<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bakes781)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (porky88)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (blackadder)</div><div class='quotemain'>True. That and all the actual transactions.</div> By transactions I hope you mean overpaying for players who'll be released in 2 years because that respective team can't afford their contract.</div> How do you know that for sure? With the salary cap continuing to escalate a franchises ability to hold on to their own is getting easier each year.</div> It's how the NFL works and will continue to work. See Lavar Arrington one year ago. These guys have value because there is simply nobody else to sign. Steinbach and Dockery get more money than Steve Hutchinson? Nate Clements is the highest paid Defensive Player Ever? Leonard Davis gets the most guarantees in Cowboy's history? When it comes time to earn a roster bonus most of the time it's usually restructure or your gone. Read this article. It's happened his year already. It'll happen again next off season. http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/stor..._len&id=2788383 For the record I thought the Thomas to New England was the best value signing of the off season. Most of the contracts given have been ridiculous.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (porky88)</div><div class='quotemain'>These guys have value because there is simply nobody else to sign.</div> the reason there are less big name FAs is b/c with the increase in salary cap spending teams are able to resign or more willing to franchise their own FAs to be.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bakes781)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (porky88)</div><div class='quotemain'>These guys have value because there is simply nobody else to sign.</div> the reason there are less big name FAs is b/c with the increase in salary cap spending teams are able to resign or more willing to franchise their own FAs to be.</div> Last year there were plenty of big name players. Hutchinson, James, and Brees to name a few. Last year was deep. This year there isn't that many great players and because of that average guys like Leonard Davis get 50 mil.
I agree w/ Porky, but bakes is right in the post before this. When Dockery & Davis get that kind of $, it makes you wonder. Though, Travis Henry IMO is the best deal... so far. I wonder if Dan Snyder is feeling okay. Other than London Fletcher, the skins have made no moves.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bakes781)</div><div class='quotemain'>Well I think as the cap continues to increase you'll see the lack in big name FAs will as well.</div> I disagree and for one reason. Players are seeing what kind of money is out there on the market and because of that they'll test the market. I really can't see DeAngelo Hall getting an 8 year 80 mil extension from the Falcons. On the market though from the looks of it he could get 100 mil from a team with a lot of money.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (blackadder)</div><div class='quotemain'>Keith & Dan were discussing this on the DP show early today. Do you want Moss to stay in Oakland and possibly be a bad influence or do you send Moss elsewhere and rebuild? Here's a rumor I saw; Moss to the Pack for Aaron Rogers. I can't speak for the rest of the Dwo, but, I'd love to see Moss go to the Pats and hasten the demise of that "dynasty".</div> Quit talking shit about the Patriots already. I left for like 2 months and I come back and still see this shit all over the god damn place. Enough already.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>I disagree and for one reason. Players are seeing what kind of money is out there on the market and because of that they'll test the market. I really can't see DeAngelo Hall getting an 8 year 80 mil extension from the Falcons. On the market though from the looks of it he could get 100 mil from a team with a lot of money.</div> Yes but owners still have the upper hand over the players with the franchise tag as a last resort option.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bakes781)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>I disagree and for one reason. Players are seeing what kind of money is out there on the market and because of that they'll test the market. I really can't see DeAngelo Hall getting an 8 year 80 mil extension from the Falcons. On the market though from the looks of it he could get 100 mil from a team with a lot of money.</div> Yes but owners still have the upper hand over the players with the franchise tag as a last resort option.</div> 8 year 80 million is so not the contract, that is a backload BS that he will never see.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bakes781)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>I disagree and for one reason. Players are seeing what kind of money is out there on the market and because of that they'll test the market. I really can't see DeAngelo Hall getting an 8 year 80 mil extension from the Falcons. On the market though from the looks of it he could get 100 mil from a team with a lot of money.</div> Yes but owners still have the upper hand over the players with the franchise tag as a last resort option.</div> On the Clements deal I read it's actually like a 6 year deal worth 54 million and 22 up front. Then it's a 2 year deal worth 26 million which he?ll probably never see. He?ll make over 8 mil a year for his base salary. So for the 2007 season he?ll make over 30 mil. Either way 6yr 54 mil and 22 in guarantees is still a lot of money and I think it's starting to take effect already. Lance Briggs got the tag and he wants out of Chicago who arguably could win the Super Bowl next year. He says wants out not because he wants to feel safe but common sense says he seeing the market and he wants a Nate Clements like pay day. His agent probably told him most teams would value him over Clements and that?s probably true. He could get a big contract like that. Also the teams can tag a guy and they can leave the following year. Either way I think this big spending is actually going to help the market for the future rather than hurt it. Teams like the 49ers are only hurting themselves down the road giving outrageous contracts out and actually helping teams who?ll have cap down the road. I could be wrong but we?ll know soon enough.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (porky88)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bakes781)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>I disagree and for one reason. Players are seeing what kind of money is out there on the market and because of that they'll test the market. I really can't see DeAngelo Hall getting an 8 year 80 mil extension from the Falcons. On the market though from the looks of it he could get 100 mil from a team with a lot of money.</div> Yes but owners still have the upper hand over the players with the franchise tag as a last resort option.</div> Also the teams can tag a guy and they can leave the following year. Either way I think this big spending is actually going to help the market for the future rather than hurt it. Teams like the 49ers are only hurting themselves down the road giving outrageous contracts out and actually helping teams who?ll have cap down the road. I could be wrong but we?ll know soon enough.</div> That we agree on. Eventually these outrageous guaranteed contracts will catch up with them. I'm no capologist by any means, but I think when you sign players to large guaranteed $ it's almost equivalent to a no trade clause in baseball where you're basically giving away your ability to deal them if they turn out to be a bust.
