Rich7sena's Mock Offseason 3 *PAGE 6* (Brady to San Fran, Trent Williams trade added, 2 Rounds)

[Rich7sena]

3 minutes ago, The LBC said:

Except that you have Shelby Harris as the DL you're projecting the Chargers to sign, not Hargrave (who you're projecting to Carolina).

And "excitement over the team" isn't what's largely responsible for the low home support turnout for the Chargers.  Now, granted, Spanos and the people he surrounds him with aren't very introspective so they may well convince themselves that it is, but the biggest reason (which doesn't look like it will be changing with the move to SoFi) for the lack of homefield advantage is the utterly indiscriminate sale of tickets.  Spanos isn't very liquid and the money for that relocation fee the league assessed in order to move the team had to be accounted for somewhere on the ledger.  Average cost to attend a Chargers game this season (before even accounting for the $20 non-tailgate parking, $16-20 beers, ticket agency chargers - because God knows we have to charge extra to give people hard tickets these days and the other edge of that sword is charging a fee to the ticketing agency like AXS to get digital tickets through their app, etc.) was $150-200 per person... for the cheap seats... in a soccer stadium.  The issue with the indiscriminate bit is that there is a ton of resale of Chargers tickets that goes on to people coming in from out of town.  I know multiple Rams fans who subsidized the cost of their own season tickets because they bought Chargers season tickets and resold them at a markup to visiting fans.

The "bring in Cam Newton because he might be a top player if he's healthy (which he hasn't been in quite a while)" is really one small step from "draft whatever QB is coming out of USC regardless of whether he's good or not because name recognition will get the ignorant masses through the gates."  Again, granted, it's the same sort of reductionist, actually-insulting-the-intelligence-of-the-local-fans brand of logic that Spanos has utilized since entering the LA market.

Harris is also a starter on the Broncos and would also start on the Chargers.

The indiscriminate sale of tickets being the primary cause of Chargers low home turnout doesn't really comport because Chargers fans could just buy the tickets so I'm not really following your logic.

And I disagree with the Cam Newton purely being a business move ala drafting a local player. Newton was an MVP, rookie of the year, and took a team to the Super Bowl. If he is healthy, which might be a big if--no one knows but he and his doctors--then trading for Cam would be both a prudent business and football decision.

[Duffman57]

1 hour ago, Rich7sena said:

Well, obviously I see things differently. Cam Newton to Los Angeles makes sense for a number of reasons:

• If healthy, Cam Newton is among the top players at the position.
• The Chargers are seeking to rebuild their fanbase and actually have home games in 2021; adding a superstar player like Newton can help attract new fans and/or fans the player.
• The Chargers have a win-now roster and Tyrod Taylor is not in the caliber of players who can make the team sincerely competitive.

Rivers to Carolina makes sense because he is from the South and played in North Carolina. Further, Carolina has a similar glut of offensive weapons as he had in Los Angeles with a better offensive line.

I don't know where you found the opinion that Hargrave is a backup player. He's a starter for Pittsburgh and would start in Los Angeles.

The pick swap makes sense because any team would gladly move up one spot if given the opportunity. Also, thank you for noticing the mistake.

Cam newton doesn't make sense for the Chargers, especially since he's on a 1 year deal, and hasn't proven that he can stay healthy in any capacity, the chargers aren't going to go out of their way to replace Rivers for a potential 1 year gap, that can't stay healthy, and even when healthy, hasn't been all that great.  I just don't see it as a great fit, and personally am not sure he's THAT much more of an upgrade, and I don't think the Chargers are willing to break the bank on a 1 year rental for 25m.  If they're going to give that up, they're just gonna pay Rivers. I don't see a FA that makes any sense other than maybe Bridgewater.

Rivers to Carolina might make some sense I guess, It was more the Chargers part that I didn't get.

Also I'm a Chargers fan, you gave us Shelby Harris, not Hargrave.  I would absolutely LOVE Hargrave as an addition.....

[Dr LBC]

1 minute ago, Rich7sena said:

Harris is also a starter on the Broncos and would also start on the Chargers.

The indiscriminate sale of tickets being the primary cause of Chargers low home turnout doesn't really comport because Chargers fans could just buy the tickets so I'm not really following your logic.

