Keep Texans Talk Google Ad Free!
Venmo Tip Jar | Paypal Tip Jar
Thanks for your support! 🍺😎👍

Keep DC and Draft VY

T

Tex-fan0604

Practice Squad

I think the Texans should just keep DC this year to see if Kubiak can really get him polished,you never know he might turn out like D.Brees.Draft VY Let him learn the offense and if DC really shows he can be the right guy for the Texans then you Can trade VY next season and still get a lot for him .If DC does ok but not great then we can trade him after the season and get more value for him and take less of a cap hit.
 
Dude we would be looking at 55M to spend on VY and an 8M or 5.5M bonus on Carr. That is alot of money tied up in the QB spot to wait and see. I think the organization will make a choice one or the other.
 
cadahnic said:
Dude we would be looking at 55M to spend on VY and an 8M or 5.5M bonus on Carr. That is alot of money tied up in the QB spot to wait and see. I think the organization will make a choice one or the other.
Click to expand...

You're looking at the same kind of money at the RB position as well. And that postion really doesn't need as much help at all.
 
kbourda said:
You're looking at the same kind of money at the RB position as well. And that postion really doesn't need as much help at all.
Click to expand...

Bush wouldn't get as much money as Vince, Davis is getting less than Carr (about the same total but spread out over more years so less per year), and Bush and Davis can at least both be on the field at the same time. That is still a lot of money in one position either way, and to me neither of those positions are of great need for us, those are two big reasons why myself and cada are in the trade down camp.

In addition, Young would likely get about a $15-18 million signing bonus as the #1 pick, so trading him after next year would cost us $12.5-15 million against the cap next year, and trading Carr then would still cost $5.7 million against the cap if we go that route.
 
MorKnolle said:
Bush wouldn't get as much money as Vince, Davis is getting less than Carr (about the same total but spread out over more years so less per year), and Bush and Davis can at least both be on the field at the same time. That is still a lot of money in one position either way, and to me neither of those positions are of great need for us, those are two big reasons why myself and cada are in the trade down camp.

In addition, Young would likely get about a $15-18 million signing bonus as the #1 pick, so trading him after next year would cost us $12.5-15 million against the cap next year, and trading Carr then would still cost $5.7 million against the cap if we go that route.
Click to expand...

That is some serious skrilla!
 
cadahnic said:
Dude we would be looking at 55M to spend on VY and an 8M or 5.5M bonus on Carr. That is alot of money tied up in the QB spot to wait and see. I think the organization will make a choice one or the other.
Click to expand...

Remember when the 49ers were good? They had Montana, Young, AND that other guy ...Jeff Garcia ...all on the roster at once ...and all with huge contracts. They played Montana ...let Young and Garcia develop ...then eventually dealt Montana.
 
MorKnolle said:
Bush wouldn't get as much money as Vince, Davis is getting less than Carr (about the same total but spread out over more years so less per year), and Bush and Davis can at least both be on the field at the same time. That is still a lot of money in one position either way, and to me neither of those positions are of great need for us, those are two big reasons why myself and cada are in the trade down camp.

In addition, Young would likely get about a $15-18 million signing bonus as the #1 pick, so trading him after next year would cost us $12.5-15 million against the cap next year, and trading Carr then would still cost $5.7 million against the cap if we go that route.
Click to expand...

So you think if Bush (and for the record he more than likely is the choice at #1) is the #1 pick you think that he'll make less money than VY who might be drafted below him? You're right, the money will be in either position so its neither here or there.
 
Yes I remember. Look into that cap and the status of the CBA back then though. Also, I am not a big fan of taking either VY or Bush, but whichever the Texans feel will help them win is fine by me. Either way it is gonna be some serious cash paid out.
 
thanks KT for bringing that info to light, I think many people dont remember the teams back then having a lot of stars because they could afford to pay them. The Niners of the 80's bought championships and every star that hit FA wanted to go there cause they could get paid and win rings.
 
Tha_Tinman said:
Remember when the 49ers were good? They had Montana, Young, AND that other guy ...Jeff Garcia ...all on the roster at once ...and all with huge contracts. They played Montana ...let Young and Garcia develop ...then eventually dealt Montana.
Click to expand...

