Topic: The NFL Thread

[voodoo ray]

Indeed. Miami can add whoever they want but their success or failure is entirely on keeping their QB on the field and not in concussion protocol.

If rodgers does eventually sign with the jets it'll be sort of amusing seeing loads of people predicting the patriots to finish bottom of the division.

[RedG13]

Bills could find themself in a tough spot with how the AFC East is shaping up

I still expect them to win the AFC east

[PaddingtonRed]

Bengals land former Chiefs LT Orlando Brown on a four year deal, it's $64m with $31m upfront. The Bengals o line when healthy now looks like Brown, Volson, Karras, Cappa, with a decision to be made between Collins and Williams to fill the RT. Regardless, Cincy offence just got better. Excited? You betcha 

[Jookie]

Yeah doesn’t look like he’ll be back. That number 10 pick will be a cb you’d imagine or maybe be able to move back a bit and still get one of the top cb prospects. Defensive line will get some love too Id guess.

Darius Slay now expected to stay at Eagles and restructure his contract.

Surprised by this but shows how much I know!

[Jookie]

I expect Lance to start for SF.

So do I in week1.

If Purdy wasnt injured  then he’d start. Think the 49ers will roll with Lance and he’ll get 3-4 games before Purdy is fit (based on current 6 month timeline for Purdy injury).

If Lance performs he’ll stay as starting QB. If not Purdy or Darnold will come in (depending on Purdy fitness).

That’s how I see it currently.

[Skeeve]

Bengals land former Chiefs LT Orlando Brown on a four year deal, it's $64m with $31m upfront. The Bengals o line when healthy now looks like Brown, Volson, Karras, Cappa, with a decision to be made between Collins and Williams to fill the RT. Regardless, Cincy offence just got better. Excited? You betcha 

Will he actually be playing at LT though, one of the knocks on him was that'd he'd be looking to get LT money while playing at RT.

[PaddingtonRed]

Will he actually be playing at LT though, one of the knocks on him was that'd he'd be looking to get LT money while playing at RT.

He started as a RT, but was traded to KC as he saw himself as a LT and the Ravens had Ronnie Staley at that position. He's played LT ever since. The plan is likely Brown plays LT and Jonah Williams moves to RT.

[Romford_Red]

On Purdy I think he's class as rookie what he did last season was sensational, my only concern is will he be the same player after his injury because regarding his playing abilities i've got no concerns about him whatsoever.

His killer attributes are a calm head and accuracy. I don't feel like the injury can change this much. Maybe accuracy suffers at first.

[Romford_Red]

So do I in week1.

If Purdy wasnt injured  then he’d start. Think the 49ers will roll with Lance and he’ll get 3-4 games before Purdy is fit (based on current 6 month timeline for Purdy injury).

If Lance performs he’ll stay as starting QB. If not Purdy or Darnold will come in (depending on Purdy fitness).

That’s how I see it currently.

Yeah probably about right.

[redwillow]

He started as a RT, but was traded to KC as he saw himself as a LT and the Ravens had Ronnie Staley at that position. He's played LT ever since. The plan is likely Brown plays LT and Jonah Williams moves to RT.

Do not get too excited by Brown, theres a reason the Chiefs moved on and there is a reason every KC fan was holding their breath on Mahomes ankle

[PaddingtonRed]

Do not get too excited by Brown, theres a reason the Chiefs moved on and there is a reason every KC fan was holding their breath on Mahomes ankle

I will get too excited! The Bengals don't make these movements in FA very often!

[redwillow]

I will get too excited! The Bengals don't make these movements in FA very often!

I guess they are now more than likely in the last year before the big contracts have to be made, now or (nearly) never.

[voodoo ray]

will the bengals have anyone playing at either safety or running back though?

[RedG13]

Do not get too excited by Brown, theres a reason the Chiefs moved on and there is a reason every KC fan was holding their breath on Mahomes ankle

He a good Lt not like top 5 good but like 8-12ish range and better then Williams

[RedG13]

will the bengals have anyone playing at either safety or running back though?

Im sure they will find another Safety to play next to Dax Hill(who they drafted last year in the first round)

[Boston always unofficial]

Don't usually bother with the transfer threads but feeling left out.So
https://nesn.com/2023/03/what-patriots-are-getting-in-juju-smith-schuster-over-jakobi-meyers/

[MBL?]