And I disagree with the Cam Newton purely being a business move ala drafting a local player. Newton was an MVP, rookie of the year, and took a team to the Super Bowl. If he is healthy, which might be a big if--no one knows but he and his doctors--then trading for Cam would be both a prudent business and football decision.

The price point is outrageous.  I'm telling you this from firsthand responses I've heard from Chargers fans in the area (if I run into people in Chargers gear at bars I flat out ask them if they've been to a game and if not, why).  It's not as prohibitive to away fans because it's easier for them to justify it in with "cost of vacation" (when you're already spending on a flight/hotel, another $150-200 for the ticket is largely incidental because you're budgeting for that one game out of the year).  By comparison, the average cost of LA Galaxy tickets in the same stadium is $44 and they certainly don't hurt for home support.  Spanos executed a historically bad entry into a new market (largely out of arrogance, partially out of incompetence - for lack of a better word, they "think what they're doing is perfectly fine" even though it's not yielding results - and that quote was disclosed to me by a major-media member who reports on the team) and doesn't appear to know how to dig himself out.

[FalconFan13]

1 hour ago, Rich7sena said:

 

I always do a cursory search to get an idea of whether a player will re-sign. Usually, the player's perspective tends to be most informative to what ends up happening. Based on that, I have Hooper not re-signing. Also, the Falcons aren't in a great cap situation.

Were not in as bad a cap situation as it looks on paper either as we have tons of dead weight cuts to make on bad players that frees up a lot.  We also just restructured ryan and gradys contracts.  So were already around 10 to 12 million above cap before getting rid of guys like freeman carpenter etc.  As said we will see but I would expect hooper to be back and expect the falcons to have about 35 to 40 million in cap space to work with this offseason when all cuts and moves are made.  Im guessing we give Hooper around 9 to 10 million a year for 4 or 5 years with his 1st year being about a 5 million cap hit or so.

[Hukos]

The funny thing is, Hooper would only be getting about 2 million more per year than Sanu did in his time in Atlanta, when both players basically hold the same kind of niche in the offense. And I'd argue that Hooper is better at what he does than Sanu was able to at what he does. Is that 2 million really worth letting a quality Tight End go, and then you have to spend draft picks to find your next Tight End? I think spending the extra 2 million over someone like Sanu is worth not having to invest draft picks into Tight End for the near future, call me crazy.

It's trying to squeeze blood from a stone if you don't resign him. What's worth more here, 2 million or draft picks?

[SmittyBacall]

Burrow can and will start from Day 1. And even if he wasn't, this franchise isn't going to doll out the funds to lure Bridgewater to Cincinnati. Nor do I think Bridgewater would want to sign here for what would likely amount to a 1-year deal. My guess is he would much prefer to compete for a legitimate starting job elsewhere.

[HTTRDynasty]

I like the Bradberry signing, and I obviously love the Young pick.  

I doubt we let Scherff walk - we'll likely either re-sign or tag him. 

Interesting you didn't address the Trent Williams situation.  I hope we can keep him, unless we're offered a 1st.

TE is a huge need, so Hooper is definitely a top target.  We also need a serviceable FS.  I'd be happy with Tre Boston.

[kingseanjohn]

9 hours ago, Rich7sena said:

Chris Jones signs with Tampa Bay Buccaneers

There's a 0% chance that we just let him walk. We're either re-signing him, he's going to be tagged, or he's going to be tagged and traded.

9 hours ago, Rich7sena said:

Kansas City Chiefs select Jevon Kinlaw, DL, South Carolina

Even if we let Jones walk, I don't like it. We need help at OL, LB, CB, RB, or WR more.

[Tetsujin]

I'm not sure about those FA signings, but the draft is OK.

[lavar703]

Two second round picks for Nick Foles? Good lord lol

We’re probably not letting Scherff walk. We’ll have a ton of cap space and he’ll most likely get tagged. 

[FalconFan13]

8 hours ago, Hukos said:

The funny thing is, Hooper would only be getting about 2 million more per year than Sanu did in his time in Atlanta, when both players basically hold the same kind of niche in the offense. And I'd argue that Hooper is better at what he does than Sanu was able to at what he does. Is that 2 million really worth letting a quality Tight End go, and then you have to spend draft picks to find your next Tight End? I think spending the extra 2 million over someone like Sanu is worth not having to invest draft picks into Tight End for the near future, call me crazy.

