Page 288 of 756
Re: College Football
Posted: Sun Feb 17, 2013 2:29 pm
by Jungle Rat
Sorta
Re: College Football
Posted: Sun Feb 17, 2013 6:20 pm
by T Dot O Dot
tasker is on the left
Re: College Football
Posted: Sun Feb 17, 2013 7:23 pm
by AugustWest
Leon looks in better shape now than he did then.
Re: College Football
Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 7:57 am
by Jungle Rat
That's what caught my eye. I figured by now he'd be 400 lbs.
Re: College Football
Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 10:58 am
by crotch
Kentucky projected to have toughest schedule of any team in country next season....
http://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/2013/s ... dule-2013/
Re: College Football
Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 12:22 pm
by sardis
Re: College Football
Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 12:45 pm
by hedge
What's up with the robe??
Re: College Football
Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 12:56 pm
by aTm
Looks like a pool, so I assume she's wearing it over her swimsuit. If you're asking why isn't she posing in a bikini instead of the robe, good question.
Re: College Football
Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 12:57 pm
by eCat
watch the video below it where that guy gets the rebound and Charlie Murphy karate kicks the guy under the goal.
Wilbon was trying to say that wasn't intentional yesterday on PTI
Re: College Football
Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 1:09 pm
by aTm
[youtube]cDMknqbh_3M[/youtube]
Re: College Football
Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 1:12 pm
by Bklyn
hedge wrote:What's up with the robe??
Maybe an ode to Obi Wan?
Re: College Football
Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 3:59 pm
by eCat
I have a hard time understanding NFL contracts. Why would any player have a contract that is back loaded tied to rentention? Unless you're a star in your mid 20's, you're not going to see that money. And now I'm reading they structure the contracts to make sure the guy has free agency down the road in trades so they can pick him back up for less.
no wonder all these NFL guys are out for themselves.
Re: College Football
Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 4:35 pm
by BigRedMan
It is all about the signing bonus and how they can structure it for cap reasons. That is the main reason they do it.
Re: College Football
Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 6:12 pm
by T Dot O Dot
the signing bonus is front loading no? I think ecat is talking about something else, ive never heard of backloaded NFL deals
Re: College Football
Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 6:26 pm
by eCat
T Dot O Dot wrote:the signing bonus is front loading no? I think ecat is talking about something else, ive never heard of backloaded NFL deals
well not necessarily backloaded - just that its likely they will never see the end of the contract, but I do remember Manning for example was supposed to get like $9m bonus if he was on the Colts roster in April so they unloaded him in March.
I'm reading about the Jets cleaning house right now.
Re: College Football
Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 10:20 pm
by T Dot O Dot
then what BRM said
if you're a high profile football player, you negotiate for your signing bonus and the 2nd year of your deal, everything else is gravy
unless you outperform your deal & hold out, which is a valid option for any NFL football player
Re: College Football
Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 10:36 pm
by T Dot O Dot
the real shady NFL shyt is the 1 year franchise tag, I get that teams need to keep talent but forcing a player who is at the peak of his earning potential to take a 1 year deal is BS
you want to tag someone? it should be for 3 years minimum, for the average salary of the top 5 players at that position, front-loaded 75-80% in the 1st 2 seasons
and still teams pull shady shyt, Green Bay tried to franchise tag jermichael finley at tight end and lost in arbitration :
Indianapolis -- The March 5 deadline looms. The Packers must figure out whether or not to use the franchise tag on tight end Jermichael Finley. And as discussed, Finley may argue that he should be tagged at wide receiver money. Of course, there's a big difference.
The tight end tag number will be $5.5 million per NFL.com, while the wide receiver number is $9.4 million.
If this does all go to an arbitrator, Finley may have a case. Pro Football Focus recently did a study on all of Finley's snaps and believes he is a "wide receiver." "By every measurable category," PFF writes, "Finley should be considered a wide receiver for the purposes of the tender."
In the story, PFF says that Finley lined up in a two-point stance on 475 of 791 plays -- 60% of the time. He was also aligned away from the offensive tackle on 51% of the snaps. Finley stayed home as a pass protector just 7% of the time.
In short, Finley was used as a receiver most of the time. The Packers would probably state their case as well, if it gets to that point. In 2011, Finley finished with 55 receptions for 767 yards and eight touchdowns. He was targeted 93 times, third-most on the team behind Greg Jennings (101) and Jordy Nelson (96).
Re: College Football
Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 10:46 pm
by Jungle Rat
Bonuses play differently in NFL contracts. They count different against any cap. NFL teams can also chose to rollover unused cap space from last year towards this year.
Re: College Football
Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2013 12:03 am
by T Dot O Dot
the NBA does the same thing, Toronto signed Landry Fields to a front loaded offer sheet but the cap hit is actually the average of the 3 years, not that it makes a difference to the player since its guaranteed
but for NFL purposes, front loading is paramount, regardless of how the team distributes the cap hit
it's the rules of the game, which is why I dont fuss too much when a football player holds out
and why i think it's a bytch move when players criticize other players for holding out
Re: College Football
Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2013 12:12 am
by Jungle Rat
Cleveland could easily steal Flaco by front loading his 6 year contract with terms Baltimore could not equal under their current payroll without gutting the team.