Reply With QuoteLooks like Frazier's the choice. Very smart move by Wilf.
Draft order has been announced, pending playoffs:
1. Carolina Panthers
2. Denver Broncos
3. Buffalo Bills
4. Cincinnati Bengals
5. Arizona Cardinals
6. Cleveland Browns
7. San Francisco 49ers
8. Tennessee Titans
9. Dallas Cowboys
10. Washington Redskins
11. Houston Texans
12. Minnesota Vikings
13. Detroit Lions
14. St. Louis Rams
15. Miami Dolphins
16. Jacksonville Jaguars
17. Oakland Raiders
18. San Diego Chargers
19. New York Giants
20. Tampa Bay Buccaneers
21. Seattle Seahawks*
22. Kansas City Chiefs*
23. Indianapolis Colts*
24. Philadelphia Eagles*
25. Green Bay Packers*
26. New Orleans Saints*
27. Chicago Bears*
28. New York Jets*
29. Baltimore Ravens*
30. Pittsburgh Steelers*
31. Atlanta Falcons*
32. New England Patriots*
*- Subject to Playoffs
Looks like Frazier's the choice. Very smart move by Wilf.
Don't forget, New England also has the #17 pick in the first round, thanks to the Richard Seymour trade.
How have coaches not learned yet that if NE wants to trade with you, SAY NO.Originally Posted by Omniscia
Niners can't even do anything right, winning their last game. Actually it wasn't so bad, they only are two places lower now than if they would have won against the Cards. Well barring some big trade to get the #1 pick, it looks like the Niners will not get Luck. Maybe not even Newton since the Cards need a QB too. Welcome to the 49ers Jake Locker.
Well, Richard Seymour is pretty good. It's not like the Raiders are aces at the draft, anyway.
Well, my Redskins just concluded another highly satisfying season, so you know what this means:
If the Bills don't take a QB in the first round and let those guys pass them by I will never root for them again. This is their chance to put a big dent in the rebuilding process and it would take a monumentally boneheaded person to believe that Ryan Fitzpatrick is the QB of the future.
I would like to believe that we're going to do something sensible, but recent history teaches that we're in for another bizarre and incompetent pick.
A 17 pick for Seymour? I'd say the Raiders probably got the best of that one.
Look at Heyward-Bey! Then look at every other receiver in that first round. Let me list them:
Michael Crabtree
Jeremy Maclin
Kenny Britt
Hakeem Nicks
Percy Harvin
Raiders are usually pretty terrible at drafting.
Last edited by Nawid A; 01-03-2011 at 09:24 PM.
I must own this shirt.Well, my Redskins just concluded another highly satisfying season, so you know what this means:
I think it worked out for both teams. NE wasn't going to pay both Wilfork and Seymor, and good (great) 3-4 NTs are hard to come by. That said many Pats fans were hoping for a top ten pick. :/
My personal favorite is this Dan Snyder jersey.
Luck is going back to Stanford.
That's bad news for the Titans, IMO. I was hoping a good QB would fall to us, and this makes it less likely. I want Gabbert. Still, there are several QBs that might be seen as first rounders, even without Luck. And there are plenty of great defensive players this draft.
There are still going to be four or five first rounders even without Luck but none of them is going to be worth taking at #1 unless somebody gets enamored. Which means it's actually good news for teams like the Titans who are hoping to grab someone later in the first round as teams like the Panthers will pick someone at another position.
That really scrambles the draft. What do the Panthers do now? They have Claussen. Getting Luck was a no-brainer, but I'm not sure that any other QB in the draft is worth the #1 overall pick.
It depends an awful lot on the negotiations.
If they can finally put into place a reasonable salary cap for so having the top pick in the draft doesn't hamstring your team financially? That'd be fantastic.
I mean...yeah, they should paid more for being a top pick in the first round. But not be paid at or above a franchise-tag for that position in the NFL without having played.