It's trying to squeeze blood from a stone if you don't resign him. What's worth more here, 2 million or draft picks?

I will say this though as much as i like Hooper and think we will bring him back.  Depending on whats available there in FA on the D-line department i might would prefer to use the money there than at TE.  I trust TD to find a solid TE in the draft and i actually do like Graham a bit as i think he has very nice upside.   I do not usually trust TD to find a great edge rusher  at this point in the draft and i honestly don't trust myself to pick a good one anymore either lol.  HE chose both my guys in Beasley and Takk and both are not as good as i thought they would be.  Now with that said i want to see how they look on a different team or different coaching because i still think both have talent. 

So my question to you us would you rather use that 10 million to keep Hooper and draft a edge rusher / D-lineman early again and hope we hit.   Or would you rather take that 10 mil and put maybe 2 to 4 more with it and see if we can get a sure fire top tier D-lineman to add to the front and draft a TE in the draft to pair with Graham?

[jetskid007]

The amount of effort you put into this is spectacular. Very well done and much appreciated. 

As for the Jets: 

14 hours ago, Rich7sena said:

• Anthony Castonzo signs with New York Jets
• Brandon Scherff signs with New York Jets 
• Graham Glasgow signs with New York Jets
• Dante Fowler signs with New York Jets

Firstly, you're absolutely spot on with Scherff and Glasgow. I've been doing a lot of research for my own Jets mock, and these two guys have a lot of links back to the Jets. Scherff is represented by Neil Cornrich, who happens to also represent Marshal Yanda. In 2007, Joe Douglas was "the guy" when it came to scouting the OL for the Ravens. He advocated for Yanda in the 3rd round, which naturally led to a lot of positive for everyone around. Fast-forward to 2020, where Douglas is now running his own team. Douglas has had plenty of opportunities to scout Scherff as VP Player Personnel with the Eagles. Obviously these are just a few scenarios and links, but when you factor in how desperate we are for OL, and our pursuit of Zack Martin (RG), it would seem Scherff fits the billing as arguably the best OL who should hit the market. I used to think that he would be franchise tagged, but with Bruce gone, Trent Williams more likely to come back on a new contract, and the young talent WAS has in the interior, it seems like Scherff will have an opportunity to break free. As for Glasgow, he's likely the best C in an extraordinarily thin market. The Jets - especially Gase - put a major emphasis on versatility and player's with a team-first mentality. Glasgow has started at LG, C, and RG in his short career because it was deemed best for the team at the time. He had a really good year at C in 2018, but because Ragnow was better fit for the C spot, they moved Glasgow to G. He never complained, just put his head down and kept working. It's going to appeal to our decision makers big-time. 

As for Castonzo and Fowler, I think it would be a dream come true but unlikely to happen. We have money, but also have needs everywhere. I think Castonzo resigns with the Colts if he doesn't retire, and I don't think the Jets will have the money to sign a guy like Fowler after breaking bank on Scherff/Glasgow. If it did happen I'd be thrilled though. 

14 hours ago, Rich7sena said:

• 11. New York Jets select Jerry Jeudy, WR, Alabama

Hard for this not to be the case after signing three starting caliber OL, especially with Thomas/Wirfs/Wills off the board. I wouldn't be complaining, that's for sure. 

[J_E_T_$]

As a jets fan, I would love the free agent signings, but I don't think we will be this active.  

I don't think in a really deep WR class the jets would use a 1st round pick on a WR when they have so many other needs.  The best of available OT, Edge, CB would be the pick. 

 

Nice work, a lot of effort

 

14 hours ago, Rich7sena said:

Jacksonville trades Nick Foles to Indianapolis for a 2020 & 2021 2nd round pick.

Jacksonville will not get anything close to this if they tried to trade him.  Foles isn't any better the Brissett, why would they want to lock into Foles huge salary.

 

14 hours ago, Rich7sena said:

Devonta Freeman signs with Las Vegas

Im not sure why the Raiders would sign him unless it was on a hugely discounted contract.  

