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!

     

SI.com NFL Predictions


Black

Recommended Posts

Considering Jerome Bettis is the one who picked us with the worst record, I don't think anyone should lose any sleep over it. I do have a couple questions though:

1. Peter King says that Fox will be gone because the Panthers do not want to pay a Top 5 head coach salary. I understand if they just want Fox gone, but I have heard this before as well. So, does that mean that no matter who the coach is and what success he has here, the Panthers will never pay a Top 5 salary? I find it hard to believe that they would simply say good-bye to a Top 5 coach, whether it's Fox or someone else, because they don't want to pay the going rate salary.

2. I don't keep up with other NFL teams like I used to. That said, am I missing something when it comes to the Falcons? Out of the eight "experts" in this column, six have the Falcons winning the division or being one of the wildcard teams. I don't put a lot of stock in these predictions, but I've heard other analysts give the same type of outlook for them. I definitely understand why people would have reservations about the Panthers with so many unknowns, but have the Falcons really improved themselves?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2. I don't keep up with other NFL teams like I used to. That said, am I missing something when it comes to the Falcons? Out of the eight "experts" in this column, six have the Falcons winning the division or being one of the wildcard teams. I don't put a lot of stock in these predictions, but I've heard other analysts give the same type of outlook for them. I definitely understand why people would have reservations about the Panthers with so many unknowns, but have the Falcons really improved themselves?

No, your not wrong. They are the same they have always been. Like always, they are overrated as usual.

From the Onion:

* Strength: It's been more than a year since Matt Ryan appeared in a Gillette commercial, so the Gillette commercial curse should have run its course; Black is still a very intimidating color

* Weakness: Have all the makings of a team that stays just competitive enough to keep their fans clinging to hope through a 7-9 season

* Player To Watch: Everyone respects a player toughing through injury, but it remains to be seen how Michael Turner expects to produce without his surgically removed left foot

* Biggest Question: Can the Braves' return to relevance in baseball keep people distracted as the Falcons start 0-3?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone is sooo convinced GB will be in the Super Bowl this year. They be good, but that's a lot of bro-love for em'. On the AFC side of things, I'm surprised for the lack of love for the Colts. They are an improved unit from their AFC Champion squad from last year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They don't have a quarterback. When you don't have a quarterback in the NFL, you're not going to be a really good football team.

Good to see he knows exactly how our QBs will play. I might have respected it more had Bettis said we have young or inexperienced QBs and that we could struggle due to this.. but not having one at all? Yeah, Moore's record at the end of last year means he's not a QB :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, your not wrong. They are the same they have always been. Like always, they are overrated as usual.

From the Onion:

* Strength: It's been more than a year since Matt Ryan appeared in a Gillette commercial, so the Gillette commercial curse should have run its course; Black is still a very intimidating color

* Weakness: Have all the makings of a team that stays just competitive enough to keep their fans clinging to hope through a 7-9 season

* Player To Watch: Everyone respects a player toughing through injury, but it remains to be seen how Michael Turner expects to produce without his surgically removed left foot

* Biggest Question: Can the Braves' return to relevance in baseball keep people distracted as the Falcons start 0-3?

lol I saw that today. Leave it to the Onion to articulate the heart of the issue a million times better than any bullshit mainstream media outlet.

Oh yeah and to answer the other guy the reason the Falcons are favored is because they signed an overrated free agent corner thus "fixing" their defense (again) and the sports media is still engaged in their now 2+ year Matt Ryan cock smoke-off where John Clayton leads everyone at ESPN and SI in a spirited beat-off fest based on the thought of Ryan becoming better than a game manager

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...