Jump to content

Cardinals extend David Johnson


Thelonebillsfan

Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, Danger said:

My foot. 

I've always hated the Franchise tag. Really unfair to players. It's complete BS that it can be used in consecutive seasons, even if the cost goes up.

The franchise tag is a necessary evil in the NFL even if it is unfair (Unless you're a QB) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Danger said:

My foot. 

I've always hated the Franchise tag. Really unfair to players. It's complete BS that it can be used in consecutive seasons, even if the cost goes up.

I’m trying to think of how many players have been franchised twice and actually ended up regretting it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, SwoleXmad said:

The franchise tag is a necessary evil in the NFL even if it is unfair (Unless you're a QB) 

I'm good with it on a single year usage. I hate multiple tagging. One year tag, can negotiate all year (no arbitrary deadline). Second year tag 150% (or just remove the ability all together). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, VanS said:

What crazy is Le'Veon is younger than David Johnson and yet the Steelers offered him half the guaranteed money David Johnson got.

David Johnson was born in 1991.  Le'Veon Bell was born in 1992.

Johnson has like 600 career touches to Bell's 1600+. That probably has more impact than age. Johnson's dislocated wrist cost him a season but doesn't have the concerns like a knee injury does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, cp0k2 said:

He was offered $70M and 5 years. Those are the numbers people see and think Bell is greedy or dumb or whatever for turning down. But as you said, only $10M of that was guaranteed. The Steelers could have cut him at any point and Bell would've be out of luck, no way he was seeing even 3 years of that contract much less 5. Why sign a long term deal without any kind of long term security? 

Because it's the Steelers Way. Bell"s supposed to Shut up and be greatful it was even offered, right? Every contract is about the Guaranteed Money. So those spewing out large contract numbers in awe that he had the audacity to not sign as if any of that truly matters, is a joke!

They could offer Bell a 4 years $100M today and it wouldn't be worth the toilet paper it was written on if the Guaranteed portion was only say 15M.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, cp0k2 said:

He was offered $70M and 5 years. Those are the numbers people see and think Bell is greedy or dumb or whatever for turning down. But as you said, only $10M of that was guaranteed. The Steelers could have cut him at any point and Bell would've be out of luck, no way he was seeing even 3 years of that contract much less 5. Why sign a long term deal without any kind of long term security? 

And I have previously pointed out that Gurley can also be cut at any time with little loss by the Rams because of how his contract is written.  Bell had an offer that would have guaranteed $30 over the first 2 years of the deal but he wants Antonio Brown money(15-17M /year).  His agent crapped his pants at that David Johnson signing.  I do not see Bell getting close to Gurley on the FA market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, jebrick said:

And I have previously pointed out that Gurley can also be cut at any time with little loss by the Rams because of how his contract is written.  

That’s not correct. Gurley has fair dead money until 2022. Here are the dead cap hits:

2018: $24M (-$17M savings)

2019: $16.8M (-$7.6M savings)

2020: $12.6M ($4.7M savings)

2021: $8.4M ($4.8M savings)

2022: $4.2M ($10M savings)

2023: $0 ($10.5M savings) 

The savings I listed also do not take into account the one year-hit the Rams would take if the dead money was rolled into one year too. 

Todd Gurley’s pretty protected until 2022.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...