NFL 2023 Offseason/Free Agency/Draft Thread

[thesloppy]

Agreed. What Jared Goff is seems open for endless debate, but what Jared Goff is not is the weakest starter on this Lions team. If the Lions are legit playoff contenders and/or the NFC is a legit pile of shit right now, then it seems foolish to spend first round capitol on guys that aren't even possibly going to contribute immediately. If the Lions roster were in a little better (or worse) shape I might feel differently.

[Bobble]

I'm not seeing much to convince me that the Lions should take a QB high in this draft. What do they get, cap control on a QB that they can only hope will eventually be as good as Goff has been? And when can they expect that, 2 or 3 seasons from now? There isn't a slam-dunk good QB at #1 let alone #6. I don't think that now is the time for the Lions to continue to tread water waiting for better days a few years from now.

[Solecismic]

I suppose it's too much to root for Buffalo to pick up Brandon Allen as their practice squad QB, now that Kyle Allen has been signed to back up Josh Allen.

With Minshew going to Indy, Foles will be released. They seem locked into drafting a QB now, and no one would pay a third QB $3 million except in very unusual circumstances. He should sign on somewhere - at least eight teams still need a guy with some experience to back up the starter.

Washington and Tampa Bay seem content to stand with those one-year deals (Brissett and Mayfield). Atlanta is going with Ridder. And it's assumed Rodgers will go to the Jets, leaving Love in place. I don't think Green Bay has picked up Love's fifth year yet (still some time, Herbert and Burrow also haven't, and those teams are hardly going to take that risk).

What happens if the Jets won't accept Green Bay's offer? It's been speculated that Green Bay can ask for a ridiculous amount here, however, if the bluff is called, the Packers can't exactly release Rodgers ($99 million in dead cap) and I'm not even sure how he can fit under New York's cap since there's so much guaranteed money.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

If you're the Lions, do you take a QB at #6? Goff seems fine for now, but he's not the long term answer. The way the Lions are trending, they may not have a pick this high for awhile. Do you take Richardson or Levis and let them sit behind Goff?

I don't think you take a QB that high right now. I think you maybe take a flyer on a QB in a later round and see if you can develop someone as a possible replacement.


edit: Got caught in the new page trap. Didn't realize others had made more responses.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

I suppose it's too much to root for Buffalo to pick up Brandon Allen as their practice squad QB, now that Kyle Allen has been signed to back up Josh Allen.

Appreciate the love for a Hog ... but practice squad? Please someone, give him another shot as QB2.

[NobodyHere]

Some Colt fan asked ChatGPT to write a poem about Gardner Minshew

The Colts have signed Gardner Minshew, A quarterback with talent anew, His arm is strong, his mind is sharp, His passes fly, lightning fast.

A mustache marks his fearless face, And on the field, he knows his place, With Colt Blue, he'll lead the way, And bring winning games, day by day.

He'll leap and sprint, and scramble too, And through the defense, he'll break anew, His moves are slick, his style's sublime, Minshew's a quarterback, true beyond time.

For Minshew's now in Indi's breach, And all their foes, they'll duly teach, With scores that rise, and fumbles few, Minshew and the Colts, will triumph anew.

[tzach]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

What happens if the Jets won't accept Green Bay's offer? It's been speculated that Green Bay can ask for a ridiculous amount here, however, if the bluff is called, the Packers can't exactly release Rodgers ($99 million in dead cap) and I'm not even sure how he can fit under New York's cap since there's so much guaranteed money.

the cap hit of rodgers would be 15.8M for the jets this season -- they are at 15M under, so no issues there.



the packers are a yr or two late in terms of getting a large compensation for rodgers. they are probably stuck with a 2nd at this point, unless the jets get desperate, but it seems they are the ones calling green bay's bluff at this point. the jets are likely reluctant of giving a fut 1st, and 1.13 is probably out of the conversation for a player that is yr-to-yr at this point.

[flere-imsaho]

Who else do we think is in the Rodgers market right now (or would come in if the Jets start balking)?

