Pro bowl guard cut

[Smittymoose]

39 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

There are some players who won't, but believe it or not every NFL player is not necessarily Rod Tidwell.

Believe it or not, the bulk of players do not make it very far into even multi-year deals.

Here's a good study: https://www.theringer.com/nfl/2019/3/15/18266458/free-agent-contracts-guaranteed-money-how-long-do-deals-last

You are really overrating how much perceived stability matters other than to potentially the very upper-crust of free agency. Of guys who sign two-year deals, more than 54% never even see that second year. NFL Free Agency is primarily about identifying opportunity to make a roster. 

[Ricky Spanish]

1 hour ago, Smittymoose said:

They will have positive feelings about getting paid millions of dollars. This isn't the NBA. Vets, especially average vets unlikely to get more than a 1/2 year deal, are taking the best combination of money/opportunity they can get on the market more often than not. And there is plenty of opportunity on the Carolina OL to come in and win a starting job. 

Again, why would they come here then?

Both Miami and Cincy have more money, they can outbid us. Cincy just went to the super bowl in spite of their terrible line and Miami has the benefit of being a really nice place near the beach as well as no state income tax so that's even MORE money they get to keep.

"We have opportunity to start!"

Yeah, that's about all we have to offer. We don't have the money, the location, or the prestige to offer that many other franchises do at the moment. 

I anticipate us scraping the bottom of the barrel in terms of quality linemen in FA this offseason, unless we overpay, which will do nothing but hurt us long term. 

[Mr. Scot]

5 minutes ago, Smittymoose said:

Believe it or not, the bulk of players do not make it very far into even multi-year deals.

Here's a good study: https://www.theringer.com/nfl/2019/3/15/18266458/free-agent-contracts-guaranteed-money-how-long-do-deals-last

You are really overrating how much perceived stability matters other than to potentially the very upper-crust of free agency. Of guys who sign two-year deals, more than 54% never even see that second year. NFL Free Agency is primarily about identifying opportunity to make a roster. 

That's also because the "bulk" of NFL free agents aren't really that good.

You've got a few top guys who make a lot of money and can afford to be picky. The rest are second tier or role players at best, camp fodder at worst.

That second group is who will be picking from. But again we'll probably have to pay more for them than other teams right.

[Waldo]

If we are so damn attractive then why did Stafford stiff-arm us out of a trade? 

Yes players do care about destination, at least the ones that have a choice. I don't know how much the 'lame duck HC' thing factors into it or even if how many of the players have the personal skills to manage their career that way (some of these guys are not the brightest), some not all is reasonable. I would imagine that the top shelf players that have better options wouldn't. We can overpay the guys who don't have better options or find guys who buy into what is being sold by the people in charge...like Sam who was both lol.

This crap has been a thing way before Rhule was here, it's just worse now because we haven't won much in the last couple of years and the failure is growing. For a long time we built a niche image where it was a good place to play and live with a family but that is all dead now and not that all players wanted that when we had it. 

Edited March 10, 2022 by Waldo

[Smittymoose]

2 minutes ago, Ricky Spanish said:

Again, why would they come here then?

Both Miami and Cincy have more money, they can outbid us. Cincy just went to the super bowl in spite of their terrible line and Miami has the benefit of being a really nice place near the beach as well as no state income tax so that's even MORE money they get to keep.

"We have opportunity to start!"

Yeah, that's about all we have to offer. We don't have the money, the location, or the prestige to offer that many other franchises do at the moment. 

Because even if those teams are better options, they're not signing more than two vets in free agency. That's four guys total. There will be more than four decent OLs. And that presupposes we're on the same type of players. Even at the top of the market, Carolina would surely be interested in someone like Armstead, but would Cincinnati? Their needs are really more on the interior. They'd have to bump a good young LT to LG or RT to sign him, which works in Madden, but doesn't always work in real life. 

This fantasy that Carolina is some utterly unattractive destination that no veteran is going to touch with a ten-foot pole in free agency is not grounded in any sort of reality. 

[Mr. Scot]

3 minutes ago, Smittymoose said:

Because even if those teams are better options, they're not signing more than two vets in free agency. That's four guys total. There will be more than four decent OLs.. 

There are only two other NFL teams looking to sign offensive linemen?

Well then, that changes everything

[Smittymoose]

6 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

That's also because the "bulk" of NFL free agents aren't really that good.

