Rubes

That is, as long as you can find a player who provides as much performance and who is actually cheaper.

This is going to be one hell of an offseason.

Didn't HBO's "Real Sports" just have a story similar to this about a month or two ago? Seemed like they were almost identical, except the one on the HBO show had somewhat more of a disability. But it was a similar theme; kid finally gets put on the court in the last game, and makes a three pointer after a couple of misses. For some reason, I recall the HBO one as actually more astounding that he actually made a basket. But they're both great stories.

Probably just trying to save money on airline fuel.

It's what I wanted to hear him say, so that's why I'm reserving judgement. If he thinks our line will improve by bringing in someone other than Sam, so be it. We'll see!

Well, last season everyone was beating on TD for releasing Pat Williams since it made our D-line a real weakness. I'll reserve judgement until the start of the season to see what our D-line is made of, but this should be interesting.

This is one of the main reasons I won't have kids.

I thought base salaries could only be cut by 30%?

Please...no more converting-small-LBs-To-Safety projects!

Has nothing to do with age. It's all about the money. If we could keep Moulds for a reasonable amount, we would. But he won't take a pay cut to do that. Somehow, I believe we could probably sign JJ for something less than $10 million. Not that I'm advocating that or anything.

Interesting. How do you see an attack on Japan playing out?

I've always thought we had one of the best helmets. Who cares about the blue stripes? The design is awesome. I can think of plenty others that are worse.

A lot of that information is not known, since much of it is not made publicly available. All of it is factored into the cap hit, though, which is why most cap reporting sites give approximations. Probably because a player wouldn't want it publicly known how much money was left on the table because they didn't meet expectations.

Yes, they do, but as you said the cost is divided per year of the contract. So the player gets the money up front, but only a fraction of it counts against the cap each year. Unless the player is released, at which point all remaining yearly cap bonuses are lumped together to count against the cap the year he is released (or is it spread out over two years?). Either way, this is all going to pot because of the uncapped year in 2007.

Damn, that's good.

I see, so I take off for a few days and FFS has a new name? Anyone figure this one out yet? Oh, and I agree, I think it's fair to say Teague will probably not be back. I wonder how much McNally has to do with that as well; in fact, I wonder if McNally has wanted to restructure this line since the first day he came here.

I still can't believe this is a guy Ditka traded ALL of his draft picks for.

Maybe, maybe not. If Peters can play LT, it might work to our advantage since picking up a free agent RT would be less expensive than a LT.

Somehow I imagine these posts would sound different if this guy played for Miami.

Gregg Easterbrook talks about this occasionally on his TMQ column (during the season, of course). He always brings up how NFL players typically only see a fraction of what they sign for. Usually, a big deal is made about how large a contract a player signs, but the reality is that contracts for the more expensive players rarely get beyond the first few years, after which most of the money is loaded.

Unless your dad always came home really late after drinking too much and banging the secretary at a local motel...whoops, never mind.

Kind of a strange argument to me, seeing that it sounds like the Bills wanted and tried to move up to take Ben, but couldn't. So why even include it as an option?

The request to raise his arm to prove his shoulder really isn't a bag of jello?

Because we all know you build your lines with only first round picks.

I thought that right after I posted it!