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

I suppose it's too much to root for Buffalo to pick up Brandon Allen as their practice squad QB, now that Kyle Allen has been signed to back up Josh Allen.

I lol'd

SI

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

Who else do we think is in the Rodgers market right now (or would come in if the Jets start balking)?

Well the Colts have a thing for old washed up QBs...

[tzach]

maybe SF?



rodgers is in a bad contract from a club perspective (it's a great contract for him, obviously). 58M+ guaranteed this season, then another 47M next season if he's on the roster in march 2024. it's a low cap this yr (15.8M), but you pay the price of being in cap hell for 2-3 seasons after that.



only a desperate team would take that, or a team that is a qb away from getting to the SB. i can't think of anyone other than SF jumping in.

[Swaggs]

I feel like there has to be some ego involved, from both Rodgers and the Packers, about what his trade value is right now. In theory, it is best for him if the team acquiring him does not give up much in the way of compensation, but you have to think the Jets have to tread lightly in what they offer so that he isn't too insulted.

If Watson is worth 3 firsts (plus change), if I am Rodgers (or the Pack), I have to be thinking that Rodgers is super durable and was the league MVP two seasons ago, so he has to be worth something decent and maybe a single 2nd rounder is offensive?

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

With Minshew going to Indy, Foles will be released. They seem locked into drafting a QB now, and no one would pay a third QB $3 million except in very unusual circumstances. He should sign on somewhere - at least eight teams still need a guy with some experience to back up the starter.

Given that I said this back in July:

Originally Posted by Drake

If I had any kids with even a modicum of musical talent, I'd be begging them start a punk band called Gardner Minshew's Mustache.

...as a Colts fan, I am (understandably) over the moon about this signing.

[Solecismic]

Originally Posted by tzach

the cap hit of rodgers would be 15.8M for the jets this season -- they are at 15M under, so no issues there.



the packers are a yr or two late in terms of getting a large compensation for rodgers. they are probably stuck with a 2nd at this point, unless the jets get desperate, but it seems they are the ones calling green bay's bluff at this point. the jets are likely reluctant of giving a fut 1st, and 1.13 is probably out of the conversation for a player that is yr-to-yr at this point.

This doesn't include $6.25 million in immediate top-51 room for the draft.

They're also committing to a $33+ million cap bomb for 2024 if he retires, and 2024 is injury-guaranteed. But then I think it's less of a bomb, only a similar amount in annual dead cap while the whole deal expires in 2026.

It's going to be tough for them. Teams do it all the time, but this will put a big strain on 2024.

Green Bay still has to eat a lot of 2024 cap room to move him, but that's there regardless - they'd be eating a lot more if they didn't move this year's option bonus to the Jets.

In the end, this is what a quarterback costs. There's just nothing to renegotiate down to make room for anything else. His salary is already sequential blocks of option money.

[JPhillips]

The NFL needs to get a handle on void years. The Browns gave Thornhill a contract with three years of salary and four void years.

[Solecismic]

The total cap amount is negotiated with the NFLPA. The newer twists are these guaranteed future bonuses. Basically, what's happening is that the next two years of negotiating is already done and guaranteed, with the admission that the player would be released after the third year. This is really a series of three five-year deals with releases guaranteed.

The trick of it is that if too much money is placed in the voidable years (Thornhill's doesn't have that much) and they don't sign him to a new contract three years from now, they have to eat what's in the voidable years in one lump.

It all works out in the end, but the net effect is more money for fewer players and more players playing for the league minimum, which is at least significant.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

The NFL needs to get a handle on void years. The Browns gave Thornhill a contract with three years of salary and four void years.

Why? The money counts against the cap at some point.

[JPhillips]

But the cap goes up every year so today's million is worth more than next year's million. In a capped league void years are manipulating the cap. These void years allow the money to be spread in a way that essentially means the team is over the cap for some of the years the player is active.

If four void years are fine why not ten or twenty or one hundred? GMs will keep pushing the limits until the NFL does something.

