Herschel posted:So they got Sanchez for a ham sandwich and Donks fans are mad? Hedging their bets with a guy who can play enough to bridge to a young guy isn't a bad move.
You are a damned oddity. You hate everything Green Bay does or does not do but Denver signs a ****ing stain waste like Mark Sanchez and you do your best to paint a happy picture that they did good.
**** man. What is you're deal?
ChilliJon posted:Broncos have to decide if they want to match the 4 year $18 million w/ $10 million guaranteed the Dolphins just signed CJ for.
Not a great offseason for Elway.
BREAKING NEWS: The Denver Broncos sign veteran quarterback, Uncle Rico, from Idaho. VP of Football operations and General Manager, John Elway said, "The guy can throw a football over them Rocky Mountains."
YATittle posted:
What a load of Thompson cultist nut sucking tripe. Two guys getting overpaid vs. re-signing Daniels (good) and Perry (meh) does not a broad story paint, just more strawmen from TT idolaters.
Has anyone griped about Jackson and Irvin not being signed? Not that I've seen.
Would I take Jackson over Daniels? Yes, and his value was more on the market, which is why he waited and got that money.
Would I rather have Daniels with the money involved? Yes, the Jags still have Bortles under his rookie contract and were $21 million under the floor. The had the money, and had to spend the money.
Making a few, solid moves is not going nuts, breaking the bank and building half the roster through free agency, but the Thompson knob-gobbling simpletons either can't or willfully refuse to understand that very basic distinction.
Guys like Guion help fill holes, but one exception doesn't make everything awesome, just like no one here is asking for 6-8 new free agents/year. Sure, the compensatory picks are nice, but the two fourths is an anomaly. Does anyone think anybody on the Packers list is going to garner those two fourths again?
ChilliJon posted:Herschel posted:So they got Sanchez for a ham sandwich and Donks fans are mad? Hedging their bets with a guy who can play enough to bridge to a young guy isn't a bad move.
You are a damned oddity. You hate everything Green Bay does or does not do but Denver signs a ****ing stain waste like Mark Sanchez and you do your best to paint a happy picture that they did good.
**** man. What is you're deal?
How do I hate everything Green Bay does? I just don't blindly love it.
What was Denver supposed to do? They lost Osweiller, arguably a good move with the money he got. Now they need to find a new QB and their defense/team is good enough they're not going to want to bottom out and start over.
Herschel posted:Now they need to find a new QB and their defense/team is was good enough they're not going to want to bottom out and start over.
FTFY
Herschel posted:ChilliJon posted:Herschel posted:So they got Sanchez for a ham sandwich and Donks fans are mad? Hedging their bets with a guy who can play enough to bridge to a young guy isn't a bad move.
You are a damned oddity. You hate everything Green Bay does or does not do but Denver signs a ****ing stain waste like Mark Sanchez and you do your best to paint a happy picture that they did good.
**** man. What is you're deal?
How do I hate everything Green Bay does? I just don't blindly love it.
What was Denver supposed to do? They lost Osweiller, arguably a good move with the money he got. Now they need to find a new QB and their defense/team is good enough they're not going to want to bottom out and start over.
You may not hate everything the Packers do, but you certainly seem to get upset when anyone suggests that Ted Thompson made a good decision. In the article that YATittle linked, the main point is that the author thinks "Ted Thompson is better than most." To you, that's "nut sucking tripe" from a "knob gobbling simpleton." Whoa! Call me a ball washer if you will, but I guess I'm still glad Ted Thompson is making these calls for the Packers rather than a guy who spends 6-8 hours on a message board every day.
Ahhh, the off season.....isn't life grand!?
Vincent Vega posted:
You may not hate everything the Packers do, but you certainly seem to get upset when anyone suggests that Ted Thompson made a good decision. In the article that YATittle linked, the main point is that the author thinks "Ted Thompson is better than most." To you, that's "nut sucking tripe" from a "knob gobbling simpleton." Whoa! Call me a ball washer if you will, but I guess I'm still glad Ted Thompson is making these calls for the Packers rather than a guy who spends 6-8 hours on a message board every day.
Considering I just noted re-signing Daniels was a good move, yeah, you're full of crap. I've said multiple times that TT is very good, but he has two weaknesses: overvaluing his own picks and failure to utilize free agency a bit more to fill holes.
It amazes me people are so binary. I guess I have too high of expectations for humanity.
ammo posted:Herschel posted:Now they need to find a new QB and their defense/team is was good enough they're not going to want to bottom out and start over.FTFY
That's what I was alluding to. They're not going to have a top pick, so any QB they get is most probably going to need some time to develop. I've got nothing against Connor Cook, Paxton Lynch or whomever, but they're probably better off going with the pedestrian Sanchez early on rather than throwing a rookie in before he's ready.
