Log in:  

Register

National Football League

Grab a short black and come join in the non-cycling discussion. Favourite books, movies, holiday destinations, other sports - chat about it all in the cafe.

Moderators: Eshnar, Irondan, King Boonen, Red Rick, Pricey_sky

Re: National Football League

25 Mar 2017 02:09

on3m@n@rmy wrote:Interesting thoughts on why the essentially ex-Vikes (with the Vikes having signed ex-Raiders running back Latavius Murray) running back Adrian Peterson is still unsigned.
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2699523-why-hasnt-anyone-signed-adrian-peterson-yet



Injuries and the fact that he is probably asking for too much money. Romo is in the same category. Kaep might be looking for a starting position but hopefully he isn't that naive ! He has won 3-19 in the last two seasons, that plus the political side issue have obviously damaged his placement chances. Cutler won't be signed anymore for the money he was making. If he takes a pay cut he should pick up something. Kaep should have gone to Denver last year even though the money was much less. The writing was already on the wall for him at the 49ers and the change of team would have been good for him. Elway obviously saw him as at least a valuable back up to have. It seems that the Texans and the Broncos see Romo as too much of an injury risk otherwise he would have already gone. Same goes for Peterson and the teams that needed a player like him and the fact that he isn't what he used to be.
movingtarget
Veteran
 
Posts: 9,471
Joined: 05 Aug 2009 08:54

Re: National Football League

25 Mar 2017 04:43

Yeah. That and the fact that running backs are a dime.a dozen really.

On Romo, Bleacher Report is reporting that CBS is after his services in the booth. All depends on what Tony wants to do.

Richard Sherman believes Kaep is being blackballed by teams in the league. Several other Seahawk players have begun to support Kaep by saying he is genuinely a good guy and saying other positive things about his locker room presence and value as player. When hearing that I thought, "Are we talking about the same Colin?" Anyway, Michael Bennett is one of those backing Kaep. After being noticed by the media for having pledged all his endorsement money to help communities (so far, $350K to groups in Seattle, Houston, and Hawaii), the NFL Network gave Bennett a platform in the last few days to speak about his pledge and the Kaep situation. That is when Bennett gave his opinion about Kaep. Surely some team might break down and give him a shot as a backup.

So in that vein, possible suitors for Kaep? You mentioned a few. Another could be New Orleans as backup to Brees. Already there is talk about Manziel signing with the Saints to back up Brees the next few years. So if you were the Saints and you had to sign one of those two (Kaep or Manziel, like if someone put a gun to your head), who would you take? Boy, what a choice. But if Saints are really considering Johnny, why not consider Kaep? I'd prolly take Kaep.

By the way, what a recipe for disaster: Manziel on Bourbon Street.
-----
Why hasn't anyone signed AP yet? Check out this meme, including the son's comment:
https://m.facebook.com/MEMES.of.the.NFL/photos/a.333078710072157.76242.332968243416537/1442655329114484/?type=3&source=54
I know. That's harsh. Some are like that.
User avatar on3m@n@rmy
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,924
Joined: 17 Jun 2010 12:25
Location: PNW

Re: National Football League

25 Mar 2017 05:02

movingtarget wrote:
on3m@n@rmy wrote:Interesting thoughts on why the essentially ex-Vikes (with the Vikes having signed ex-Raiders running back Latavius Murray) running back Adrian Peterson is still unsigned.
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2699523-why-hasnt-anyone-signed-adrian-peterson-yet



Injuries and the fact that he is probably asking for too much money. Romo is in the same category. Kaep might be looking for a starting position but hopefully he isn't that naive ! He has won 3-19 in the last two seasons, that plus the political side issue have obviously damaged his placement chances. Cutler won't be signed anymore for the money he was making. If he takes a pay cut he should pick up something. Kaep should have gone to Denver last year even though the money was much less. The writing was already on the wall for him at the 49ers and the change of team would have been good for him. Elway obviously saw him as at least a valuable back up to have. It seems that the Texans and the Broncos see Romo as too much of an injury risk otherwise he would have already gone. Same goes for Peterson and the teams that needed a player like him and the fact that he isn't what he used to be.

It looks like the lastest "scoop" on incognito Romo is the Texans or retire:

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/tony-romo-reportedly-believes-hes-down-to-two-options-for-the-2017-season/

And given the Texan's current situation at QB (only two are listed on their roster; Savage & Weeden), they better hope for Romo or likely get stuck with Cutler.

