Jump to content

Khalil Mack traded to the Bears (Page 19)


RaidersAreOne

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Totty said:

Several coaches are paid 7+ mil a year.  Pete freaking Carroll is at 8.  10 isn't that far off course for someone who you (Mark Davis) really wants.  So, I'd say get over that.  

And Gruden isn't making 10 million a year anyway. There is a lot of language in that contract and breaks down more complex that 100 divided by 10.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just want him back and practicing. Hall, Hurst and Key really have shown some promise and should elevate our pass-rush substantially. Even Jelly had some awesome plays collapsing the pocket this PS. It's going to be awesome seeing Mack and Irvin combined with these pieces. They should all help mask the deficiencies in the secondary to a certain extent. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, big_palooka said:

https://www.silverandblackpride.com/2018/8/29/17797802/conflicting-khalil-mack-trade-rumors-show-sad-state-of-sports-journalism

Great article about how ridiculous this Mack situation is. How much manufactured BS and rumor mongering is going on. 

Honestly.... I hate social media. Everything is just click bait.

I couldn't agree more :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, big_palooka said:

https://www.silverandblackpride.com/2018/8/29/17797802/conflicting-khalil-mack-trade-rumors-show-sad-state-of-sports-journalism

Great article about how ridiculous this Mack situation is. How much manufactured BS and rumor mongering is going on. 

Honestly.... I hate social media. Everything is just click bait.

Very true. Although the article did raise a valid point of it being the byproduct of people's demand for free stuff on the internet. Under that model, these outlets will be motivated by views to generate ad revenue. Twitter is a whole other crap hole. 

On a similar note, I've been stoked with The Athletic for those who haven't given it a try. Worth the subscription IMO. Tafur (and others) have some good stuff on there and Ted Nguyen puts out some awesome film breakdown articles. Hopefully that model gains more traction with other outlets. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, StocktonSav said:

Very true. Although the article did raise a valid point of it being the byproduct of people's demand for free stuff on the internet. Under that model, these outlets will be motivated by views to generate ad revenue. Twitter is a whole other crap hole. 

On a similar note, I've been stoked with The Athletic for those who haven't given it a try. Worth the subscription IMO. Tafur (and others) have some good stuff on there and Ted Nguyen puts out some awesome film breakdown articles. Hopefully that model gains more traction with other outlets. 

The Athletic is great. Totally worth it. Nguyen gives awesome looks at players. Tafur is just a solid writer. 

Twitter is a cesspool. Just constant click bait and hot takes. Hard to have a meaningful conversation or realistic view on things

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, big_palooka said:

The Athletic is great. Totally worth it. Nguyen gives awesome looks at players. Tafur is just a solid writer. 

Twitter is a cesspool. Just constant click bait and hot takes. Hard to have a meaningful conversation or realistic view on things

I joined two days back and I've read better articles there than I ever have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, StocktonSav said:

On a similar note, I've been stoked with The Athletic for those who haven't given it a try. Worth the subscription IMO. Tafur (and others) have some good stuff on there and Ted Nguyen puts out some awesome film breakdown articles. Hopefully that model gains more traction with other outlets. 

 

2 hours ago, big_palooka said:

The Athletic is great. Totally worth it. Nguyen gives awesome looks at players. Tafur is just a solid writer. 

 

30 minutes ago, MrOaktown_56 said:

I joined two days back and I've read better articles there than I ever have.

 

+1 to all. I effing love The Athletic. Worth the subscription to get good Raider and Laker content. Hell, even Pete from Laker Film Room joined.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, RaidersAreOne said:

How much is it? Is it a monthly subscription? 

For a year, it's like 45. Which is a little under 4$ a month. Just for Ted's film review articles, it's worth it. Vic seems to have insider info as well that you won't get anywhere else. He also talks to all the position coaches and Mckenzie from time to time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, MrOaktown_56 said:

For a year, it's like 45. Which is a little under 4$ a month. Just for Ted's film review articles, it's worth it. Vic seems to have insider info as well that you won't get anywhere else. He also talks to all the position coaches and Mckenzie from time to time.

Interesting. That's nothing and I'll probably do it. They cover all the sports correct? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://overthecap.com/super-bowl-titles-high-salary-quarterbacks/

Steve Young holds the record for highest percentage of the salary cap consumed by a QB at 13%. Next season , Carr will be making nearly 20m which will put him close to 11% (190m estimated salary cap). The question is, if Mack gets extended now, and his number is above the estimated 17~m the franchise tag will cost, is it feasible for a team to win with more than 20% of the salary cap dedicated to two players?

Read the link and you'll see that only 3 QBs since Steve Young won that Super Bowl have been above 10%. The average percentage of all the Super Bowl winning QBs comes out to a low 6%. I have no stat to back this up, but with the previous information in hand, I'm willing to bet that no team has ever won the championship dedicating 20% of their salary to only two players. 

Morale of this story is, as much as I love Mack, re-signing him is likely to reduce the Raiders chances of winning a Super Bowl. I love watching the guy but barring major CBA changes it is very likely to be detrimental to the team to pay him as much as he deserves. :|

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, raiders4life said:

https://overthecap.com/super-bowl-titles-high-salary-quarterbacks/

Steve Young holds the record for highest percentage of the salary cap consumed by a QB at 13%. Next season , Carr will be making nearly 20m which will put him close to 11% (190m estimated salary cap). The question is, if Mack gets extended now, and his number is above the estimated 17~m the franchise tag will cost, is it feasible for a team to win with more than 20% of the salary cap dedicated to two players?

Read the link and you'll see that only 3 QBs since Steve Young won that Super Bowl have been above 10%. The average percentage of all the Super Bowl winning QBs comes out to a low 6%. I have no stat to back this up, but with the previous information in hand, I'm willing to bet that no team has ever won the championship dedicating 20% of their salary to only two players. 

Morale of this story is, as much as I love Mack, re-signing him is likely to reduce the Raiders chances of winning a Super Bowl. I love watching the guy but barring major CBA changes it is very likely to be detrimental to the team to pay him as much as he deserves. :|

Is it bad that I'd rather have committed that money to Mack instead of Carr if we had to pick between the two?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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




×
×
  • Create New...