Jump to content



Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, bitonti said:

2 weeks before the end of the season people thought Darnold wouldn't be worth a 5th rounder

now he's some kind of hot property? Darnold might not get traded until mid-draft, 2nd or 3rd rd when teams start to panic they missed out on Kyle Trask or whatever. 

As for Houston, there's no proof that the Texans even want 2 overall 

Justin Fields and Deshaun Watson share an agent. Those negotiations would be awkward.  

and it's a rumor that BYU's Zach Wilson is not on their board for religious reasons. Which sounds crazy until looking up the team chaplain that runs the team and the ownership etc.  

why does Houston want 2 so bad exactly? if anything they seem more hot on Quinnen in the trade and that seems to be a deal breaker for most fans. 

If the Jets trade now they almost certainly have to overpay. The longer this thing goes on the lower Watson's price goes, until middle of the year, they are shipping him out of town on the cheap to end the distraction 


1) I really don't know what other people thought but I've always known we would get value for Sam.  My guess is no lower than a third.

2) These guys share agents all the time.  They can separate that.

3) If they won't take Zach (which I doubt) then having #2 is even more important.  Because if #2 likes fields better they're in trouble.

4) Jets will move Darnold and then make a conservative offer to the Texans.  If they take it great.  If they don't, I agree with you, they'll wait it out.  I think it's unlikely they get into a bidding war. 

Based on nothing but I think JD is comfortable taking a QB at 2 and keeping his picks - that was his plan and I'm sure he was excited about it.  This is an unforeseen opportunity and he's looking into it as he should.  If he can get Watson for a price he deems worth it he'll do it but I also think he would be quite comfortable moving forward with his original plan.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/31/2021 at 11:46 AM, Sperm Edwards said:

Whether they then want to go the keep-him route just to prove a point that the tail doesn’t wag the dog is on them (even if I disagree with what they may do, it’s true there’s some legitimate concern about setting bad precedents, but it seems they opened that door in the first place).

Very good point 

  • Sympathy 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Business of Football: After the Matthew Stafford Trade, the QB Carousel Will Stop Spinning

Business of Football: After the Matthew Stafford Trade, the QB Carousel Will Stop Spinning
Many prominent names are caught in the rumor mill, but Aaron Rodgers, Carson Wentz and even Deshaun Watson will stay put this offseason.

Andrew Brandt       9 hours ago

Never mind that there is still this little thing called the Super Bowl to be played; the NFL offseason—the busy season for the business of football—has begun. And the overriding media message for this 2021 offseason is one of change and chaos at the game’s marquee position. It is now hard to turn on any sports programming—television, radio, podcasts, etc.—and not hear a segment about a quarterback who has been the face of his franchise being Photoshopped into different uniforms, leading to more commentary about trade compensation, weapons on the new team, blah, blah, blah.

I get it, as I am part of the media (sort of), but please. Someone has to be a voice of reason to slow down this fantasy football speculation train, and it may as well be me. Beyond the quarterback movement that just happened over the weekend, I don’t see much, if any, change. Let’s examine.

The one that happened
The first pick in the 2009 draft, Matthew Stafford, was willingly sent from the Lions to the Rams in exchange for the first pick in the 2016 draft, Jared Goff. The Rams had to include a lot more in the deal: two future first-rounders and a third-rounder. And both players leave quite a trail of dead cap money on their former teams’ books for 2021. Indeed, here is how the quarterback situations for the two teams’ 2021 caps will look:

Lions: Goff: $21 million; Stafford: $19 million
Rams: Goff: $22 million; Stafford: $20 million

Unlike the quarterbacks discussed below, Stafford and the Lions mutually agreed to part, as he and his agents came to the Lions and said, in so many words: “Hey, we’ve had a nice run, but it’s time for a change.” Stafford still has an elite arm, and quarterback is, in my opinion, an arm position. Thus, the Lions were able to leverage multiple offers into a nice haul from the Rams, with one of those future first-round picks probably seen partially as an “incentive” to take on Goff’s remaining $43 million in future guarantees.