And any reason why Keap didn’t take the pay cut and go to Denver last year? It's funny that he still hasn't been signed nor shown any serious interest by any team at this point. It may be his political views have become a concern and many team owners don't want the distraction. Either way it's strange that not one team has shown any interest in him.
Nomad
Member
 
Posts: 372
Joined: 20 Apr 2016 01:39

Re: National Football League

25 Mar 2017 12:25

on3m@n@rmy wrote:Yeah. That and the fact that running backs are a dime.a dozen really.

On Romo, Bleacher Report is reporting that CBS is after his services in the booth. All depends on what Tony wants to do.

Richard Sherman believes Kaep is being blackballed by teams in the league. Several other Seahawk players have begun to support Kaep by saying he is genuinely a good guy and saying other positive things about his locker room presence and value as player. When hearing that I thought, "Are we talking about the same Colin?" Anyway, Michael Bennett is one of those backing Kaep. After being noticed by the media for having pledged all his endorsement money to help communities (so far, $350K to groups in Seattle, Houston, and Hawaii), the NFL Network gave Bennett a platform in the last few days to speak about his pledge and the Kaep situation. That is when Bennett gave his opinion about Kaep. Surely some team might break down and give him a shot as a backup.

So in that vein, possible suitors for Kaep? You mentioned a few. Another could be New Orleans as backup to Brees. Already there is talk about Manziel signing with the Saints to back up Brees the next few years. So if you were the Saints and you had to sign one of those two (Kaep or Manziel, like if someone put a gun to your head), who would you take? Boy, what a choice. But if Saints are really considering Johnny, why not consider Kaep? I'd prolly take Kaep.

By the way, what a recipe for disaster: Manziel on Bourbon Street.
-----
Why hasn't anyone signed AP yet? Check out this meme, including the son's comment:
https://m.facebook.com/MEMES.of.the.NFL/photos/a.333078710072157.76242.332968243416537/1442655329114484/?type=3&source=54
I know. That's harsh. Some are like that.


I really thought that the Jets would have taken on Kaep. A lot of people did. Let's face it the Jets have had QB issues since Joe Namath left ! The other possibilities were the Browns and maybe Chicago. If he is only looking for a starting position I don't think it's going to happen but if he accepts a back up position he will be taking a pay cut much worse than the one Denver was offering him. Some people were suggesting back up positions at Seattle, Cardinals or Pittsburgh. The latter two teams have QBs ready to retire so maybe. Seattle is probably unlikely even though some of the players there seem to support him. I think he has to accept the reality that on the current QB market people won't pay him what the 49ers are currently paying him. He probably wishes now that he didn't opt out of his contract. I agree with what others are saying, until Cutler and Romo are placed, Kaep will remain in limbo as he is further down the list talent wise for experienced QBs. If it doesn't happen before the season starts injuries should get him a placement eventually

Manziel on Bourbon St while he is already on High Street sounds like a recipe for disaster. The guy has talent but if Romo is a risk what is Manziel ? I think that would be a very complex contract with a lot of clauses in it like "if he does not" or "if he fails to !" If the Raiders move to Las Vegas he would probably be just as much a liability there, really I would be surprised if he was signed anywhere. RGIII is also without a team. He and Kaep would probably be seen as being at a similar level at the moment, both have talent but just don't produce it often enough. If the Browns dump Osweiler as predicted Kaep might have a chance there.
movingtarget
Veteran
 
Posts: 9,471
Joined: 05 Aug 2009 08:54

Re: National Football League

25 Mar 2017 12:33

Nomad wrote:
movingtarget wrote:
on3m@n@rmy wrote:Interesting thoughts on why the essentially ex-Vikes (with the Vikes having signed ex-Raiders running back Latavius Murray) running back Adrian Peterson is still unsigned.
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2699523-why-hasnt-anyone-signed-adrian-peterson-yet



Injuries and the fact that he is probably asking for too much money. Romo is in the same category. Kaep might be looking for a starting position but hopefully he isn't that naive ! He has won 3-19 in the last two seasons, that plus the political side issue have obviously damaged his placement chances. Cutler won't be signed anymore for the money he was making. If he takes a pay cut he should pick up something. Kaep should have gone to Denver last year even though the money was much less. The writing was already on the wall for him at the 49ers and the change of team would have been good for him. Elway obviously saw him as at least a valuable back up to have. It seems that the Texans and the Broncos see Romo as too much of an injury risk otherwise he would have already gone. Same goes for Peterson and the teams that needed a player like him and the fact that he isn't what he used to be.

