NFL Free Agency Thread

[supafly]

With the suspension of Brady a possibility, no way will bb trade jimmy.
I would love to see hoyer sign a one year deal with us though, just in case jimmy nuts up if given a chance.

While I agree with you that there's about zero chance of JG getting traded, I just can't get on board with the idea of keeping three quarterbacks. Not only would it take away from precious learning reps for JG, but it's a waste of cap space and a roster spot.

 

[DaBruinz]

Can you elaborate?

The team that PICKS the player gets the money allocated to their rookie pool. That money is not tradeable..

 

[RobertWeathers]

Well the Teams who could use a QB are NYJ Den CLE DAL
Dallas is the only team that would make sense.
Id rather hold on to him in case Brady serves a 4 game suspension, gets hurt or becomes human

Agreed. The downside of letting Jimmy go is worse than the upside

 

[Froob]

Jets might end up getting Fitzmagic at a bargain and come out looking like geniuses. He has a very short list of suitors.

 

[JarOfMayo51]

The rookie pool rules prohibit the Pats from picking up a first rounder in this manner.

Can you explain in more detail? I wasn't aware of this, but are you saying they have a rookie pool allocated based on their current picks, so if they traded for a player who was just drafted they wouldnt be able to cover their salary in their rookie pool?

What about if the team that drafted him signed him to his rookie deal then traded him?

 

[Ross12]

Jets might end up getting Fitzmagic at a bargain and come out looking like geniuses. He has a very short list of suitors.

The Jets could probably sign Hoyer and be okay, honestly. He's not that huge of a downgrade from Fitz...

 

[Ivan]

With the suspension of Brady a possibility, no way will bb trade jimmy.
I would love to see hoyer sign a one year deal with us though, just in case jimmy nuts up if given a chance.

All Brady has to do is push it to the Supreme's, that will keep him playing another season, and that's in the worst case scenario.

 

[chasa]

Yesterday, today was tomorrow;
so tomorrow, today will be yesterday.

- written and sung by…? If you know the answer, you're probably as old as I am.

tailor swift?

 

[Froob]

The Jets could probably sign Hoyer and be okay, honestly. He's not that huge of a downgrade from Fitz...

Highly disagree, Fitz is much better. Denver should be calling his agent everyday. Fitz is a solid starting QB, Hoyer is very very meh.

 

[DaBruinz]

Can you explain in more detail? I wasn't aware of this, but are you saying they have a rookie pool allocated based on their current picks, so if they traded for a player who was just drafted they wouldnt be able to cover their salary in their rookie pool?

What about if the team that drafted him signed him to his rookie deal then traded him?

The team that drafts a player would have to eat the full signing bonus of said player if they gave him one. Now, if the 1st round pick didn't get a signing bonus, but got all guaranteed money, then yes, it would be doable..

 

[Ross12]

Highly disagree, Fitz is much better. Denver should be calling his agent everyday. Fitz is a solid starting QB, Hoyer is very very meh.

I don't understand, you disagreed without giving me negative ratings? How is this possible?

 

[Froob]

I don't understand, you disagreed without giving me negative ratings? How is this possible?

Glitch in the matrix? If a ten page pissing fest doesn't ensue then we know something is wrong here.

 

[s3antana5757]

The team that drafts a player would have to eat the full signing bonus of said player if they gave him one. Now, if the 1st round pick didn't get a signing bonus, but got all guaranteed money, then yes, it would be doable..

So if Kansas City took Player X at 28 on Thursday night, you're saying that New England couldn't trade it's two seconds(or whatever picks) for Player X on Friday night? They haven't paid him any signing bonus yet...

 

[crownontherocks]

According to Alex Marvez of Fox Sports, the Eagles and Browns have set the framework for a potential trade involving the No. 2 pick.

IF @Eagles & @Browns make deal for No. 2 overall pick, I'm told compensation includes 1st- & 3rd-rnd picks in 2016/17 @SiriusXMNFL @NFLonFOX

 

[crownontherocks]

ESPN's Adam Schefter stated Wednesday that "if it were up to the Eagles, the deal would be done today" to trade up to No. 2 overall with the Browns.

It was reported Tuesday that the two teams had agreed to the framework of a trade, which would net the Browns the No. 8 overall pick, two 2016 third-rounders, and the Eagles' first- and third-round picks in 2017 in exchange for the No. 2 overall selection. But, according to Schefter, the price to move up from 8 to 2 wouldn't be nearly that high. The Browns are taking their time.

 

[Ross12]

ESPN's Adam Schefter stated Wednesday that "if it were up to the Eagles, the deal would be done today" to trade up to No. 2 overall with the Browns.

It was reported Tuesday that the two teams had agreed to the framework of a trade, which would net the Browns the No. 8 overall pick, two 2016 third-rounders, and the Eagles' first- and third-round picks in 2017 in exchange for the No. 2 overall selection. But, according to Schefter, the price to move up from 8 to 2 wouldn't be nearly that high. The Browns are taking their time.

That's a really nice haul just to move down 6 spots.

 

[DW Toys]

All Brady has to do is push it to the Supreme's, that will keep him playing another season, and that's in the worst case scenario.