I agree with you I just dont see why we cant keep both for one year either way we are going to lose some money.
 
MorKnolle said:
Bush wouldn't get as much money as Vince
Click to expand...

Where is there any evidence for this assertion? Can you name a RB who was paid less on their 1st contract than a QB taken after him? Safeties and TE's are at the low end of the NFL pay scale--nonetheless Winslow and Taylor were paid commensurate to their draft position, not their play position. Neither the Texans nor their fans should plan on a RB discount if Bush is taken.
 
Tha_Tinman said:
Remember when the 49ers were good? They had Montana, Young, AND that other guy ...Jeff Garcia ...all on the roster at once ...and all with huge contracts. They played Montana ...let Young and Garcia develop ...then eventually dealt Montana.
Click to expand...

Garcia was never on the 49ers with Joe Montana, his first season was 1999, long after Montana went to the Chiefs and then retired, for that matter Garcia barely overlapped with Steve Young. The third guy behind Young and Montana was Steve Bono, and as cada pointed out, there was no salary cap back then so teams could pay guys whatever they wanted like in baseball today.
 
kbourda said:
So you think if Bush (and for the record he more than likely is the choice at #1) is the #1 pick you think that he'll make less money than VY who might be drafted below him? You're right, the money will be in either position so its neither here or there.
Click to expand...
infantrycak said:
Where is there any evidence for this assertion? Can you name a RB who was paid less on their 1st contract than a QB taken after him? Safeties and TE's are at the low end of the NFL pay scale--nonetheless Winslow and Taylor were paid commensurate to their draft position, not their play position. Neither the Texans nor their fans should plan on a RB discount if Bush is taken.
Click to expand...

I meant (and thought I had said, but looking back I can see where the confusion developed. Since I was talking about the cap situation for our team I assumed you'd realize I meant Bush vs. Vince being picked #1 by us) that Bush being picked #1 will get paid less money than Vince getting picked #1. Vince at #3 will be about the same or probably a little less than Bush at #1. QBs are the highest paid position in the NFL, so a QB will get paid more than a RB if they are picked at the same position in the draft.
 
MorKnolle said:
I meant (and thought I had said, but looking back I can see where the confusion developed. Since I was talking about the cap situation for our team I assumed you'd realize I meant Bush vs. Vince being picked #1 by us) that Bush being picked #1 will get paid less money than Vince getting picked #1. Vince at #3 will be about the same or probably a little less than Bush at #1. QBs are the highest paid position in the NFL, so a QB will get paid more than a RB if they are picked at the same position in the draft.
Click to expand...

The problem is there is zero evidence for that assertion. In the last 5+ years, draft picks have been paid virtually lock step across the board, i.e. everyone gets in between the guy above and guy below them. Sean Taylor ($7.2 mil signing bonus on contract worth up to $40 mil), for example did not receive less money than Roy Williams (taken 2 positions later as in your #1 to #3 hypo--$6.6 mil signing bonus on a contract worth up to $27 mil) although Roy played a position which is much higher paid--in fact, the disparity between the pay of safeties and WR's in greater than the disparity between RB's and QB's. If you have any examples with actual facts I would love to see them.
 
infantrycak said:
The problem is there is zero evidence for that assertion. In the last 5+ years, draft picks have been paid virtually lock step across the board, i.e. everyone gets in between the guy above and guy below them. Sean Taylor ($7.2 mil signing bonus on contract worth up to $40 mil), for example did not receive less money than Roy Williams (taken 2 positions later as in your #1 to #3 hypo--$6.6 mil signing bonus on a contract worth up to $27 mil) although Roy played a position which is much higher paid--in fact, the disparity between the pay of safeties and WR's in greater than the disparity between RB's and QB's. If you have any examples with actual facts I would love to see them.
Click to expand...

Good point.
 
infantrycak said:
The problem is there is zero evidence for that assertion. In the last 5+ years, draft picks have been paid virtually lock step across the board, i.e. everyone gets in between the guy above and guy below them. Sean Taylor ($7.2 mil signing bonus on contract worth up to $40 mil), for example did not receive less money than Roy Williams (taken 2 positions later as in your #1 to #3 hypo--$6.6 mil signing bonus on a contract worth up to $27 mil) although Roy played a position which is much higher paid--in fact, the disparity between the pay of safeties and WR's in greater than the disparity between RB's and QB's. If you have any examples with actual facts I would love to see them.
Click to expand...

