Uncle Buck Posted March 14, 2018 Share Posted March 14, 2018 18 hours ago, SemperFeist said: 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDBrocks Posted March 14, 2018 Share Posted March 14, 2018 9 minutes ago, Cearbhall said: That seems to be a common misconception here. It would not benefit the team in any way other than to save them from themselves. The team is far better off paying less up front, banking the difference, rolling over the banked cap space to future years, and then paying it to the player. This is better from a cap flexibility standpoint as well as real dollar issues. Teams used to front load because rolling cap space from year to year was somewhat tricky. Rules have been changed since then. That's only if they are not going to spend more this year. If they back load the contract, and choose not to spend money this year, does that make the team any better than having cap flexibility next year to resign other players? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Buck Posted March 14, 2018 Share Posted March 14, 2018 16 minutes ago, Duff Man said: You don't understand the hype behind a dude who is: 3rd in completion % 4th in yards 4th in TDs 3rd in Game-winning drives since 2015? Do I need to spell it out for you??? The question that remains unanswered until they both play is whether Cousins alone adds more to our offense than Teddy plus the free agents we could add to our O-line with the savings. I'm fine with Cousins, but I think keeping Teddy and bolstering the O-line would have also been a decent plan. Maybe the team knows something we don't about Teddy's knee. One thing is certain - if Cousins doesn't work out over the next three years, Spielman just turned up the heat on himself and Mike Zimmer. I do think Cousins will be a good QB for us, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cearbhall Posted March 14, 2018 Share Posted March 14, 2018 13 minutes ago, JDBrocks said: That's only if they are not going to spend more this year. If they back load the contract, and choose not to spend money this year, does that make the team any better than having cap flexibility next year to resign other players? If they front load the contract they would not be able to spend that amount this year. If they do not, that can choose whether to spend it this year. If the plan is to roll over cap space to next year they are better off doing it by a straight rolling over of that space than by front loading a contract. There is no benefit to the team of front loading a contract. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 14, 2018 Share Posted March 14, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, Duff Man said: You don't understand the hype behind a dude who is: 3rd in completion % 4th in yards 4th in TDs 3rd in Game-winning drives since 2015? Do I need to spell it out for you??? Well...yes. Whenever I watched Washington (and unfortunately due to where I live...I see more of the Redskins then I can stomach) I see, with my own eyeballs, a mediocre quarterback with a propensity for turnovers. I have never been a big believer in any quarterback statistic other than TD/Interception ratio. The problem with Cousins is that he also fumbles...quite a bit. So, statistically, he may be Johnny Unitas...I still don't see it with my own eyeballs!! Edited March 14, 2018 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Purplexing Posted March 14, 2018 Share Posted March 14, 2018 32 minutes ago, JDBrocks said: If you don't understand the reservation or hesitation shared by many, that's on you. You don't have to share those reservations, but it doesn't make them any less valid. I don't understand either. Explain it to us. That's the purpose of the comment board; i.e. share ideas. What 'top 5' Cousins stats since 2015 were exaggerated, to which disaacs claimed those were lies, damn lies, etc.? What stats show KC to be below an average NFL QB? Do those exclusively cause reservation or hesitation or both? Do those bad stats offset the 'top 5 stats' ('lies, damn lies, ...) ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VikeManDan Posted March 14, 2018 Share Posted March 14, 2018 6 minutes ago, Cearbhall said: If they front load the contract they would not be able to spend that amount this year. If they do not, that can choose whether to spend it this year. If the plan is to roll over cap space to next year they are better off doing it by a straight rolling over of that space than by front loading a contract. There is no benefit to the team of front loading a contract. But if they front load the contract i.e. $35M in year 1 and $24.5M in years 2 and 3 wouldn't they "gain" $9.5M in cap space in years 2 and 3 of his deal by him having a lower cap hit? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDBrocks Posted March 14, 2018 Share Posted March 14, 2018 7 minutes ago, Cearbhall said: If they front load the contract they would not be able to spend that amount this year. If they do not, that can choose whether to spend it this year. If the plan is to roll over cap space to next year they are better off doing it by a straight rolling over of that space than by front loading a contract. There is no benefit to the team of front loading a contract. I understand what you are saying, but don't see it as cut and dried as you do. There are benefits and drawbacks both ways. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heavydan85 Posted March 14, 2018 Share Posted March 14, 2018 10 minutes ago, Cearbhall said: If they front load the contract they would not be able to spend that amount this year. If they do not, that can choose whether to spend it this year. If the plan is to roll over cap space to next year they are better off doing it by a straight rolling over of that space than by front loading a contract. There is no benefit to the team of front loading a contract. What about the spending minimum rules? Legit question cap rules are not my thing...although they really should be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Purplexing Posted March 14, 2018 Share Posted March 14, 2018 18 minutes ago, Uncle Buck said: The question that remains unanswered until they both play is whether Cousins alone adds more to our offense than Teddy plus the free agents we could add to our O-line with the savings. I'm fine with Cousins, but I think keeping Teddy and bolstering the O-line would have also been a decent plan. Maybe the team knows something we don't about Teddy's knee. One thing is certain - if Cousins doesn't work out over the next three years, Spielman just turned up the heat on himself and Mike Zimmer. I do think Cousins will be a good QB for us, though. If rumors and tenders pan out, Berger and Easton will return, leaving 1 or 2 OL spots to be upgraded, perhaps more likely thru the draft. Cook returns, and is supposed to be on schedule to return fully healed, if I recall and interpret recent reports properly. The loss of McK is offset by Cook's return, and Ham and the other RB whose name escapes me now should suffice at RB. GMs avoided TB, perhaps correctly, perhaps wrongly. They have the right to put him through a medical exam, but he got few interviews, to my knowledge. So, GMs were wary of his future potential, and that supports Spielman/ Zimmer/ DeFillippo also being wary of riding with him and an upgraded OL. We can all speculate, but no one knows if he will improve, level off, or decline. Time will tell if everyone was right or wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CriminalMind Posted March 14, 2018 Share Posted March 14, 2018 Teddy might be a 3rd stringer this season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Buck Posted March 14, 2018 Share Posted March 14, 2018 8 minutes ago, Purplexing said: If rumors and tenders pan out, Berger and Easton will return, leaving 1 or 2 OL spots to be upgraded, perhaps more likely thru the draft. Cook returns, and is supposed to be on schedule to return fully healed, if I recall and interpret recent reports properly. The loss of McK is offset by Cook's return, and Ham and the other RB whose name escapes me now should suffice at RB. GMs avoided TB, perhaps correctly, perhaps wrongly. They have the right to put him through a medical exam, but he got few interviews, to my knowledge. So, GMs were wary of his future potential, and that supports Spielman/ Zimmer/ DeFillippo also being wary of riding with him and an upgraded OL. We can all speculate, but no one knows if he will improve, level off, or decline. Time will tell if everyone was right or wrong. I don't blame the team for going after Cousins, but as a fan I'm going to miss Teddy. What a great guy he is. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cearbhall Posted March 14, 2018 Share Posted March 14, 2018 21 minutes ago, VikeManDan said: But if they front load the contract i.e. $35M in year 1 and $24.5M in years 2 and 3 wouldn't they "gain" $9.5M in cap space in years 2 and 3 of his deal by him having a lower cap hit? Nope. They have the same amount of cap space in those years. If they pay him a salary of $24.5M this year and $35M next year rolling over the $10.5M from this year to next year they will have the exact same amount of cap space next year as they would if they paid $35M this year and $24.5M next year. They would have a lot less flexibility though. 18 minutes ago, Heavydan85 said: What about the spending minimum rules? Legit question cap rules are not my thing...although they really should be. Fair point. It could help the team inflate the used space this year to get to minimum. If that is going to be an issue, it would be a benefit. I hadn't considered that possible benefit but also do not see that as relevant right now. It is possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RSkinGM Posted March 14, 2018 Share Posted March 14, 2018 Welp, all I can say is I'm glad you guys have him . I didn't want him back at any price. I thought he was a weak player ( Not Physically ) . Just seemed to wilt too often at the biggest moments of the game . Missed open touchdowns for the short sure completions. Wasn't great at extending plays -just average. You guys have a killa 2018 schedule - Hope you get your money's worth .. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duff Man Posted March 14, 2018 Share Posted March 14, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, disaacs said: There are 3 kinds of lies...lies, damn lies, and statistics. Statistics don't tell the whole story. Are we getting Aaron Rodgers? No. Are we getting a very good QB who has proved that he can produce even with a mediocre (at best) cast? Yes. You guys are correct in saying you have the right to whine about this if you don't like it. Its just funny because I've seen Broncos fans whining about Keenum, Jets fans whining about Teddy, and Cardinals fans whining about Bradford. This was the vikings best option, I don't understand what the big deal is with overpaying a bit for the most important position on the field. If you guys are content with Keenum laying a complete egg in playoff games and saving that $10m or so per year all the power to you. There's going to be enough crow to go around when Cousins makes the same type of improvement to his numbers that Bradford and Keenum did when they came here. Edited March 14, 2018 by Duff Man 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.