthers team building philosophy as well. Coker and TMac both are bigger receivers that won't get the best YAC production but thrive as possession receivers in contested scenarios. They're not the best in space and creating additional yardage in such, and would likely fair better systematically with a stronger armed QB who can create better opportunities on those boundary 1v1 matchups with stronger throws. Bryce, on the other hand, is a spread-native QB. His strengths are rhythm, spacing, quick processing, and off-script creation. Asking him to live in condensed formations with long-developing play-action concepts just hasn't been his forte. And well, his boundary throws are limited in velocity which takes a big chunk of the playbook off. And I mean a QB like Bryce can still work, it's just Dave's offensive philosophy and foundation is very much at odds with Young's physical limits and his own experience. So it's certainly still a learning experience for Dave to figure out how he can mesh his offensive philosophy with Young's strengths. He's very inexperienced with maximizing Bryce's strengths with his system. Would love to see us bring in an OC with spread experience and adaptability to implement a cohesive system with Dave to allow Bryce to thrive, as it's obvious we're sticking with him for a bit longer.   
    • Only thing I really agreed with is questioning why we didn’t take any timeouts on their last drive.  I know hindsight is 20/20, but I think it would’ve saved clock bc they were desperate to score as soon as the opportunity presented itself, but I also think it could’ve helped the defense regroup and maybe give us a better chance to stop them.
×
×
  • Create New...