Darius Slay now expected to stay at Eagles and restructure his contract.

Surprised by this but shows how much I know!

Only reason I suggested it is because I think the same happened with Cox last year after he was released. Looks like they called his bluff.

I still don’t understand how the cap works, how they make more space for the year coming and especially what dead cap is or how it works.

[Jookie]

I still don’t understand how the cap works, how they make more space for the year coming and especially what dead cap is or how it works.

This is a reasonable explanation

https://www.the33rdteam.com/category/analysis/explaining-nfl-salary-cap/

[Jookie]

Mike Gesicki to Patriots.

If they get Hopkins via trade, they could on paper have some decent offensive weapons for Mac Jones- Smith-Schuster, Hopkins, Gesicki, Parker, Stevenson. I like Stevenson as a running back. I quite like Kendrick Bourne as a 3rd down/RZ wide receiver.

Not sure what OL looks like but their current offensive plan looks better (though I like Jakobi Meyers over JuJu Smith-Schuster personally)

[voodoo ray]

the biggest plus to NE offensively this year will be actually having an OC.

[Jookie]

the biggest plus to NE offensively this year will be actually having an OC.

I agree.

I meant to say that. Potentially more weapons and an OC who can utilise them. I expect Mac Jones to trend back towards his rookie year level of form

[MBL?]

This is a reasonable explanation

https://www.the33rdteam.com/category/analysis/explaining-nfl-salary-cap/

Thanks, that certainly helped.

[Jookie]

I quite like the Lions picks ups in free agency so far.

They struggled a fair bit defensively in 2022 but got better as the season went on. Think they gave up 3rd most passing yards in regular season. Cameron Sutton and Emmanual Moseley improve the cornerback position immeasurably. Sutton was a solid performer at the Steelers in 2022 and Moseley was an emerging star for the 49ers before an ACL. The Moselely deal is 6M for 1 year so that's a reflection of his ACL injury rather than his ability. Be interesting to see how he does.

I wonder what it means for the former 1st round (and 3rd overall) pick Jeff Okudah.

Also a lot of mock drafts had the Lions going after a CB. Maybe they still do with Moseley coming off an ACL. Equally they may feel they've filled this weakness in free agency and go improve elsewhere with the No6 and No18 picks. Think the Lions have 5 picks in top 100 in the draft so good chance for them to build on last season's promise and/or build for the future (draft a QB if they like one to play behind Goff for a season or 2).

Chauncey Gardner-Johnson going to the Lions makes me like their free agency signings even more.

They could be a team to watch if they can hit on the high end draft picks they have.

[MBL?]

Chauncey Gardner-Johnson going to the Lions makes me like their free agency signings even more.

They could be a team to watch if they can hit on the high end draft picks they have.

Thought they’d be able to compete on terms at 8 mil he is reportedly getting in Detroit.

[Wolverine]

I actullay got the Lions as a surprise team to make the Superbowl next season as the NFC is wide open. The Eagles lost their OC and DC in the same off season, 49ers have question marks about their QB and The Lions retained Ben Johnson as the OC and he's one of the most brightest minds in the league plus The Lions's Divison isn't the strongest with The Vikings being frauds, The Bears not quite ready yet to contend and The Packers going into rebuild.

[KillieRed]

Saw a great idea in the latest Peter King FMIA article, suggested by a reader:

Make the 17th (and potentially 18th) games against a rival every year and play those games at neutral venues. Would be great, for example, to make the Rams-Chargers an actual thing, and those dates could also be used to export the game around the world to meet demand, as well as take the games to football friendly states that have no NFL team.

[Romford_Red]

Saw a great idea in the latest Peter King FMIA article, suggested by a reader:

Make the 17th (and potentially 18th) games against a rival every year and play those games at neutral venues. Would be great, for example, to make the Rams-Chargers an actual thing, and those dates could also be used to export the game around the world to meet demand, as well as take the games to football friendly states that have no NFL team.