The Rams have shown us to be the NFL team least worried about first-round picks and dead cap money on their roster. Most teams view first-round picks as precious assets; the Rams have given five away in total for Brandin Cooks, Jalen Ramsey and now Stafford. As to dead cap—charges on the team’s salary cap for players no longer there—the Rams now have the two highest charges in NFL history, more than $21 million for Cooks and more than $22 million for Goff.
The fact that the Lions had so many teams interested in Stafford is because, in my unpopular opinion, teams know that Stafford was and will be the onlymarquee quarterback on the trade market. I know it’s fun to speculate, “Well, if they can get that for Stafford, imagine what [fill in the blank] could fetch!” Well, my opinion is they got that for Stafford, because [fill in the blank] is not available. Let’s look at a few of those names.

Carson Wentz
Remember way back in December 2020, when weeks of Sunday morning NFL programming were focused on hot takes about Carson Wentz? Remember when the Eagles were sending him to the Colts into the waiting arms of his former coordinator Frank Reich? Remember when Wentz was going to pay the Eagles back tens of millions of dollars, only to have that repaid by the Colts when they traded for him? Please. 

As I countered that noise at the time, the Eagles were not going to trade Wentz due to the massive organizational investment in him and the $34 million in dead money that would be left behind (a different dead-money neighborhood than even Goff). Their investment in Wentz dwarfed the investment in the coaching staff, which was jettisoned. Instead of sending Wentz to the Colts, they brought the Colts to Wentz (in the form of new head coach and Reich protégé Nick Sirianni). Now the hot-take rumor mill that had so much energy about Wentz not being an Eagle has moved on to other targets (and the thousands who came at me on social media for standing firm that Wentz would not be traded have gone curiously quiet).

Deshaun Watson
With reports that Watson desperately wants out of Houston, no matter the new coach, the Photoshopping of Watson in different jerseys is rampant and the fantasy football trade discussions are out of control.

I’ll stand on the same lonely and unpopular hill that I stood on for Wentz: Watson will not go anywhere. The Texans may be bad communicators and curiously starstruck by an evangelist EVP of football operations, but they are not stupid enough to trade their best asset, no matter the return compensation. This does not even mention the reality of a dead-money hit that exceeds even that of Goff if they somehow traded Watson after paying him $30 million for one year of service. The surest way for the new general manager to become the old general manager is to trade away the most valuable person and player in the organization.

I know what you are saying: “But Andrew, Watson is serious. He’s furious and won’t play for them!” Deep breaths. It’s the beginning of February; the team doesn’t even gather for three months; there is not a meaningful snap in a game for eight months. What, exactly, is Watson’s leverage over the next six months:He’s going to boycott the team’s Zoom meetings? Will he have leverage if he still feels this way in September? Perhaps. But that is a long way away.

My mentor at the Packers, Ron Wolf, used to say this when we had a disgruntled player or players in the offseason: “I don’t care about harmony in March; I care about harmony in December.” Time will tell. Speaking of my old team …

Aaron Rodgers
I watched three prominent ESPN personalities tell me last week that Rodgers had played his last game for the Packers. I heard about Aaron’s home in Los Angeles and how he is from the San Francisco area. Please. He’s not going anywhere (this year).

First, the obvious: The Packers will not trade the best player in the NFL, not to mention incurring the cap-busting $32 million in dead money if they did. They are not stupid. Although there is this: Unlike the Texans and Watson, there will be a separation between the Packers and their star QB, one I have predicted since April. The only question is whether that will come in 2022 or 2023.

The Packers’ selection of quarterback Jordan Love in the first round of the 2020 draft made me say something I thought I would never say: There is an expiration date on Rodgers and the Packers. First-round quarterbacks play. They don’t back up, they don’t get traded, they all play—the only question is when. Aaron sat for three long years; no other first-round quarterback since has sat for nearly that long. I predicted a two-year apprenticeship for Love back in April, and—if forced to choose a date of transfer—I still predict that.
Aaron was much more compliant about the selection of a first-round quarterback in 2020 than Brett Favre was in 2005 when we took Rodgers. That selection caused an immediate negative response from Favre and his agent, not to mention fans and media.

Rodgers’s statements since the NFC championship game have illustrated the need for an open and honest conversation between the Packers and Rodgers about the future. If I were Aaron’s agents, I would say this to the team: “O.K., Jordan is going to play, I get it. When? 2022? 2023?” Transparency breeds trust. Many have speculated that Rodgers may want a contract adjustment or extension. An adjustment? Perhaps. An extension? Unlikely. I wrote about the conundrum of Rodgers’s contract negotiation in 2018. There was talk about the possibility of unprecedented terms in that contract: adjustability to the marketplace, percentage of the cap, multiple future guaranteed years, etc. And, in my opinion, had Rodgers waited until he got closer to free agency, those groundbreaking precedents would have been in play. But the Packers were smart: They threw a ton of money at him—including a record $58 million signing bonus—and he signed as they maintained their cherished structure.