Look at the salaries for all the players in the league. QBs are easily the highest on average. Obviously 7 of the last 8 #1 overalls have been QBs and we haven't had a RB drafted #1 overall since before the salary cap came into play so we can't look at how #1 RBs are paid, but since QBs on the whole are paid more than RBs, it stands to reason that a QB drafted #1 will be viewed as a more valuable player and demand a higher salary. I think, going from the current trends, that Vince (or Leinart) will command a contract in the range of $52-55 million (higher than Eli and Alex Smith), while Bush will probably be more like $48-50 million (about the same as Eli and Alex Smith). Of course that is just speculation at this point, but QBs are undeniably the highest paid position in the NFL so chances are very great that a QB drafted at #1 will have higher market value than a RB at #1, of course contract negotiations will also depend on the player's perceived value of himself and how stingy of an agent he has along with what team he goes to, but it is still reasonable to say that a QB is going to get paid more than a RB.
 
MorKnolle said:
Of course that is just speculation at this point
Click to expand...

So there are no examples of 1st time contracts fitting this hypothesis that you know of? Seriously, would any agent worth his salt give in to this kind of speculation without a single concrete example? This is a recipe for a hold out disaster IMO.

but QBs are undeniably the highest paid position in the NFL so chances are very great that a QB drafted at #1 will have higher market value than a RB at #1
Click to expand...

Here is where your theory breaks apart--you are mixing in free agency and 2nd and 3rd contracts. That is simply using apples to try to judge oranges. As you can see from my safety and WR example, market value for subsequent contracts does not determine the value of 1st time contracts to displace draft position. QB's have not been promoted over their draft position on 1st time contracts in the last few years.

FYI--last year the franchise tag number for CB's (the average of the highest 5 players at the position) was 800k more than for QB's, but yes QB's are generally the highest paid players.
 
I do not think we need to debate the value of a position over another. The salaries for drafted players are not set in flexible concrete like the NBA, but the bonuses and accelerators are going to be more tilted in a QB's favor over a RB's in my opinion. It seems like the debate is essentially over the future cap hit due to the salary and bonuses at each position.
 
Tex-fan0604 said:

I think the Texans should just keep DC this year to see if Kubiak can really get him polished,you never know he might turn out like D.Brees.Draft VY Let him learn the offense and if DC really shows he can be the right guy for the Texans then you Can trade VY next season and still get a lot for him .If DC does ok but not great then we can trade him after the season and get more value for him and take less of a cap hit.
Click to expand...

The only problem I see with this, is that David may go back to his old self again, once the competition is gone. So, we should keep him at least 2 years. & a 4 year contract isn't the same as tied up money(I don't think it is) Teams are always cutting players signed to long term deals. Contracts are designed so that you can drop/trade a player without hurting yourself.

Besides, we Sign David for 2 years, put part of his bonus onto the 2005 cap, then we're only paying like $1.5, $1.6 million per year of bonus money.... Drop Banks, and you're about even. Ragone is your backup(can't be worse than Banks) and Vince is being Groomed. If David has two outstanding seasons in a Row, I doubt seriously that Vince's value would have dropped at all. We trade Vince, and get on with football.
 
Couldnt VY if he wanted to take a cheaper contract to play for the Texans....since he has said how bad he wants to be here:confused:
 
And BTW if Bush is the #1 pick, don't you think his agent will try and get "the highest rated prospect in the past 30 years" the biggest contract?
 
infantrycak said:
So there are no examples of 1st time contracts fitting this hypothesis that you know of?



Here is where your theory breaks apart--you are mixing in free agency and 2nd and 3rd contracts. That is simply using apples to try to judge oranges. As you can see from my safety and WR example, market value for subsequent contracts does not determine the value of 1st time contracts to displace draft position. QB's have not been promoted over their draft position on 1st time contracts in the last few years.