You've got a few top guys who make a lot of money and can afford to be picky. The rest are second tier or role players at best, camp fodder at worst.

That second group is who will be picking from. But again we'll probably have to pay more for them than other teams right.

This is not reality. According to Spotrac data, 618 guys signed free agent contract last off-season. 524 of those deals were of the one-year variety. Another 55 were two year deals. So 93% of contracts were what I would consider "short-term." 

So really only about 7% of guys fit in our "make a lot of money camp." I do not think the remaining 93% are "second tier or role players at best, camp fodder at worst." Actually, there are a lot of reasonable deals to be had for starters in this range. Using the Bengals as an example, they signed 4 starters (and a number of other contributors) to one-year deals for a team that was coming off of a bad year and went to the Super Bowl

[Smittymoose]

7 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

There are only two other NFL teams looking to sign offensive linemen?

Well then, that changes everything

Don't be intentionally dull. I was using the examples he gave. Your point, to the extent you have one, is bad, not thoughtful, and lazy. 

[Mr. Scot]

1 minute ago, Smittymoose said:

This is not reality. According to Spotrac data, 618 guys signed free agent contract last off-season. 524 of those deals were of the one-year variety. Another 55 were two year deals. So 93% of contracts were what I would consider "short-term." 

So really only about 7% of guys fit in our "make a lot of money camp." I do not think the remaining 93% are "second tier or role players at best, camp fodder at worst." Actually, there are a lot of reasonable deals to be had for starters in this range. Using the Bengals as an example, they signed 4 starters (and a number of other contributors) to one-year deals for a team that was coming off of a bad year and went to the Super Bowl

You're actually helping make my argument for me.

[Ricky Spanish]

28 minutes ago, Smittymoose said:

Because even if those teams are better options, they're not signing more than two vets in free agency. That's four guys total. There will be more than four decent OLs. And that presupposes we're on the same type of players. Even at the top of the market, Carolina would surely be interested in someone like Armstead, but would Cincinnati? Their needs are really more on the interior. They'd have to bump a good young LT to LG or RT to sign him, which works in Madden, but doesn't always work in real life. 

This fantasy that Carolina is some utterly unattractive destination that no veteran is going to touch with a ten-foot pole in free agency is not grounded in any sort of reality. 

There are other teams besides those two who need OL help. All are more attractive destinations than us on Paper. 

Even if we do attract a guy to come play for us, do you really anticipate he'll be any good? This is the coaching staff that brought in Elflein and Erving day one of FA last offseason (because versatile!) then passed on Slater because he has short arms, then didn't play Christensen at LT until the last two games of the season due to, again, short arms, and then he played the best of any LT on the roster all season...

I don't have faith they even know what a decent OL looks like. 

[jayboogieman]

55 minutes ago, Smittymoose said:

Carolina would surely be interested in someone like Armstead

I hope not. He's 30 and has never played a full season. There has also been talk of him needing knee surgery this offseason. If the Panthers want someone else at LT, they need to draft one at 6.

[Smittymoose]

1 hour ago, Mr. Scot said:

You're actually helping make my argument for me.

Your argument was that no one good would want to come here, so no I'm not. I'm showing you that there are a lot of quality players that sign short-term, low guarantee deals that have to be primarily motivated to make a roster. You just have a very surface-level understanding of how free agency and contracts work, apparently. 

[Smittymoose]

53 minutes ago, Ricky Spanish said:

There are other teams besides those two who need OL help. All are more attractive destinations than us on Paper. 

Even if we do attract a guy to come play for us, do you really anticipate he'll be any good? This is the coaching staff that brought in Elflein and Erving day one of FA last offseason (because versatile!) then passed on Slater because he has short arms, then didn't play Christensen at LT until the last two games of the season due to, again, short arms, and then he played the best of any LT on the roster all season...

I don't have faith they even know what a decent OL looks like. 

If the argument is that you don't trust this staff to evaluate the correct targets, that's a different question. And the track record is bad. But there will be numerous quality starters available to Carolina on 1-2 year deals for an affordable price if they pick the right guys. 

[Smittymoose]

31 minutes ago, jayboogieman said:

I hope not. He's 30 and has never played a full season. There has also been talk of him needing knee surgery this offseason. If the Panthers want someone else at LT, they need to draft one at 6.

It was just one example. No clue if they're interested. I would not be inclined to give him a mega deal, but they might do it.