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!

     

Seattle's Bruce Irvin suspended for 4 games


Mage

Recommended Posts

Seattle is poor away from the 12th man.  Their defense was 27th in the league in yards per average rush.  They were 27th in the league in sack %.  And Seattle plays the same style of game Carolina does.  They like to slow the game down and control the clock evidenced by the fact they were 31st in defensive snaps last season and 29th in offensive snaps.  The only other team close?  Carolina at 23rd and 25th respectively.  

 

This game is very closely matched because of the styles your teams play.  Carolina wins, 23-17 due to Seattles struggles in away games.  The media will have a collective heart attack.  Cam Newton will be praised as the second coming, for a week at least. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest HelloWorld

Irvin is a cool dude. wish him a great comeback. Saw him in an episode of the "RealRobReport"(wish every team had something like that)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seattle is poor away from the 12th man.  Their defense was 27th in the league in yards per average rush.  They were 27th in the league in sack %.  And Seattle plays the same style of game Carolina does.  They like to slow the game down and control the clock evidenced by the fact they were 31st in defensive snaps last season and 29th in offensive snaps.  The only other team close?  Carolina at 23rd and 25th respectively.  

 

This game is very closely matched because of the styles your teams play.  Carolina wins, 23-17 due to Seattles struggles in away games.  The media will have a collective heart attack.  Cam Newton will be praised as the second coming, for a week at least. 

 

that's what should have happened last year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With one less threat to worry about, we can push these guys around and turn our RBs loose on them. If we keep the clock moving and keep that potent offense of theirs on the sideline, we'll walk away with a Week 1 upset!

Seattle doesn't really have a potent offense. They were notorious for controlling the clock and taking their time moving the ball down the field. Potent in ability to score, yes - but it takes them an entire quarter to do so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seattle doesn't really have a potent offense. They were notorious for controlling the clock and taking their time moving the ball down the field. Potent in ability to score, yes - but it takes them an entire quarter to do so.

 

Seahawks averaged 42 points in their last four games

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seahawks averaged 42 points in their last four games

In which 3 were at home (whole new team) and they played buffalo, arizona and some other shitty team. The crapping on the niners was only amazing thing they did. But still one game is one game. VS our defense away from home they couldnt even put up 20 points

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...