DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Free Agency

The Patriots signed Chris Long.

https://twitter.com/ProFootballTalk/status/709918427855626241

He wasn't good enough for the Browns. LOL


Speaking of the Pats..........I still am amazed they didn't sign Forte. I think he would have been a perfect fit for them.

Chris Long was never going to the Browns unless he was massively overpaid.

The Patriots are smarter than everyone. They just traded Chandler Jones for a second round pick and a former top ten pick. They then replace Jones with Chris Long (who was released, so it doesn't affect compensatory picks).

Being smart, the Patriots know that they shouldn't pay an old running back like Forte any significant sum of money. He would have been a perfect fit for what they do on offense, but he is not a perfect fit in how they run their business.

is Chris Long a 4-3 guy or a 3-4 guy? I do not really remember but I am thinking he played 4-3 most or all of his career? how old is he? 29ish? has a couple decent years left him I think.

Explain. Just be aware that you will help prove my point. LOL




I disagree. The Pats have signed guys like Moss, Stallworth, Rodney Harrison, Seau, Revis, Corey Dillon, Big Penny, etc.

I don't think I need to explain my first point. I've been saying for weeks that our years of dysfunction are coming back to haunt us all at once.

Most of the guys you mentioned are not running backs. Almost all also went to the Patriots on the cheap (Revis did not, Moss got paid well one year). Corey Dillon is probably one of the reasons why the Patriots don't pay for running backs. He was good for his first year and then had a sharp decline.

https://twitter.com/BrianCoz/status/710084695086731264

(Imagine a purple banana)

Meh, wonder how much is guaranteed.

$4M.

Not a bad signing in my opinion. He's good against the run if I recall

Apparently he the one that set McCown into helicopter mode Game 1.

Yeah, I'd have to say it's a very so-so signing. I'd rather have Craig Robertson. But, this dude hasnt missed a game in three seasons I believe. Should help in the run, we're in trouble if he asked to drop.

Not bad, but definitely not good.

side note: this will also cost the Browns a 5th-round comp pick. Not that a 5th round comp pick is necessarily better than having Davis on the team, just pointing it out.

Is this verified? I think they would want the draft pick over the player.

He can stay healthy and he defends the run.

Both. He played 3-4 DE at UVA, they switched him to 4-3 DE in St. Louis.

For clarification: I am talking about 2017 comp pick (for Travis Benjamin)

It's possible it will just move our 5th to a 7th (Johnson Bademosi) but I expect there will be 32 qualifying uncancelled deals above Johnson's.

http://overthecap.com/compensatory-draft-picks-cancellation-chart/

*Update* Whoa, looks like I got this backwards. Since Davis' deal is expected to be in the 6th-round range, it cancels out Baddy's pick. Generous rule I think. I thought it went the other way.

http://overthecap.com/the-basics-and-methodology-of-projecting-the-nfls-compensatory-draft-picks/

Each qualifying player has a value based on his contract, playing time and postseason honors, and that value corresponds to a round in the draft. In the compensatory equation, each qualifying player that a team signs cancels out a qualifying player that the team lost whose value is the highest in the same round. If there are no lost players remaining in that round, the signed player cancels out the lost player whose value is the next-highest. A signed player will cancel out a lost player whose value falls in a higher round only if there are no remaining lost players. After all of a team’s qualifying signed players have canceled out a lost player, the team can receive a comp pick for each qualifying player who remains. For example, consider a team that loses one qualifying player whose value falls in the third round and another qualifying player whose value falls in the sixth round but signs a qualifying player whose value falls in the third round. That team would receive a sixth-round comp pick because the signed player would cancel out the loss of the higher-valued player. If the signed player’s value were equal to a fourth-round pick or lower, however, the team would receive a third-round comp pick, because the signed player would cancel out the loss of the lower-valued player.

Thanks, 'steve.

The Patriots traded for Martellus Bennett.

http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story/_/id..._medium=twitter

The Saints signed the former Ohio State and Rams linebacker whose name I cannot spell.

https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/710278920701132800

They got a good TE for next to nothing. Must be nice.

Meh

This just seems like the Vernon Davis deal. Bennett struggled.

I like what Arizona did though. They're my favorite to represent the NFC if they have a strong draft.

Palmer has a mental block in the playoffs. No draft will solve that.

I saw a team carry Peyton Mannings corpse to a ring. Arizona is close to having the same amount of talent.

Yep, the Pats are smart and never go after veteran players.

What we saw was pretty rare. You also had a team that probably believed if they kept it close Manning could reach deep down and pull out one more bag of tricks based on track record alone. In a lot of ways Palmer is a never was and is a definite nervous Nelly when the stage gets too big. This isn't to slam Palmer or the Cardinals. Hell, I'm jealous of that team. But I would never bet on them to reach the Super Bowl with Palmer as their QB. Which is unfortunate because he's a really good player mostly.

They didn't sign him as a free agent to a long term, big money contract. They traded a fourth rounder for him and a 6th. He's still under 30, and his contract is affordable and only for two years.

I was talking to cfrs. It was a joke that arose from an earlier discussion we had. Go study your math.

He never did though, that's my point. The Broncos had the worst offensive performance by a super bowl winner ever.

Got a 99 on the Calculus and a 97 on the Stats exams. Spring Break is next week. I think I'll be okay.

I'm still missing the humor, but it's never been a strong point.

I'm kind of feeling like Batman with you playing the Joker. I can see you asking me "Why so Serious?"

Now, that was funny.

him Andy Dalton and tony Romo

and the entire Cleveland browns organization for the past 50 years.

Whether he did or didn't, doesn't change my point. Teams who believe they have a winning QB play better. Teams who believe they have a QB who can keep them in the game and win more than lose and lead them back occasionally play better. It's why the "talent" argument on the Browns has long been a fallacy. Talent isn't the problem, the lack of a franchise QB is the problem. At any rate, my belief is the team rallied around Manning and believed if they needed him, he could deliver just one more time.

I think you should take your money and put it on the Cardinals to represent the NFC in the Super Bowl next year. But I'll go one better. Find out the odds the books are paying and I'll better them and book it for you.

We are so far away from the SB that even discussing it or drawing parallels to SB teams is, IMHO, absurd.

IMHO, talent is very important, QB is also important, but coaching is determinant, both on improving from a average to a good team, or from a good to an excellent team.

Cardinals didn't implode only on the QB position, the D play was atrocious. And regarding the talent importance, well Fitz play against Green Bay should be an illustration on how talented players can win you games.

When Denver lost to Seatle, which team believed the most on his QB? And do you actually think Denver trusted more the QB then Carolina


Pettine was an atrocious HC, he was way out of his comfort zone.

I remember the 80's very clearly and don't remember us losing due to mental lapses.

I'd have to say that Red Right 88 was a mental lapse.