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!

     

SB XLVIII: SEAHAWKS VS BRONCOS


CelibatePimp

Recommended Posts

I'm kinda excited about the game. I hope Manning wins so for today, I'm a broncos fan.

 

Yeah hopefully they win and PM retires on Monday. With Farve long gone and Manning done...Brady will be the only one left of these crybaby QBs who the media shove down our throats. These guys can do no wrong and get constant passes from the media.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My money is on the Broncos....but I don't feel as strong about it as I did a week ago. I still think there's too much negative energy floating around the Seahawks. 

 

27 Broncos

24 Seahawks 

 

I think the Hawks will implode early lol. Too much adderrall will make their systems unstable...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My money is on the Broncos....but I don't feel as strong about it as I did a week ago. I still think there's too much negative energy floating around the Seahawks. 

 

27 Broncos

24 Seahawks 

 

So the media's psychology is working well. Creating a big deal out of nothing simply to generate a great deal of negative energy for one team over another. 

 

That says to me the Seaharks are the better team but the politics as usual with today's media reign supreme.

 

Don't be surprised if you see some shady calls going against the Seahawks today. A Peyton win must be fulfilled so those in  media can say he has solidify his legacy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So the media's psychology is working well. Creating a big deal out of nothing simply to create a great deal of negative energy for one team over another. 

 

I don't think it has anything to do with the media. I think they are buying into their own hype, the LOB that is. Kinda like us before the 49ers game. I think that will leave them very vulnerable. I may be wrong though.

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...