Bracie Smathers
Footballguy
Football Perspective@fbgchase
There seems to be lots of assumptions based on no direct evidence that a WR getting 7 carries a game shortens his career or increases his injury risk more than it increases his value.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
WR Deebo Samuel, WAS (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Faust
- Start date
There seems to be lots of assumptions based on no direct evidence that a WR getting 7 carries a game shortens his career or increases his injury risk more than it increases his value.
rockaction
Footballguy
Get used to it, JohnnyU. Once pro basketball went that way, it was easier for the other sports to do so. Hockey and baseball have retained slightly more contractual integrity than basketball or football, but that's because of a hard cap and guaranteed, exorbitant baseball contracts. But the norm is to follow basketball's march through contractual integrity if the athletes can do so.
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
wgoldsph
Footballguy
And yet most teams are doing everything they can to pay as little as possible to the point where baseball has seemingly almost had a strike every year for the past five. Know nothing about hockey but at least ball players have the good sense to actually get paid when they get paid. Guaranteed contracts in the NFL should have been a thing all along, especially considering how every player is a misplaced step from a career ending injury.
rockaction
Footballguy
Salary cap in hockey. Baseball is the only one without a cap. Thank Marvin Miller and a really strong union tradition. Or hate Marvin Miller and the really strong union tradition. Whichever you choose, he's there. He got the reserve clause removed from baseball with the Curt Flood case, which led to free agency in sports writ large, never mind just baseball. He proved collusion by the owners when they decided not to sign free agents. And on and on. But baseball almost ruined itself in '94 with a walkout strike mid-season that resulted in no World Series. So with a strong union comes drawbacks for fans.
massraider
Footballguy
Average NFL career is what, 4 years?
NFL teams can easily control a player for 5 years, 6 if he's a 1st rounder.
If you on the owners side here, I don't really think you've thought this through.
NFL teams can easily control a player for 5 years, 6 if he's a 1st rounder.
If you on the owners side here, I don't really think you've thought this through.
JohnnyU
Footballguy
Yet owners cave when they whine. Either by contract or trade. I wouldn't call that control.
Last edited by a moderator:
wgoldsph
Footballguy
This is my thought. I've been in "letting things play out" mode as I think he's in the best place possible for his fantasy outlook and just his "omg nobody should be able to do that!" skillset. But if anywhere can afford him the quality touches it would be GB.
The worst place would be the Jets imo. Moore and Davis are already on the roster and I have zero faith in Zach Wilson.
Why would GB or KC for that matter give up a WR who was already established in their system as one of best WR's in the game only to turn around and pay likely everything they gave up to get a WR who they can only hope works out as well? Other then getting a few years younger I don't see the rationale in it.
rockaction
Footballguy
Drezden
Footballguy
I am not sure about KC, but GB don't have an option to keep Adams, they offer him a new deal but he wants to play ONLY in Oakland with Carr, I think GB did OK in a trade but I am not ruling out a trade for Deebo. Now, the real question to me is if SF will trade him to GB?
Anarchy99
Footballguy
The Packers didn't have to trade Adams. They franchised him. It could have turned out badly if they kept him, but they didn't have to send him packing. Same situation with Deebo and the Niners. SF could keep him and tell to play or not get paid. Granted, he's still on a low dollar rookie deal . . . but that is setting up to be problematic for the league moving forward.
The league is turning into the NBA if players start demanding trades and refusing to play for the team they are under contract with. The whole point of implementing a rookie salary cap was to give teams some low dollar options that they could plan on having around for 4 or 5 years.
rockaction
Footballguy
Right. I was trying to allude to that upthread. It's a balancing act for a fan. You want the player to play out his contract and establish ties with a team for all that goes along with that, but as a fan of the player, you want to see him get paid because careers are so short. They need to ixnay the franchise years and get back to having players play out their rookie deals without that albatross.
Anarchy99
Footballguy
The franchise tag has a strange history. Back when it was first discussed, the owners intended it as a way to keep their franchise quarterbacks (at the time, mainly John Elway). At the beginning, the players did not find that to be an unreasonable requests and legend has it that they suggested each team get two franchise tags each year. As time evolved, players at all positions started getting tagged . . . which surprised a lot of people.
