Emmanuel Sanders visting today

[Bhelmet]

Also, both are significant upgrades to Lloyd, Edelman, and too a lesser extent, Branch.

I guess you did not watch Branch play last year.

 

[Kontradiction]

Sanders is a good player, I'd be sad to see him go.

His injury history is not so much games missed (although he has been dinged some), so much as what seemed to be chronic problems with his feet.

He was injured in the Pit/GB SB, and subsequently had surgeries on *both* feet, not just the injured one, in 2011. So there was concern (I believe Tomlin himself voiced this in 2012) that he might not be able to stay healthy. I think most Steelers fans like his talent but consider him somewhat brittle, his full slate of games last year notwithstanding. (It should be noted that *Sanders* was the 3rd rd pick and Antonio Brown the 6th rounder in 2010...really it was the injuries that held Sanders back and allowed Brown to develop as he has).

Without meaning to open up a huge can of worms here, I've got to ask: wouldn't this be a strange year to sign an RFA, given the Pats small number of picks in 2013? And if the argument for signing an RFA is that the Pats are in win-now mode, why essentially swap Welker (more durable, knows system) for Amendola? (Note I really like Amendola, but he seems like another "brittle" guy, and unless Brady actually plays 5 more years I'm not sure what good Amendola's years 4 and 5 does for the Pats if they are in "win-now" mode?)

Then again, maybe the Pats are thinking that if they bring in Sanders they essentially have insurance for Amendola (it's unlikely both would be injured at the same time)

Belichick has shown time and again that he has the ability to trade down and acquire more picks. If we aren't on the phone with the Giants to inquire about Cruz (which could be another alternative given that they have to pay Nicks pretty soon), then forking over a 3rd for Sanders seems like a no-brainer, particularly since Pittsburgh won't be able to match our offer.

 

[dales804]

I'm just saying Donald jones isn't any answer. And sanders isn't a castoff but he sure as hell isn't coming cheap ? I want proven players or better scouting to get one in the draft. Sorry that I don't think amendola, sanders, jones is some huge step in the right direction.

There's nothing to be sorry about. I am just asking what you think the answer is.

 

[PatsFaninAZ]

Can someone just briefly recap the rules for offering RFAs after the Welker situation?

My memory of this goes like this. As I recall what happened there, he was tendered at the rate where it would cost a second rounder to re-sign him. The Patriots never actually made an offer, but the threat was to put in a "poison pill" to ensure Miami couldn't match. Something like, "plus a $10 million bonus if you play more than 5 games a year in Southern Florida." The threat of that, though legal at the time, got attention -- and eventually to avoid an unseemly situation, the Dolphins and Patriots agreed on a trade, with the Patriots ponying up an additional draft pick (a 7th).

Because of that situation and another poison pill offer to an RFA by another team, there were new rules put in place, but I forgot what they are.

I guess the question, then, is what kind of stuff can you still do to make it so the other team doesn't match? And, is it permissible simply to call the other team and say, "look, this is what we are going to offer him, and we know you are in cap hell so can't match, how about we give you a third and a seventh and call it a trade"? Or is that all improper now?

 

[ctpatsfan77]

I guess the question, then, is what kind of stuff can you still do to make it so the other team doesn't match? And, is it permissible simply to call the other team and say, "look, this is what we are going to offer him, and we know you are in cap hell so can't match, how about we give you a third and a seventh and call it a trade"? Or is that all improper now?

I'm not going to get into the latter issue, which is a bit hazy, but the former one isn't.

You can offer any terms you want, so long as the contract doesn't force the old team to do something you're not required to do. So, in other words, they can't force PIT to offer extra years, or an extra million dollars in salary, or to guarantee money in a way that doesn't apply to them as well. (For example, "If the player participates in 6 games in the state of Pennsylvania, the player's salary the following year is fully guaranteed" = prohibited; "If the player scores at least 7 TDs, the player's salary the following year is fully guaranteed" = allowed.)

[OK, not any terms, but any sort of normal contract involving signing bonuses, roster bonuses, etc.]

 

[Brady2Moss]

There's nothing to be sorry about. I am just asking what you think the answer is.

I think the answer is the draft particularly this year with lots of big outside receivers. Problem is our scouting it sanders isn't too expensive ill give up that 3rd round pick and act like he's a more proven NFL commodity that we subbed for a 3rd round WR but they need to get another outside guy with more upside.

Free agency isn't usually the way to go because of the nutty contracts dolled out. 13 million for mike Wallace O_O

 

[Brady_to_Moss]

Pitt would have to match the pats offer..right....i can't see them letting go after wallace leaving

 

[Brady2Moss]

Pitt would have to match the pats offer..right....i can't see them letting go after wallace leaving

I'm guessing we have a huge year one cap hit to ward them off

 

[ctpatsfan77]

And, FWIW, the relevant portion of the CBA:

