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!

     

Broncos rookie Hillis out for season


Kevin Greene

Recommended Posts

We won't have to face their hot rook this week.

Looks like Tatum Bell.

ENGLEWOOD, Colo. -- The Denver Broncos' backfield carousel shows no sign of slowing down.

Rookie Peyton Hillis, who had energized the Broncos offense over the last month, became the fifth Denver running back to go on injured reserve this season when medical tests showed he had a torn right hamstring behind the knee.

The Broncos now will turn to tailback , who was selling cell phones at a Denver-area mall before he was re-signed last month. The team also will promote from the practice squad to compete with to serve as Bell's backup.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d80d299b4&template=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He was on my fantasy team.... I was very upset!!!!! but that's okay because it means I don't have to worry about whether or not to start him this week because he's playing the panthers.... Which is the reason I didn't start antonio bryant last night, and that bit me in the ass lol good thing I was up 30 before the game!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Denver with no running attack? Haven't we already played Arizona?

In all seriousness, we've got to shore up some holes in our secondary or else it's going to be a long day against Denver. Teams seem to pass at will against us, especially when running three and four wide.

Our linebackers, however, seem to be improving in pass defense, so that's a good sign.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • 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.
    • Get any shot you can at humane society, so much cheaper
×
×
  • Create New...