 

 

[Hukos]

2 hours ago, FalconFan13 said:

I will say this though as much as i like Hooper and think we will bring him back.  Depending on whats available there in FA on the D-line department i might would prefer to use the money there than at TE.  I trust TD to find a solid TE in the draft and i actually do like Graham a bit as i think he has very nice upside.   I do not usually trust TD to find a great edge rusher  at this point in the draft and i honestly don't trust myself to pick a good one anymore either lol.  HE chose both my guys in Beasley and Takk and both are not as good as i thought they would be.  Now with that said i want to see how they look on a different team or different coaching because i still think both have talent. 

So my question to you us would you rather use that 10 million to keep Hooper and draft a edge rusher / D-lineman early again and hope we hit.   Or would you rather take that 10 mil and put maybe 2 to 4 more with it and see if we can get a sure fire top tier D-lineman to add to the front and draft a TE in the draft to pair with Graham?

Modern NFL offenses really seem to need a quality TE1 to thrive. Don't forget, keeping Hooper gives Atlanta the flexibility to run more TE2 sets, which opens up a heavier dose of play-action in the playbook if Koetter decides to tap into it (he won't, but that's besides the point). 

Do you remember what happened in the Saints game on Thanksgiving? Julio was out, so Ridley was double covered, and the other targets were being pressed all night and they couldn't beat press coverage. This is the real value of a guy like Hooper, which lets you circumvent that kind of strategy. Another reason to keep Hooper around is, well, the only time Koetter had a good offense in Atlanta was 2012... and we had a significant talent advantage on offense compared to what most defenses were running. Just chuck it up to Roddy/Julio/Tony and the rest really didn't matter.

The only way Koetter's offense is going to function in a semi-literate fashion is if we have that same kind of talent advantage on offense, which is going to require us holding onto Hooper. I just don't see Koetter being creative enough to get Graham involved in the playbook - and he already doesn't scheme Julio/Ridley open, so why would he do that for Graham? If we resign Hooper and the offensive line stabilizes, it's not impossible that the Falcons just score by out-talenting other teams, but it won't be like in 2016, it'd just be a "nice" offense, instead of the output you'd expect from a team flush with skill position guys. But I'll take that over this year. Plus, Matt and Hooper seem to have a nice chemistry going, so I'd like to keep that locked down.

[FalconFan13]

21 minutes ago, Hukos said:

Modern NFL offenses really seem to need a quality TE1 to thrive. Don't forget, keeping Hooper gives Atlanta the flexibility to run more TE2 sets, which opens up a heavier dose of play-action in the playbook if Koetter decides to tap into it (he won't, but that's besides the point). 

Do you remember what happened in the Saints game on Thanksgiving? Julio was out, so Ridley was double covered, and the other targets were being pressed all night and they couldn't beat press coverage. This is the real value of a guy like Hooper, which lets you circumvent that kind of strategy. Another reason to keep Hooper around is, well, the only time Koetter had a good offense in Atlanta was 2012... and we had a significant talent advantage on offense compared to what most defenses were running. Just chuck it up to Roddy/Julio/Tony and the rest really didn't matter.

The only way Koetter's offense is going to function in a semi-literate fashion is if we have that same kind of talent advantage on offense, which is going to require us holding onto Hooper. I just don't see Koetter being creative enough to get Graham involved in the playbook - and he already doesn't scheme Julio/Ridley open, so why would he do that for Graham? If we resign Hooper and the offensive line stabilizes, it's not impossible that the Falcons just score by out-talenting other teams, but it won't be like in 2016, it'd just be a "nice" offense, instead of the output you'd expect from a team flush with skill position guys. But I'll take that over this year. Plus, Matt and Hooper seem to have a nice chemistry going, so I'd like to keep that locked down.

The only reason im somewhat in agreement with this is because the TE draft class to me isn't that impressive compared to the early round DE class.  I think theirs a good chance we could hit on a very good TE in the 1st 2 to 3 rounds more so than a TE in this class.  If i seen a sure fire stud at TE that i knew could replace Hooper sooner than later i would probably jump on a top notch edge rusher in FA like a Clowney or something.