[GrantDawg]

It is a feature, not a bug. They purposely created this little loop hole so that teams have some way cutting back on cap and still sign players, and so that players can get paid. The cap does a job in limiting contracts to an extent, but it is in no one's interest to hamstring so bad that they have a hard time putting 53 players on the field.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[Solecismic]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

But the cap goes up every year so today's million is worth more than next year's million. In a capped league void years are manipulating the cap. These void years allow the money to be spread in a way that essentially means the team is over the cap for some of the years the player is active.

If four void years are fine why not ten or twenty or one hundred? GMs will keep pushing the limits until the NFL does something.

The rule is five years on bonus money, which is why the contract was done in a sequence in that manner. It may be guaranteed, but as far as the cap in concerned, that guarantee can never be moved more than five years ahead. It may look that way right now, but that's just accounting.

Most importantly, he has to be on the team or released after the deadline the previous year in order for it to actually be part of the cap.

As far as how it's reported? Doesn't matter. He still has a salary and a bonus assigned to 2023, and that bonus cannot be extended more than five years if he has the money in his hands.

It's interesting to look at some of these contracts. Try making sense of the Mahomes deal, which extends through 2031. Not a cent he's received, though, goes against the cap past 2027.

In the end, all it is amounts to negotiating deals that get executed in the future, subject to all the cap rules of any other deal that gets done at that time.

[tzach]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

This doesn't include $6.25 million in immediate top-51 room for the draft.

They're also committing to a $33+ million cap bomb for 2024 if he retires, and 2024 is injury-guaranteed. But then I think it's less of a bomb, only a similar amount in annual dead cap while the whole deal expires in 2026.

It's going to be tough for them. Teams do it all the time, but this will put a big strain on 2024.

Green Bay still has to eat a lot of 2024 cap room to move him, but that's there regardless - they'd be eating a lot more if they didn't move this year's option bonus to the Jets.

In the end, this is what a quarterback costs. There's just nothing to renegotiate down to make room for anything else. His salary is already sequential blocks of option money.

exactly -- but the jets will need the rookie pool money only after the draft. by then, they can easily do something with carl lawson or restructure cj mosley.

the main problem will be 2025 if rodgers retires after this season. if he plays in 2024, 2025 and 2026 become cap hell years.

one advantage of the team option bonuses is for players near retirement, like rodgers. he will only earn that if he plays. i think we'll see more and more the option bonuses being used in lieu of signing bonuses for players with a yr or two left on their careers.

i find these contracts fascinating -- the packers must have thought that they were extending their championship window by another yr last season when they signed rodgers to that contract. and that rodgers would retire after last season. who can blame them after the 2021 season results.

the jets, conversely, are banking that they are in a situation similar to denver's when they got peyton manning. no reason to take on a contract like rodgers' if you are not a contender.

[tzach]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

I feel like there has to be some ego involved, from both Rodgers and the Packers, about what his trade value is right now. In theory, it is best for him if the team acquiring him does not give up much in the way of compensation, but you have to think the Jets have to tread lightly in what they offer so that he isn't too insulted.

i haven't appreciated that from rodgers' perspective, but i'd think he would be even more fired up if he's traded for what would be perceived as a low compensation (implying that rodgers is done).

from his interview, it's clear that he's discontent with green bay's management. i wouldn't be surprised if he follows his predecessor and play in the NFC North in two seasons time hehe.

[Solecismic]

I try to be careful to try and interpret Rodgers carefully. He uses sarcasm a lot, and the media absolutely detests him. It's gone from an uncomfortable relationship to out-and-out war. He'll play them in ways no one else will and they, in turn, will spin analysis in ways designed to make him look bad.

Green Bay is not managed by idiots. Rodgers is not an idiot. The contract seems appropriate for a quarterback who had been up there with anyone until last season.

