American Sports Thread

[Syferus]

We'll see.
If he wins a playoff game, or God forbid, brings the Jags to the Superbowl he could end up with a contract that would greatly outweigh his value going forward - hence the Flacco comparison.

He's still going to get tagged then. No team pays big money for someone who has four average years and is hot in the last few games. Just look at Cousins in Washington ffs, and he's way better than Bortles.

He's not getting the cast iron contract Flacco got if he does get one this season, it will be filled with incentives and allow the Jags to cut him after two years with little cap hit.

[Clov]

You are making the mistake of assuming that teams are rational, value optimizing decision makers. The NFL is littered with bad contracts - there are hundreds and every team has them. There are so many examples of players getting signed after 'four average years and then a few hot games', including QB's (e.g. Flacco). Cousins has been offered a contract and refused to sign.

[Syferus]

You are making the mistake of assuming that teams are rational, value optimizing decision makers. The NFL is littered with bad contracts - there are hundreds and every team has them. There are so many examples of players getting signed after 'four average years and then a few hot games', including QB's (e.g. Flacco). Cousins has been offered a contract and refused to sign.

The reason Cousins refused to sign was the contract was below market value.. proving my point.

[Clov]

That assumes we know we know why Cousins refused to sign - I don't think we do.

Regardless of the reasons why Cousins refused to sign if your wider point is that NFL contracts are are rational given the market constraints then i don't agree. There are lots of examples of bad contracts were teams have grossly over estimated the value of a player. Furthermore, i would argue the ability to accurately gauge the value of a player is one the key factors that distinguishes good teams with savvy personnel departments from bad teams.

[Syferus]

That assumes we know we know why Cousins refused to sign - I don't think we do.

Regardless of the reasons why Cousins refused to sign if your wider point is that NFL contracts are are rational given the market constraints then i don't agree. There are lots of examples of bad contracts were teams have grossly over estimated the value of a player. Furthermore, i would argue the ability to accurately gauge the value of a player is one the key factors that distinguishes good teams with savvy personnel departments from bad teams.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/bruce-allen-redskins-offered-kirk-cousins-53-million-but-he-prefers-franchise-tag/

He was offered a contract that contained exactly $400,000 more in guaranteed money than he'd be getting on the transition tag next year. We know.

[Clov]

We don't know Cousin's reasons - you are imputing.

But let's suppose for a minute that the reason Cousin refuses to sign is because Washington's evaluation of him does not meet his evaluation of himself, rather than say a desire to play somewhere other than Washington - it's quite a leap to conclude that this means that Washington's evaluation is an accurate evaluation of his true market value. In fact there is a whiff of reductio absurdum about the argument that NFL teams accurately and without fail gauge player value - if all NFL teams accurately gauge the true market value of players there would never be any need for negotiation as it would be futile. Nobody would ever offer an above 'market value' contract and if any team ever offered a below market value contract another team (acting rationally) would step in with a market value contract and sign the player away. There is the further irony in your example of Cousins in that Washington is the team that is synonymous with the bad free agent contract (it's like they invented it!) - Albert Haynesworth for example.

[TabClear]

Just saw Derek Carrs f**k up on Sunday night.  Cowboys were lucky to get away with that one. 

[Minder]

I agree with you Clov, Washington did seem to invent it when Snyder bought the team. And you are right about some terrible contracts in the NFL, the only thing that saves teams is the non guaranteed nature of NFL contracts, a lot of the time it's "two years and we will see", but even if they do cut the player there is a cap hit.

Any QB that shows some competence will get paid, look at Glennon in Chicago in the off season, $15m a yr, Osweiler got a fortune from Houston for showing average ability in about 7 starts for the Broncos. The list goes on.

Bortles was very good two season ago so it's not as if this season is a total outlier.

[Therealdonald]

That assumes we know we know why Cousins refused to sign - I don't think we do.

Regardless of the reasons why Cousins refused to sign if your wider point is that NFL contracts are are rational given the market constraints then i don't agree. There are lots of examples of bad contracts were teams have grossly over estimated the value of a player. Furthermore, i would argue the ability to accurately gauge the value of a player is one the key factors that distinguishes good teams with savvy personnel departments from bad teams.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/bruce-allen-redskins-offered-kirk-cousins-53-million-but-he-prefers-franchise-tag/

He was offered a contract that contained exactly $400,000 more in guaranteed money than he'd be getting on the transition tag next year. We know.

There's also the assumption that Cousins doesn't feel appreciated by the Redskins upper brass. Then factor in the Shanahan mindset where it was universally agreed that Cousins was going to follow KS to the 49ers.

Back to the point, there are very few viable alternatives available on the market who will automatically be better than Bortles. At present he leads the NFL in December in a host of stats. We can dismiss this or we can assume that perhaps maybe adjustments have worked and the Jags are heating up at the right time, either way they are an interesting team at the minute.

[Minder]

So that's Rodgers done for the season

[gawa316]

Just saw Derek Carrs f**k up on Sunday night.  Cowboys were lucky to get away with that one.

Not to mention indexcardgate!

[Capt Pat]

So that's Rodgers done for the season

The vikings are happy about not having to face him on saturday. It sets the vikings up for 2 more wins against the Packers and Bears to end the regular season. That will get the vikings a bye in the playoffs at least and maybe homefield advantage to and including the superbowl. 

[stew]

So that's Rodgers done for the season

The vikings are happy about not having to face him on saturday. It sets the vikings up for 2 more wins against the Packers and Bears to end the regular season. That will get the vikings a bye in the playoffs at least and maybe homefield advantage to and including the superbowl.

Pat the vikings are not getting near the superbowl, they are one of the worst franchises in the NFL.

[Syferus]

So that's Rodgers done for the season

The vikings are happy about not having to face him on saturday. It sets the vikings up for 2 more wins against the Packers and Bears to end the regular season. That will get the vikings a bye in the playoffs at least and maybe homefield advantage to and including the superbowl.

Pat the vikings are not getting near the superbowl, they are one of the worst franchises in the NFL.

I do wonder sometimes if this is some elaborate art project to portray the most off-base and genuinely incorrect viewpoints imaginable, but then I look at the URL and realize I'm on GAABoard.

[Minder]

So that's Rodgers done for the season

The vikings are happy about not having to face him on saturday. It sets the vikings up for 2 more wins against the Packers and Bears to end the regular season. That will get the vikings a bye in the playoffs at least and maybe homefield advantage to and including the superbowl.

Pat the vikings are not getting near the superbowl, they are one of the worst franchises in the NFL.

Are you crazy ?