MacReady Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 Any QB ever really wants to win Super Bowls and they’ll sign for like 15 million per. Just really makes me wish Brady had married some waitress he met in college. Then we’d see how many rings he’d win while getting paid market value. For our next QB we just gotta find somebody from like Duke or Harvard or somewhere who will marry a billionaire. Or one who can also play defense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 8 hours ago, Golfman said: Works in NE too! The whole league is now talking about analytics. This is the next phase in my opinion. Look at the high end talent that was traded in the past two years: Mack, Clowney, Tunsil, Ramsey, Fitzpatrick, and L Williams come to mind immediately. I'm sure I"m forgetting others too. That never used to happen. New England has paid Brady, don't see the connection. They've lowered his cap hits sure, but they also let him sell TB12 merchandise in their stadium and I'm sure have found other under the table ways to pay him and make up for it. He's also married to a model worth half a billion. Not a blueprint any other team can follow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fl0nkerton Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 9 hours ago, squire12 said: It will be interesting to see how some of the recent QB classes are handled by their respective teams. HOU with Watson KC with Mahomes Bal with Lamarr Each of those QB have shown the ability to be elite. Can they lead a team to the super bowl (and win it) is yet to be seen. But each of those teams will need to decide on the value of signing them to contracts that are going to be pushing $40M or more Watson + Mahomes are going to be the highest paid QBs in the NFL. Lamar is well on his way. The whole strategy is fine if you want to **** around and waste entire seasons for the sake of utilizing assets elsewhere. GM's aren't willing going to do that because they'd be fired for doing so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted December 5, 2019 Author Share Posted December 5, 2019 1 minute ago, Fl0nkerton said: The whole strategy is fine if you want to **** around and waste entire seasons for the sake of utilizing assets elsewhere. GM's aren't willing going to do that because they'd be fired for doing so. Finish the thought. Why are they fired? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 Just now, Leader said: Finish the thought. Why are they fired? He finishes the thought, you give up a franchise QB in a trade and don't immediately build a contender the following season you will be fired, guarantee it. No owner is going to accept a rebuild when you gave up an asset you could afford to sign who would make you playoff contenders for a decade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fl0nkerton Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 Just now, Leader said: Finish the thought. Why are they fired? "We're gonna trade the most popular player on the team, keep drafting QBs until one hits (again), then use his 4-year window of his Rookie Deal to splurge on other positions." If you tell the owner of the team you have an idea but there's no set date for "Mission Success", they would have a hard time hiring you / keeping you employed imo 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted December 5, 2019 Author Share Posted December 5, 2019 Just now, Packerraymond said: He finishes the thought, you give up a franchise QB in a trade and don't immediately build a contender the following season you will be fired, guarantee it. No owner is going to accept a rebuild when you gave up an asset you could afford to sign who would make you playoff contenders for a decade. Actually, you just did. Correctly. Thats why its not going to happen with an organization thats actually committed to winning and increasing profits as a result. Nobodies gonna survive trading away a top tier QB and selling that to their customers: "It will allow us to be more mediocre for longer" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted December 5, 2019 Author Share Posted December 5, 2019 Just now, Fl0nkerton said: "We're gonna trade the most popular player on the team, keep drafting QBs until one hits (again), then use his 4-year window of his Rookie Deal to splurge on other positions." If you tell the owner of the team you have an idea but there's no set date for "Mission Success", they would have a hard time hiring you / keeping you employed imo Agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fl0nkerton Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 If you're into that sort of thing, there's a really good thread in the Madden/Video Games Forum with @MKnight82 re-building the Bengals. He did exactly what Outpost is talking about and he just won the SB after trading his MVP QB (to the Packers) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golfman Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 It's gonna happen, but may not be Mahomes. At some point you have to understand analytics to understand the value in this thinking. You can't commit 15-20% of your cap to one guy, even at the most premium position, and expect to have enough pieces to win many Super Bowls. You may get lucky one year, but reality is you probably won't. