swede700 Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 (edited) 25 minutes ago, SemperFeist said: I wonder if Staley lands in SF? I think that would be the obvious choice...while they've never worked together, they are really of the same philosophy. Edited February 14 by swede700 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wcblack34 Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 Someone had to be the fall guy. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vike daddy Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 2 hours ago, wcblack34 said: Someone had to be the fall guy. yeah, and it was obviously Wilkes' fault that the Niners abandoned running the ball in the second half. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Relax Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 9 hours ago, vike daddy said: yeah, and it was obviously Wilkes' fault that the Niners abandoned running the ball in the second half. Obviously! I really, really hope that O'Connell works at building a complementary running attack, THAT YOU DON'T ABANDON, is really important to team success! But, honestly, I don't think O'Connell is interested. He should talk to Shanahan about the importance of running the ball. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wcblack34 Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 40 minutes ago, Captain Relax said: Obviously! I really, really hope that O'Connell works at building a complementary running attack, THAT YOU DON'T ABANDON, is really important to team success! But, honestly, I don't think O'Connell is interested. He should talk to Shanahan about the importance of running the ball. It's hard to not abandon the run when Mattison consitently runs into Bradbury's backside for a loss. Things got better when Chandler got more carries, but we still weren't good at runnng the ball. I think that's more of a talent issue than the scheme or coaching preferences. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Relax Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 51 minutes ago, wcblack34 said: It's hard to not abandon the run when Mattison consitently runs into Bradbury's backside for a loss. Things got better when Chandler got more carries, but we still weren't good at runnng the ball. I think that's more of a talent issue than the scheme or coaching preferences. I think it's both. I like Chandler, but he's not an every down back. I don't know what the cap consequences of releasing or trying to trade Mattison would be since he was just resigned. There are some really interesting free agent running backs this year. I would doubt the Vikings would be in the market for Barkley or Henry, but there would be some backs available that would complement Chandler. Mostly, the Viking line coaches need to work on pro run blocking techniques and do a better job of schemeing pulling linemen. Our guys are athletic enough to be better at it then they are. So, to my eye, it's a coaching issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vike daddy Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 The picture for Jimmy Garoppolo’s NFL playing future is currently unclear. But wherever he’s playing in 2024, he won’t be on the field for the first two weeks of the season. According to ESPN’s Adam Schefter, Garoppolo is being suspended for two games due to violating the NFL’s performance-enhancing substances policy. Schefter also reports that the Raiders are expected to release Garoppolo before the fifth day of the new league year in March. Garoppolo used a prescribed medication without having a valid therapeutic use exemption. He is not planning to appeal the two-game suspension. https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootballtalk/rumor-mill/news/jimmy-garoppolo-facing-two-game-suspension-raiders-are-expected-to-release-him Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swede700 Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 Here is a guy, like Tasker, should probably go into the HoF... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SemperFeist Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 (edited) 3 Super Bowl rings 5x 1st team All Pro 3x 2nd team All Pro 10x Pro Bowler That’s a Hall of Fame resume regardless of the position. Edited February 20 by SemperFeist 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swede700 Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 (edited) The Saints are continuing to Saint...and marching money down the road. Whenever Loomis either retires or gets canned, that team is going to be screwed for years. Edited February 22 by swede700 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SemperFeist Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 It’s going to be fascinating how they handle the cap when they no longer can push money down the road. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vike daddy Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 Atlanta is now listed by odds makers as the team most likely to sign Justin Fields. Which is odd as they're also most likely to sign Cousins, lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vike daddy Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 The Cowboys have plenty of problems. But they have one very specific and significant problem at quarterback. Because they dragged their feet with Dak Prescott in the past, their present entails: (1) Dak entering the last year of his contract; (2) the Cowboys having no way to use the franchise tag to keep him in place for 2025; and (3) a massive 2024 cap number of $59.4 million. It gives Dak all the cards in the negotiations for an extension. He has the kind of leverage that owner/G.M. Jerry Jones would fully exploit, if in the same situation. Basically, Dak can name his terms. An item in the Dallas Morning News introduces a smart wrinkle I hadn’t previously considered. Because the contract already carries two voidable years, the Cowboys could (if the contract allows it or Dak agrees to it) implement a simple restructuring that would knock his $29 million salary for 2024 down to the league minimum of $1.21 million. The difference ($27.78 million) would be spread over 2024, 2025, and 2026. That would create $18.52 million in cap space for 2024, dropping his cap number to $40.88 million. That’s great for 2024. It’s not great for 2025. If the Cowboys fail to extend Dak’s deal before next March, he’d count for nearly $55 million against the cap in 2025 — even if he signs elsewhere. It still might be the only way out of this mess for the Cowboys. Kick the can and hope the cap goes up so much by 2025 that, if push comes to shove, they can take $55 million in dead money for a player who is no longer on the team. Regardless, at some point in the next 12 months the Cowboys either need to pay Dak or watch him walk away. And if they don’t extend his contract, they’ll take a total cap charge of $95.915 million in his name over the next two league years. https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootballtalk/rumor-mill/news/simple-restructuring-of-dak-prescotts-contract-doesnt-solve-the-cowboys-problem speaking of kicking the can down the road.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Relax Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 35 minutes ago, vike daddy said: The Cowboys have plenty of problems. But they have one very specific and significant problem at quarterback. Because they dragged their feet with Dak Prescott in the past, their present entails: (1) Dak entering the last year of his contract; (2) the Cowboys having no way to use the franchise tag to keep him in place for 2025; and (3) a massive 2024 cap number of $59.4 million. It gives Dak all the cards in the negotiations for an extension. He has the kind of leverage that owner/G.M. Jerry Jones would fully exploit, if in the same situation. Basically, Dak can name his terms. An item in the Dallas Morning News introduces a smart wrinkle I hadn’t previously considered. Because the contract already carries two voidable years, the Cowboys could (if the contract allows it or Dak agrees to it) implement a simple restructuring that would knock his $29 million salary for 2024 down to the league minimum of $1.21 million. The difference ($27.78 million) would be spread over 2024, 2025, and 2026. That would create $18.52 million in cap space for 2024, dropping his cap number to $40.88 million. That’s great for 2024. It’s not great for 2025. If the Cowboys fail to extend Dak’s deal before next March, he’d count for nearly $55 million against the cap in 2025 — even if he signs elsewhere. It still might be the only way out of this mess for the Cowboys. Kick the can and hope the cap goes up so much by 2025 that, if push comes to shove, they can take $55 million in dead money for a player who is no longer on the team. Regardless, at some point in the next 12 months the Cowboys either need to pay Dak or watch him walk away. And if they don’t extend his contract, they’ll take a total cap charge of $95.915 million in his name over the next two league years. https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootballtalk/rumor-mill/news/simple-restructuring-of-dak-prescotts-contract-doesnt-solve-the-cowboys-problem speaking of kicking the can down the road.... I love that the Cowboys and Jerry have this headache! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swede700 Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 17 minutes ago, Captain Relax said: I love that the Cowboys and Jerry have this headache! A headache that was Jerry-mandered. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.