It looks like the lastest "scoop" on incognito Romo is the Texans or retire:

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/tony-romo-reportedly-believes-hes-down-to-two-options-for-the-2017-season/

And given the Texan's current situation at QB (only two are listed on their roster; Savage & Weeden), they better hope for Romo or likely get stuck with Cutler.

And any reason why Keap didn’t take the pay cut and go to Denver last year? It's funny that he still hasn't been signed nor shown any serious interest by any team at this point. It may be his political views have become a concern and many team owners don't want the distraction. Either way it's strange that not one team has shown any interest in him.


Elway offered Kaep a big pay cut and at the time with the 49ers new coach constantly saying good things about Kaep and most people expecting Chip to get more than one season with the 49ers, I think Kaep thought he was in a pretty good position. Ponder and Gabbert were not going to keep him off the field even though Gabbert has a better win ratio in the past two seasons than Kaep. Playing badly in a bad team was probably enough for him to get some offers but not many and add the political side issue and many teams just didn't want or need that. Interesting that he came out in the media few weeks ago and said he was going to start standing for the national anthem again this season. Of course the cynics had a field day with that ! Most people thinks it's the football reasons mainly to blame for his lack of offers but also admitting that the politics won't be helping and i think they are right.
movingtarget
Veteran
 
Posts: 9,471
Joined: 05 Aug 2009 08:54

25 Mar 2017 15:28

2016 stats for Kaep: 16 TD, 4 INT, 2241 YDS, 59.2 COMPLETION %, 6.8 YPC, 90.7 RTG.
Not elite, but not bad.
Russ Wilson 2016: 21TD, 11 INT, 4,219 YDS, 64.7 COMPLETION %, 7.7 YPC, 92.6 RTG.
Based on that comparison, Sherman's statement that Kaep is being blackballed is probably true. Owners probably do not want to risk the fan and ticket sales backlash. Or the distraction.
User avatar on3m@n@rmy
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,924
Joined: 17 Jun 2010 12:25
Location: PNW

Re:

26 Mar 2017 01:11

on3m@n@rmy wrote:2016 stats for Kaep: 16 TD, 4 INT, 2241 YDS, 59.2 COMPLETION %, 6.8 YPC, 90.7 RTG.
Not elite, but not bad.
Russ Wilson 2016: 21TD, 11 INT, 4,219 YDS, 64.7 COMPLETION %, 7.7 YPC, 92.6 RTG.
Based on that comparison, Sherman's statement that Kaep is being blackballed is probably true. Owners probably do not want to risk the fan and ticket sales backlash. Or the distraction.


Yep he's probably right but he also said wait a bit longer and see how it plays out. It wasn't only the kneeling that upset people it was also the comments about Castro and other political situations. Politically he doesn't seem to have much idea but at least he is putting his money where his mouth is which is more than a lot of other people are doing. His charity work has been praised.
movingtarget
Veteran
 
Posts: 9,471
Joined: 05 Aug 2009 08:54

Re: National Football League

27 Mar 2017 14:44

I forgot that Castro thing. Well, I have a possible new suitor for Kaep. Seattle. I think Seattle fans could overlook the negative press on Kaep, especially considering that Seahawk players Bennett and Sherman have publicly come forth to support Kaepernick.

I always thought Kaepernick could back up Russell Wilson, but never thought it would happen because Seattle backup QB Trevon Boykin was solid in his rookie 2016 season. At least until yesterday that is what I thought.

Now, Bleacher Report is reporting that Boykin, who had some issues in college has been arrested. According to the report, Boykin was the passenger in a car driven by a woman who crashed into four people on a sidewalk and injured a worker inside a bar that her vehicle crashed into. Boykin was arrested on related drug charges and public intoxication. OOPS. It is way too early to make judgement, but I am curious just how much patience Seattle will show regarding this matter, considering Boykin's history. [On December 31, 2015, two days before the 2016 Alamo Bowl he was arrested in San Antonio after a bar fight in which he threw a punch that hit a patrol officer. He was charged with assaulting a public servant, a third degree felony, and was charged with public intoxication and resisting arrest. He was suspended from the Alamo Bowl and his draft stock tumbled. He was not drafted, then Seattle signed him as an undrafted free agent.]
User avatar on3m@n@rmy
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,924
Joined: 17 Jun 2010 12:25
Location: PNW

27 Mar 2017 16:11

Well, that kind if thing would never happen with Kaep. You may disagree with his political statements, but I believe he's both a man of faith, and kept clean his entire life.

