dennehy
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Dec 29, 2015
- Posts:
- 11,828
- Liked Posts:
- 12,877
- Location:
- Jewels to get a case of Squirt
Floyd was good last year with Donald only playing 11 games and not to his usual standard in most games when he did play.
**OFFICAIL** Bears 2024 Regular Season News & Schleisse - FTO Preferred - No ALTS! Derailing Is Discouraged!
- Thread starter Anytime23
- Start date
Bearly
Guest
Only if Whitehair can spiral a shotgun. Making your young QB look a slow knuckle ball all the way in will absolutely slow his progressions and recognition. I think it's Whitehair's best position... if he could shotgun a spiral.
- Joined:
- Aug 21, 2012
- Posts:
- 14,420
- Liked Posts:
- 16,638
- Location:
- United Club
My favorite teams
I believe Floyd can get them 8 sacks while still playing above average run defense.
Enasic
Who are the brain police?
- Joined:
- Mar 17, 2014
- Posts:
- 14,338
- Liked Posts:
- 10,126
Can Floyd play DE?
rawdawg
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Apr 28, 2013
- Posts:
- 8,013
- Liked Posts:
- 6,460
That's a good point. And Floyd had 4 sacks with Donald out toward the end of the year. And they were 5-5 in sacks when both played.
But I do think Floyd being an all-around player makes him a lesser signing than Ngakoue. Like I've said, Ngakoue has a very clear role that fills a deficiency on the defense (sack production). While, Floyd fills that role as well, because he is better all around, you're going to want him on the field more. And those additional snaps to 31-year old Floyd will come at the expense of Walker, Robinson, and a likely early draft pick who all have 3 years under contract.
***I'm assuming 1-year deal for either Floyd or Ngakoue and probably cut/trade Gipson in camp if you sign Floyd.
Enasic
Who are the brain police?
- Joined:
- Mar 17, 2014
- Posts:
- 14,338
- Liked Posts:
- 10,126
I’d like to see that number closer to 600-700 yards.
Foreman/Herbert are both capable of rushing for 800+ yards
Moore/Mooney/Claypool are all capable of 850+ yards
Kmet/Tonyan both have 500+ yd seasons under their belt
Absolutely no reason for Fields to have a huge rushing year or having to rely on his legs as much.
rawdawg
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Apr 28, 2013
- Posts:
- 8,013
- Liked Posts:
- 6,460
I think Jenkins will go where Braxton goes. If the Bears get Paris at 9, he goes to LT and Jones to RT. Jenkins then stays at RG to play next to Jenkins and you get vet Davis at LG next to the rookie. If the Bears wait on OT and get a guy in the 2nd or 3rd, then Braxton stays at LT, Jenkins to LG and again Davis is next to the rookie, this time at RG.
Dejo
Godfather of FTO
- Joined:
- Apr 4, 2011
- Posts:
- 16,507
- Liked Posts:
- 20,174
My favorite teams
Dejo
Godfather of FTO
- Joined:
- Apr 4, 2011
- Posts:
- 16,507
- Liked Posts:
- 20,174
My favorite teams
- Joined:
- Aug 21, 2012
- Posts:
- 29,797
- Liked Posts:
- 24,363
- Location:
- USA
Several one year deals will happen for the remaining free agents. Some will get multi, but I think the Bears will get one or two of them to fill out some spots for a year.
- Joined:
- Sep 15, 2012
- Posts:
- 63,789
- Liked Posts:
- 40,753
They both had to pay back only a small portion of the SB, it goes to arbitration. Yes, the option would void if he retires, but that does not mean that then the Packers could cut him after retirement. The contract is still valid. None of the 40 mil from past contracts would need to be paid back. FFS this has been in articles all over the web. That is money from past contracts in which the can was kicked down the road, old contracts tore up, and this new one in place. Besides, once he un-retires, it is all a moot point, he wouldn't have to pay anything back.
Stop with the " I am sure the Packers did this nonsense". Show me. And I am equally sure Aaron Rodgers agent isn't stupid either.
Rodgers would be forfeiting his rights to the fully guaranteed $59.465 million by retiring. He insisted that his decision wouldn't be influenced by the money because of the generation wealth he has accumulated from playing football. Rodgers has made over $300 million from his NFL player contracts.
The Packers would have $40,313,570 of dead money, a salary cap charge for a player no longer on the roster, with Rodgers retiring. The dead money would consist of $32.640 million in roster bonus proration and the $7,673,570 of 2023 bonus proration that already existed before Rodgers' new deal.
The $40.8 million was specifically designed by Rodgers' camp to be a roster bonus. Unlike signing bonus, the Packers don't have rights of recoupment for any type of contract breach, including retirement, after the 2022 league year with the roster bonus.