After a mediocre season and headed into a contract year, it makes sense for the Packers to see what they have in Love. Quarterbacks are hard to find - that's an understatement. The record for quarterbacks drafted 2-4 in the first round... it's not good. There hasn't been a franchise guy since Matt Ryan in 2008. Go first, you might have some security in the right year (as long as JaMarcus Russell isn't around). Go second, and you probably don't. So if Green Bay loves Love and they can trade out of this contract, they do it.

I don't think it's as personal as people are making it out to be. And I think Rodgers understands that as do any of the people making decisions in Green Bay. Will he win in New York? Hard to say. But it might be the perfect place for him and would make them a legitimate contender.

As for the price, this is a tough negotiation. The Jets have to honor the massive 2023 guarantee in the contract. So there's value in taking that off of Green Bay. But they're getting a guy who, until last year, was the top QB in the league as often as not.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by tzach

from his interview, it's clear that he's discontent with green bay's management. i wouldn't be surprised if he follows his predecessor and play in the NFC North in two seasons time hehe.

If Fields doesn't work out this season maybe we'll see him with the Bears. He owns them, after all.

[rjolley]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

If Fields doesn't work out this season maybe we'll see him with the Bears. He owns them, after all.

No. Just....no.

[flere-imsaho]

[stevew]

Brandon Cooks traded for the 4th time(tie with Eric Dickerson)

[miami_fan]

Draft Night 2016 seems so far away. Good for him.

Texans reach $75M extension with LT Laremy Tunsil, sources say

[albionmoonlight]

Tom Brady Bans Jokes About Ex-Wife Gisele From Upcoming Comedy Roast: ‘It’s The One Rule’

FWIW, I'd never subject myself to a roast b/c being publicly made fun of does not sound pleasant.

But if you're going to do it, then do it. Setting it up as "you can make fun of me for winning too many Super Bowls but not about anything else" is not the right mindset.

[Ksyrup]

Good idea to get this out of the way BEFORE his Fox broadcasting career. For viewers... not so much.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

Tom Brady Bans Jokes About Ex-Wife Gisele From Upcoming Comedy Roast: ‘It’s The One Rule’

FWIW, I'd never subject myself to a roast b/c being publicly made fun of does not sound pleasant.

But if you're going to do it, then do it. Setting it up as "you can make fun of me for winning too many Super Bowls but not about anything else" is not the right mindset.

Boo!

The roasters better not tolerated that BS especially not the actual comedians. No wife jokes? No ex wife jokes? What in the name and defense of Chris Rock is that all about?

[Solecismic]

The Lamar Jackson case is getting a little more interesting. Since the franchise tag is usually non-exclusive and no one has ever paid the price without it being clear that the franchising team did not want to keep the player, I think that prevented teams from seriously exploring an offer.

So Jackson's "rep" is apparently hinting that there is a serious rift with Baltimore. If there isn't a matching risk, teams might get involved - even teams that previously indicated they wouldn't be in the game. The key is clearing enough cap room to make an offer, so it has to come soon. I suppose that's why the hints are coming right now.

If it's real enough, and Baltimore wants out, they could ask for more than two firsts - especially if they can put together a sign-and-trade to keep it more immediately cap-friendly.

Deep down, though, I think this gets worked out and Jackson gets his money and stays with Baltimore.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

Boo!

The roasters better not tolerated that BS especially not the actual comedians. No wife jokes? No ex wife jokes? What in the name and defense of Chris Rock is that all about?

The best roasts are of the people who are in on the joke and allow themselves to be the butt of the joke. If I was Jeff Ross or one of the others, I'd be roasting him for not allowing jokes about his family. The jokes technically wouldn't be about his family.

And if he or his reps object too much, fuck him. He wouldn't make a good roastee. Find another Shatner/Hasselhoff/Sheen.

[tzach]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

If it's real enough, and Baltimore wants out, they could ask for more than two firsts - especially if they can put together a sign-and-trade to keep it more immediately cap-friendly.