Those numbers between Wilson and Kaep are misleading. Keep in mind Wilson was hurt much of the season, and had one of the worst OL's in the league. While SF was a poor team overall, when they tried to rely on Kaep, he failed, especially in clutch time. Having said that, I would have no problem with a team taking him as a back-up. But there are a lot of potential back-ups out there now.

That's sad about Boykin. I'm not sure what else to say. Pathetic? Stupid?

As to Romo - I said before he should retire. He could work for CBS, or the Cowboy organization (more likely to get a rink that way, even if just as a lowly assistant).

As to Manziel, I wouldn't touch that guy with a 100 foot pole. As much as I think Kaep doesn't have it, I'd take Kaep in a heartbeat before Manziel.

RG3 should definitely get signed, if only as a back-up. He still can throw well, and still has potential. He played okay, not great, but okay, for a poor Browns team last year, when he wasn't trying to injure himself.

I'd be hesitant to sign Peterson to a large contract as well. As great as he was a few years ago, not only do RB's not age well, few teams will ask as much of one as he did in the past.

The NFL now seems bent on moving the Raiders to Vegas, and my guess is it has to do with the bottom line. Oakland seems to have a somewhat tentative plan to get a stadium built in Oakland that at least comes close to various deals being talked about in Vegas, but it seems the mighty dollar will win out. Despite what I posted before how you don't really need a $1.5 billion dollar stadium to play football in, the league is likely to go to the highest bidder, regardless of long-term financial stability. Goodell said something peculiar though in his letter to the mayor of Oakland, in that Oakland would remain viable for a team in the future. More or less, build it, and hope. This brings up another question. Could any football fan see a team in Oakland called anything but the Raiders??
User avatar Alpe d'Huez
Veteran
 
Posts: 10,200
Joined: 11 Mar 2009 03:51
Location: New England

Re:

27 Mar 2017 18:41

Alpe d'Huez wrote:Those numbers between Wilson and Kaep are misleading. Keep in mind Wilson was hurt much of the season, and had one of the worst OL's in the league. While SF was a poor team overall, when they tried to rely on Kaep, he failed, especially in clutch time. Having said that, I would have no problem with a team taking him as a back-up. But there are a lot of potential back-ups out there now.

That's sad about Boykin. I'm not sure what else to say. Pathetic? Stupid?

As to Manziel, I wouldn't touch that guy with a 100 foot pole. As much as I think Kaep doesn't have it, I'd take Kaep in a heartbeat before Manziel.

The NFL now seems bent on moving the Raiders to Vegas, and my guess is it has to do with the bottom line. Oakland seems to have a somewhat tentative plan to get a stadium built in Oakland that at least comes close to various deals being talked about in Vegas, but it seems the mighty dollar will win out. Despite what I posted before how you don't really need a $1.5 billion dollar stadium to play football in, the league is likely to go to the highest bidder, regardless of long-term financial stability. Goodell said something peculiar though in his letter to the mayor of Oakland, in that Oakland would remain viable for a team in the future. More or less, build it, and hope. This brings up another question. Could any football fan see a team in Oakland called anything but the Raiders??

Stupid is the term I'd use. Pathetic too. But this is the 2nd instance that we know of where Boykin has put himself in a bad situation. In other words, he did not learn from the first go at stupidity.

On Manziel, no organization could ever be sure he could go dry and stay dry. There would always be that fear of relapse.

Agree the NFL seems bent on moving the team. On top of that, it seems as though the only way a new stadium gets built in California is if the investment is largely private funds, instead of public money.

Those Kaep/Wilson numbers can be misleading, true. But my point was simply that Kaep really had a pretty good year with the TD/INT ratio and everything else not bad. I have not really thought about it, but compared to other backups maybe Kaep has a higher ceiling than the others?