Jump ahead almost 30 years, and top players and agents now despise the tag. However, it's probably here to stay because the tag only impacts a few members of the players union. Most guys don't have that problem. It's unlikely that guys that are going to make more in a single year, guaranteed contract (the haves) will be able to get the rest of the players that may have a very short NFL career at relatively low dollars (the have nots) to risk their livelihood for a handful of diva players.
Of course, teams have figured out that they can extort the system. Draft a guy in the first round, use the fifth-year option, and franchise him twice. That's 7 years of team control. For some players, that could get them past their prime and they might never see a top of the market, huge contract. That doesn't make sense, but yet here we are.
massraider
Footballguy
Most players don't have the power, talent or leverage to cash in on contract demands while under contract, but if two WRs manage to do it, the whole system is falling apart.
Weird.
massraider
Footballguy
There's also transition tags, and RFA.
What is a restricted free agent, exactly?
A player who wasn't drafted, but if the NFL let him slip through the cracks, they write a clause into his contract that he cannot cash in early, as a free agent. Call me crazy, that doesn't seem very reasonable.
And these kids are are playing by rules that other players negotiated, they had nothing to do with it.
You wanna make them honor their contracts? Cool! Guaranteed deals, and no draft. That'll sort it out.
All whining eliminated, and that's what everyone wants right??
What is a restricted free agent, exactly?
A player who wasn't drafted, but if the NFL let him slip through the cracks, they write a clause into his contract that he cannot cash in early, as a free agent. Call me crazy, that doesn't seem very reasonable.
And these kids are are playing by rules that other players negotiated, they had nothing to do with it.
You wanna make them honor their contracts? Cool! Guaranteed deals, and no draft. That'll sort it out.
All whining eliminated, and that's what everyone wants right??
Drezden
Footballguy
Packers franchised Adams was a problem according to multiply reports Adams never will be playing under the tag and franchising him was the way to keep him from F/A and trade him. SF situation is completely different, first- SF QB is not Rodgers, and the number of distractions to the rookie QB will be much more significant, second- Adams wants to play ONLY in Oakland, and SF has more options and as result possibly better return for Deebo.
rockaction
Footballguy
Like I said upthread, you're going to want to call your congressman or woman about that because that's the problem with collective bargaining writ large.
I don't think anybody is strong-arming for the owners here; it's that if the players have that much leverage the pendulum of power swings wildly the other way. We'd like the hour and minute hand to align at twelve, really.
massraider
Footballguy
Yeah, we are talking about one player under contract here, Tyreek.
Adams played out his contract.
I don't see a wild pendulum
rockaction
Footballguy
And then per the CBA they had the option to tag. I'm all for getting rid of the tag, but there has to be a collectively bargained process that goes along with that. By federal law. Otherwise, it's at the team's leisure to use it. Saying he "played out his contract" is misleading because he's still technically under club control. If the players don't like what appears to be the equivalent of an old-style reserve clause tacked onto their first contract, then bargain against it.
I'm actually on the player's side here, but there are three guys that seem like they're going to play hardball with the NFL about their last contract year. Once they start doing that en masse, it snowballs. But you know that.
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
...and it's not like Green Bay or Kansas City made out poorly in their deals.
For some reason every one of us are ok with trying to make the most money we can or work where we want but as soon as some pro athlete does it they're "greedy punks".
massraider
Footballguy
I'm sure my post came off as intentionally obtuse, but it's not.
You can start with the Joe Namath $400,000 contract 50 years ago, and pick a year, and there was some contract that year that was gonna wreck the whole system. At some point, we have to admit the sky isn't falling. The owners aren't going to let their league fall apart.
The NFL has it better than any other league, in terms of owner leverage. It's not even close.
