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!

     

Official NFL Free Agency Thread


TheCasillas
 Share

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, *FreeFua* said:

Unreal. 

This is a fantastic deal for the Pats. The Hurst deal was already iffy money wise now it looks worse

Hurst breakdown is up 

41060511-9136-4688-B3E4-DF8E839568BC.thumb.png.b9548c35b7b0b95c87d1a527a81e09ae.png

Would have been nice to sign them both and play Geseki as a big slot. Hurst is a more well rounded TE but Geseki a better pure pass catcher 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, *FreeFua* said:

Unreal. 

This is a fantastic deal for the Pats. The Hurst deal was already iffy money wise now it looks worse

Hurst breakdown is up 

41060511-9136-4688-B3E4-DF8E839568BC.thumb.png.b9548c35b7b0b95c87d1a527a81e09ae.png

I'm fine with going with the guy that can actually block and catch. Dolphins fans aren't that upset about losing him, basically a really tall possession receiver who isn't good at blocking. 2 years $13M guaranteed isn't bad for Hurst

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, *FreeFua* said:

Unreal. 

This is a fantastic deal for the Pats. The Hurst deal was already iffy money wise now it looks worse

Hurst breakdown is up 

41060511-9136-4688-B3E4-DF8E839568BC.thumb.png.b9548c35b7b0b95c87d1a527a81e09ae.png

Gesicki is basically WR. We got Hurst who is much better all around as a TE for an average of 7 million per season, although we used his cap hit as flexibility to lower it this season so that we can sign more weapons. Hurst had a very good year and would have had much better receiving stats if the Beangles didn’t have so many injuries on the O line. He was ask to block much more in the second half of the season due to this. There is a reason why we signed him long term and why Gesicki got a one year deal. We also have an out after 2 years with only 2 million dead cap so again, great flexibility on a well rounded TE who seems to be getting better with age. Gesicki is a one truck pony that’s why he’s 27 and only getting a one year deal

Edited by WarPanthers89
  • Pie 2
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/16/2023 at 8:24 AM, Mr. Scot said:

FYI: This is the guy we chose Greg Little over

I have a feeling the Bills weren't too happy with their pick either.  If the Little pick was an F grade, then Cody Ford was around a D-.  He had a 41.2 PFF grade last year and his career best was a 53.8.  I'm surprised he's even still getting signed somewhere but I can only imagine it's because he has experience at OT and OG (albeit he sucks at both).

  • Pie 3
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

    • 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...