Look up The Battle of the Bay. Might not be completely wise to try and recreate this

[voodoo ray]

If they're going to stick to an odd number of games then I wouldn't be surprised if they go to neutral site, but I don't know about the 'rivalry game' thing

[Romford_Red]

If they're going to stick to an odd number of games then I wouldn't be surprised if they go to neutral site, but I don't know about the 'rivalry game' thing

My guess is that they want to significantly ramp up the international series of games. With an odd number of games, you get to have an equal home/away schedule and then have the remaining game be your international fixture.

[Statto Red]

Week 18 is already division rivalry round, & theirs always at least one game somewhere, were both teams must win to be in the playoffs. 

I thought the original idea behind the extra 17th game, was teams with the extra home game, would have a neutral site home game, but covid put paid to that

[Jookie]

Saw a great idea in the latest Peter King FMIA article, suggested by a reader:

Make the 17th (and potentially 18th) games against a rival every year and play those games at neutral venues. Would be great, for example, to make the Rams-Chargers an actual thing, and those dates could also be used to export the game around the world to meet demand, as well as take the games to football friendly states that have no NFL team.

I hate the idea of an 18th game. Think it's currently too many games if you have a post season run.

The idea that the 17th game is at a a neutral venue isn't a bad one. Teams then have 8 games at home and 8 games away, with the 17th game at a neutral venue for all teams.

For the 17 games I'd make the following choices:

6 games against divisional rivals (home and away)
4 games against division within conference (2 home and 2 away)
4 games against division outside of conference (2 home and 2 away)
2 games against the two remaining divisions in its own conference based on previous seasons divisional ranking (1 home and 1 away)
1 game against a non-conference opponent from a division that the team is not scheduled to play (neutral venue)

I feel like the above is fairer since it keeps the US fans with 8 games at home. They also get the divisional games every year. They also get the round robin of NFC and AFC games. They also get the additional conference games where they are more likely, in general, to play a rival.

The outlier game is the NFC v AFC fixture. This is more random of a fixture since it would be based on previous season's divisional ranking. That makes it more suitable as a neutral venue game. Given there would 16 of these fixtures, they could be Weeks 1 to 16. Probably wouldn't want Week 17 games outside of US since they would be unfair for teams who make the play-offs.

To make neutral venues work (and them likely being non-US) then you need to include a 2nd bye week for all teams. Given travel to neutral games is likely to be different distances (for example Mexico or Canada versus Europe or SE Asia) then a 2nd bye week seems the only fair way to compensate for this. The 2nd bye week also helps players since they are being stretched to the limit with current schedule.

The knock on effect is that either the season is 1 week longer (not necessarily ideal) or you spread the 2 bye weeks throughout the current schedule and you have less games being played each week. More teams would have to have bye weeks each week.

[KillieRed]

Jookie for commissioner 

[Statto Red]

I hate the idea of an 18th game. Think it's currently too many games if you have a post season run.

The idea that the 17th game is at a a neutral venue isn't a bad one. Teams then have 8 games at home and 8 games away, with the 17th game at a neutral venue for all teams.

For the 17 games I'd make the following choices:

6 games against divisional rivals (home and away)
4 games against division within conference (2 home and 2 away)
4 games against division outside of conference (2 home and 2 away)
2 games against the two remaining divisions in its own conference based on previous seasons divisional ranking (1 home and 1 away)
1 game against a non-conference opponent from a division that the team is not scheduled to play (neutral venue)

I feel like the above is fairer since it keeps the US fans with 8 games at home. They also get the divisional games every year. They also get the round robin of NFC and AFC games. They also get the additional conference games where they are more likely, in general, to play a rival.

The outlier game is the NFC v AFC fixture. This is more random of a fixture since it would be based on previous season's divisional ranking. That makes it more suitable as a neutral venue game. Given there would 16 of these fixtures, they could be Weeks 1 to 16. Probably wouldn't want Week 17 games outside of US since they would be unfair for teams who make the play-offs.

To make neutral venues work (and them likely being non-US) then you need to include a 2nd bye week for all teams. Given travel to neutral games is likely to be different distances (for example Mexico or Canada versus Europe or SE Asia) then a 2nd bye week seems the only fair way to compensate for this. The 2nd bye week also helps players since they are being stretched to the limit with current schedule.

