NFL 2018 Season Thread

[stevew]

Giants should just tank for Tua or the guy from Georgia who will be better

[stevew]

Lev Bell getting a weak total amount of salary. No reports of how much is guaranteed though.

[ISiddiqui]

Apparently $35mil is guaranteed.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[Bobble]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

Probably no words but I'm sure they've made a beer for it.

I think it's that beer with the skittles in it. You know, Skittlebrau.

[Scoobz0202]

Saw these tweets on the NFL subreddit that I found interesting (and tend to agree with my view on the Browns trade so of course I agree)

Giants could have built a team around Darnold and OBJ for the next decade. Instead it’s a RB and the 17th pick. Gettleman should be fired today.

— Football Perspective (@fbgchase) March 13, 2019

I tried to tell u @Giants fans Dave was your problem but u laughed and called me bitter! Well welcome to the salt wagon jump on and let’s ride together lol

— DeAngelo Williams (@DeAngeloRB) March 13, 2019

[Lathum]

I totally disagree.

For one, I have seen nothing from Darnold that shows he is going to be an elite QB capable of wining a SB. Show me the last time an NFL team won a title with an elite WR. OBJ can't stay healthy. He has a shit attitude. He makes a ton of money.

Eli was and is the problem in NY. I get that. A better QB probably makes OBJ better, and he may blow up the next few years, I'm just not sold. Barkley is a generational talent at RB. That being said the Giants will likely waste his prime because they can't cut ties with Eli.

[Coffee Warlord]

So I'm calling it now. This being the Browns, OBJ tears his ACL week 2 of preseason.....high fiving his kicker after celebrating a field goal.

(I woulda said touchdown, but it's the Browns. They don't score touchdowns.)

[Scoobz0202]

Originally Posted by Lathum

That being said the Giants will likely waste his prime because they can't cut ties with Eli.

That's my issue. Darnold/OBJ/Barkley is a hell of a lot better then what they have now. It puts the Giants closer to winning something then whatver their team is now. Would it enough? I dunno. But with the shorter lifespan of running backs in this league just how much time do they have to use Barkley to his fullest?

[molson]

There was such a fan and media backlash when they tried to move on from Manning before. It cost people jobs. Some of that backlash was rationalized with the idea that Geno Smith wasn't the QB of the future. But they don't have to move on directly to the "QB of the future". Moving on from Manning two years ago wouldn't mean they HAD to keep Geno Smith at QB for any amount of time. They could have moved on to a guy off the street and it would put them in a better position to find a longer-term option when the opportunity arose.

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Show me the last time an NFL team won a title with an elite WR.

...


Barkley is a generational talent at RB.

Lets reverse the criteria.
Last NFL team to win a super bowl with an elite RB was?

[CleBrownsfan]

Originally Posted by Coffee Warlord

So I'm calling it now. This being the Browns, OBJ tears his ACL week 2 of preseason.....high fiving his kicker after celebrating a field goal.

(I woulda said touchdown, but it's the Browns. They don't score touchdowns.)

Times are changing CW... time to get out of the mindset that the Browns stink because this will be a nice stretch of Browns success - mark my word!

[Kodos]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

Lets reverse the criteria.
Last NFL team to win a super bowl with an elite RB was?

Seahawks in 2014 maybe? Does Lynch count? Or do we have to go back to the Broncos in '99? Or Rams in 2000?

[bhlloy]

Originally Posted by Lathum

I totally disagree.

For one, I have seen nothing from Darnold that shows he is going to be an elite QB capable of wining a SB.

I dunno, I'm biased but given Darnold's play at USC when he wasn't surrounded by a complete train wreck (and most of the time when he was) as well as the second half of last season on a team with arguably bottom 3 talent around him tells me his ceiling is way higher than anyone in this draft (at least assuming the Giants don't make the offensive changes necessary to accommodate Kyler). He needs to cut down on his turnovers but a lot of other metrics and his physical gifts all point to him being a very good QB, and those are easily good enough to get you to a SB, IMO.

You can argue you'd rather bottom out and get Fromm or Tua (and maybe if you miss those you wait for Lawrence) but what happens if you win enough games to miss all 3? Are you willing to suck for the next 3-4 years just hoping you hit a can't miss QB?

