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!

     

Charles Johnson restructures contract -saves $4.26 Million (old thread bumped)


jamos14

Recommended Posts

Not call in you out or anything CRA, just an honest question and anyone feel free to answer.

What FA is there out there that is going to magically fix these issues?

I honestly don't know who is left out there. Usually it is old guys or scrubs at this point.

 

Bingo.  Spending money does not fix problems (see Hurney, Marty). 

 

I, however, share CRA's frustration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No trolling here, just asking legitimate questions to a couple of guys whos opinion I respect.

So out of the blue you ask about us "moving on" from our QB while we're only two games into the season in a thread about Charles Johnson restructuring his contract? You and I both know what you are doing here, lol.

Shame we don't play you guys until November.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With this much cap space, there have to be some kind of moves pending.

 

 

That would be nice.

 

I ain't gettin' my hopes up.

 

I tend to think what is gonna happen is we sign "bodies".

 

I wonder if Robert Lester could be activated?  I mean, except for Rhodes, are there any sure-fire replacements that we know are absolutely better than him?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That would be nice.

I ain't gettin' my hopes up.

I tend to think what is gonna happen is we sign "bodies".

I wonder if Robert Lester could be activated? I mean, except for Rhodes, are there any sure-fire replacements that we know are absolutely better than him?

Unfortunately, I'd have to agree with you. Gettleman is going to let Rivera sink or swim either way.

Yes, as far as I know Lester can be brought up from the practice squad at any time.

The best we're likely to find out there right now besides Rhodes are backups.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

With all the talk about extending Hardy, I've been pondering a CJ cut for some time.  It'd suck--he's a quality player and honestly one of the best representations of class this franchise has, but the 2014 and 2017 cap hits are absolutely astronomical.  I'm also not very hopeful for another restructuring, and honestly that's one of the things that got us into this mess in the first place under Hurney.  The other option is, of course, to just let Hardy go, but then we're back to the Peppers situation where we let a homegrown talent walk for nothing.  Then we've got Cam to worry about extending, then Luke, then Star and KK...

 

Should we have to do another restructure, I couldn't see keeping him for more than a couple years beyond that point anyway.  It'd be the only way to get out from under the rest of his contractual albatross without getting into worse trouble financially, unless Gettleman can talk him into some sort of reduced contract. 

 

This is a messy situation that doesn't have an easy answer, but I guess it'll be interesting to see where all the chips ultimately fall.  I'm very doubtful we'll keep Hardy though, considering the other roster holes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A hurt Stewart is still a more effective RB than Deangelo. Hoping for both to be cut is not happening IMO.

The Age/money factor is big for GMs and the drafting of Barner plays the hand that Deangelo is the one closer to the door.

Now if J Stew is seriously hurt...career wise...which I still have not seen and heard optomistic news about his knee...he is the guy along with Tolbert.

I wish we went after a true FB like John Conner when he was cut by the Bengals or FB Michael Robinson from Seattle to block for Tolbert.

Back to topic: CJ greater than Hardy...therefore Hardy is not worth the same money CJ deserves. Although Hardy may get the Franchise tag if he does not extend..I know the DE tag is pricey.

Position Franchise/Transition

Quarterback: 14,896,000/13,068,000

Running back: 8,219,000/6,970,000

Wide receiver: 10,537,000/8,867,000

Tight end: 6,066,000/5,194,000

Offensive lineman: 9,828,000/8,709,000

Defensive tackle: 8,450,000/7,039,000

Defensive end: 11,175,000/9,151,000. <<<<<<<<<<<<

Linebacker: 9,619,000/8,358,000

Cornerback: 10,854,000/9,095,000

Safety: 6,916,000/6,002,000

Kicker/punter: 2,977,000/2,700,000

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Even limited as he was I still don't think they have replaced his production, and not just the sack stats. The games Clowney missed it was very obvious what his value still was. Risky move but whatever. They only had 32 sacks last year and if that drops then it's going to get ugly. I see the improvement in run stopping but not in pass protect in any way.  
    • I have zero issues with this.  
    • Sorta related.  I just looked up a stat:  Success rates for NFL draft's second rounders.  I was surprised that it is 49%.  The success rate for first rounders is 58%.   Here success does not mean those that did not bust, it means that roughly half of the players selected in the second round become full-time starters at some point in their careers.  Busts do that too.  However, considering the fact that a first round talent is worth up to 1800 points (first overall pick) more than the first pick of the second round and as low as 350 points (last pick in first round) higher than the last pick in round 2, it seems there could be cases in which it would be to your advantage to trade out of round 1 and draft two or three second rounders for the value.  Of course, the elite players are likely to be gone, and some positions overwhelmingly suck after round 1 (traditionally, like QB or LT, for example), but if you need to find starters at positions like DT, G, LB, S, C, TE, RB, etc, there could be a time when you trade back for more starters.  I was surprised that the margin between rounds 1 and 2 was only 9%.    While I realize that some of you sofa scholars are thinking, "Well duh?  Trading back gives you more players." as you wipe the Cheetos off your shirt.  Not the point.  The point is you have to consider the draft,the needs (and the number of them), and you need to scout the second and third rounds like you do the first, the cap, and the long-term impact.  If you can find 2 players with a 49% chance of becoming a starter, are you better off than drafting one player who has a 58% chance in the long term? So if I traded away my first rounder for two second rounders (a trade most teams would make) regularly, when I got 10 second rounders (by trading 5 first rounders), 5 would be starters.  If I did not trade and kept my 5 first rounders, 3 would be starters.  Furthermore, their rookie contracts would be much cheaper than the 5 first rounders. 
×
×
  • Create New...