Rodgers' contract is structured in a manner where the cap ramifications get worse for Green Bay if he doesn't retire this offseason. Although $31,623,570 is a manageable 2023 cap number for Rodgers to stay with the Packers, the dead money takes a big jump if Rodgers hangs up his cleats after the 2023 season.
Green Bay would have to contend with $68.205 million of dead money in 2024. It would be composed of $24.48 million of roster bonus proration and $43.725 million of option bonus proration from Rodgers' 2024 through 2026 contract years. As with the roster bonus, Green Bay won't have any recoupment rights with an option bonus past the year when exercised.
Agent's Take: How Aaron Rodgers' future decision affects the Packers' bottom line
The future Hall of Famer could retire, be dealt or stay put; all options pose salary cap problems for Green Baywww.cbssports.com
So once again, you are arguing about something you know nothing about.
Game/Set/Match
Jets release Favre, clear way for possible return - AFC East - ESPN
<em>Posted by ESPN.com's Tim Graham</em> <p>If <a href=http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/profile?playerId=112>Brett Favre</a> wants to play football again, he won't need to go through any crazy machinations like he did last year. All t
web.archive.org
Yes it does mean they can cut him after he retired as the Jets (not the Packers) did with Favre. Again retirement is abandoning the contract so the team has a right to release themselves from the obligation without penalty.
Rodgers' deal includes $150M over first 3 years
A week after announcing his return to the Packers, QB Aaron Rodgers signed an extension that includes about $150 million in guaranteed money over the first three years.
www.google.com
Rodgers filed an extension. Extensions do not tear up old contracts. They add to years to existing contract. So Pack would still be able to recoup money from any SB not yet allocated from that old contract which is about 6-7m.
As for the roster bonus, most roster bonuses pay out immediately. As this pays out over time it is treated as a SB for cap purposes. So I do not think it is as clear cut as the agent is claiming that they cant recoup. You are talking about Rodgers purposefully shitting on the Pack so if I were them I would go after it. You are also saying paying back SB goes arbitration but then pretend the Pack just sit idly by on the roster bonus. No if they are upset with him they likely go to arbitration and argue the substance of the option is that it is delayed signing bonus hence why it is allocated over the life of the remaining contract.
The point is it is clear teams void guarantees in contracts for retirememt. You are talking as if it is not possible the Pack did it. I am offerring my opinion and concede I dont know for sure.
So in the end you and I dont know and until it happens this is just a fantasy and I still have no clue why Rodgers would be so petty. So let's revisit if this nonsense actually happens.
Last edited:
Dejo
Godfather of FTO
- Joined:
- Apr 4, 2011
- Posts:
- 16,507
- Liked Posts:
- 20,174
My favorite teams
- Joined:
- Nov 27, 2014
- Posts:
- 19,982
- Liked Posts:
- 4,823
Oh just go **** yourself already.
It is not as if it is like this was my idea, there are several articles on the web discussing this exact possibility . And no, un-retiring is far from unprecedented. Sorry, but is clearly you that is the butt hurt moron in this case. Sorry to have made Remy look like a complete fool talking about things he clearly did not research before posting.
NFL insider thinks a fake-out Aaron Rodgers retirement is on the table to screw Packers
An NFL insider doesn't think it's that far out to expect Aaron Rodgers could potentially retire and unretire this offseason.
There are plenty more of these articles
Deal with it you clueless ****
Last edited:
Luke
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Mar 25, 2016
- Posts:
- 1,963
- Liked Posts:
- 1,633
Fields has already missed 7 games so he definitely needs to improve on all aspects of his passing game so he can reduce his carries and injury risk. Hopefully, an improved OL and the addition of Moore will help that.
Last edited:
- Joined:
- Nov 27, 2014
- Posts:
- 19,982
- Liked Posts:
- 4,823
Again, dipshit, it is not a signing bonus, it is a roster bonus, it is not subject to be recouped for any year other than the year it was exercised. Absolutely none of the 40 mil can now be recouped by GB, that ship sailed last year. Deal with it, you are wrong, you have been proven to be wrong, just deal with it. This is common knowledge.Jets release Favre, clear way for possible return - AFC East - ESPN
<em>Posted by ESPN.com's Tim Graham</em> <p>If <a href=http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/profile?playerId=112>Brett Favre</a> wants to play football again, he won't need to go through any crazy machinations like he did last year. All tweb.archive.org
Yes it does mean they can cut him after he retired as the Jets (not the Packers) did with Favre. Again retirement is abandoning the contract so the team has a right to release themselves from the obligation without penalty.