Also, not directed at you:
Who is whining their way out of town? It seems to me that Adams and Hill quietly let the teams know where they stood, and the teams made a decision based on that, and other factors.
wgoldsph
Footballguy
Per roto
Appearing on the Pat McAfee Show, NFL Network's Ian Rapoport stated Deebo Samuel essentially told the 49ers to not make a contract offer, and he just wants to be traded.
"From my understanding, he basically told them, like, 'I want to be traded, don't make an offer,'" said Rapoport of Samuel's situation in San Francisco. "I don't think this is" about the money, per RapSheet. It sounds like Samuel's relationship with the Niners has soured beyond repair, but the word right now is the team has no intention of trading Samuel. This will be something we'll be tracking all the way up to and through next week's draft.
Here's my questions - What happened between the playoffs and now? Was this always his stance behind closed doors and when did he decide it? Why? How in the days of social media, reporting everywhere, and everyone having hot takes did nothing about this make it to the media until it was a "trade me or nothing" situation? Harkening back to a former conversation, wouldn't the immature thing be to whine for months about how he hated SF and needed to leave?
Appearing on the Pat McAfee Show, NFL Network's Ian Rapoport stated Deebo Samuel essentially told the 49ers to not make a contract offer, and he just wants to be traded.
"From my understanding, he basically told them, like, 'I want to be traded, don't make an offer,'" said Rapoport of Samuel's situation in San Francisco. "I don't think this is" about the money, per RapSheet. It sounds like Samuel's relationship with the Niners has soured beyond repair, but the word right now is the team has no intention of trading Samuel. This will be something we'll be tracking all the way up to and through next week's draft.
Here's my questions - What happened between the playoffs and now? Was this always his stance behind closed doors and when did he decide it? Why? How in the days of social media, reporting everywhere, and everyone having hot takes did nothing about this make it to the media until it was a "trade me or nothing" situation? Harkening back to a former conversation, wouldn't the immature thing be to whine for months about how he hated SF and needed to leave?
Last edited by a moderator:
rockaction
Footballguy
I didn't mean to imply that. And I know the bolded is hyperbole, but if that's the general gist you're drawing from what I'm saying, I need to re-phrase what I said. I'm not talking about salary demands. I'm talking about player movement. If the league sees its marquee players switching teams all the time because of the tag, then they need to come together with the players and approach the whole issue of franchise tags again. And even if players move more frequently and deleteriously, it won't kill the league, just dampen it a bit. But it's an issue to watch. Again, won't kill the league.
I agree wholeheartedly.
I think players should get whatever they can get. Careers are too short and the game leaves people with serious physical and sometimes emotional issues. Strike while the iron is hot.
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
I dunno...maybe. Been listening to all the usual suspects on local sports talk radio, and the consensus is that he wants out. Apparently he let it be known he wanted to be the league's highest paid non-QB, and the Niners balked hard at that.
There was also allegedly some bad blood, because Deebo wanted to be paid for his hybrid position, while the Niners didn't think it made a difference that he was used as a RB and a WR.
Again, this is a widely circulated rumor, but worth noting that both of these things pre-date his reported hold-out, and trade request/demand.
So yeah - it might all be a negotiating tactic, but it's a strange approach to negotiation to tell your prospective partner to not bother to make an offer. That would seem to be the opposite of a negotiating tactic.
Camp Deebo knows the 49ers can't do anything until they clear the 25M that JimmyG represents, and with all these WRs getting paid, clearly he's deeply unhappy with his contract situation. I would think he could get anything he wanted from the Niners, considering how desperately they need him. But camp Deebo is not taking that approach - they are demanding a trade.
Personally I hope it happens. Texans, Jets, whatever. Give the Niners a 1st and a 2nd, and hey, maybe package JimmyG in with him and see ya. I'm over it already. I agree he's underpaid, and while I don't agree with holdout tactics, I respect a player's right to do things like that to squeeze a little more juice out of the lemon. But demanding a trade? Yeah - go ahead and trade him, and use the draft picks to get younger talent that will cost less.
ghostguy123
Footballguy
He wants the most money he can get from the niners or someone else.
Hence, negotiating tactic.
Also, he's not holding out. Its April.