One thing I wonder about Kaep is, would he be willing to take a backup role? And if he would, then it seems he'd prefer a position behind a good aging QB whose spot may open up in a couple of years (e.g. Palmer's, Brees' backup), instead of a career backup spot (e.g. behind a guy like Wilson).
User avatar on3m@n@rmy
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,924
Joined: 17 Jun 2010 12:25
Location: PNW

27 Mar 2017 18:50

Latest news: Owners approve Raiders move to Vegas, and Raiders will play in Oakland the next two seasons (2017-2018) before moving. Playing in Oakland two more seasons makes a return of Lynch seem much more possible, provided Seattle helps by releasing him, Oakland gives up a low round draft pick, or some other financial deal is worked out between the two clubs over guaranteed monies already paid to Lynch by Seattle.
User avatar on3m@n@rmy
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,924
Joined: 17 Jun 2010 12:25
Location: PNW

Re:

27 Mar 2017 21:25

A sad, sad day. :(

What happens if the Raiders win the Super Bowl this, or especially next season? That's going to be really ugly winning it all, then moving away.
User avatar Alpe d'Huez
Veteran
 
Posts: 10,200
Joined: 11 Mar 2009 03:51
Location: New England

Re: Re:

27 Mar 2017 22:55

on3m@n@rmy wrote:
Alpe d'Huez wrote:Those numbers between Wilson and Kaep are misleading. Keep in mind Wilson was hurt much of the season, and had one of the worst OL's in the league. While SF was a poor team overall, when they tried to rely on Kaep, he failed, especially in clutch time. Having said that, I would have no problem with a team taking him as a back-up. But there are a lot of potential back-ups out there now.

That's sad about Boykin. I'm not sure what else to say. Pathetic? Stupid?

As to Manziel, I wouldn't touch that guy with a 100 foot pole. As much as I think Kaep doesn't have it, I'd take Kaep in a heartbeat before Manziel.

The NFL now seems bent on moving the Raiders to Vegas, and my guess is it has to do with the bottom line. Oakland seems to have a somewhat tentative plan to get a stadium built in Oakland that at least comes close to various deals being talked about in Vegas, but it seems the mighty dollar will win out. Despite what I posted before how you don't really need a $1.5 billion dollar stadium to play football in, the league is likely to go to the highest bidder, regardless of long-term financial stability. Goodell said something peculiar though in his letter to the mayor of Oakland, in that Oakland would remain viable for a team in the future. More or less, build it, and hope. This brings up another question. Could any football fan see a team in Oakland called anything but the Raiders??

Stupid is the term I'd use. Pathetic too. But this is the 2nd instance that we know of where Boykin has put himself in a bad situation. In other words, he did not learn from the first go at stupidity.

On Manziel, no organization could ever be sure he could go dry and stay dry. There would always be that fear of relapse.

Agree the NFL seems bent on moving the team. On top of that, it seems as though the only way a new stadium gets built in California is if the investment is largely private funds, instead of public money.

Those Kaep/Wilson numbers can be misleading, true. But my point was simply that Kaep really had a pretty good year with the TD/INT ratio and everything else not bad. I have not really thought about it, but compared to other backups maybe Kaep has a higher ceiling than the others?

One thing I wonder about Kaep is, would he be willing to take a backup role? And if he would, then it seems he'd prefer a position behind a good aging QB whose spot may open up in a couple of years (e.g. Palmer's, Brees' backup), instead of a career backup spot (e.g. behind a guy like Wilson).


i think Kaep realizes now that he will have to take what he can get not just starter positions. It was definitely an issue at the 49ers as when he was out injured he thought he would be straight back in the job but Chip made it clear he would be competing with Gabbert and at that stage Kaep was not fully healed anyway or a bit rusty so Gabbert got the nod for the first few games and then it went pear shaped after winning the first game convincingly because the entire team had already gone that way for the most part and the injuries mounted up. Kaep did rehab in Denver in late 2015 and that's when Elway approached him and I am convinced that if the money was better he would have gone. With looming retirements a few starter positions will open up but whether Kaep gets a shot is another thing. None of this years QB batch are rated ahead of Goff and there always a few unexpected duds and one or two surprises with the QBs. Be interesting to see what happens with Goff. Cutler should pick up a job as well eventually. Watson, Kizer and Trubisky seem to be the most high profile draft QBs.
movingtarget
Veteran
 
Posts: 9,471
Joined: 05 Aug 2009 08:54

Re: Re:

27 Mar 2017 22:58

Alpe d'Huez wrote:A sad, sad day. :(

What happens if the Raiders win the Super Bowl this, or especially next season? That's going to be really ugly winning it all, then moving away.