The knock on effect is that either the season is 1 week longer (not necessarily ideal) or you spread the 2 bye weeks throughout the current schedule and you have less games being played each week. More teams would have to have bye weeks each week.

With that idea, you could keep to the current schedule still have the 2nd bye week, but it means theirs no bye week between the championship game & the super bowl [like it used to be], pro bowl would have to move back to the week after the super bowl.

Or you still have the bye week between the championship game & super bowl, but move the super bowl to a week later, or they could move week 1 [& all the preseason games] to a week earlier.

Remember they got rid of the 4th preseason game to get the 17th game introduced

[Jookie]

With that idea, you could keep to the current schedule still have the 2nd bye week, but it means theirs no bye week between the championship game & the super bowl [like it used to be], pro bowl would have to move back to the week after the super bowl.

Or you still have the bye week between the championship game & super bowl, but move the super bowl to a week later, or they could move week 1 [& all the preseason games] to a week earlier.

Remember they got rid of the 4th preseason game to get the 17th game introduced

Are you saying the 2nd bye week would be full league bye (i.e. every team has 1 weekend off throughout the year at staggered points and the 2nd bye is a whole league bye)?

[Jookie]

Jookie for commissioner 

Ha ha - though not sure the NFL owners would like my ideas.

No 18th game and more byes for the players health. Less TV games each week would probably not help TV contracts.

Think the commissioners primary role is to serve the NFL team owners and make the league more profitable. Not sure my ideas would necessarily do that.

[Statto Red]

Are you saying the 2nd bye week would be full league bye (i.e. every team has 1 weekend off throughout the year at staggered points and the 2nd bye is a whole league bye)?

No i'm not, any 2nd bye week would be after a neutral game.

You could have up to 2 neutral site games a week from week 3 or 4 onwards.

[Jookie]

No i'm not, any 2nd bye week would be after a neutral game.

You could have up to 2 neutral site games a week from week 3 or 4 onwards.

2 neutral games a week from Week 3 to week 11. So during weeks 4 to week 12 every team gets 1 bye (at least)

I think you'd then need to stagger the 2nd bye from weeks 8 to 16 or 9 to 17.

For example, Team A play week 1 and 2 in US, week 3 in neutral venue. Week 4 becomes bye 1. Week 5 to 8 play games in US. Week 9 bye. Then games from week 9 to 18.

For example, Team B play week 1 to 3 in US, week 4 in neutral venue. Week 5 becomes bye 1. Week 6 to 9 play games in US. Week 10 bye. Then games from week 11 to 18.

etc...

[jedimaster]

I didn't used to follow the NFL in the off-season, but it seems like more and more players are switching teams in free agency, and key players as well. Dolphins have done what the Rams did prior to their Superbowl win and hoovered up players like Tyreek Hill, Bradley Chubb and Jalen Ramsey, but they are not alone and other teams are going all in more often as well.

I remember the 'good old days' in the 80s and early 90s when most players went through their entire career with the same team that drafted them. It made me feel more connected to my team as it developed rather than players just team hopping every few seasons. I also think the standard of play was higher when players had built up understandings over years and years.

I was thinking it could be argued that unless you are 1 or 2 players short of a Superbowl team, the best strategy in the draft should now always be best player available. You get the best players you can and then fill in the gaps in free agency. And even if the best player available is in a position you already have a top player in, draft them anyway because either the player you have will eventually ask for too much money and you will have a ready made replacement, or you use them as trade capital.

[Jookie]

Before salary cap was introduced in 1994 players did stay with certain teams longer.

The hard salary cap combined with rising costs of players in certain premium positions means it’s impossible to keep the same team, with all it stars together.

The minimum spend part of the salary cap stops teams from tanking fully.

There is still a wealth disparity despite salary cap. Rich owners, willing to spend, can invest in better facilities. I also think they can get star players with more guaranteed money. Mainly because any owner has to prove they can pay the guaranteed money. It’s why the like of Raiders are unlikely to ever being able to sign a star QB ion a 200M guaranteed contract but other teams can despite the salary cap being the same.

[voodoo ray]

the whole "money in escrow" thing needs to be binned. with all the money sloshing around in the nfl these days does anyone seriously think that any team would fail to have enough to pay a contract? really?