[bhlloy]

DOLA - and yeah, the argument that teams don't win with elite WR but the Giants need to build around a generational RB in Barkley is about as strange as you can get. Even with the small swing back to all-around RB over the last few years it's still one of the most replaceable positions in football.

[spleen1015]

Originally Posted by molson

There was such a fan and media backlash when they tried to move on from Manning before. It cost people jobs. Some of that backlash was rationalized with the idea that Geno Smith wasn't the QB of the future. But they don't have to move on directly to the "QB of the future". Moving on from Manning two years ago wouldn't mean they HAD to keep Geno Smith at QB for any amount of time. They could have moved on to a guy off the street and it would put them in a better position to find a longer-term option when the opportunity arose.

The backlash wasn't about moving on from Eli. It was about playing Geno Smith instead. No matter what the situation Geno Smith is not a better option over Eli unless Eli is dead.

You're trying to justify starting Geno Smith over Eli, man.

[cartman]

People after the NFL season in 1990:

I have seen nothing from Aikman that shows he is going to be an elite QB capable of wining a SB.

edit: not saying that Darnold is going to win 3 super bowls, but the bulk of rookie QB seasons (both good and bad) aren't a barometer for future performance.

[spleen1015]

How did RG3's career turn out after his rookie season?

[molson]

Originally Posted by spleen1015

The backlash wasn't about moving on from Eli. It was about playing Geno Smith instead. No matter what the situation Geno Smith is not a better option over Eli unless Eli is dead.

You're trying to justify starting Geno Smith over Eli, man.

Why are they not allowed to move on unless it's directly for the QB of the future?

What if they somehow win 7 games the next two years and don't get a top pick? They just have to keep Manning until 2022 and beyond? And then if they bottom out and there's no elite franchise QB prospect that year, they just have to keep Manning longer? This is so bizarre to me.

If they started Geno Smith - or anyone else - for the rest of that season, or just used a couple of different backup-type QBs, they'd be free of Manning now, the may have their QB of the future, and either way they'd be further along than whatever they're doing now. It's like an early-version FOF AI team.

They're kind of re-building, except they're clinging to a 38-year old declining QB for the indefinite future, and they have this stud franchise player at a position with the shortest NFL lifespan at a time when they're apparently not trying to be competitive. It's like an earlier-version FOF AI team.

[spleen1015]

Originally Posted by molson

Why are they not allowed to move on unless it's directly for the QB of the future?

What if they somehow win 7 games the next two years and don't get a top pick? They just have to keep Manning until 2022 and beyond? This is so bizarre to me.

If they started Geno Smith - or anyone else - for the rest of that season, or just used a couple of different backup-type QBs, they'd be free of Manning now, the may have their QB of the future, and either way they'd be further along than whatever they're doing now.

I'm not saying they're not allowed to move on. Why move on to a a player that is proven to be worse than what you're moving on from?

Move on to a young QB all you want.

[molson]

Originally Posted by spleen1015

I'm not saying they're not allowed to move on. Why move on to a a player that is proven to be worse than what you're moving on from?

Move on to a young QB all you want.

So, the goal IS to win games now? Then why did they just trade OBJ?

As for the why, like I said, if they moved on from him then, then they'd maybe have a QB now they can build their team around. They weren't required to start Geno Smith for the next 5 years if they got rid of Manning then, and they're not required to commit to their backup or any other QB now if they move on from Manning. But, since they think they are, they're instead stuck with Manning, still. And maybe for the next few years since they can only move on from him directly for the "QB of the future". And if Manning really is better than the other available options off the street (which I'm not sure of), then they're actively hurting their chances of getting that QB of the future by refusing to move on.

I'm starting to think Manning is going to be on this team longer than Barkley.

[spleen1015]

They definitely don't know what they are doing. If they felt like he should have been benched back then, then they should've moved on from him last offseason.

[JPhillips]

There's a reasonable argument in, "we're going to fix the o-line, add pieces to the defense and make one last run in Eli's last contract year." And there's a reasonable argument in, "we're going to start all over and build for the future starting today." But I have no idea what they are doing with the additions and subtractions they've made this year.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

But I have no idea what they are doing with the additions and subtractions they've made this year.

Don't feel bad ... neither do they.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by bhlloy

Packers throwing money at players I've never heard of like it's going out of style. Either they have some analytics that the rest of the league doesn't, or they are going to be terrible for a couple years and Rodgers is going to have a complete meltdown.

