The Weird, Wacky and Awesome World of the NFL - General Banter thread

Billy86

I wouldn't be shocked to see Angelo go to the Bucs either, mind - he was director of player personnel for them through the 1990s when they drafted John Lynch, Alstott, Sapp, Brooks, Ronde Barber (and Trent Dilfer! ) so there is history there with the team on top of his history with Lovie.

rockonollie

davyjose wrote: »

Apparently he promised a number of recruits he was sticking around too.

It may be little consolation, but a head coaching change is one of the conditions that allow recruits to switch schools without NCAA sanctions

Itssoeasy

Jay cutler has signed a 7 year contract with the bears.

Knex*

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Jay cutler has signed a 7 year contract with the bears.

Did not expect that..

Any confirmation as to salary?

Itssoeasy

Knex. wrote: »

Did not expect that..

Any confirmation as to salary?

No, it's literally a breaking story on nfl.com and twitter.

I mean in term of the amount of the deal. I'd doubt it's for league minimum.

kmart6

$17.6m per year average, is a bit too much IMO

Knex*

kmart6 wrote: »

$17.6m per year average, is a bit too much IMO

That confirmed?

Madness from the Bears to pay him that much, IMO.

Wonder how much is guaranteed.

Oat23

Knex. wrote: »

Madness from the Bears to pay him that much, IMO.

What would you suggest? Let him walk, start 35 year old McCown and hope to strike lucky in the draft? McCown played well, but he is still a career backup. He played great against sh*te teams and the draft is a lottery.

No thanks. I'll take Jay and focus on drafting defense.

Cliff Stein is one of the best contract negotiators in the league. He knows what he is doing and the numbers will make sense for the Bears.

Billy86

As a Packers fan, this is all music to my ears.

Itssoeasy

Knex. wrote: »

That confirmed?

Madness from the Bears to pay him that much, IMO.

Wonder how much is guaranteed.

@SportsCenter: Jay Cutler's 7-year deal expected to average more than Matt Stafford's $17.6M per year, with at least $50M guaranteed. (via @AdamSchefter)

raze_them_all_

Knex. wrote: »

That confirmed?

Madness from the Bears to pay him that much, IMO.

Wonder how much is guaranteed.

Joe Flacco set the standard for average qbs to get over paid.

frostie500

Wow, thought they'd franchise tag Cutler and play out next year before making a decision to put up big money on him but in saying that they do have some big cap room for 2014 so maybe they're front loading the contract so that they'd be in a position to release or trade him three years down the line if it doesnt work out?

SameOleJay

Billy86 wrote: »

As a Packers fan, this is all music to my ears.

I really don't get this.

What was the alternative you would have feared?

Realt Dearg Sec

Billy86 wrote: »

As a Packers fan, this is all music to my ears.

A full year working with trestman and a high powered offense, and hopefullya less injury ravaged defense bolstered by a good defensive draft, and I'm betting Cutler and the bears can beat the packers next year. I'm not seeing a better scenario in terms of getting an elite QB on the horizon, but Cutler is the right guy to make the most of what is, without a doubt, the most dangerous receiver corps in the league.

HigginsJ

These contracts for average QB's are getting out of hand. Rodgers, Brees, Brady & Peyton. No other QB in the league is worth $100 million contract.

Teams are terribly handicapping themselves with these huge contracts for average QB's (Cutler, Romo, Flacco, Eli, Matr Ryan) They are simply not worth it.

Knex*

Oat23 wrote: »

What would you suggest? Let him walk, start 35 year old McCown and hope to strike lucky in the draft? McCown played well, but he is still a career backup. He played great against sh*te teams and the draft is a lottery.

No thanks. I'll take Jay and focus on drafting defense.

Cliff Stein is one of the best contract negotiators in the league. He knows what he is doing and the numbers will make sense for the Bears.

On my phone so can't comment much right now, but just surprised really. Take it you're a bears fan so will know more, but felt they would franchise him really, as not many would have been vying to trade for him or pay him a 100m contract like that, I would imagine.