These front loaded salaries for large amounts & the results they cause may be IMO a way to equalize what is occuring in the marketplace. I, however, am not an economist. It would seem IMO that SF has learned nothing from the cap hell they were in at the end of the mooch/Seifert era. Just because you have the $ doesn't mean you need to spend it ASAP. But then, Prudence and moderation aren't exactly Bay area values or so Limbaugh might have us believe. lol.
http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/6553286 <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Packers pondering potential Moss trade AP Even fans who own shares of Green Bay Packers stock don't have veto power over a potential trade for a player seen here as a touchdown-scoring scoundrel - Randy Moss. When the widely rumored trade was brought up in front of a crowd at the Packers' annual Fan Fest at Lambeau Field on Friday evening, boos and hisses drowned out any timid cheers. Packers general manager Ted Thompson was sitting on stage at the time. So, Ted, what do you say to that? "I don't say anything," Thompson said. "That's the best way to do it." In keeping with Thompson's close-to-the-vest philosophy, he hasn't officially acknowledged that he is exploring a trade for Moss - which is fine, because the Oakland Raiders haven't said that they're bent on trading the talented but moody former Pro Bowl wide receiver. But Packers chairman and CEO Bob Harlan hinted strongly on Friday that the Packers' front office is going through the same sort of character risk-versus-reward debate they did before signing former Minnesota Vikings wide receiver Koren Robinson last fall.</div> If Ron Wolf is for it then I say do it. Packer fans remember Andre Rison? He wasn't much of a class act but he did help us win a Super Bowl. Perhaps this is similar, although I do believe the Packers need to address RB, TE, and FB as well on offense.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2796831 <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>GREEN BAY, Wisc. -- The Green Bay Packers' leadership is expected to discuss a potential trade for wide receiver Randy Moss when it meets on Tuesday. A trade sending Moss from the Oakland Raiders to Green Bay is already in discussion stages, the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reported, saying according to an unnamed league source, general manager Ted Thompson has already been in direct talks with Raiders owner Al Davis about the move. According to sources, the teams have discussed the trade for a month and the Packers have been given permission to talk to Moss' agent about restructuring his contract.</div> Looks like this is getting closer and closer to a reality. Geesh I hope it happens. Moss has always been one of my favorite players on this era and if he would play for the Packers that'd just make my day. I'm trying not to get my hopes up but things are definitely starting to pickup.
Any word on what they're offering in a trade? I don't think he's worth a 1st round pick & since GB doesn't appear to be competing with any other team's for his services anything more than a 2nd pick would be too much for Randy IMO.
I would think that they'd take a 3rd, maybe a 3rd and a 4th, I don't think he's worth a 2nd. If he plays even close to what he's capable of I wouldn't mind giving up a 2nd, but there's too much risk with him to make it worth it IMO. I think the Raiders just want to get rid if him, and I expect they'll take a 3rd round pick for him. I think that our biggest need is a running back, and since we didn't pick no one up in FA, the 1st round pick needs to address that. The next biggest need I would have to say is TE, I'm not sure what potential prospects are out there, but I'd say it's more important that we get a decent TE then pick up Moss, so if there's no one in FA, then we have to address it in the draft. So IMO, as far as priorities go, it has to be; RB, TE, Moss.
I heard a 2nd for Moss. I heard KGB and a 4th for Moss. I heard KGB and a pick next year for Moss. So who knows. I heard the Raiders have their eyes on KGB or Corey Williams.
I know not many others feel the same, but i'd hate to see us lose KGB, I'd like to see him at least here 1 more year as a Pass Rush Specialist just to show he still has that ability that many say he's lost. Corey Wiliiams and a 4th would sound better to me, thats the good thing, we have pretty good depth with our 3 tech Tackles, Jenkins, Williams, Colin Cole(can fill in a NT as well), and John Jolley(showed some promise by making the roster last season), this could also possibly give us the excuse to grab one in the draft, maybe even Okoye if he were to fall to 16?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (FLORIDA PACKER)</div><div class='quotemain'>maybe even Okoye if he were to fall to 16?</div> My hunch is the Rams are looking @ Okoye. What about M Lynch on the <u>frozen tundra</u> next year? Though, the Bills may be eyeing an RB. Whoever the Pack is targeting they may need to move up? Just a WAG, but, I'd bet whoever is @ #9 would be willing to listen to offers.
