Jump to content

This Is Rival Talk v1.0


CWood21

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Packerraymond said:

That was a bad utilization of money yes. I'm OK with it because it was only a 2nd contract and they weren't 6 year deals like Martin got but if Sitton or Lang's 2nd deal went to a defensive player you'd have a hard time convincing me we'd been worse off.

So you would have not signed either Lang nor Sitton so you could have a poorer OL and be able to spend money elsewhere on outside FA to bloated contracts that don't often offer as good of value?

But since they were 2nd deals but not for 6 years that makes them OK.  Even when Sitton was released before his deal expired. 

Interested to see the next added stipulation to justify things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, squire12 said:

So you would have not signed either Lang nor Sitton so you could have a poorer OL and be able to spend money elsewhere on outside FA to bloated contracts that don't often offer as good of value?

But since they were 2nd deals but not for 6 years that makes them OK.  Even when Sitton was released before his deal expired. 

Interested to see the next added stipulation to justify things.

Correct, if it were up to me I would've chosen one and let the other go. The bloated FA thing is living in 2008. The age of draft and develop added into analytics and now your bigger name FAs are working out at a much higher clip. There's no stipulation to it, I've been pretty clear from the start that I'm not paying guards. Neither did Wolf, Ted for the most part followed suit although he did give the guards a 2nd deal, but we aren't talking 10+ AAV here. I have no reason to believe that Gute will be any different. You don't throw money like Jax or Dallas did at a guard. It's just poor cap management.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Packerraymond said:

Correct, if it were up to me I would've chosen one and let the other go. The bloated FA thing is living in 2008. The age of draft and develop added into analytics and now your bigger name FAs are working out at a much higher clip. There's no stipulation to it, I've been pretty clear from the start that I'm not paying guards. Neither did Wolf, Ted for the most part followed suit although he did give the guards a 2nd deal, but we aren't talking 10+ AAV here. I have no reason to believe that Gute will be any different. You don't throw money like Jax or Dallas did at a guard. It's just poor cap management.

Hi PR - following the context of your comments, wondering if you could clarify this: The bloated FA thing is living in 2008. The age of draft and develop added into analytics and now your bigger name FAs are working out at a much higher clip. Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Leader said:

Hi PR - following the context of your comments, wondering if you could clarify this: The bloated FA thing is living in 2008. The age of draft and develop added into analytics and now your bigger name FAs are working out at a much higher clip. Thanks!

I think there's still a negative connotation that exists about FA from the era where teams did just go out and throw cash at any big name they could.

You look at today's roster management and the front offices are much smarter about it. I feel it's pretty universal around the league now at this point that the draft is a far more valuable tool than FA to build a roster. 

I think the stigma that FA is just a bunch of teams throwing cash at big names should be over now. Money will still be spent, but more often than not those big names are paying off for the teams that spend on them. That certainly wasn't the case in the early Ted era.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Packerraymond said:

Correct, if it were up to me I would've chosen one and let the other go. The bloated FA thing is living in 2008. The age of draft and develop added into analytics and now your bigger name FAs are working out at a much higher clip. There's no stipulation to it, I've been pretty clear from the start that I'm not paying guards. Neither did Wolf, Ted for the most part followed suit although he did give the guards a 2nd deal, but we aren't talking 10+ AAV here. I have no reason to believe that Gute will be any different. You don't throw money like Jax or Dallas did at a guard. It's just poor cap management.

The % of cap used is not that drastically different.  If you are going to use cap hit in dollars terms you, I am not sure what to tell you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

I think there's still a negative connotation that exists about FA from the era where teams did just go out and throw cash at any big name they could. You look at today's roster management and the front offices are much smarter about it. I feel it's pretty universal around the league now at this point that the draft is a far more valuable tool than FA to build a roster. I think the stigma that FA is just a bunch of teams throwing cash at big names should be over now. Money will still be spent, but more often than not those big names are paying off for the teams that spend on them. That certainly wasn't the case in the early Ted era.

Okay. Got it. Thanks!

 Agreed. Although there are still salary escalations - the ladder is still being climbed - it seems to me at least (no data driven research conducted) that the majority of those "big ticket" salaries/players are going to those teams who in a cyclical manner wind up with gobs of CAP money to burn. (Rookie QB contract ; multiple contracts removed from the books....etc). Wiser heads seem to have prevailed on the overall. 

Edited by Leader
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, squire12 said:

The % of cap used is not that drastically different.  If you are going to use cap hit in dollars terms you, I am not sure what to tell you.

I don't get your point. We spent a lot on guards, I've said I wouldn't have done it, didn't cripple us I guess but I would've paid the cheaper of the two if I didn't have a backup I was confident in, or let both go if I had young guys I liked. I don't agree with Dallas paying Martin nor Jax paying Norwell. That money is MUCH better spent at way more important positions. Totally fine with a guard group of Lane Taylor, Justin McCray, Cole Madison, Kyle Murphy, Kofi Amichia and Lucas Patrick going into camp.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

I don't get your point.

He's saying that since the cap keeps rising, its better to use the percentage of cap instead of the absolute dollars. 10AAV means something very different in 2008 vs 2018.

I don't disagree with your overall point on OGs but the NFL always evolves and the new DC said its far easier to negate an edge rusher than it is an interior rusher. That's why Pettine puts so much into his interior DL. And that might mean that OG value goes up in a way similar to how the NFL shifted from RT being the most important OT in the rush-centric NFL to the LT being the most important in the pass-centric NFL.