Sounds like Ted isn't very good as a GM.
I guess I'm not understanding which draft picks he has overvalued to the point where it has become a major weakness? Just because he gave bad contracts to Hawk and Brad Jones? I would venture to say every GM has a handful of bad deals they gave out in their career. I think he has valued his own guys pretty well and seems to consistently get team friendly deals and is unafraid to walk away from a player making crazy demands. Other than his blue chip players, he's pretty stingy with his guys...he doesn't ever overpay RFA's, rarely tendering players above the low tender or tendering them at all. He's unafraid to keep UDFA's over players with experience.
I think what it comes down to his priority for cap dollars. Current Packers get first dibs. He has a decent amount of free agents in 2017, guys who will likely get solid contracts and will likely be resigned during this cap year. So it comes down to Danny Trevathan vs. Josh Sitton or TJ Lang or Eddie Lacy or whoever. If Lacy gets a sizable extension, which is possible, Ted can use 2016 money to make that contract very manageable for the future, but if that money is spent on a free agent that may or may not pan out, then there's a ripple effect down the road.
I think TT is in the Top 5 in terms of his ability to assemble a decent roster.
However, he does have a blind spot and that's free agency. I don't think people asking for him to sign a solid TE like Ladarius Green or a decent RB like Forte is too much to ask once in a while.
If they had either guy last season it might have put them over the top. When a team is this close you have to be willing to take some more calculated risks.
Tschmack posted:If they had either guy last season it might have put them over the top.
Helluva strawman there since both were under contract to other teams.
So dum. All the talent in the world.
@RapSheet: #Steelers WR Martavis Bryant facing a year-long suspension for violating @NFL substance abuse policy, per source (@Dejan_Kovacevic was 1st).
New England's path to SB 51 gets easier and easier every day.
Grave Digger posted:
I think what it comes down to his priority for cap dollars. Current Packers get first dibs. He has a decent amount of free agents in 2017, guys who will likely get solid contracts and will likely be resigned during this cap year. So it comes down to Danny Trevathan vs. Josh Sitton or TJ Lang or Eddie Lacy or whoever. If Lacy gets a sizable extension, which is possible, Ted can use 2016 money to make that contract very manageable for the future, but if that money is spent on a free agent that may or may not pan out, then there's a ripple effect down the road.
And there it is. TT signs FA by not letting them become a FA. I sure would hate to be a new car salesman trying to sell TT a new car.
cuqui posted:So dum. All the talent in the world.
@RapSheet: #Steelers WR Martavis Bryant facing a year-long suspension for violating @NFL substance abuse policy, per source (@Dejan_Kovacevic was 1st).
When they signed Green, I thought Henry for sure would be available at 27. Now it appears WR may yet again be on their radar in the 1st. Sad Bryant can't stay away from 420. SMH.
Vincent Vega posted:Herschel posted:ChilliJon posted:Herschel posted:So they got Sanchez for a ham sandwich and Donks fans are mad? Hedging their bets with a guy who can play enough to bridge to a young guy isn't a bad move.
You are a damned oddity. You hate everything Green Bay does or does not do but Denver signs a ****ing stain waste like Mark Sanchez and you do your best to paint a happy picture that they did good.
**** man. What is you're deal?
How do I hate everything Green Bay does? I just don't blindly love it.
What was Denver supposed to do? They lost Osweiller, arguably a good move with the money he got. Now they need to find a new QB and their defense/team is good enough they're not going to want to bottom out and start over.
You may not hate everything the Packers do, but you certainly seem to get upset when anyone suggests that Ted Thompson made a good decision. In the article that YATittle linked, the main point is that the author thinks "Ted Thompson is better than most." To you, that's "nut sucking tripe" from a "knob gobbling simpleton." Whoa! Call me a ball washer if you will, but I guess I'm still glad Ted Thompson is making these calls for the Packers rather than a guy who spends 6-8 hours on a message board every day.
I'm wondering, given that I have questioned the wisdom of some of TT's moves, if I too am "in the camp of hating everything GB does or does not do while simultaneously maybe not hating everything the Packers do?"
We questioners of our GM's omnipotence truly are a tricky bunch -- hating everything GB does and not hating everything the Packers do at the very same time.
Oh Browns. Why in the hell would you give a 3rd?! for Kaperdick? I mean unless you plan on playing GB/Capers all year. Good grief..