Rodgers' deal includes $150M over first 3 years
A week after announcing his return to the Packers, QB Aaron Rodgers signed an extension that includes about $150 million in guaranteed money over the first three years.
Rodgers filed an extension. Extensions do not tear up old contracts. They add to years to existing contract. So Pack would still be able to recoup money from any SB not yet allocated from that old contract which is about 6-7m.
As for the roster bonus, most roster bonuses pay out immediately. As this pays out over time it is treated as a SB for cap purposes. So I do not think it is as clear cut as the agent is claiming that they cant recoup. You are talking about Rodgers purposefully shitting on the Pack so if I were them I would go after it. You are also saying paying back SB goes arbitration but then pretend the Pack just sit idly by on the roster bonus. No if they are upset with him they likely go to arbitration and argue the substance of the option is that it is delayed signing bonus hence why it is allocated over the life of the remaining contract.
The point is it is clear teams void guaranteee in contracts for retirememt. You are talking as if it is not possible the Pack did it. I am offerring my opinion and concede I dont know for sure.
So in the end you and I dont know and until it happens this is just a fantasy and I still have no clue why Rodgers would be so petty. So let's revisit if this non-sense actually happens.
What part of this is it you fail to comprehend?
The $40.8 million was specifically designed by Rodgers' camp to be a roster bonus. Unlike signing bonus, the Packers don't have rights of recoupment for any type of contract breach, including retirement, after the 2022 league year with the roster bonus.
A contract is still valid even after retirement. not sure what part of this you don't understand. That is why if Aaron Rodgers were to un-retire, his rights would still be property of the Green Bay Packers. Cutting him in this instance would be idiotic. Now you are grasping to your last straw that there might be some hidden clause in this contract that no one knows about stating that they can cut him if he retires without paying the guarantees. That is moronic. if it were possible, then there would not be 1,000 articles on the web about the cap implications of what might happen if Aaron were to retire pre-june 1, etc. It would be a foregone conclusion, that if he did retire, Green Bay would just cut him.
You can't be this mind numbingly stupid.
Last edited:
- Joined:
- Aug 20, 2012
- Posts:
- 44,093
- Liked Posts:
- 53,380
Bears OL enters chat…
- Joined:
- Apr 17, 2010
- Posts:
- 38,174
- Liked Posts:
- 36,973
Nothing because it will be PJJ LT Jones RT
dentfan
No gods! No Masters!
- Joined:
- Apr 28, 2013
- Posts:
- 5,372
- Liked Posts:
- 4,589
Yes. There are a great many differences between Gibbs and Robinson. BR is a much better runner who can create more with his ability. There's the blocking and Bijan has much better hands. Yes, Gibbs has more receptions, but the quality and ability BR shows as a receiver telegraphs that he is a much better receiver. Gibbs will be a decent 3rd down back that can catch swing passes out of the backfield and may be good for a couple of inside runs a game. It really isn't close, apart from they are 1 and 2, but that is only due to ranking. Bijan is a unique athlete with a ridiculously high ceiling on his potential; whereas, Gibbs is a what you see what you get undersized back that can catch and will go somewhere in the 2nd. Godd for him. Again, Bijan Robinson is to RBs as Deebo is to WRs: a transcendent talent that demands mismatches and will force an OC to account for him on every play.
Starting OL and DL taken outside of the first is more the rule than the exception. There are only so many 1st round draft picks. How much of our line is made of 1st round draft picks? In fact, we have one (Leatherwood) that nobody is discussing, but I'd like to see at IOL, maybe even C. So, Poles believes, and has proven, that he can find STARTING OL in later rounds. He has another 2 OL that haven't seen the field that he drafted and I'd like to see. So, don't call getting starting quality linemen the exception. Having a dynamic 3 down offensive weapon like BR would win us more games than taking the third or fourth DL or one of the OT, from this class, in the 1st. He's just a much better prospect. The only argument against him is value-based money ball group think.
- Joined:
- Sep 15, 2012
- Posts:
- 63,789
- Liked Posts:
- 40,753
Maybe this is why he thinks it is possible. Stranger hypotheticals have come true.
Think it is more than that. He has 101 passing TDs and 38 TDs with a 96.7 passer rating so teams pretending he is just a running QB is odd. Further even if they do feel that way you would still call and have a convo to figure out what he wants.
The Falcons were will to offer Watson a ton of money guaranteed even when all those sexual assaults were hanging over his year and even when he could have been suspended indefinitely.
So nah I think this is the owners trying to make it point.
Dejo
Godfather of FTO
- Joined:
- Apr 4, 2011
- Posts:
- 16,507
- Liked Posts:
- 20,174