The guaranteed money isn't crazy (despite the big contract numbers posted). They could get out of any of these deals after two seasons and only have between 5 and $10 mil in dead money max. Atleast Brian didn't give them 5 years (like Ted did with Nick Perry) - that's when the dead money can kill you. Here's an interesting quote from the Athletic on the Smiths:

Za'Darius Smith had a career year in 2018, finishing with 8.5 sacks and 25 QB hits. He played all over the Ravens’ defense as an outside linebacker, defensive end and interior pass rusher. Smith’s ability to beat guards one-on-one is intriguing, and he plays with tremendous effort and energy. Over the past two seasons, Smith has produced a sack or a quarterback hit on 7.2 percent of his pass-rush opportunities. Below is a look at how that number compares to some of the other free agents available in this year’s class:

Player 		Pct. of snaps with sack/QBH
Ezekiel Ansah 		10.44%
Cameron Wake 		9.63%
Trey Flowers 		7.45%
Za’Darius Smith 	7.20%
Preston Smith 		6.90%
Bruce Irvin 		6.79%
Clay Matthews 		6.72%
Shaquil Barrett 	6.62%
Terrell Suggs 		6.13%
Dante Fowler 		4.56%
Darius Philon 		4.46%
Ndamukong Suh 		4.40%
Sheldon Richardson 	4.04%

Last season alone, Smith’s number was even higher — 7.95 percent. That ranked 14th out of the 174 players who had at least 200 pass-rushing opportunities and was better than guys like Dee Ford, Demarcus Lawrence and Trey Flowers.

Smith started just eight games and totaled 10 sacks in his first three NFL seasons. But he’s just 26 years old. The film and numbers suggest that he’s an ascending player whose best days are ahead of him.

[Pyser]

Originally Posted by spleen1015

I'm not saying they're not allowed to move on. Why move on to a a player that is proven to be worse than what you're moving on from?

Move on to a young QB all you want.

i mean, they drafted two young qb's in the past 2 years. the 3rd round qb lasted 1 year. they have no plan.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by spleen1015

The backlash wasn't about moving on from Eli. It was about playing Geno Smith instead. No matter what the situation Geno Smith is not a better option over Eli unless Eli is dead.

You're trying to justify starting Geno Smith over Eli, man.

It was actually about playing Geno over Davis Webb. I think Giants fans would have been ok if they said "we are sitting Eli and starting Webb the rest of the year to see what we have"

Instead the started Geno, a known commodity and it was obvious the move was nothing but McAdoo taking a shot because he knew he was on the way out.

[miked]

Seems like Bell made a smart move. Turn down 11M for 1 year and risk injury (and have people say how overused he is) or wait a year and get 35M guaranteed and 50M if he makes it to the end. I would imagine all RBs are taking note.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

Lets reverse the criteria.
Last NFL team to win a super bowl with an elite RB was?

You could say James Whites 18 catches in the SB was an elite performance, but your point is well taken.

The thing I take exception with is the notion taking Barkley over Darnold was a mistake. They both just finished their rookie season. We have no clue how their careers will play out, yet people say the Giants screwed the poch like it is gospel.

IMO if you get the best player in the draft, and a guy who is top 3 at his position the day he enters the league, you did ok.

The Giants have a ton of issues, tops being the unwillingness to let go of Eli, but taking Barkley over Darnold to me isn't one of them.

[molson]

Originally Posted by miked

Seems like Bell made a smart move. Turn down 11M for 1 year and risk injury (and have people say how overused he is) or wait a year and get 35M guaranteed and 50M if he makes it to the end. I would imagine all RBs are taking note.

He didn't just turn down 11M for 1 year, he turned down the Steelers' offer that was similar to Gurley's, and the one he just signed with the Jets.

There's a lot of various breakdowns of those two contracts and one offer and what was guaranteed, but Bell would have made the same or more with the Steelers if he lasted 3 years that he will with the Jets if he lasts 3 years. The Jets offered more fully-guaranteed, but I don't know if that makes up for the year making nothing, and it seems pretty unlikely that he won't make even 3 years in either scenario (if had a career ending injury, he'd get paid the whole contract).

[PilotMan]

Bell lost on this one.

[bhlloy]

Originally Posted by Lathum

You could say James Whites 18 catches in the SB was an elite performance, but your point is well taken.

