Kirby Jackson

I was thinking 3 but 2 is an option.

Also, we talk about it A LOT at this time of the year but Matt Miller is one of the best.

It is certainly a possibility. The Bills are in love. It’s just a matter of the cost .He was in again last week.

Yeah, a year ago Oliver was considered the next Donald. He played out of position for a year and put on a coat and his stock took a hit. He was an absolutely DOMINANT college player early in his career. He’s one of the best players in this draft and a future pro-bowler. He may be even better than that. Without getting carried away, I wouldn’t be shocked if he won a DPOY in his career. He can’t be blocked as a 3-technique.

Oliver makes tons of sense!! He’s a star that plays, arguably, the position of biggest need. His skill set is EXACTLY what they need. I’m thinking that he won’t make it to 9 but if he does it shouldn’t come as a surprise if he is the pick.

This year is an average draft IMO. It’s way better than the Eric Fisher draft for example. There are going to be some impact players in this class as pass rushers.

I’m planning on a few this year: Dallas, Nashville, Pittsburgh and Cleveland.

I don’t think it would direct a player anywhere but to the highest bidder (as it does now). It isn’t that the owners are worried about feelings it’s about a system that doesn’t achieve its initial goal. It won’t look the same way in the next CBA and the owner’s aren’t going to put up massive resistance. The players will never accept it in its current state and the owners aren’t going to pound the table for it. It’s flawed. You may be able to designate a player as exclusive to you but it absolutely, 100% will not be a 1 year deal that is the average of the top 5 highest paid players at a position. It may evolve to a multi-year deal, it may be the highest paid player at a position plus 5%, etc... The system as it is now is coming to an end.

Because it creates hard feelings. They like having it but they don’t like the ill will created. Bell is an extreme example but that could have been prevented. You may keep a guy a year, you may trade him or you may work out a long-term deal. It is just tough to start from “team had total control now let’s see if we can work something out?” When it started the top 5 money was thought to be a benefit to the players. With the rising cap it isn’t. There is no security and every single guy that is slapped with the tag can get more guaranteed money in FA. It puts star players vs. their teams and that’s not good for anyone.

It’s clearly broken IMO. It started as a way to reward top players and allow teams to keep them. With the escalating cap, no one is thrilled with a 1 year commitment. The players will fight (hard) for changes to it in the next CBA. The owners aren’t really thrilled with it at the moment either. Guys want long-term security. A 2 year commitment isn’t perfect but it is a much better option. Whenever a guy is tagged instantly creates a contentious negotiation. Another option is to drop the compensation on a non-exclusive tag to one 1st. There shouldn’t be a situation where the nastiest negotiations are with the players most important to your franchise. That’s counter-intuitive.

The easiest one is to make the franchise tag a 2 year commitment fully guaranteed. In year 3 they can do it again with a 3 year full guarantee. This will prevents teams from slapping tags on marginal players like Kyle Fuller, Grady Jarrett and LaMarcus Joyner. Teams with think twice about making that type of commitment. At the same time guys like Bell or Lawrence are more likely to sign the tag with the extra commitment. It is a WAY better option than the current method (which is clearly broken). We have players skipping an entire year!! That’s not good for anyone.

You do get the benefit of but shouldn’t be punished for developing superstars. That’s a benefit in the other sports. You can do things for your own that other teams can’t. That’s the general concept of the franchise tag but it’s broken. The goal was to let teams keep their stars. The league is already trying to do that. The method though is antiquated. They need to go back to the goal (allow teams to retain their own top talent) and find a method to make it work. There are a bunch of options that are better than that.

You are allowing for those teams with an elite talent (especially at QB) to not have to gut their team because of it. They are still in a bit of a tough situation but it buys them some breathing room. It really would only be triggered by the elite of the elite. Off the top of my head some guys that would be eligible: Brady, Luck, Wilson, Rodgers, Antonio Brown (before the move) or Ben, Julio, Watt, Von Miller, Rivers, AJ Green (maybe), It isn’t a big universe. The criteria would have to be defined and it isn’t a huge difference. That 2.5% number that I threw out equates to another $4.7M in cap space. So a team like the Seahawks would still be forced into a tough decision but have a little more wiggle room.

You are missing a very important element of it though and that’s the criteria that has to be met to be eligible. You can’t just designate someone a super-max guy. They will have to qualify to be eligible. Jared Goff wouldn’t be eligible for this but Russell Wilson would be in my hypothetical. It probably doesn’t kick in until you have over 6 years experience (which is your rookie deal as a 1st, plus another year so 3rd contract). You also must meet certain benchmarks in terms of statistics or awards.

I think that the NBA system is SO much better when it comes to star players. Teams are rewarded for drafting well with things like Bird Rights as @Ethan in Portland alluded to. There are some solutions in the NFL to fix this broken franchise player model. What if it were a 2 year commitment that escalated in year 2? Why is it only a 1 year-commitment? Teams would be more reluctant to slap the tag on just about anyone and players plus be more likely to sign it with a multi-year commitment. It seems like a win-win to me. Another option is to start introducing elements of a soft cap. This COULD be a slippery slope if not done correctly but could also be a HR. You COULD be allowed to exceed the cap by a certain percentage to sign 1 player, drafted by that team, that meets certain criteria. In some ways it would be similar to the Super-max in the NBA. Each team can only have 1 guy on this type of deal, etc... it would have to be hashed out but it would protect a team that drafts Russell Wilson from having to tear down the rest of their team BECAUSE they drafted Russell Wilson. Maybe a super-max contract allows that team to exceed the cap by 2.5% or something like that?

I’m hoping for Thanksgiving in Dallas. It is so easy to get there from here. Can fly in that morning and out that evening. It’s only an hour and super cheap.

I can’t wait

I tend to agree with you here BB. It is in everyone’s best interest imo. It should be up to each team to decide how to manage these visits.

Jadeveon Clowney measured 6’5” and 266 lbs at the combine with 34 1/2” arms. Ferrell measured 6’4” and 264lbs with 34 1/8” arms. Ferrell’s measurements aren’t a problem.

I started thinking that our 3rd and one of our 4ths may do it. That’s probably wishful thinking as well but they want picks. I’d also offer a swap in round 1 and a 4th. I’d try to do it while still having 2 picks in the top 40.

He’s 6’4” and 265 lbs. Jerry Hughes is 6’2” and 254 lbs.

One is done and the other may be

Thanks!!

After trying to trade up into the late 1st to acquire this guy the SF 49ers are thrilled to select AJ Brown, WR, Ole Miss with the 36th pick in the draft! We couldn’t be happier with the additions of Allen and Brown. @bkep32 and the Arizona Cardinals are now on the clock.