Thoughts on a rookie/draft salary cap? Would you have to also limit contract length to 3-4 years so they _can_ cash in if they're really that good? Would you want a salary cap at all specifically for drafted players? A significant increase in base salaries? Better guarantees of health care after retiring (and how long do you have to play to be eligible)?
I really haven't heard any good, detailed positions on what each side might settle for in several months. Anyone have sources?
What they need is a system so that they are not hamstrung by top picks who are busts. That's what kills teams. Bradford's guaranteed $50M with the Rams, but that's ok -- he's worth it. JaWalrus wasn't worth whatever his contract was.
So they need to approach that issue, but they also need to take care of players who have career-ending injuries. That's the biggest thing I'd worry about as a top rookie pick -- what if I blow out a knee in training camp? There was a Bengals RB who did that -- Kijaana Carter or something?
What's interesting is that people blame the NFL owners for giving the rookies so much money to begin with. But the problem is that if the owners didn't pay more and tried to agree on a maximum, that would be collusion which would be illegal. So I think a rookie salary cap is necessary. Unlike the NBA though, I think it should be by position, otherwise if everyone has to be paid like a QB gets paid, the cap won't mean much to 'non-skill' positions.
I like the idea of different caps by skill positions but I think in the long run there will be so much wrangling then about the what positions should be capped where that it will make the whole thing too unwieldy to actually implement. Nice idea but not practical. I think a simple rookie wage scale, as unfair as it might be to players of different positions, has the strong advantage of simplicity and easy in implementation. My crystal ball says that's what the NFL and NFLPA will agree on.
Yeah probably but I'm sure the owners will argue for an average, which will really screw QB's. Oh well.
The counter to that will just be agents pushing for really short rookie contracts for players that they think will prove to be worth a lot more.
While I'm sure there is/will be a lot of agent influence in the negotiations, in the end they are not able to vote, so let's hope that their influence can be limited. NBA has three years but that may be based on the average length of a star's career, which I don't know. I think the length of time of the rookie limitation should be no more than 20% of the players expected career. The other thing is that in the NBA, after their rookie contract, players become restricted free agents, where their team can match any offer any other team can make, and also that their team can lock them into a long term contract before any other team. I'm not really sure how well that's actually working out in the NBA though.
Yeah, I would think that if they put a salary cap on rookies, the rookies need to get shorter contracts -- no longer than three years.
The NFLPA won't stand for a cap unless the money saved is spread around among the veteran players. They won't be happy with an overall reduction in money spent on players.
And in related news, ESPN is going to pay 40% more for Monday Night Football. It's going to be up from $1.1B a year to somewhere between $1.5B and $2B a year. The players are going to want to share in that.
So basically y'all agree with me!
On NFLPA spreading money to vets: A proposal to increase the base salaries, plus increasing the number of players on a team (i.e., let everyone suit up, make practice squad into real players), plus a commitment to long-term health care for sports injuries is a pretty good start and a good bit of money spent from the 'savings' from the first round draft picks in total.
Also, by restricting rookie contracts to that 3-4 years (plus having minimum salary increases during those few years for rookies) they can vest into vets more quickly.
I'd like to see a pension system, and a guarantee to give a scholarship for finishing college, in place as well (scholarship for those that made under X dollars/played X years perhaps?). In case of severe injury, especially from concussions, they're taken care of; and the education thing is good PR if nothing else, so pays for itself.
Finally, I'd also like everyone to get a flying pony. Including the fans.
They are not going to expand the rosters to include the practice squad. They've already addressed expanding the rosters if they go to the 18 game schedule and it doesn't include the PS guys.
One thing they could get rid of is the game day inactives. I see no reason why they can't use any player on the active roster. Currently they have to declare some inactive.
I just realized (yea, slow to get there) with some amusement is that if the Seahawks actually made it to the Superbowl and lost, they'd end the season at .500.
Why the fuck did the Saints punt?? What was Payton thinking?
Posting Permissions