The Free Agency Thread

How aggressive in Free Agency?

  • Pay big for 1 or 2 impact starters!

    Votes: 2 20.0%

  • Build depth with value mid-tier players

    Votes: 8 80.0%

  • Prioritize re-signing our own free agents

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    10
Heard talk on NFL Radio about how the Cowboys had to have a plan with Tryon, they couldn't let him practice, just so they could get him to the game on Sundays.
There's no way the Redskins should have wanted anything to do with him.

My hope is to get two OTs in the draft but I don't know how they'll pull that off with taking a QB at two? Now I know that a majority of mocks are wrong and that reality is a lot different but it seems like a lot of OTs are gone by the end of the first round in all the mocks I've seen so far, so even if we trade picks to get back in round one, we're only getting one tackle.

It will be very interesting to see how they handle this draft.
 
Reminds me of John Riggins at the end of his career. He'd spend all week in traction, never practice, then suit up on Sundays, get a hundred yards, and go back to traction.
 
Like Neo, I think we may draft 2 tackles in this draft. I don't see any vets out there that are going to be long-term solutions. One of the strongest tackle groups in recent draft history according to the experts? Sounds like an ideal time to go get some young studs to anchor our OL for the next decade.
 
There's this argument going around that the only reason Fields hasn't been moved is because the Bears have zero leverage. I don't buy it. I think Washington had the same zero leverage as Chicago. Now, I don't like the compensation we got, but Chicago is either asking way too much (reportedly a second) or the league thinks that Fields just doesn't have the mix of untapped potential/ready to play production to be worth a seventh.

Btw, Bruce Allen would have given that second without blinking. Fields is very much a Rivera, Bruce Allen type of reclamation QB.
 
Chris said:
The problem will Fields is primarily contractual. Very different than the QBs moved recently.
Click to expand...
How is that he has one year on his rookie contract and one year at 11 mil if extended on his 5th year option. And 11 mil for an nfl qb even a marginal starter is a bargain these days
 
Chicago would have to exercise the option before trading him, which would be a pretty dirty thing to do.

The 5th year option is a right that only the team that drafted the player has. Once a player is traded, the new team does not have any of the rights that the original team had, including the right to exercise the 5th year option. The 5th year option is a 1-year contract that is fully guaranteed for injury.
 
Chicago isn’t going to get a #2 pick for a guy they are basically admitting wasn’t worth their own draft pick two years ago.
 
Just not interested in Fields - there may be ways to work out the contract details if the team is in trade talks - can't believe Washington would be in the Fields business.

There are four or five quarterbacks in this draft that have potentially higher upsides and higher floors than Fields.
 
Because he wouldn’t agree and would be a fool to agree?
 
No one is talking about Fields to Washington here. Just Field’s generally.
 
Yeah, I get it. Just having a bit of Fields fatigue with his status being a talking heads issue in media since the final weekend of the regular season.
 
Om said:
Absolutely. As I said, it think it's part of their calculus. The other part(s) are their own assessments of each player's skill, potential, age, cost, etc., and how each would fit into the schemes they are planning to run.
Click to expand...
I really think you hit the nail on the head regarding the Commander players who are hitting free agency. I am sure Peters’ is balancing an individual player’s “fit” versus the cost to retain them.
 
  • Fist Bump
Reactions: Om
The one big favor Rivera/Snyder did is that they didn’t hamstring the new brain trust with albatross legacy contracts. Because they signed so few players the last two years, Peters was free to really start over without worrying about the cap or creating dead money in carryover years.

Think how few teams could sign 13 new free agents without leveraging or restructuring.
 
True, Burgold. I think Harris was very conscious not to allow Rivera and Co. to spend much money, that's one reason Sweat and Young were dealt even before Peters came on board.

Harris was smart enough to not hamstring his new people.
 
How about Kevin Zeitler at OG.

He is 34 but is coming off a season where PFF had him rated at 70. Gave up 2 sacks in 2023.

One year deal?
 
Chris said:
Because he wouldn’t agree and would be a fool to agree?
Click to expand...
Why - it is a way to guarantee 11 million in pay. And give him two years to prove it with another team. Instead of going to FA and getting 5-6 million, and it would allow the bears to get a better trade in return. because no one will pay him 20-30 million in the 2025 season unless he has an amazing 2024
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Help Users

You haven't joined any rooms.

    You haven't joined any rooms.
    Top