The thing I take exception with is the notion taking Barkley over Darnold was a mistake. They both just finished their rookie season. We have no clue how their careers will play out, yet people say the Giants screwed the poch like it is gospel.

IMO if you get the best player in the draft, and a guy who is top 3 at his position the day he enters the league, you did ok.

The Giants have a ton of issues, tops being the unwillingness to let go of Eli, but taking Barkley over Darnold to me isn't one of them.

I think you've unwittingly contradicted the point you were trying to make there, given that White was a mid 4th round pick and was on a base salary of $690k at the time.

As for Barkley over Darnold, I'd definitely agree that if Darnold busts it's a good pick, but the general consensus is that starting QB #20 in the league is more valuable than having starting RB #1. If you don't have a top 20 QB you have absolutely zero shot at winning a SB, whereas the Pats have won multiple Super Bowls where we didn't even really know which RB would be active or most utilized the night before. That's even before you consider the salary cap implications of having an above average QB on a rookie deal vs what a typical RB makes (which is less of a concern with the Giants so far below the cap but still).

[jbergey22]

As much as I think the Steelers are a very classy organization they really botched the situations with Bell and Brown. Generation talents both gone from the organization with very little to show for it. How they are standing behind Shazier and helping him maximize his future earnings is very nice of them. They definitely are doing him right.

[cartman]

Ravens get Earl Thomas on a 4 year/$55 mil deal, $32 mil guaranteed.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by molson

He didn't just turn down 11M for 1 year, he turned down the Steelers' offer that was similar to Gurley's, and the one he just signed with the Jets.

There's a lot of various breakdowns of those two contracts and one offer and what was guaranteed, but Bell would have made the same or more with the Steelers if he lasted 3 years that he will with the Jets if he lasts 3 years. The Jets offered more fully-guaranteed, but I don't know if that makes up for the year making nothing, and it seems pretty unlikely that he won't make even 3 years in either scenario (if had a career ending injury, he'd get paid the whole contract).

Gurley's contract was 4/$57, with $41m guaranteed. The closest real reporting I've heard on the Steelers is that it was 5/$70, with only $17m guaranteed, and obviously they tried to make him play on a franchise tag two seasons in a row. Bell wasn't really pushing for a higher AAV, he was pushing against the Steelers only guaranteeing him one year at a time while also giving him 400 touches. He felt like the Steelers were overusing him and wanted to be able to get rid of him as soon as he suffered a serious injury... and I think he was right. In retrospect the thing he did wrong was not signing the contract, then forcing his way out as soon as the guaranteed money was up, because apparently the Steelers will cave into that.

Originally Posted by bhlloy

I think you've unwittingly contradicted the point you were trying to make there, given that White was a mid 4th round pick and was on a base salary of $690k at the time.

As for Barkley over Darnold, I'd definitely agree that if Darnold busts it's a good pick, but the general consensus is that starting QB #20 in the league is more valuable than having starting RB #1. If you don't have a top 20 QB you have absolutely zero shot at winning a SB, whereas the Pats have won multiple Super Bowls where we didn't even really know which RB would be active or most utilized the night before. That's even before you consider the salary cap implications of having an above average QB on a rookie deal vs what a typical RB makes (which is less of a concern with the Giants so far below the cap but still).

Well, White was making 1.8m at that time on his rookie deal once you add in the bonus money, and was subsequently signed to a $4m/y deal, plus paired with a 1st round RB for this last Super Bowl win, despite the Patriots allegedly being at the forefront of the "RB's are fungible", so I don't think it's quite that cut and dried... put me on Lathum's side in this - I don't buy Darnold as ever turning into an elite QB because I don't think he'll ever cut down on the turnovers, so I don't mind taking the clearly elite RB there (or trading down), but he's also worth less to the Giants than other teams because they'll likely just waste too much of his prime - and particularly his underpaid years - with bad Eli and no obvious replacement.

[molson]

Football reporters seem to have a hard time distinguishing between guarantees as signing, and "rolling guarantees" that become guaranteed later in the contract. A lot of people reported $41 million guaranteed for Gurley, but later reports were that only $21 million and the $1 million first year salary was actually guaranteed at the time of signing, and then $33 million was guaranteed if he wasn't cut in the first two seasons, and then over $40 million was guaranteed after 4 seasons. Early reports of the Steelers offer for Bell were $33 million guaranteed, but then later, it was reported that it was something closer to $17 million guaranteed at signing, and $33 million guaranteed if he wasn't cut in the first two seasons, and then no rolling guarantees after that (but a big non-guaranteed third year salary, which, isn't that much different than a rolling guarantee). We don't really know the breakdown of the Jets contract yet.