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted December 5, 2019 Author Share Posted December 5, 2019 1 minute ago, Golfman said: It's gonna happen, but may not be Mahomes. At some point you have to understand analytics to understand the value in this thinking. You can't commit 15-20% of your cap to one guy, even at the most premium position, and expect to have enough pieces to win many Super Bowls. You may get lucky one year, but reality is you probably won't. You're (partially) preaching to the choir. I'm the guy that was taken to task last year challenging the thought that the ever increasing concept of QB salaries - while tied to relatively stagnate statistical output/production - was.....well, stupid. But - in an age of increasing cap space.....it all becomes possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 10 hours ago, Outpost31 said: Quit saying that last part. 10 years ago nobody in their right mind would trade a top 5 EDGE. Gruden just did and all signs currently point to him having made the right choice. 30 years ago you couldn’t win without a great QB. Then Rypien happened. And Dilfer. And Foles and Flacco. The more often analytics are proven right, the more likely it’s going to happen. Might not be Mahomes, but it’s coming. Every NFL team is going to see what happens to the Rams and Eagles and that will be one more point in my argument’s favor. The Eagles should have traded Wentz and kept Foles. Especially considering Wentz and his weird people skills. You can say no G.M. would ever trade a QB like that, but 99% sure you dismissed the early rumor of Mack being traded and look how well that aged. You’d also have told me I’m unrealistic if I had said the Raiders should trade Mack for two first round picks and rebuild from scratch. “No G.M. would ever do it.” You can act like I don’t know what I’m talking about while also admitting everyone knows what I’m talking about is right but too risky to actually live by. Gruden signed a 10/100 deal. If he got fired he's getting every penny. Not a lot of risk of firing on his end. Plus he's got an ego larger than any other executive save maybe Belicheck. Everyone else was paying Mack. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golfman Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 1 minute ago, Leader said: You're (partially) preaching to the choir. I'm the guy that was taken to task last year challenging the thought that the ever increasing concept of QB salaries - while tied to relatively stagnate statistical output/production - was.....well, stupid. But - in an age of increasing cap space.....it all becomes possible. It is still about the % of cap space used on the QB or EDGE rusher, ect.. The average salary of other positions rises with cap as well. If you remember I trotted out the idea of trading Rodgers and robbing Cleveland blind a few years back on another site. In hindsight, not sure that wasn't the play. Hoping we can break trend and win another Super Bowl with a QB commanding over 10% of our cap space. Got very lucky to hit on 3 free agents this year which may put us in the discussion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golfman Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 (edited) 1 minute ago, Packerraymond said: Gruden signed a 10/100 deal. If he got fired he's getting every penny. Not a lot of risk of firing on his end. Plus he's got an ego larger than any other executive save maybe Belicheck. Everyone else was paying Mack. Houston wasn't paying Clowney! They have to be regretting paying Watt at this point too. Look at the Rams this year too. They overpaid three positions, soon to be 4 with Ramsey, and are now strapped and will continue to decline. You can't hit on 2, 3, and 4th rounders every year to give you enough talent elsewhere. You can't pay enough people when you invest so much into so few players. It's bad math and doesn't work. Edited December 5, 2019 by Golfman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 1 minute ago, Golfman said: Houston wasn't paying Clowney! They have to be regretting paying Watt at this point too. They swapped a pass rusher for a LT, they gave up massive capital and are going to pay Tunsil. Plus they got hosed in the Clowney deal. Houston has no GM, they have a HC on the bubble with no playoff success who's making the calls. Not the model you want to follow. Teams don't win the Super Bowl without star players, if drafting were easy we'd have a league full of 10-6 to 6-10 ranged teams where luck is the most common driving factor of game results. Let's not pretend you can stop paying stars, trade them for picks and consistently improve via the draft. You'd need to hit it out of the park immediately or you'd be out of a job. 2 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.