NFL Off Topic

[TracerBullet]

Re: NFL Off Topic

The NFL is ditching Roman numerals for Super Bowl 50, then going right back to them for Super Bowl LI.

Didn't the WWE do that with Wrestlemania 25?

Oh well...

Wrestlemania 21-23. 25 was just the 25th Anniversary, but is still listed as XXV. 2 and 13 were Arabic numerals as well.

But no one wants to play in Super Bowl L, so it makes sense.

[ProfessaPackMan]

Re: NFL Off Topic

Kaepernick gets paid:

Ian Rapoport @RapSheet · 3m

For <s>#</s>49ers QB Colin Kaepernick: It’s a 6-year extension worth up to $126M with $60M guaranteed, source says. Under contract through 2020

Ian Rapoport @RapSheet · 4m

The <s>#</s>49ers have agreed to terms on a 6-year mega-extension with star QB Colin Kaepernick that could eclipse $20M per year, source says.

[thaima1shu]

Re: NFL Off Topic

Man QBs get ridiculous money. Probably means Russell Wilson will be looking to get even more than that. Wow.

[Hooe]

Re: NFL Off Topic

Kaepernick gets paid:

Am I the only one who thinks this is a _really_ bad move?

Maybe I'm thinking too old-school here, but I don't think Kaepernick throws the ball well enough to justify that kind of money, regardless of the great running ability he has.

I guess at this point they can't afford to let him go, though, and that's the going rate of quarterbacks so the 49ers paid him what they had to.

[azdawgpound]

Re: NFL Off Topic

Am I the only one who thinks this is a _really_ bad move?

Maybe I'm thinking too old-school here, but I don't think Kaepernick throws the ball well enough to justify that kind of money, regardless of the great running ability he has.

I guess at this point they can't afford to let him go, though, and that's the going rate of quarterbacks so the 49ers paid him what they had to.

I agree there talking about it on nfl live now and saying he needs to get better etc also meantioned its gonna effect on who they can sign resign and I believe crabtree is gonna be a free agent next yr so this could be same thing that happen with flacco yea he got paided but then he lost his weapons to throw to.

[mestevo]

Re: NFL Off Topic

Like most monster contracts it's probably back-loaded and really only a 3-4 year deal.

That's a lot of money, but would be interested in seeing it as a % of cap/year vs other QB deals for better perspective.

[wwharton]

Re: NFL Off Topic

I agree there talking about it on nfl live now and saying he needs to get better etc also meantioned its gonna effect on who they can sign resign and I believe crabtree is gonna be a free agent next yr so this could be same thing that happen with flacco yea he got paided but then he lost his weapons to throw to.

That's not what happened to Flacco. The only player they lost was Boldin and they could've paid him but he wasn't worth what he wanted (for the Ravens... the state of the 9ers is a better fit for what he could give for another year or two, but I still think he costs too much). Meanwhile, the Ravens threw around money like crazy to rebuild the defense.

Anyway, this is the same discussion after every QB gets a new contract. The average shifts and it will never happen top down, it depends on when each guy is up to get paid... this is just par for the course. I also don't believe the thought it handicaps the team that also comes with this discussion. If the 9ers get cash strapped they can look at the other big signings they've made bc this was one that was going to happen either way, and I'm sure they began factoring it in the budget years ago.

[rangerrick012]

Re: NFL Off Topic

Didn't they lose a few other guys from that defense in free agency...and brought in bums like Michael Huff to 'rebuild' their defense? I think saying they only lost Boldin is stretching it quite a bit.

And yeah we know that QBs market value has risen dramatically, I still don't buy the thought of 'oh we have to pay him because we can't get anyone better'. I don't see why a team couldn't let a QB walk if they have another young QB on the bench who they feel can step in a play and get paid less in the short term. Not saying that's the case w/ the Niners and Kaep, but not saying that I buy the 'we have to pay the QB' angle either. Bucs didn't pay Josh Freeman last year and they're probably thankful that they didn't.