And then the "Injury guarantees" and what the CBA says about cutting injured players add another layer. But Gurley only would have gotten $22 million total if the Rams cut him this week.

Inside Todd Gurley’s new deal – ProFootballTalk

https://deadspin.com/leveon-bells-je...s-a-1833262186

It's interesting that NFL teams are so reluctant to guarantee money at signing but less so after 2 years, then 3 years, when they're on the hook anyway if there's a serious injury. I guess there is the idea that RBs really can just crap the bed and be done at any time, but, it's hard to see Gurley or Bell being cut next year even if they suck.

There's also the interesting question of what happens to an elite 27 year old running back's performance when he just sits out for a season.

[BishopMVP]

Spotrac is usually the best - Todd Gurley Contract Details, Salary Cap Breakdowns, Salaries, Bonuses | Spotrac - though obviously even they have to deal with the uncertainty of new signings - Le'Veon Bell Contract Details, Salary Cap Breakdowns, Salaries, Bonuses | Spotrac (Was it the NHL that recently made the decision to officially release contract details at the time of signing?) Interesting that from the consensus Bell did get more fully guaranteed at signing than even Gurley & Johnson. And I do think it's obvious the Steelers tried to hold harder line on guaranteeing money to non Big Ben players (though actually even Ben only got $31m guaranteed on a 4 year extension Ben Roethlisberger Contract Details, Salary Cap Breakdowns, Salaries, Bonuses | Spotrac )

I don't know how much sitting out a season matters - haven't we all been trained to think of RB's in terms of how many hits they've taken, not their age? Bell specifically does have the occasional rumors about offseason weight gain, but I figure he'll be very motivated to have a great 2019. There is evidence that some of his supposed value as a receiver was fool's gold and just a product of volume, so we'll see if he still consistently has 30+ touch games or if the Jets do a better job than the Steelers did of spreading the touches (and the hits) out - Isaiah Crowell is a competent back if they keep him around (will know next 2 days - has a $2m roster guarantee 3/15), and they've been hyping Cannon as a potential pass catching back since training camp last year.

Btw, great Eli stat - if he earns his $17m next year he'll pass Peyton as the highest earning player in NFL history with 252m (though Rodgers should blow past him in only a few years) NFL Player Earnings | Spotrac

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by Lathum

The thing I take exception with is the notion taking Barkley over Darnold was a mistake. They both just finished their rookie season. We have no clue how their careers will play out, yet people say the Giants screwed the poch like it is gospel.

The Giants have a ton of issues, tops being the unwillingness to let go of Eli, but taking Barkley over Darnold to me isn't one of them.

I agree with this part, especially the bolded, whole-heartedly.
In fact if the ginats had a plan of draft Barkley, trade Eli for whatever picks we can get, try to get to top of draft and get a true franchise QB...I'd even suggest it was a good plan.


But drafting Barkley, letting OBJ go...who admittedly was approaching the 'Is the juice worth the squeeze' territory - see: Owecs, Terrel and Cinco,Ocho...and keeping Eli. That tells me they don't have a plan.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

That tells me they don't have a plan.

Yup. I think that the Giants could have rationally gone one of two ways. They could have said that they were blowing it up, cut expensive older players, traded older players with value, collected cap space and picks, and tried to line up the QB of the future.

Or, they could have said that they are making one last run with Eli and tried to make a team built to win over the next two years.

I can see arguments for either approach.

But they instead seem to be just making moves with no real coherent plan in mind and appear to have the worst of all worlds.

[Lathum]

I think they are tanking for Tua, and what better way to tank then with Eli as your starting QB.

[molson]

What's more disrespectful to Eli, benching him two years ago when his decline was clear, or blowing up the team but keeping him because he sucks and they want to lose games.

In latter scenario he makes money so I guess that's better.

[BishopMVP]

And Crowell is gone, so barring a signing/draft pick, or Cannon actually getting an increased role, looks like Bell will be getting almost all the touches.

