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!

     

Was The Demeco Ryan's Trade Due To Scheme, The Achilles, Money Or All Three?


panthers55

Recommended Posts

Houston trades Ryans for a fourth round draft pick to Philadelphia who is in desperate need for a MLB. Initial articles think Philly got the best end of the deal. If so then why was Houston willing to part with a probowler for a 4th round pick? Was it scheme give the Texans run a 3-4 and the Eagles run a 4-3? Was it that they don't want to wait for Ryans to come back totally from achilles surgery with his production dropping off precipitously after the rehab and scheme change?? He was primarily used as a 2 down back last year. Was the 5.9 million contract that big a deal when he wouldn't take a paycut? A combination of the 3 or what?

http://profootballta...-to-the-eagles/

What happens if the same kind of production fall happens to Beason particularly if Rivera starts using the 3-4 more.

One bleacher report article thinks that this might negatively impact Kuechly going high in the draft since Philly is where many folks have pegged him at 15. Yeah it is bleacher report but it was a fan opinion and this is a fan messageboard.

http://bleacherrepor...or-luke-kuechly

I know I am giving ammunition to the anti-Kuechly folks but that is just the kind of guy I am. Besides I can always say it was bleacher report, LOL.

DIscuss.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everything I've seen says it was mainly a scheme issue and some cap relief... Ryans had his worse year (stat wise) last year after they switched to a 3-4...

It was also the first year back from Achilles Surgery. Takeo Spikes has made it most of the way back but it took him 3 years and different teams before he returned to 90% of his old self.

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...