Browns will trade a third-round pick if Kaepernick will take a pay cut
Posted by Michael David Smith on March 12, 2016, 6:46 AM ESTAP
The Browns are willing to trade a third-round pick to the 49ers to acquire quarterback Colin Kaepernick â but only if Kaepernick is willing to take a pay cut.
Mary Kay Cabot of the Cleveland Plain Dealer reports that the 49ers want a second-round pick, but might settle for the Brownsâ third-round pick, which is the second pick in the round, No. 65 overall. The key, however, is that the Browns would want Kaepernick to agree to a pay cut before the trade is completed.
The Moneyball guys running the Brownsâ front office apparently think Kaepernick is only worth $7 million or $8 million a year, and thatâs what theyâd want Kaepernick to take, with the possibility of more money in the form of performance incentives.
But why should Kaepernick agree to that? On April 1, the 49ers either have to guarantee his $11.9 million base salary or cut him free and let him negotiate with every team and give his services to the highest bidder.
Boris posted:Ahhh, the off season.....isn't life grand!?
That's what the other football (i.e. soccer) is for: to fill the time of the NFL off season. 
Only the Browns would offer up a 3rd for a player they covet so much they want him to take a pay cut. After they let 4 good players walk away plus the confirmation they screwed up on Johnny Highball.
It is criminal what those fans are subjected to.
Grave Digger posted:I think what it comes down to his priority for cap dollars. Current Packers get first dibs. He has a decent amount of free agents in 2017, guys who will likely get solid contracts and will likely be resigned during this cap year. So it comes down to Danny Trevathan vs. Josh Sitton or TJ Lang or Eddie Lacy or whoever. If Lacy gets a sizable extension, which is possible, Ted can use 2016 money to make that contract very manageable for the future, but if that money is spent on a free agent that may or may not pan out, then there's a ripple effect down the road.
And that's generally a good plan, but again, when there are some very glaring weaknesses, they need to be filled with guys who can at least be decent-to-solid, notepad of hanging on to the Hawks, Jones, Jennings, etc. in the wild hope that somehow they won't just continue to suck.
Don't be so worried about tomorrow that you forget about today.
I wouldn't be surprised if this is Sitton's last year. He's been dealing with a bad back, which is why I think they made sure Lane Taylor stayed around.
That just goes with the draft and develop philosophy, players aren't always going to step in and succeed immediately. Some times you have to take some lumps and let players get experience. Ted's also not the only one who chooses to stick with a young starter and let him develop rather than replacing him with a vet after a bad year. Of course it is better to have insurance, but that's not always feasible in a lot of cases. Vet backups that are available are either available for a reason or not cheap...so if all that's available is the a reasonably good vet for 5M, a mediocre vet who will cost 1M minimum or the mediocre youngster who will cost 500K, more often than not I would say you might as well find out what you have in the cheap young talent. It's generally a bad idea to disregard the future in favor the right now, that's why bad teams end up with poor cap situations and hemorrhage talent. Front load the contracts for your blue chip talent using current money and if you have any left then you can bring in outside help.
Thompson cultist nut sucking tripe
Seems to be an odd penchant for scrotums in this place, for quite a while now.
It's really weird. Just sayin.
Penchant for Scrotums is my band name
Does Uncle Ted have nuts?
No, TT doesn't have nuts. He has balls. 
Grapefruits
Hitler had one.
(my cousin had three)
Chargers are gonna sign Casey Hayward. Good get for them.
I hope they overpay to the tune of another fourth round comp pick.
@RapSheet: For the #Chargers and CB Casey Hayward, it's a 3-year deal worth $15.3M, source said.
That smells like a fourth rounder. Congrats Casey.
I would rather have hayward than a 2017 4th round pic that will take until at leadt 2019 to fully develop
Rollins has too much upside to be sitting on the bench. Best of luck to Casey and the move was really inevitable given the CB depth.
YooperPackfan posted:I would rather have hayward than a 2017 4th round pic that will take until at leadt 2019 to fully develop
Why would we ever retain this guy when CB is one of our deepest positions and players under their rookie contracts have more immediate and long term upside? Absolute no brainer to let him walk.
Nearly half of his new contract is guaranteed.
@BobMcGinn: CB Casey Hayward's deal with #Chargers is for three years and averages just more than $5 million per year. Guaranteed money: $6.8 million.
@BobMcGinn: Hayward was able to obtain a very solid contract due in part to keen interest from #49ers and #Chiefs in addition to the #Chargers.
Agree with MJ's and Crusher's takes. Good slot corner but Hayward simply doesn't have the deep speed to cover on the outside. A finicky tackler, too.
