Steve Billieve

I don't know, I think he's better than a number of QBs who will be starting next year.

Is it ridiculous that I think RI agreeing to this confirms he's put his past behind him?

I think we'll be better. I know we could be better. Our problem last year wasn't talent. I don't want to speculate on what contributed to it, but we could have been a lot better with the talent we had going into the year. We didn't loose anyone who was all that helpful to us last year. We still have the draft.

Yep, we cut him saving 12 mil and he signed for 8.

Would it be criminal to pick the 80s?

Yeah . . . super secret . . . Is that always true though? I don't think the Suh and Dareus deals raised the price on DTs

My thoughts exactly!

Now that we've cleared out the dead wood can we change the title of this thread?

That's all I can think of too, but it seems like something else has to be involved. It looks like playing length has been in free fall starting around 2008-2010. Something different had to happen to explain this. Players have been getting better since sports were invented. I guess you could say its reached a tipping point and injuries/awareness are causing players to opt out but to me (without any data) its seems like teams are the ones responsible for players not playing in monumentally more significant numbers. Although it seems very reasonable, has also been put forward, that there are more quality players available now. I don't think that is something new either. As more people play football and it gains in popularity the bell curve gets bigger and more people are in the middle, this should have a relatively continuous effect. Perhaps its the new CBA that is to blame. Although the decline started around 08, that could definitely be explained by natural fluxtuations. Things didn't really start getting significant until 2010, perhaps precipitated by the lockout and new CBA. Were there any major changes that would stop teams from signing there own? I don't really know the CBA but it seems like this has to be something new, something that was changed.

Yeah, I was sort of wondering about that. Does one season really make all these teams ignore the reason that no one was willing to sign him 2 years ago? They knew then that he could play but he still had zero interest. It seems like that would significantly effect other teams offers but maybe I'm being naive and it was more about pr of bringing him back.

That's a bunch of nonsense. It's in his own interest to stay with his team. His money makes way more money than he does in a year. Once he retires he will still be a sought after commodity able to command ridiculous amounts of money. All his best financial plays are PR ones going forward.

Yep. Referring back to the OP, running backs also take those hits, but often miss a couple of games along the way, but most teams are able to plan on that a little and carry two pretty good running backs. Don't QBs have smaller pads too?

Yeah, the cba was definitely negotiated without that in mind, so it makes it tough to implement. That shouldn't make it impossible though. Another problem might be lots of strategic renegotiations to lesson the cap amount. You mention the nba, has it been effective in keeping players on their team there? I also wonder why you need a lot of cap space when you're mostly interested in drafting and retaining players.

Yeah, I agree, but I don't think the biggest obstacle is money at this point. Can we trust him to play? After last year I kinda doubt it. Plus we don't want to give overdorf a coronary, I'm sure Marios money has already been spent in everyone's mind.

Has anyone let the da know how long this thread is getting, I'm sure that after he reads all 114 pages he'll speed up his timetable a bit.

He's been pretty clear about what he wants, to be the oldest running back to play the game. He's close, and I don't think he gives a hoot about the money. He's never really seemed like the kind of guy to spend a lot, I'm sure he's got plenty in the bank.

Did the other cap thread close?

Completely agree.

Seems really silly to compare picks like that. For a couple picks we traded up or down so player comparisons are really silly. Seems kinda dumb to be doing 1 to 1 comparisons when QBs are involved too, as that's obviously a high risk high reward pick.

But we don't have to cut Shady if we goes to jail. Right?

So what's your solution through back all the productive players we signed last off season. You make it out like we bought a bunch of junk we didn't want and now we don't have any money for what we do want. Finishing with a less than desirable record doesn't make every decision wrong.

Mine are maybe more from a league perspective. Bledsoe over Norwood under Guess I should have read the article first

When you consider losing Mario, it is a loss of talent, but I doubt it will be a loss in production from last years squad. You guys don't think we were able to add a lot of production last offseason huh?

No, seriously this time.

Yeah I think the trade could be really really bad for us and still be way better than it was for the Eagles.