[Old 2020 thread] NFL Free Agency/Trade Rumors:

[DaBruinz]

Whosoever chooses Wilson ahead of Thomas did not maximize their pick...kinda like choosing one UGA RB ahead of his bigger, faster, stronger, more athletic...and healthier...teammate...

Gotta Love when you spew BS..

Michel - 5'10 5/8 - 214
10 - 1.56
20 - 2.62
40 - 4.54
Shuttle - 4.21

Chubb - 5'10 7/8 - 227
10 - 1.62
20 - 2.67
40 - 4.52
Shuttle - 4.25

You are correct that Chubb weighed more than Michel and was healthier than Michel. Your claims that Chubb is faster and more athletic are your BS that you spew that aren't based in fact.

 

[Uptown]

 

[ralmat55]

So, let me see if I am interpreting what you wrote correctly. We are accustomed to a 53 man active roster and a 10 man Practice Squad = 63 players total. The 53 active player roster is then reduced by 7 to 46 on game day.

Under the new CBA, the game day roster roster grows to 48. The extra two players can come from either the Practice Squad or the 53 man active roster. Is that correct?

The Practice Squad grows by two players in 2020 and two more in 2021. That's a four player increase in the total roster spots from 63 to 67. So all the new jobs are on the Practice Squad and are governed by a set pay scale, and those players continue to be eligible for signing by other teams. A team can only elevate a Practice Squad player twice in a season before they sign him to the active roster and have to demote or cut a player.

Is the above correct?

So if a team wants to stash a veteran on their practice squad, it can activate that player to the 53 if he makes it through the week without being signed.

Let me try an example on for size. A few years ago the Patriots had all sorts of injuries in the backfield and signed retired RB Steven Jackson to the 53. He played okay and filled in in weeks 14-17 if I remember correctly. Under the new CBA, they could sign a guy like that to the Practice Squad, elevate him to the 53 twice, and not cost themselves a roster spot because he would be the 47th or 48th player on the game day roster. Is that right?

That’s correct. The Steven Jackson example is a good one. It will be harder for the Pats or any team to keep players in their practice squad if another team wants to add them to their 53. If signed off a practice squad, the player has to be kept on the 53 man roster for at least 3 games which makes it better from a monetary standpoint that what the current team can offer without adding him to the 53 because they can only activate him to the 48 man game roster twice.

It’s going to be interesting to see how teams manage this. You’ll might see teams try to do handshake(er elbow bump) deals with later round draftees and UDFAs. Teams might agree to guarantee a portion of the players salary in return for the player agreeing to sign on back to the practice squad and stay. Or, the team agrees to activate them for the allowable 2 games. Another interesting note is that the 48 man game roster must contain 8 OLineman now. Most teams, like the Pats usually carry 7, so the active roster really only increases by one player. That, along with the success the Ravens had doing it, might lead to more tackle eligible formations to make use the 8th OLineman.

 

[Ochmed Jones]

You can't seriously be pointing to mock drafts to validate that though lol.

Sure it's more likely than not they're gone but mock drafts also had Delpit & Trey Adams as top 5-20 players not to long ago. Adams might not get drafted and Delpit will be lucky to get called Rd1 if he does.

Point is literally anyone can write up a mock draft nowadays. I've always said players don't shoot up & down boards like the media wants you to believe. It's just the media, mocks included are always behind the curve. Literally every year we hear of someone " flying" up on w/e teams board. They didn't fly up, its just the media is just now finding out about them.

so we could have 2 offensive tackles next season with the same first name?

bb still setting trends after all these years.

 

[crownontherocks]

 

[jboston19]

so we could have 2 offensive tackles next season with the same first name?

bb still setting trends after all these years.

From the same school, no less!

 

[signbabybrady]

F that. Puke.

But what would you take in return to make it worth it?

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

From the same school, no less!

This is something Bill always does. Picks teammates, goes back to the same college the following year. Definitely not a coincidence if you look at our drafts.