Also, have we talked about the Todd Gurley situation yet? Rams now saying he has arthritis in his knee and will pursue stem cell therapy. Doesn't look like the NFL will fine them, but I still don't understand why they didn't just say something vague like "Yeah, he's a little banged up, but he's playing through it." and instead insisted to everyone Gurley was 100% during the playoff run.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Lathum

I think they are tanking for Tua, and what better way to tank then with Eli as your starting QB.

Geno Smith as your starting QB! (And probably drafting a lineman or trading down to accumulate more/future picks instead of drafting a top 3 RB who is a threat to pick up 1-2 long touchdowns in any game.)

[SirFozzie]

Looks like the prosecutor was a wee bit overzealous (Although what Kraft IS accused of doing is still illegal, just that there was no human trafficking involved)

TMZ: Suspects from Spa in Robert Kraft Case Not Charged with Sex Trafficking | Bleacher Report | Latest News, Videos and Highlights

[QuikSand]

Green Bay could be a pretty interesting team for this upcoming season. If you buy into the theory that they had been held back by inept management and coaching, then seeing them make real defensive commitments and potentially rethink their offense could uncork a serious team there. I'm seeing future odds in the 20-1 range, which isn't delicious... but if you forced me to pick among the teams in that general band (Minnesota, Chicago, Indianapolis, Philadelphia) I think I'm most intrigued by the Packers by far.

[molson]

AND the Giants go back the other way again and sign Golden Tate, with $23 million fully guaranteed.

Meanwhile, it's not surprising that the Patriots are mostly sitting out the early free agent frenzy, but I sure hope that Brady will have somebody to throw to.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by molson

AND the Giants go back the other way again and sign Golden Tate, with $23 million fully guaranteed.

Meanwhile, it's not surprising that the Patriots are mostly sitting out the early free agent frenzy, but I sure hope that Brady will have somebody to throw to.

Belichick already has his eye on a 5'8" white college lacrosse player who they will draft in the 7th round who will end up catching 120 balls next year. They will then trade him to the Dolphins for a 2nd round pick, and he'll be out of football two years after that.

[albionmoonlight]

dola:

Joking aside, Tate to the Pats did seem like a match made in heaven for player and team. Kind of surprised it didn't happen.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

Belichick already has his eye on a 5'8" white college lacrosse player who they will draft in the 7th round who will end up catching 120 balls next year. They will then trade him to the Dolphins for a 2nd round pick, and he'll be out of football two years after that.

I don't think he played lacrosse, but I could see Braxton Berrios (who basically redshirted last year as a rookie) having a decent impact. Bruce Ellington has also made his way around the Belichick coaching tree.

Originally Posted by molson

AND the Giants go back the other way again and sign Golden Tate, with $23 million fully guaranteed.

Meanwhile, it's not surprising that the Patriots are mostly sitting out the early free agent frenzy, but I sure hope that Brady will have somebody to throw to.

Don't know much at all about Maurice Harris, but at 6'3 he'll at least get a shot to be an outside guy. Dorsett re-signed, and I've always liked him when he's on the field. Unlike last offseason I'm pretty close to 100% sure Gronk is coming back, and they also tendered Josh Gordon at 1 year/$2.025 million, so they have more confidence than I or the media do that he could return for at least the second half of the season.

It did seem like they went harder after Adam Humphries and Cole Beasley than Tate, but given the Giants approach maybe Tate will be available for a 4th (conditional 3rd) by the trade deadline. There's a lot of big name guys out there who I could see being brought in to fanfare, and then quite likely cut in August (Dez, Crabtree, Kelvin Benjamin, Randall Cobb, Jordy Nelson, Demaryius Thomas, Martavis Bryant), and the other name that stood out to me is Brandon LaFell as a fallback. But I definitely think the tender to Gordon is a subplot that I don't think any media people are talking about when looking at the Pats WR depth.

At TE it sure seems like they should draft a guy early as a Gronk "replacement", especially with this draft having the Iowa guys and Smith at the top and some quality depth like Smith from Stanford and Gentry from Michigan etc, but Martellus Bennett is floating out there as a backup plan if the draft doesn't fall their way.

[Thomkal]

Tannehill and 6th rounder traded to the Titans for a 4th round in 2020 and a 7th rounder in 2019.

[albionmoonlight]

Basically Tannehill for slightly less than a 4th.

I bought into the hype for his breakout year three or four years ago. Now he's a mid-round reclamation project. It is just so hard to know in this league.