OK Cousin. Thoughts and questions. If the Pats and Brady get screwed by this kangaroo court, what is the next play? Supreme court? Will that even reach their docket?
If I am Brady I see about a quarter billion dollar win against the NFL, Ted Wells, Roger, the lying NFL Attorney Paul Clement, Troy Vincent and 31 NFL Owners:

animal house boy this is great - - Yahoo Search Results

It seems to me that the NFL has been slaughtered in defamation suits of this sort. As high profile as Brady is , his net worth is tarnished by lies and mischaracterizations that the NFL should have treadled lightly.

“Brady would need to show that not only were public statements made about him false and damaging to his reputation, but he’d have to show those statements were made with actual malice, which means knowingly or intentionally,” Game...set...match!!!!! Malice? Intentionally damaging?

Jonathan Vilma case:

"While the Court is extremely disturbed by the fundamental lack of due process in Goodell's denying the players the identities of and the right to confront their accusers, that was substantially rectified later in the process," Berrigan added. "So while the process was initially procedurally flawed, the statements were ultimately found to have enough support to defeat the defamation claims."

Berrigan ended her decision by writing: "Even though this matter has been pending only since May of this year, it feels as protracted and painful as the Saints season itself, and calls for closure. The Court nonetheless believes that had this matter been handled in a less heavy handed way, with greater fairness toward the players and the pressures they face, this litigation and the related cases would not have been necessary."

This would not be the case of Brady. The NFL was out to get he and the Pats. Done deal. No proof. Even the Wells reports denied proof.

DW Toys

 

[Hammer of Thor]

So if Kansas City took Player X at 28 on Thursday night, you're saying that New England couldn't trade it's two seconds(or whatever picks) for Player X on Friday night? They haven't paid him any signing bonus yet...

A rookie pool was established in the 2011 CBA. It can be viewed as a "cap within the cap", although it's not entirely true. That is to say, of the existing salary cap for the team, only $x can be spent on rookies, where $x is based on the number of and position of a team's draft selections. That said, again, it's not 100% true - the salary cap charge itself is different from the rookie pool charge, so while the rookie pool number might be $x, the actual salary cap charge could be $x +/- $y depending on how the deal is structured.

Hypothetically - suppose that with the current 11 picks the Pats have, and in their current position and assuming the Pats make all those selections without trading them, their total 2016 rookie pool might be $3M. From there, the Pats can trade their 2 seconds for pick 28, but their total rookie pool stays $3M regardless. The rookie pool is based on a "slotting" system, where each pick is given an expected dollar amount - meaning the player will likely actually sign for something along those lines.

Based on the slotting system, picks 60 and 61 might be expected to be worth $1M each (implies the other 9 picks are expected to be worth $1M in total), while pick 28 might be expected to be worth $3M. Well, after the trade the Pats still only have $3M in rookie pool dollars, for 9 players now, but the 1st round pick is expecting to receive $3M. That means they wouldn't be able to sign the other 8 picks. The only way it would work is if the Pats manage to convince pick 28 to sign for $2M -- the odds of that player agreeing to it and not holding out are slim-to-none.

Miguel recommends this blog post on his website for details:
AdamJT13: The NFL rookie pool and the salary cap

Another explanation here: Explaining the NFL's Rookie Salary Cap - Over the Cap

 

[Galeb]

That's a really nice haul just to move down 6 spots.

It is assuming the Browns get a very high pick. In the unlikely event the Browns are picking in the 20s next year it's not that bad. If they're picking top 2 again...

 

[Ivan]

OK Cousin. Thoughts and questions. If the Pats and Brady get screwed by this kangaroo court, what is the next play? Supreme court? Will that even reach their docket?
If I am Brady I see about a quarter billion dollar win against the NFL, Ted Wells, Roger, the lying NFL Attorney Paul Clement, Troy Vincent and 31 NFL Owners:

animal house boy this is great - - Yahoo Search Results

It seems to me that the NFL has been slaughtered in defamation suits of this sort. As high profile as Brady is , his net worth is tarnished by lies and mischaracterizations that the NFL should have treadled lightly.

“Brady would need to show that not only were public statements made about him false and damaging to his reputation, but he’d have to show those statements were made with actual malice, which means knowingly or intentionally,” Game...set...match!!!!! Malice? Intentionally damaging?

Jonathan Vilma case:

"While the Court is extremely disturbed by the fundamental lack of due process in Goodell's denying the players the identities of and the right to confront their accusers, that was substantially rectified later in the process," Berrigan added. "So while the process was initially procedurally flawed, the statements were ultimately found to have enough support to defeat the defamation claims."

Berrigan ended her decision by writing: "Even though this matter has been pending only since May of this year, it feels as protracted and painful as the Saints season itself, and calls for closure. The Court nonetheless believes that had this matter been handled in a less heavy handed way, with greater fairness toward the players and the pressures they face, this litigation and the related cases would not have been necessary."

This would not be the case of Brady. The NFL was out to get he and the Pats. Done deal. No proof. Even the Wells reports denied proof.

DW Toys

If Brady wins that should be the end of it. Brady doesn't want the distraction a defamation suit would bring as out would literally go on for the rest of his career, and he doesn't need money. I don't disagree that he has a solid case I just don't believe he wants to be in court for ther next 5 years.