Also, means you prob won't be able to keep McCown as a backup now due to cap room, and injuries haven't been kind to Jay in recent times.

Suppose we are in an era where we see teams overpaying for QBs. As mentioned, Flacco probably was a sign of things to come, but he had a ring in his corner.

davyjose

kmart6 wrote: »

$17.6m per year average, is a bit too much IMO

Holy sh!t. At least Flacco won a super bowl.

davyjose

SameOleJay wrote: »

I really don't get this.

What was the alternative you would have feared?

Having cap space?

Realt Dearg Sec

HigginsJ wrote: »

These contracts for average QB's are getting out of hand. Rodgers, Brees, Brady & Peyton. No other QB in the league is worth $100 million contract.

Teams are terribly handicapping themselves with these huge contracts for average QB's (Cutler, Romo, Flacco, Eli, Matr Ryan) They are simply not worth it.

The contracts are farcical and all the examples you've given bear that out, given how hamstrung those teams are, but what should they do? The alternative is taking a pot shot in the draft, usually at a time when there are other urgent needs. These teams can't whisk a Rodgers out of thin air and letting a relatively strong QB go could leave you looking like the Vikings or the jets, juggling a bunch of crappy QBs and losing constantly, hoping your draft piston the next year might eventually land you a Brady or something.

Realt Dearg Sec

davyjose wrote: »

Having cap space?

We have a fair bit of space.

Oat23

davyjose wrote: »

Having cap space?

There's still a lot of space. Just not $45m+ like before.

Billy86

SameOleJay wrote: »

I really don't get this.

What was the alternative you would have feared?

As has been said, cap space that could be better used (not just talking now but in the years to come) and really just generally getting a better QB (even if it meant drafting one and taking a small step back for a year or two). I keep hearing how Cutler is 'ready to step up and make a difference' since his time at Denver... but he never really does. I just think $17.6mn per year is a major, major overpayment for the guy.

Realt Dearg Sec wrote: »

A full year working with trestman and a high powered offense, and hopefullya less injury ravaged defense bolstered by a good defensive draft, and I'm betting Cutler and the bears can beat the packers next year. I'm not seeing a better scenario in terms of getting an elite QB on the horizon, but Cutler is the right guy to make the most of what is, without a doubt, the most dangerous receiver corps in the league.

He's 1-8 against us with the Bears, and most of the time we haven't had a running game or halfway decent defence. Sunday was the first time he has ever thrown more TDs than INTs against us, and he's good for a fumble every second game or so too. Here are his numbers vs GB for the Bears:

163-of-261 (62.4%), 1,744yds (6.68ypa), 10 TD (3.83%), 18 INT (6.9%), 66.00 QBR

On top of this he offers zero threat running the ball with something like 10 yards a game against us using his feet. He's not the worst in the league or anything, but he's a long, long way from being anything special and I'd be more than happy for GB to be playing against him for the next several years than risking Chicago upgrading there, especially at such a high cost to you guys. It's like Woodson said:

HigginsJ

Realt Dearg Sec wrote: »

The contracts are farcical and all the examples you've given bear that out, given how hamstrung those teams are, but what should they do? The alternative is taking a pot shot in the draft, usually at a time when there are other urgent needs. These teams can't whisk a Rodgers out of thin air and letting a relatively strong QB go could leave you looking like the Vikings or the jets, juggling a bunch of crappy QBs and losing constantly, hoping your draft piston the next year might eventually land you a Brady or something.

I honestly dont know. The money saved on rookie contracts in the CBA is been blown on these terrible contracts.

If I was someone like Flacco or Eli, i'd rather take a paycut so my team could keep Boldin/Bennett

SameOleJay

Billy86 wrote: »

As has been said, cap space that could be better used (not just talking now but in the years to come) and really just generally getting a better QB (even if it meant drafting one and taking a small step back for a year or two). I keep hearing how Cutler is 'ready to step up and make a difference' since his time at Denver... but he never really does. I just think $17.6mn per year is a major, major overpayment for the guy.