 

[patsinthesnow]

The dog account broke the AB news:

 

[luuked]

More early draft picks are always nice. Gronk or any team he'd like to join have zero leverage so this will be one expensive transaction.

 

[luuked]

This is something Bill always does. Picks teammates, goes back to the same college the following year. Definitely not a coincidence if you look at our drafts.

Like you are saying not a coincidence at all. It is all about the coaching.

He kept drafting the Rutgers players not because of the school but because he had trust in Schiano and his program. Same with Bielema except there you see it over multiple college teams.

And looking at how DMac, Harmon, Logan Ryan, White and Flowers developed it certainly worked out.

 

[goheels22002]

Party on, Garth.

 

[ralmat55]

More early draft picks are always nice. Gronk or any team he'd like to join have zero leverage so this will be one expensive transaction.

Gronk does have leverage because the Pats do not have the cap space to absorb his cap charge if he were to unretire unless they make a move to quickly clear $10 million in cap space. The Pats would have to release him making him a free agent otherwise.

 

[Wilfork#75]

The dog account broke the AB news:

For those that don't know, this twitter account belongs to PFT Commenter from Barstool Sports podcast Pardon My Take (Leroy is his dog). Gronk is a huge Stoolie and been a guest on PMT many times and has a good relationship with them. It would not surprise me at all if Gronk gave these guys inside information he wouldn't give to traditional media, it just seems his style. The PMT guys have broken quite a few stories in the past through their connection with athletes.

 

[mgteich]

Gronk does have leverage because the Pats do not have the cap space to absorb his cap charge if he were to unretire unless they make a move to quickly clear $10 million in cap space. The Pats would have to release him making him a free agent otherwise.

If Gronk un-retires, IMO the team has all the leverage. They could simply look for trade partners, with any pick voidable (or greatly reducible) if Gronk returns again.

 

[luuked]

Gronk does have leverage because the Pats do not have the cap space to absorb his cap charge if he were to unretire unless they make a move to quickly clear $10 million in cap space. The Pats would have to release him making him a free agent otherwise.

The time around the draft often has trades in store so I would be shocked if they don't have run through various scenarios to clear up differing amounts of space. Especially with the amount available next year there should be some flexibility via extensions with Thuney being at the front and center.

But for the sake of argument if there would be no way to clear up space can Gronk just "send a letter" to RG to get off the reserve/retired list without the club having any input on it ?

 

[signbabybrady]

The time around the draft often has trades in store so I would be shocked if they don't have run through various scenarios to clear up differing amounts of space. Especially with the amount available next year there should be some flexibility via extensions with Thuney being at the front and center.

But for the sake of argument if there would be no way to clear up space can Gronk just send a letter to JG to get off the reserve/retired list without the club having any input on it ?

I don't believe a team is required to immediately remove a player from the reserve list if a player un-retires. I forget the exact rules behind it and I assume it's different off-season and in-season.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

The time around the draft often has trades in store so I would be shocked if they don't have run through various scenarios to clear up differing amounts of space. Especially with the amount available next year there should be some flexibility via extensions with Thuney being at the front and center.

But for the sake of argument if there would be no way to clear up space can Gronk just "send a letter" to RG to get off the reserve/retired list without the club having any input on it ?

Waiting for Miguel to quote the relevant Psalms or whatever from the CBA on this

 

[ralmat55]

I’ve not had the time to find and read the pertinent parts of the CBA on this. I guess it’s possible the Pats could trade his rights without adding him to the cap. But, if Gronk said he’s unretired, the Pats would have to clear room for him or release him otherwise.

 

[borisman]

Pats can trade him while he's on the retired/reserve list. It would be foolish of Gronk to have the Pats reinstate him if his goal is to go to Tampa. He has to play by the Pats rules.
If he does come back it may not be until after the draft so any picks we acquire would be next year which could include a player, since Tampa already has Brate and Howard.