[ProfessaPackMan]

Re: NFL Off Topic

I don't see why a team couldn't let a QB walk if they have another young QB on the bench who they feel can step in a play and get paid less in the short term.

That depends on the team but for most of them, they all can operate under this mindset.

Not saying that's the case w/ the Niners and Kaep, but not saying that I buy the 'we have to pay the QB' angle either.

So when do you buy the "We have to pay the QB" angle?

Does it depend on the team and it's finances because there are cases where for most teams, it's not best for business and not best for the team either.

[The_Wise_One]

Re: NFL Off Topic

I get that it's a QB driven league, but good lord that's a lot of cheddar. Wilson is the biggest winner from the Kaep deal. Call me a cynical Seahawk fan but I don't see Kaep as the starter in 2020. He just doesn't seem like a long-term surefire quarterback. I could be very wrong but that's just how I see it.

[Bellsprout]

Re: NFL Off Topic

I think Flacco was more a case of a guy that he was a pretty good QB who got on a historic hot streak at the right time and forced the Ravens to pay out the *** for him.

[wwharton]

Re: NFL Off Topic

Didn't they lose a few other guys from that defense in free agency...and brought in bums like Michael Huff to 'rebuild' their defense? I think saying they only lost Boldin is stretching it quite a bit.

And yeah we know that QBs market value has risen dramatically, I still don't buy the thought of 'oh we have to pay him because we can't get anyone better'. I don't see why a team couldn't let a QB walk if they have another young QB on the bench who they feel can step in a play and get paid less in the short term. Not saying that's the case w/ the Niners and Kaep, but not saying that I buy the 'we have to pay the QB' angle either. Bucs didn't pay Josh Freeman last year and they're probably thankful that they didn't.

Original quote:

this could be same thing that happen with flacco yea he got paided but then he lost his weapons to throw to.

The only weapon he lost to throw to was Boldin. The offense took a hit bc of Birk retiring and injuries throughout the season to Pitta and Rice.

Every player they lost on defense was either by choice or uncontrollable. They didn't want Reed or Pollard back. Ed wanted too much money (and we've seen he didn't deserve it) and Pollard was labeled a locker room problem. Ray Lewis retired (uncontrollable). They let Kruger and Ellerbee walk and get paid, like they've done with many LBs that have played next to Ray and had one good year.

Last year's defense was hands down better than the year before, and it was with the help of FA signings like Dumervil, Canty and Daryl Smith. And yes, add in the money they wasted on Huff and you can see they had no problem throwing money at the side of the ball they felt needed the most attention despite paying Flacco what they did.

And I'll also add (and repeat) this was despite throwing a ton of money at Ray Rice the year before, which is what anybody should be complaining about considering the trend of how RBs are getting paid these days.

[TheShizNo1]

Re: NFL Off Topic

QBs aren't these rare gems GMs, owners, and media make them out to be. But if they keep willingly shelling out the money, o well.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

[wwharton]

Re: NFL Off Topic

The thing is the only QBs who will see any of these numbers (besides the signing bonus) are the ones that deserve it. The rest is smoke and mirrors.

[rangerrick012]

Re: NFL Off Topic

So when do you buy the "We have to pay the QB" angle?

Does it depend on the team and it's finances because there are cases where for most teams, it's not best for business and not best for the team either.

There are cases (Romo being the first that jumps to mind) where I think if the team had a young QB in waiting to possibly step in, they wouldn't have been forced to shell out so much for a guy. I'm of the belief that only the top tier guys - Brees, Rodgers, Brady, Manning - that are virtually indispensible and the teams clearly falter when they go down - are worth that kind of money.

And it is a QB driven league but at the same time it's easier to play QB/offense now than ever before in the NFL. I'm not saying that guys like Kap/Romo/etc aren't worth having but would you rather have a Romo at his price or draft a Russell Wilson or Andy Dalton (but better) and let them grow.

I know eventually you're going to have to pay somebody at that position, but if it's still a toss up why pay a guy who hasn't fully proven that he can be a SB winning guy? I'd put Stafford/Romo more in that category than Kap/Ryan/Flacco TBH.