It was sad for San Diego as well but there is a lot of politics involved as the following video points out


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q6LH6Vp2xKw
movingtarget
Veteran
 
Posts: 9,471
Joined: 05 Aug 2009 08:54

Re: Re:

28 Mar 2017 00:10

movingtarget wrote:
Alpe d'Huez wrote:A sad, sad day. :(

What happens if the Raiders win the Super Bowl this, or especially next season? That's going to be really ugly winning it all, then moving away.

It was sad for San Diego as well but there is a lot of politics involved as the following video points out

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q6LH6Vp2xKw

Having watched the Sonics get uprooted from Seattle to OKC, I know what that feels like, and so empathize with Raider fans. At this point I would think it better for Raider fans if Oakland won a SB while still in Oakland than for the Raiders to win the SB after the move happens. One consolation for Sonic fans is OKC has never won an NBA title, and they have fallen off some this season.

I like listening to Colin Cowherd and that was a good link. He says, as often he does, things that make a lot of sense, this time calling the Vegas move all about politics: 1) of Jerry Jones not wanting a team in San Antonio to dilute the market in Texas for the Cowboys, and 2) Rams owner Stan Kroenke not wanting another team in LA to dilute that market there. And it was interesting what the HERD had to say about how the close friendship of the passive Kroenke and persuasive Jones may have worked to convince the owners (who voted 31-1 in favor of the move; only Miami opposed it) to move the Raiders.

Before Kroenke and Jones have to worry about their team's market being diluted, I would think St Louis or Oakland could be suitors for an expansion team in 10 years or so. Who knows though?

NFL Network's "Good Morning Football" crew had some interesting comments about the market in Vegas and what players will be faced with when visiting Vegas. But going from a #6 market (Oakland) to a #44 market (Vegas) may not make a lot of long-term sense. The move makes short-term sense, but with that market will it make long-term sense. Time will tell.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Djt4HjAiA68
User avatar on3m@n@rmy
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,924
Joined: 17 Jun 2010 12:25
Location: PNW

28 Mar 2017 18:10

That Cowherd angle is interesting, but I think fairly minimal. This really came down to money. As I pointed out before, the Raiders could have stayed in Oakland and played in a $500m stadium financed with little public money, just money from the league, Davis, some sort of loan, and a very minuscule tax or fee of some sort. But as someone noted, stadiums are like d*ck measuring contests for owners. Plus, if the league can get suckers in Vegas to pay for something for them to use, while the city takes all the risks, and rosy assumptions on projected returns, they are going to do it. They knew that Vegas would be giddy to get a team, and took advantage of that. Cities like St. Louis, San Diego, Seattle, they've been burned in the past by this gimmick, and wouldn't fall for it as easily.

I feel for fans that lose sports teams, but at the same time, I am pragmatic about it. And that includes Oakland. But I also have sympathy for tax payers.
User avatar Alpe d'Huez
Veteran
 
Posts: 10,200
Joined: 11 Mar 2009 03:51
Location: New England

28 Mar 2017 21:25

Makes sense.

For some Twitter humor on the owners approval of the Oakland move -
@JonRyan9:
I know I just dumped you but I'm going to stay in our house for the next 2 years until my new gf is done building our new house. #Raiders

Besides being a great punter, Ryan is good for stuff like that too.
User avatar on3m@n@rmy
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,924
Joined: 17 Jun 2010 12:25
Location: PNW

29 Mar 2017 01:33

What Kaep Wants

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jpTvAf3-80

I think that's a reasonable amount of money but the fact that he actually has to come out and state what he is looking for makes me think that no teams are showing interest at the moment.
movingtarget
Veteran
 
Posts: 9,471
Joined: 05 Aug 2009 08:54

Re:

29 Mar 2017 07:55

movingtarget wrote:What Kaep Wants

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jpTvAf3-80

I think that's a reasonable amount of money but the fact that he actually has to come out and state what he is looking for makes me think that no teams are showing interest at the moment.

Yea, that is good reading between the lines. Either that or everyone who might be interested is low-balling him.

As for the amount he's asking is concerned, his asking $9M is a reasonable price only because of new contracts that second or third rate QBs like Mike Glennon got with Chicago. Compare what he's asking to whomever and it will appear reasonable. But I'd rather take that $9M and spend it on a top tier offensive lineman who is a starter than pay a likely backup QB (which is probably the pecking order he will start off at on a new team) that much to collect splinters on the bench.

Kaep's asking price may be driving some teams away. Like Seattle, who really might like to have him now, but only have about $10M left in cap space. So a Seattle gig is not going to happen unless he comes in at a kicker's price. I'm sure there are other teams in that situation. What I mean is, his putting that price tag on himself may be limiting teams willing to give him a shot.