(e) Principal Terms. For the purposes of this Article (and Article 10), the Principal Terms of an Offer Sheet shall include only:
(i) Salary, which shall consist only of (a) the fixed and specified dollar amounts the New Club will pay, guarantee or lend to the Restricted Free Agent and/or his designees (currently and/or as deferred compensation in specified installments on specified dates) in consideration for his services as a football player under the Player Contract (i.e., signing bonus, Paragraph 5 Salary, and reporting and roster bonuses); and (b) Salary that is variable and/or is subject to calculation only upon the following bases: (1) based upon the performance of the Club extending the Offer Sheet (only those incentives which are “likely to be earned” by the player if he enters into a Player Contract with the New Club, pursuant to Subsection (c) above, must be matched by the Prior Club for the purpose of exercising a Right of First Refusal, and such incentives may not exceed 15% of the Salary in the Offer Sheet); and (2) League honors listed in Exhibit C to Article 13; and
(ii) Any modifications of and additions to the terms contained in the NFL Player Contract requested by the Restricted Free Agent and acceptable to the New Club, that relate to non-compensation terms (including guarantees, no-cut, and no-trade provisions) of the Restricted Free Agent’s employment as a football player (which shall be evidenced either by a copy of the NFL Player Contract, marked to show changes, or by a written brief summary contained in or attached to the Offer Sheet).
(iii) Notwithstanding Subsections (i) and (ii) above, no Offer Sheet may contain a Principal Term that would create rights or obligations for the Old Club that differ in any way (including but not limited to the amount of compensation that would be paid, the circumstances in which compensation would be guaranteed, or the circumstances in which other contractual rights would or would not vest) from the rights or obligations that such Principal Term would create for the Club extending the Offer Sheet (i.e., no “poison pills”).

 

[dales804]

I think the answer is the draft particularly this year with lots of big outside receivers. Problem is our scouting it sanders isn't too expensive ill give up that 3rd round pick and act like he's a more proven NFL commodity that we subbed for a 3rd round WR but they need to get another outside guy with more upside.

Free agency isn't usually the way to go because of the nutty contracts dolled out. 13 million for mike Wallace O_O

I agree Mike Wallace got too much. I think a WR core of Lloyd, Sanders, Amendola, Jones. It would be great to have a more explosive guy but I don't think it's as big a need if these moves do happen. Assuming they bring back Talib, I think the Patriots might just take the best available at 29.

 

[supafly]

I'm not going to get into the latter issue, which is a bit hazy, but the former one isn't.

You can offer any terms you want, so long as the contract doesn't force the old team to do something you're not required to do. So, in other words, they can't force PIT to offer extra years, or an extra million dollars in salary, or to guarantee money in a way that doesn't apply to them as well. (For example, "If the player participates in 6 games in the state of Pennsylvania, the player's salary the following year is fully guaranteed" = prohibited; "If the player scores at least 7 TDs, the player's salary the following year is fully guaranteed" = allowed.)

[OK, not any terms, but any sort of normal contract involving signing bonuses, roster bonuses, etc.]

ct--are you saying that they could offer something in the deal that would still act as a poison pill, even though poison pills are a thing of the past?

Such as your example that "If the player scores at least 7 TD's, the player's salary the following year is fully guaranteed."

If that is the case, why can't they just change your example to "1 TD?"

 

[PatsFaninAZ]

Thanks. So, (c)(ii) is the post-Welker rule. You can't say, "we'll pay you $10 million if you receive more than 30 balls in the state of Pennsylvania." That would be a term that differentiates compensation for one team as opposed to another.

But, if I'm reading it right, you can structure a $20 million, 5 year contract to pay $10 million guaranteed in salary for the first year instead of doing it as a signing bonus, so that the other team if in cap hell cannot spread the $10 million out over 5 years.

 

[JMC00]

Pitt would have to match the pats offer..right....i can't see them letting go after wallace leaving

or they could value the 3rd round pick a little more. If there is one thing the Steelers have done is find wide receivers in the 3rd round or later that fit their system of having Roethlisberger drop back buy time and have the receivers go out.

Wallace- 3rd round
Brown- 6th round
Sanders- 3rd round

 

[Ring 6]

I mostly agree, although there is a slight difference in that those were all crappy organizations that probably didn't even realize what kind of talent they had.

OTOH, while the Steelers are a solid organization, I'd be willing to bet that they want to re-sign him, but poor cap management has come back to bite them so hard that they might just not have the option.

Mike Vrabel says hi.

 

[Sciz]

ct--are you saying that they could offer something in the deal that would still act as a poison pill, even though poison pills are a thing of the past?

Such as your example that "If the player scores at least 7 TD's, the player's salary the following year is fully guaranteed."

If that is the case, why can't they just change your example to "1 TD?"

The only "poison pill" the Pats need is the first year cap hit. The Pats have cap room, while the Steelers don't. Rather than a signing bonus, if they use a bonus that doesn't prorate, then the Pats get him for the same amount of money, but the Steelers would have a much harder time matching.

I don't know how much they want to offer him, but I'd make a three year, $9M deal into $5M in the first year and $2M each year after that, for example.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Mike Vrabel says hi.

Vrabel's another example of my point. Cowher has gone on record as saying that he wanted to keep Vrabel, but due to the players that they already had at LB and the money committed there, they couldn't match the Pats' offer. Most definitely wasn't a case of "the Steelers didn't want him", just like Sanders ending up here wouldn't mean that the Steelers didn't want him.

Not wanting a guy and not being able to afford to keep him are very different things.

 

[Ring 6]

Thanks. So, (c)(ii) is the post-Welker rule. You can't say, "we'll pay you $10 million if you receive more than 30 balls in the state of Pennsylvania." That would be a term that differentiates compensation for one team as opposed to another.

But, if I'm reading it right, you can structure a $20 million, 5 year contract to pay $10 million guaranteed in salary for the first year instead of doing it as a signing bonus, so that the other team if in cap hell cannot spread the $10 million out over 5 years.

Which will become more popular with the spending floor rules coming into effect.
Its going to probably create a nightmare of holdouts too though.

 

[Brady_to_Moss]

I don't know how much they want to offer him, but I'd make a three year, $9M deal into $5M in the first year and $2M each year after that, for example.

Pitt wouldst be able to keep him with a 5 mill first year cap hit.

 

[randomk1]

Always liked this kid.

 

[PATRlOT]

Is Greg Jennings still a possibility?

Sanders and Jennings would be awesome.