Originally Posted by Wisconsin_Chief:
I really hate to say it, but Juan is kind of right. I'm shocked at the lack of money being spent, especially with all the new TV contract cash about to start flowing. There seems to be a deliberate attempt to drive prices down on starting caliber players. Compared to the deals that were flowing last year and all the seasons in the past, the market seems really weak. Prices on players usually steadily go up every offseason, and they seem to have taken a nose dive this year.
Not that I necessarily have a problem with it, but there definitely seems to be some collusion going on. You can't tell me all these teams suddenly figured out after 35 years of free agency that it's dumb to throw too much money at average starters.
DJ says there’s no way 32 NFL teams could collude.
The league already colluded during the 2010 uncapped year. Jerry Jones and Dan Fucking Synder got their wrists slapped for not playing along.
And the average plutocrat has the ethics of an especially unscrupulous pit viper. [Reply]
Can't attest to the accuracy but this says the Falcons signed Mack Hollins.
That's a relief. When I looked at the remaining free agent WRs and saw him still there I got a bit nervous. That guy is complete ass. He could barely produce when Renfrow and Waller were out and he was basically the #2 option in the passing game.
He had one big game early in the season by some complete stroke of luck. After that game I isolated on him because he was the absolute cheapest WR in the salary cap FF league I played in and I wanted to pick him up. After watching him I wanted no part of him. Completely gives up on a lot of plays. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Wisconsin_Chief:
I really hate to say it, but Juan is kind of right. I'm shocked at the lack of money being spent, especially with all the new TV contract cash about to start flowing. There seems to be a deliberate attempt to drive prices down on starting caliber players. Compared to the deals that were flowing last year and all the seasons in the past, the market seems really weak. Prices on players usually steadily go up every offseason, and they seem to have taken a nose dive this year.
Not that I necessarily have a problem with it, but there definitely seems to be some collusion going on. You can't tell me all these teams suddenly figured out after 35 years of free agency that it's dumb to throw too much money at average starters.
I don't think it's collusion at all. Look at how players were paid LAST season; they're pretty clearly paying for that ridiculousness THIS season. The Chiefs, who didn't crazy spend last season OR this season have very little cap room. From where is all of this additional "collusion-prevented" money supposed to come? [Reply]
Originally Posted by Cave Johnson:
If we bring back Watson and Harman on a JJSS deal, it’s 4 of the same 5 WRs.
No thanks to Watson - I'd rather try just about anyone else - he just isn't consistent. Hardman I would welcome back - I think he has very good value as a gadget receiver. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Pitt Gorilla:
No, that was the AFCCG KC receiving group.
Aka the group that we'd be starting if the season started today.
3 guys will be added to this room. 1 will probably be Justin Watson. Another will be a 2nd round or later rookie. Hopefully the 3rd is one of OBJ/Dhop. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Detoxing:
It doesn't sound like there's interest in Chark. He's probably out.
Sounds like the Chiefs are offering a 4M base salary, incentive laden contract to OBJ. Hard to imagine OBJ signs for 4M. Not looking good there.
Fuck no to Jarvis Landry. God that would suck.
That don't leave a whole lot on the bone.
I'd rather bring Pringle back.
I'd rather bring Pringle back at 4 times price of Landry. Or just roll with John/Justyn Ross. Or trade a 7th rounder to get Marcus Kemp back.
Landry has been so overrated for so long. I just don't get it. And frankly, JuJu is headed down the same path as his legs get more beat up.
These possession receivers age in dog years once their bodies start to break down. [Reply]