Last edited by a moderator:
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
I meant "talk of a hold out" - obviously he's not holding out yet. He's "skipping voluntary workouts", or soon to do so.
And since he's under contract with the 49ers, it only really matters what he's demanding of the 49ers.
And right now, all he's demanding is a trade.
Last edited by a moderator:
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Plus the draft is fast approaching. It's a great time to cause a fuss. I can easily see the niners shell out a few extra million as to not have to alter their entire draft strategy at the last second.
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Yeah and Watson said no to Cleveland......until the money was right.
Words are meaningless in the offseason. We should all know this by now.
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
I could see them regretting spending so much draft capital on Lance, and wanting to get some picks to address the gaping holes they're about to be dealing with.
Dealing Deebo for a 1st, 2nd, and a couple 4ths could certainly go a long way towards doing that. I'm just sayin.
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Not sure who is lining up to pay Deebo a zillion dollars AND give up that kind of draft capital.
King of the Jungle
Footballguy
I don’t think they fetch that, but if Deebo is serious about never playing for SF they should settle on something. I feel like the Jets end up making a play but time will tell.
JohnnyU
Footballguy
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
Well, so far we know it's not the Chiefs.
Which is unfortunate, as I'd love to see what Andy Reid could do with him.
Last edited by a moderator:
ffmail4me
Footballguy
You heard of Dan Snyder? Jerry Jones? They both are dumb enough to make any deal happen that looks good regardless of the logic/money involved.
The Niners better find some WR in the draft they love then, because otherwise they’d be handing Lance maybe the worst group in the league to work with.
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
I mean, Deebo is awesome, but pretty sure most QBs would be jealous of just having Aiyuk and Kittle.
I’m high on Aiyuk’s future, but he didn’t exactly light the world on fire and who knows how many games you’ll get out of Kittle. There’s no way that group ranks in the top half of the league in terms of pass catching options.
Aiyuk looked really good during his rookie season. Interestingly, 4 of Aiyuk's 5 best games came without Jimmy G that season, so perhaps Aiyuk will actually be better with Lance. Also, in his 5 years, Kittle has played at least 14 games in 4 of them. He's only missed 14 out of a possible 87 games, and 8 came in 1 season.
Off the top of my head as far as a top-3 weapons standpoint, I'd take the Kittle/Aiyuk/Jennings trio over every teams top-3s guys except:
Baltimore, Buffalo, Cincinnati, Las Vegas, LA Rams, Minnesota, Tampa Bay, Tennessee
There are a couple others I can go either way on, but those 8 are the only for sure bets in my opinion.
It would certainly hurt SF to deal Deebo, but I hardly think they'd be screwed in the passing game, and I say that as someone who would call Deebo a top-10 WR, maybe top-8 WR. That said, with Deebo, its the best top-3 in the NFL in my opinion, and it might not even be close, which is part of the reason, I don't think much of Jimmy G.
Last edited by a moderator:
Bracie Smathers
Footballguy
Those poor NFL owners.
---------------------------------------
Andrew Brandt@AndrewBrandt
Recent public subsidies:
- Nevada giving $750 million to the Raiders;
- New York giving $850 million to the Bills;
- Tennessee giving $500 million (probably more) to the Titans.
----------------------------------------------------
BIG4 Sports Nation@big4scores
Trending: #Titans are getting $500M from Tennessee for a new stadium. Public contribution could top $1.5B #NFL
King of the Jungle
Footballguy
Good point on Aiyuk. I think many forget how electric his rookie season was and how some thought he was on the verge of stardom. He also played very well the second half of last season but certainly was overshadowed by what Deebo did. I think he is good enough to lead that group along with Kittle. Even if they were to trade Deebo, if Lance can get up to speed it brings the threat to stretch the field which will open up the offense on its own. That is something that Aiyuk has been underutilized doing with Jimmy G at the helm. The offense will be fine without Deebo IMO and will go as far as Lance can take them. Strong running game, good defense, mobile QB with the ability to throw down the field, Aiyuk & Kittle to scheme….Shanny can win with that.
farfromforgotten
Footballguy
Similar threads