Rodgers has three years left on that deal. Extending it solely to push out cap room is not a “Packers” thing to do. When I managed their cap, I had a real reluctance to push out cap pain, always cognizant of leaving the team in the best position to succeed. They still have that philosophy. I can see the Packers adding no-strings-attached money into this year’s compensation. The extra money would not—or should not—be proratable bonus that adds to future cap pain; rather, it should simply be salary or roster bonus (nonproratable). Why do this? Well, Rodgers is, to put it bluntly, both the NFL MVP and a placeholder for Love. The Packers have had it both ways this year; next year may not be as easy.

The bottom line for Rodgers is the same as for Wentz and the Eagles and Watson and the Texans: He won’t go anywhere. I know I’m lonely on this hill, but I’m embracing the rationality.

Young quarterbacks also staying
Sam Darnold: won’t go anywhere. The Jets made him the third pick in the draft a couple of years ago; they’re not pivoting now.

Tua Tagovailoa: won’t go anywhere. The Dolphins made him the fifth pick in the draft nine months ago; they’re not pivoting now.

Drew Lock: won’t go anywhere. The Broncos invested their second-round pick a couple of years ago and like what they have seen; they’re not pivoting now.

Quarterbacks cheaper to keep than leave

Rest of the story below ...


Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

I just looked it up. He gave his first game check to three cafeteria workers 

That’s no small amount of money. I’m impressed. 

DW will love our Strength & Conditioning Coaches. 








  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Samtorobby47 said:

“Don’t deal him yet, we’ll get a 1 once we hash out Deshaun to NY. I’ll call you back soon”

Well, they wouldn’t make the call if they didn’t have any ones to play with, and the Jets can give them those ones. Could get juicy with the quickness 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, T0mShane said:

Albright saying the Texans have called about Wentz:


If true it’s absolutely the most important news we have heard so far. It means they are definitely moving Deshaun. We have heard Deshaun news up until now. Never anything on the Texans side about moving on. 

if you are trading Deshaun for many picks in this draft I would think you would want to know early. If your trading Deshaun your dumping this year. If not you need to sign Fa’s etc. They were in the playoffs in 19 with him. They will try to win if he’s there. You need to make this kind of call ASAP. 

For the Jets the absolute best thing in the world is Wentz to the Bears for a 1. The Bears have no interest in Sam. Hes pretty much Tribisky 2.0. It kills an NFC team with a QB need and raises the comp price on Sam to a 1. Most importantly the last thing we need in the world is the Texans trading for a vet QB. We need the Texans to fall hard for Zach Wilson. They are not trading a 1 for Wentz and then taking Zach Wilson at 2. They also have Tunsil so Sewell is kind of odd. Just not good for us. 

  • Sympathy 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure this makes sense.  Would HOU really trade Watson and be happy ending up with Wentz, particularly if he is overpriced?  Obviously they aren't trading the #2 for Wentz unless they get a buttload back with him.  The #23 could be in play here but it might not be enough and they really don't have anything else.  So unless they are getting both of our firsts and another premium pick (which I'm not ready to believe yet) I don't see how it all fits together.

Add to that the fact that Wentz has a $25M salary this year, which takes the Texans modest cap problem and makes it bigger.  

I'd love it to be true, but it feels like a red herring to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, nycdan said:

Not sure this makes sense.  Would HOU really trade Watson and be happy ending up with Wentz, particularly if he is overpriced?  Obviously they aren't trading the #2 for Wentz unless they get a buttload back with him.  The #23 could be in play here but it might not be enough and they really don't have anything else.  So unless they are getting both of our firsts and another premium pick (which I'm not ready to believe yet) I don't see how it all fits together.

Add to that the fact that Wentz has a $25M salary this year, which takes the Texans modest cap problem and makes it bigger.  

I'd love it to be true, but it feels like a red herring to me.

Houston needs to rebuild just like the NY Jets with or without Watson. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...