He's 1-8 against us with the Bears, and most of the time we haven't had a running game or halfway decent defence. Sunday was the first time he has ever thrown more TDs than INTs against us, and he's good for a fumble every second game or so too. Here are his numbers vs GB for the Bears:

163-of-261 (62.4%), 1,744yds (6.68ypa), 10 TD (3.83%), 18 INT (6.9%), 66.00 QBR

On top of this he offers zero threat running the ball with something like 10 yards a game against us using his feet. He's not the worst in the league or anything, but he's a long, long way from being anything special and I'd be more than happy for GB to be playing against him for the next several years than risking Chicago upgrading there, especially at such a high cost to you guys. It's like Woodson said:

I would expect the contract negotiations were contingent on more than the Green Bay Packers and his performances against them. You might want to add some context to his stats too- namely having an abominable o-line for the majority of these games, no tight-end and a receiving corps headed by such luminaries as Devin Hester. Sunday was the first time he had the tools necessary and he performed well.

We don’t have the draft position to go quarterback with anything resembling confidence. McCown, as has been mentioned, was never an option. Had he hit free agency there was a huge contract coming his way,whether people like it or not.

The Bears hands were tied. He isn’t worth 18 mill a year,anyone with half a brain could see this. But the market dictates these deals, not Emery or Trestman. With Peppers as good as gone the space was there. I’m happy to build the offence around him and, like most Chicago fans I suspect, am excited for the seasons ahead.

Billy86

SameOleJay wrote: »

I would expect the contract negotiations were contingent on more than the Green Bay Packers and his performances against them. You might want to add some context to his stats too- namely having an abominable o-line for the majority of these games, no tight-end and a receiving corps headed by such luminaries as Devin Hester. Sunday was the first time he had the tools necessary and he performed well.

We don’t have the draft position to go quarterback with anything resembling confidence. McCown, as has been mentioned, was never an option. Had he hit free agency there was a huge contract coming his way,whether people like it or not.

The Bears hands were tied. He isn’t worth 18 mill a year,anyone with half a brain could see this. But the market dictates these deals, not Emery or Trestman. With Peppers as good as gone the space was there. I’m happy to build the offence around him and, like most Chicago fans I suspect, am excited for the seasons ahead.

Indeed they were, but we tend to be the top two teams in the division so it helps that... "SameOleJay. We don't need luck, we just need to be in position and Jay will throw us the ball."

You forgot to mention Matt Forte of course. Or Desmond Clark/Greg Olsen who are/were pretty decent TEs. He's had in my opinion a borderline top-5 WR since Brandon Marshall got there. If the 'tools necessary' for him to play well against what has been a pretty awful defence for three years now in what are typically the two most important regular season games for either team need to be a very solid TE, a top 5-7 RB in the league, a solid o-line and perhaps the best WR duo in the NFL... then he's probably not worth such a major investment.

I'm not too surprised you resigned him, but it's the size and length of the contract that shocked me a bit here.

adrian522

I think that's the going rate for an above average QB now.

Just think how much Wilson and Luck for example will demand when they get off their rookie contracts.

If the bears didn't pay him they would be in a hole without a quality QB, they really made the only decision they could have.

Billy86

That's the thing... I don't know if we're too far off there being positional salary caps, or a per-player limit or something. The way it's going it wouldn't be out of this world to see a QB take up 30% salary cap when he's on that last, big year in a few seasons time... and the other 52 guys sharing the remaining 70%. Which is nuts.

Paully D

Cutler's deal is essentially just for three years, that's all that is guaranteed on it, 50 odd million $.

Paully D

davyjose wrote: »

Having cap space?

I think teams like the Browns have proved there's no point having cap space without a capable QB.

HigginsJ

adrian522 wrote: »

I think that's the going rate for an above average QB now.

My issue is that alot of these guys are not above average at all.