Deep down, though, I think this gets worked out and Jackson gets his money and stays with Baltimore.

the cba doesn't seem to allow a trade for more than 2 first-round picks for a player in lamar's situation. that said, the interpretation of the cba has been stretched in other occasions, so who knows. for instance, the cba doesn't say anything about BAL revoking the tag, signing lamar to a dummy contract, and trading him for more than 2 firsts, since then he would not be on the tag anymore. but i'd expect there would be litigation in that case, since the spirit of the rule has been circumvented.



the ravens are certainly aware of the cba limitation, so they are either happy to move on for 2 firsts, or they have signaled they would match any offer sheet that comes in.

[Joker]

Originally Posted by molson

Jerry, all these big companies, they write off everything.

“…and they’re the ones writing it off…”

[Solecismic]

Originally Posted by tzach

the cba doesn't seem to allow a trade for more than 2 first-round picks for a player in lamar's situation. that said, the interpretation of the cba has been stretched in other occasions, so who knows. for instance, the cba doesn't say anything about BAL revoking the tag, signing lamar to a dummy contract, and trading him for more than 2 firsts, since then he would not be on the tag anymore. but i'd expect there would be litigation in that case, since the spirit of the rule has been circumvented.



the ravens are certainly aware of the cba limitation, so they are either happy to move on for 2 firsts, or they have signaled they would match any offer sheet that comes in.

Once Jackson signs a new contract, I don't think there are restrictions on trading him. A team might find value in offering more than two first-round picks to offset some initial cap room, enabling them to make a larger offer - one that Jackson would presumably sign. Baltimore then would be trading cap room and some money for that additional compensation.

In addition, the premium might be seen as inducement for Baltimore not to match the offer under the franchise process. So they negotiate terms with Jackson, he says, "yes, I would sign that," and then the team negotiates with Baltimore so that they don't simply say, "ah, thanks for doing that for us, but he's worth more than two firsts so we'll keep him."

There's a reason no player a team wanted to keep has ever been signed away under the non-exclusive franchise tag. It was essentially designed to work that way. Of the three designations, the non-exclusive franchise tag is almost always the one used.

Of course, Jackson doesn't have to cooperate. Then Baltimore can't trade him at all - it's either take the two firsts or match.

[albionmoonlight]

The GM Show on the Athletic Football Show Podcast did a rundown about the big four QBs. Randy Mueller tends to have a slightly different perspective than the current groupthink. Worth a listen if you are into that.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

The GM Show on the Athletic Football Show Podcast did a rundown about the big four QBs. Randy Mueller tends to have a slightly different perspective than the current groupthink. Worth a listen if you are into that.

Havent listened yet, but this class of qbs is interesting. I've seen analytic sites that love Stroud, others that like Young, and even some that prefer Richardson. A scout liking Richardson wouldn't surprise me, but analytics does. There seems to be a lot of confidence that his issues with accuracy are definitely fixable.

Out of the top 4 the only one I haven't seen someone put at #1 is Levi's. He seems locked in at 3 or 4.

[albionmoonlight]

Bit of a feel good story (depending on how you look at it): Foster Moreau got a routine physical as part of a free agency visit with the Saints. And they discovered that he has Hodgkin's Lymphoma. The feel-good part of it is that they caught it before he had any symptoms, so the prognosis is really good.

[HomerSimpson98]

I may be regretting this in a couple of years Josh Allen-style, but I wouldnt touch Will Levis anywhere in the first round much less top 5.

[Solecismic]

I think Allen is very good, but he seems like Russell Wilson, but just a bit worse in every category. So will he have the similarly shorter prime?

There are far worse things to be than just a bit worse than a future Hall of Famer. The Bills are set with him. And he was the 7th pick.

My sense is Levis is going to be a good one - that this is the year of the quarterback we'll be talking about for the 2010s.

[tzach]

the panthers are looking carefully at will levis -- attending the pro day and scheduling a private visit, in a similar manner as they are doing to the other top 3 qbs. being at 1.1, the fact that they are spending valuable pre-draft time on him is intriguing.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

I think Allen is very good, but he seems like Russell Wilson, but just a bit worse in every category. So will he have the similarly shorter prime?

