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!

     

2012 mock offseason and draft.


DaCityKats

Recommended Posts

Bump anybody interested in getting a team?

* Arizona Cardinals- Gin and Juice

* Atlanta Falcons- jb online

* Baltimore Ravens- (╯°□°)╯︵

* Buffalo Bills- RadioKiller

* Carolina Panthers- CaliPanthers

* Chicago Bears- DoubleTrouble34

* Cincinnati Bengals- JawnyBlaze

* Cleveland Browns- jramsey4

* Dallas Cowboys- WolfpackPantherMan

* Denver Broncos- Miaoww

* Detroit Lions- pantherman95

* Green Bay Packers- Jackofalltrades

* Houston Texans- adub2b23

* Indianapolis Colts- carpanfan96

* Jacksonville Jaguars- llalliweid

* Kansas City Chiefs- X-Clown

* Miami Dolphins- MusikmanLP7

* Minnesota Vikings- RedMage138

* New England Patriots- DaCityKats

* New Orleans Saints- kman72

* New York Giants- Kevin Greene

* New York Jets-C42[)14C C47

* Oakland Raiders- CaliPanthers

* Philadelphia Eagles- Ken

* Pittsburgh Steelers- Bj-Monster23

* San Diego Chargers- jamos14

* San Francisco 49ers- ZackAttack23

* Seattle Seahawks- BigBeast52

* St. Louis Rams- ROCKnROLLA

* Tampa Bay Buccaneers- X-Clown

* Tennessee Titans- CamToSmithTD

* Washington Redskins- CatMan72

UPDATED.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

obviously I would be interested in the Panthers first and foremost (like all of us), but I'm definitely in for representing a team for this. Are we doing trades involving players or no? If so, we probably need to appoint a committee to veto trades so there are no ridiculous deals sending someone like Phillip Rivers or Aaron Rogers packing....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

obviously I would be interested in the Panthers first and foremost (like all of us)' date=' but I'm definitely in for representing a team for this. Are we doing trades involving players or no? If so, we probably need to appoint a committee to veto trades so there are no ridiculous deals sending someone like Phillip Rivers or Aaron Rogers packing....[/quote']

Yes to player trades and we should have a group to veto BS trades.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'll take the rams but i don't feel like running the thing again.

as far as the FA bidding that added a whole extra 1-2 weeks worth to the thing. i think it'd be better to either use the actual NFL free agent moves or b) use some blind bidding system where you can just submit all the FAs you want and what $$$ you bid for them and then use the rules/system to figure out who gets who. that way you don't have to bid, get outbid, rebid, checking back over and over for days, ect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

can't really get everyone online all at once. that's why last year we had to let people bid then give the top bid a few days to sit there, let people get online to outbid if they want, before pushing it through. that just makes it take forever though, which is why i said blind bidding system if anything.

i wouldn't mind just going by the actual NFL FA moves this year though, as it'll actually be before the draft like normal

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if you could actually set a time/date and get all 32 teams owners into a chat at once that would work as well. name a player, people bid bid bid, going once, twice...gone! move on to the next player... might take an hour or two but it'd be done with rather than stringing out the bidding for weeks. only thing is i'm not so sure you can get the majority of 32 people to show up all at once

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • lol, that second part is quite literally one of the dumbest things ever. Having or not having guaranteed contracts has absolutely nothing to do with how much these billionaires have to pay.  Because there is a hard cap and a minimum cap spend requirement, and teams either use their cap or roll it over to use it all the next year, so the owners have to pay the same amount of money in the end no matter what. Having fully guaranteed contracts in the NFL would only hurt salary cap management, and thus would end up screwing over the team and its fan base when teams kiss on signings as they take up cap room that is needed to improve the roster. Look at the Browns with Watson, they gave him the fully guaranteed deal and all it’s doing is sucking up massive cap space now.  If they hadn’t done that, the owner would still be paying the same amount of money each year as that cap space would still be used elsewhere. If you want to argue for fully guaranteed contracts because the players deserve it, that’s an entirely different argument and a fair one to discuss.  But anyone against fully guaranteed deals isn’t doing it to argue for the billionaire owners.
    • Start posting in threads in the other forums instead of just creating threads. No one comes over here so you aren't starting conversations.  Get your ass up to 100 posts. It's not that hard. Don't create 100 posts. Contribute to conversations. 
    • Ryabkin could be the steal of the draft, he was a Top 10 pick heading into last season and had a rough year.  Lots of GMs passed on him because of that and his workouts. Pick has really high upside and Svech should be able to translate Rod tearing his arse a new one for making dumb plays since Svech has had several years of it.  🤣😂
×
×
  • Create New...