Not paying or valuing OGs might change. It is easier to find them so supply/demand plays a role - but we have to be open to the evolution of the game as well

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't matter if the game changes for interior pass rush because there are always guards to get or players to convert to guard.  Look at how many interior offensive linemen we let go only to not miss a beat or get better.  Lang, Sitton, EDS, Tretter, Colledge, Wells... More.  And more.  Then look at how tough it's been for us to replace corner talent.  DL talent for a while there.  TE talent.  RB talent.  QB talent.  WR talent.  Tackle talent.

Guard is probably (still) the least important position on offense, and the easiest position to find talent for.  How many times have you heard the phrase, "They need a guard to get to the next level."  The Falcons traded away a buttload to get receiver talent that they thought would put them over the top.  Countless teams have done that for QB, EDGE, secondary help, running back help and on and on and on. 

It's also easier for a RB to step up and help out an interior pass rush than it is an EDGE pass rush, so guards have pretty much the most help out of any position in football. 

I'll never understand this guard obsession here. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, HorizontoZenith said:

I'll never understand this guard obsession here.

I have no obsession, I was merely raising a salient point about the evolution of the NFL over time. OGs may continue to be the "least valuable", but their pay continues to grow and its closing the previously immense gap between OGs and OTs. On top of that OGs are the target for many DCs including Pettine and Zimmer with his double A gap blitz schemes. If they are the weakest link, they will continue to be attacked and it doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figger out how the NFL offenses will respond.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Shanedorf said:

I have no obsession, I was merely raising a salient point about the evolution of the NFL over time. OGs may continue to be the "least valuable", but their pay continues to grow and its closing the previously immense gap between OGs and OTs. On top of that OGs are the target for many DCs including Pettine and Zimmer with his double A gap blitz schemes. If they are the weakest link, they will continue to be attacked and it doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figger out how the NFL offenses will respond.

Trends happen in the NFL only for them to revert back to the norm.  One team wins a Super Bowl somehow and teams will try to emulate what they did because they don't understand that that team was usually good in the areas that the NFL dictates you must be good at, but they also had their own little spark (interior pass rush) that was an X-Factor. 

Guards will always be among the least important positions.  No matter what the trend dictates. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, HorizontoZenith said:

It doesn't matter if the game changes for interior pass rush because there are always guards to get or players to convert to guard.  Look at how many interior offensive linemen we let go only to not miss a beat or get better.  Lang, Sitton, EDS, Tretter, Colledge, Wells... More.  And more.  Then look at how tough it's been for us to replace corner talent.  DL talent for a while there.  TE talent.  RB talent.  QB talent.  WR talent.  Tackle talent.

Guard is probably (still) the least important position on offense, and the easiest position to find talent for.  How many times have you heard the phrase, "They need a guard to get to the next level."  The Falcons traded away a buttload to get receiver talent that they thought would put them over the top.  Countless teams have done that for QB, EDGE, secondary help, running back help and on and on and on. 

It's also easier for a RB to step up and help out an interior pass rush than it is an EDGE pass rush, so guards have pretty much the most help out of any position in football. 

I'll never understand this guard obsession here. 

 

This argument is pretty much used for every position on offense not named QB. You hear it all the time with RBs and WRs as well.

 

When you have talented/elite players entering their prime, like Zach Martin you pay them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, pollino14 said:

When you have talented/elite players entering their prime, like Zach Martin you pay them. 

When he's your ONLY talented/elite player, yeah.  Otherwise, nah. 

It's why the Niners didn't re-sign Iupati.  It's why the Panthers didn't re-sign Norwell.  It's why the Ravens didn't re-sign Osemele.  Why we cut Sitton.  Why we didn't re-sign Lang.  The Niners let Evans go to Seattle.  The Eagles let go of Mathis.  The Patriots traded away Logan Mankins a year early because they knew they weren't going to re-sign him.  These are all guards coming off all-pro or second all-pro seasons only to be let go.  How many times does that happen with ANY other position group in the NFL? 

You won't find a position in the NFL that teams don't re-sign at a higher rate than interior offensive linemen. 

No offense, but I'm sick of arguing this because NFL GMs have shown this time and time and time and time and time and time again, and yet some people here refuse to see it.  If you have the money and no other impending major free agents to sign, yeah, sure, you sign that guard.  Especially if it's a team friendly deal.  However, guards and centers are the FIRST positions to get priced out of a new contract.  No amount of arguing otherwise is going to change the fact that there is not a single position group in the NFL that is let go so willingly as talented/elite interior offensive linemen. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Shanedorf said:

He's saying that since the cap keeps rising, its better to use the percentage of cap instead of the absolute dollars. 10AAV means something very different in 2008 vs 2018.

I don't disagree with your overall point on OGs but the NFL always evolves and the new DC said its far easier to negate an edge rusher than it is an interior rusher. That's why Pettine puts so much into his interior DL. And that might mean that OG value goes up in a way similar to how the NFL shifted from RT being the most important OT in the rush-centric NFL to the LT being the most important in the pass-centric NFL.

Not paying or valuing OGs might change. It is easier to find them so supply/demand plays a role - but we have to be open to the evolution of the game as well

There's been no evolution, the middle of the OL has always been the fastest way to the QB. You have 3 to block 2 there however and usually a back that can also help, that's why OGs have less value.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

There's been no evolution

Disagree

Why did NFL teams stop using and paying  guys like Gilbert Brown, Sam Adams, Grady Jackson and Ryan Pickett in favor of interior DL that can rush the passer ?

Capers took the Big Fatties to the SB, the heaviest 30 front in history. But then NFL offenses evolved and the fatties became dinosaurs

Teams soon realized that the era of girth was over and the shift to NT/DTs with wiggle was under way across the league. Teams play very little base anymore and the value and paychecks of the fatties went away. That's just one aspect of the never-ending evolution in the NFL.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...