If he wants to increase his chances of getting a contract he really needs to drop his asking price to a level where teams will bite. Do a 1-year incentive laden contract and see what happens the following year. Then that gives him a chance to not only prove himself (which is norm anyway for the business) and gives him one year to shake the negative perceptions. So, it comes down to how badly he wants to play now and have a chance to move on later.

Besides asking price, the timing of things may also be disrupting his ability to get a deal done now. There are probably some teams waiting to see what they collect in the draft before they try to sign Kaep. The timing for Kaep to get a deal might be a bit early.

That said, I really hope he can find a landing spot and get a deal done. And that he has a supportive teammates wherever he lands.
User avatar on3m@n@rmy
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,924
Joined: 17 Jun 2010 12:25
Location: PNW

Re: Re:

29 Mar 2017 10:08

on3m@n@rmy wrote:
movingtarget wrote:What Kaep Wants

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jpTvAf3-80

I think that's a reasonable amount of money but the fact that he actually has to come out and state what he is looking for makes me think that no teams are showing interest at the moment.

Yea, that is good reading between the lines. Either that or everyone who might be interested is low-balling him.

As for the amount he's asking is concerned, his asking $9M is a reasonable price only because of new contracts that second or third rate QBs like Mike Glennon got with Chicago. Compare what he's asking to whomever and it will appear reasonable. But I'd rather take that $9M and spend it on a top tier offensive lineman who is a starter than pay a likely backup QB (which is probably the pecking order he will start off at on a new team) that much to collect splinters on the bench.

Kaep's asking price may be driving some teams away. Like Seattle, who really might like to have him now, but only have about $10M left in cap space. So a Seattle gig is not going to happen unless he comes in at a kicker's price. I'm sure there are other teams in that situation. What I mean is, his putting that price tag on himself may be limiting teams willing to give him a shot.

If he wants to increase his chances of getting a contract he really needs to drop his asking price to a level where teams will bite. Do a 1-year incentive laden contract and see what happens the following year. Then that gives him a chance to not only prove himself (which is norm anyway for the business) and gives him one year to shake the negative perceptions. So, it comes down to how badly he wants to play now and have a chance to move on later.

Besides asking price, the timing of things may also be disrupting his ability to get a deal done now. There are probably some teams waiting to see what they collect in the draft before they try to sign Kaep. The timing for Kaep to get a deal might be a bit early.

That said, I really hope he can find a landing spot and get a deal done. And that he has a supportive teammates wherever he lands.


Yeah some teams might be put off by him putting a price on himself because if he wants to play at all, that decision won't be his unless he is happy to sit out the season or maybe part of it and wait for them to bite on his terms. I suppose opting out hasn't made a lot of difference to his chances because he was never a fit for Shanahan's system anyway so they were not going to keep him. The 49ers acted quickly to pick up Hoyer and Barkley and I know Chicago fans were not very big on those two either. With Romo and Cutler in limbo and Osweiler waiting to see if the Browns will retain him plus RGIII still without a team there is still some options out there for teams that need a QB. As for the draft it seems to be a lean year for QBs depending on who you believe and none of them have rated above Garoppolo or Goff. As for Manziel I think that might be fake news a bit like the return of the glory days for the coal industry ! The fact that no one is showing much interest in Kaep probably only increases the chances of Gabbert picking something up and maybe even Ponder but he has not started a game for a long time but for a low price I suppose some teams could bite if they need back ups or they get injuries. Maybe Ponder will end up returning to his house painting or applying another coat !

Trent Baalke the 49ers ex GM and Chip Kelly are also out of work. Chip couldn't even get the offensive line coach job at the Jags so it seems that the train wreck called 49ers management of the past few years is impacting on some of them picking up new jobs although Jim Tomsula picked a DC assistants job at the Washington which is still quite a step down for a head coach in his previous job but maybe that's what he prefers anyway. Most people thought he did a good job at the 49ers with his defensive work. Unfortunately Tom Rathman wasn't retained as the RBs coach at the 49ers and he was another one that was highly regarded. I will be interested to see how Robert Saleh goes as the new 49ers DC. Why the 49ers hired DC Jim O'Neil from the Browns last year I will never know.
movingtarget
Veteran
 
Posts: 9,471
Joined: 05 Aug 2009 08:54

PreviousNext

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests

Back to top