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!

     

baltimore wr's


philp

Recommended Posts

yeah but you don't pick the most important game of the season to "drop a few balls". clutch is everything. im not comparing the two....that would be crazy.

Well give me a team good enough to put us in big time playoff situations where they need to be clutch first.... then we can talk after our team is at that level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those two were more than half the reason the Ravens were even in it. Unfortunately because of that reason, one bad game from both of them causes a loss.

Boldin was, but not Housh.

Housh started two games and ended up with 30 receptions, 398 yards. Less than both Gettis AND LaFell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Getting Boldin wouldve been a waste given the circumstances. It would not of helped this year with the bad QB play. On top of it, we wouldve lost a third , fourth and fifth. With 28 million over 4 years, with $10 million guaranteed.

And next year unless Clasuen come to his own, Boldin wouldn't have had a good QB throwing the ball.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some objective numbers...

Anquan Boldin Age: 30, 8th Yr, 16 games, 16 starts, 64 catches, 837 yards, (13.1 avg), 52.3 YPG, 7 TDs, 1 fumble

David Gettis Age: 23, Rookie, 15 games, 13 starts, 37 catches, 508 yards, (13.7 avg), 33.9 YPG, 3 TDs, 0 fumbles

Brandon LaFell Age: 24, Rookie, 14 games, 2 starts, 38 catches, 468 yards, (12.3 avg), 33.4 YPG, 1 TDs, 0 fumbles

T.J. Houshmandzadeh Age: 33, 10th Yr, 16 games, 2 starts, 30 catches, 398 yards, (13.3 avg), 24.9 YPG, 3 TDs, 1 fumble

And that's not even factoring salary in. T J may have made more than Gettis and LaFell combined. Both outperformed him.

Also worth considering that TJ and Boldin have Flacco throwing to them. Gettis and LaFell have Clausen.

Boldin was the best of the bunch, but far from dominating. And for both he and TJ, their best years are behind them while Gettis and LaFell are getting started.

And then there's their "clutch" playoff performances :sosp:

They'll all end the year with the same number of Super Bowl rings (that being zero).

Somebody tell me again why it would have been better to rent TJ and Boldin for one year rather than picking Gettis and LaFell with their whole careers ahead of them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some objective numbers...

Anquan Boldin Age: 30, 8th Yr, 16 games, 16 starts, 64 catches, 837 yards, (13.1 avg), 52.3 YPG, 7 TDs, 1 fumble

David Gettis Age: 23, Rookie, 15 games, 13 starts, 37 catches, 508 yards, (13.7 avg), 33.9 YPG, 3 TDs, 0 fumbles

Brandon LaFell Age: 24, Rookie, 14 games, 2 starts, 38 catches, 468 yards, (12.3 avg), 33.4 YPG, 1 TDs, 0 fumbles

T.J. Houshmandzadeh Age: 33, 10th Yr, 16 games, 2 starts, 30 catches, 398 yards, (13.3 avg), 24.9 YPG, 3 TDs, 1 fumble

And I wonder if the Raven castoff Clayton would have outperformed them had he not gotten injured.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean good grief. If you want a 30-40 catch guy, why pay half as much for a 23-24 year old player that you could develop for the next ten years when you could pay twice as much for a broken down 33 year old that'll likely be hitting the bricks next season?

What is our front office thinking? :sosp:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some objective numbers...

Anquan Boldin Age: 30, 8th Yr, 16 games, 16 starts, 64 catches, 837 yards, (13.1 avg), 52.3 YPG, 7 TDs, 1 fumble

David Gettis Age: 23, Rookie, 15 games, 13 starts, 37 catches, 508 yards, (13.7 avg), 33.9 YPG, 3 TDs, 0 fumbles

Brandon LaFell Age: 24, Rookie, 14 games, 2 starts, 38 catches, 468 yards, (12.3 avg), 33.4 YPG, 1 TDs, 0 fumbles

T.J. Houshmandzadeh Age: 33, 10th Yr, 16 games, 2 starts, 30 catches, 398 yards, (13.3 avg), 24.9 YPG, 3 TDs, 1 fumble

And that's not even factoring salary in. T J may have made more than Gettis and LaFell combined. Both outperformed him.

Also worth considering that TJ and Boldin have Flacco throwing to them. Gettis and LaFell have Clausen.

Boldin was the best of the bunch, but far from dominating. And for both he and TJ, their best years are behind them while Gettis and LaFell are getting started.

And then there's their "clutch" playoff performances :sosp:

They'll all end the year with the same number of Super Bowl rings (that being zero).

Somebody tell me again why it would have been better to rent TJ and Boldin for one year rather than picking Gettis and LaFell with their whole careers ahead of them?

I agree about Housh, but getting Boldin does not necessarily mean we wouldn't have taken Gettis and Lafell in the draft. Having a couple of veterans in there while Gettis and Lafell learn the ropes is not a bad thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree about Housh, but getting Boldin does not necessarily mean we wouldn't have taken Gettis and Lafell in the draft. Having a couple of veterans in there while Gettis and Lafell learn the ropes is not a bad thing.

Considering BAL gave up a 3 and 4 to get Boldin, it would've cost you at least LaFell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean good grief. If you want a 30-40 catch guy, why pay half as much for a 23-24 year old player that you could develop for the next ten years when you could pay twice as much for a broken down 33 year old that'll likely be hitting the bricks next season?

What is our front office thinking? :sosp:

What you are failing to factor in is that if we would have signed Boldin at the begining of the season then we would have been on ESPN for at least a 2 minute segment about how we signed Boldin.

If we could have then signed Housh later in the season we would have once again possibly been on ESPN again.

Also, think about all of the average fans that don't know anything about football but could of gotten really excited that we were able to pick up a guy with an injury history and who excelled in the shadow of a really great WR.

Plus if we don't sign big name FA then we are doomed to fail because of...because of................So we need to sign us some FA and fast.

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...