There are far worse things to be than just a bit worse than a future Hall of Famer. The Bills are set with him. And he was the 7th pick.

My sense is Levis is going to be a good one - that this is the year of the quarterback we'll be talking about for the 2010s.

Do you mean statistically? They are obviously much, much different in height/weight (Wilson: 5'11/215 lbs vs Allen: 6'5/240 lbs), which I would think would impact durability/aging - for better or worse.

Wilson has been remarkably durable for his size, but he runs a lot less often than he did early in his career and takes a lot of sacks. I can see how their first 4-5 years look pretty similar, but I think Allen's physical advantages will likely see him developing and aging differently.

[Solecismic]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

Do you mean statistically? They are obviously much, much different in height/weight (Wilson: 5'11/215 lbs vs Allen: 6'5/240 lbs), which I would think would impact durability/aging - for better or worse.

Wilson has been remarkably durable for his size, but he runs a lot less often than he did early in his career and takes a lot of sacks. I can see how their first 4-5 years look pretty similar, but I think Allen's physical advantages will likely see him developing and aging differently.

In terms of what they bring - the mobility and the statistical profile, yes. Obviously, not in terms of size.

I have not seen a relationship between size and durability, though it may exist and probably does exist for running backs. Neither runs (or ran) enough that I would make that link. It only takes one hit to derail a career and I'm not sure how that sort of thing accumulates.

[Carman Bulldog]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

... that this is the year of the quarterback we'll be talking about for the 2010s.

Better than Joe Burrow, Justin Herbert, Jalen Hurts, Tua - health permitting - and possibly Jordan Love, who the Packers still seem to have a lot of faith in?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by HomerSimpson98

I may be regretting this in a couple of years Josh Allen-style, but I wouldnt touch Will Levis anywhere in the first round much less top 5.

I'm not sure I like Levis enough for the first three rounds.

[QuikSand]

Lamar Jackson has requested a trade, via twitter

https://twitter.com/Lj_era8/status/1640365152707944450

A letter to my Fans

I want to first thank you all for all of the love and support you consistently show towards me. All of you are amazing and I appreciate y’all so much. I want you all to know not to believe everything you read about me. Let me personally answer your questions in regards to my future plans. As of March 2nd I requested a trade from the Ravens organization for which the Ravens has not been interested in meeting my value, any and everyone that’s has met me or been around me know I love the game of football and my dream is to help a team win the super bowl. You all are great but I had to make a business decision that was best for my family and I. No matter how far I go or where my career takes me, I’ll continue to be close to my fans of Baltimore Flock nation and the entire State of Maryland. You’ll See me again

Related note... he apparently also has no media assistant/advisor, in addition to no agent.

[albionmoonlight]

Requesting a trade kind of does not make sense for a restricted free agent who has not signed his tender, though I understand what he means.

He really really needs an agent. That 3% fee will pay for itself and then some.

[QuikSand]

Yeah, I don't know how things might work from here. In theory, if Lamar talked with, say, the Colts... and worked out a deal where they'd trade for him on the one year franchise tender, then maybe he could force that sort of deal, right?

So, the moving parts could be:
1. Colts and Lamar agree to a new contract
2. Colts and Ravens agree to a deal
3. Lamar signs Ravens 1y tender
4. Ravens trade Lamar to Colts per the deal
5. Lamar signs new deal with Colts

In theory, that seems to be how this could work, right? Presumably for something other than the "two firsts."

I wonder how strong the Ravens front office can be here. If he gets no offers for a contract/trade, and he just sits on the 1y franchise tender, are they willing to just play without him this year? (Maybe, tbh)

[albionmoonlight]

I *think* that's OK under the CBA.

But these kinds of complicated multi-move deals are where you really really need an agent to help make sure nothing gets overlooked.

I think that it is not advisable for a player to not have an agent. But at least if you are just doing a normal contract extension, you can find the contract of a similar player to you and say "give me this deal."

But this is going to require multiple parties all talking to each other at the same time to do something that I am sure will require weird-looking moves to make it comply with the cap, etc.