FYI--last year the franchise tag number for CB's (the average of the highest 5 players at the position) was 800k more than for QB's, but yes QB's are generally the highest paid players.
Click to expand...

he's right about the different salaries. it doesnt just go solely off of draft slot.

Cedric Benson 2005 pick #4 5 years $35 million

Philip Rivers 2004 pick #4 6 years $50.5 million
 
djkennedy101 said:
Couldnt VY if he wanted to take a cheaper contract to play for the Texans....since he has said how bad he wants to be here:confused:
Click to expand...

I don't think the rest of the players in the draft would like that too much. I think the pay would be slotted from the #1 pick on down.
 
kbourda said:
I don't think the rest of the players in the draft would like that too much. I think the pay would be slotted from the #1 pick on down.
Click to expand...
Who cares about the other players....That would be between VY and The Texans
 
stevo3883 said:
he's right about the different salaries. it doesnt just go solely off of draft slot.

Cedric Benson 2005 pick #4 5 years $35 million

Philip Rivers 2004 pick #4 6 years $50.5 million
Click to expand...

Rivers is kind of an anomaly as his agent was saying that since he landed with SD who had the first pick he should get higher money than a normal #4.
 
stevo3883 said:
he's right about the different salaries. it doesnt just go solely off of draft slot.

Cedric Benson 2005 pick #4 5 years $35 million

Philip Rivers 2004 pick #4 6 years $50.5 million
Click to expand...

Rivers is a poor example as he held out (much to his chagrin now--bet he isn't meeting those performance bonuses he negotiated) arguing he was in effect drafted #1. In any event, other reports don't have the disparity you report:

Rivers signed for $40 million, including a $14.25 million signing bonus.

Terms of the contract were not revealed, but the Bears reportedly had offered [Benson]between $17 million and $17.5 million guaranteed on a deal that could pay $35 million.
Click to expand...

40 over 6 doesn't average as much as $35 over 5, plus Benson appears to have gotten more guaranteed money.

Link

If Bush is taken #1 we will see. IMO this is just a made up argument to promote Bush (and I have nothing against drafting Bush, I just don't think this argument is realistic).
 
QB's will always get the good contracts, they get the ball almost every play. Of course if you are the #1 pick AND a QB, you just hit the lottery. Is it right, is it fair? Probably not as it's a team sport, but that is a capitalistic society we live in. Since the QB is more a focal point in the sense that he controls the ball the most, he basically becomes the picture for the franchise. Poor Oakland when they had Todd Marinovich, that was one ugly QB. (I'm afraid to mention any other ethnicity other than my own for fear of riots and/or terrorists)
 
SESupergenius said:
(I'm afraid to mention any other ethnicity other than my own for fear of riots and/or terrorists)
Click to expand...
no yer not...your not afraid. I've read you too long....besides, your avatar says that your not afraid. That said...we aren't keeping Young and Carr together cause they ain't like Peanut butter N jelly.
 
infantrycak said:
Rivers is a poor example as he held out (much to his chagrin now--bet he isn't meeting those performance bonuses he negotiated) arguing he was in effect drafted #1. In any event, other reports don't have the disparity you report:



40 over 6 doesn't average as much as $35 over 5, plus Benson appears to have gotten more guaranteed money.

Link

If Bush is taken #1 we will see. IMO this is just a made up argument to promote Bush (and I have nothing against drafting Bush, I just don't think this argument is realistic).
Click to expand...

One of the reasons that Benson held out this season was that his agent was trying to use River's contract as the baseline instead of just slotting in between the 3rd and 5th picks like was expected.
 
Why would we "waste" the first pick on the draft on a player who would not start for a year or two under this scenario? Seriously, if they want VY, and he is as quality as you all seem to think, then trade/release Carr and put him in now. Since Carr didn't receive the benefit of learning for a couple of years - why bother with VY? He is the best quarterback to ever come out of college...isn't he?
 
Vinny said:
no yer not...your not afraid. I've read you too long....besides, your avatar says that your not afraid. That said...we aren't keeping Young and Carr together cause they ain't like Peanut butter N jelly.
Click to expand...
ok ok, you got me, I actually don't know where I am going with that avatar, something just inspired me to make it.

I think Carr and Young can co-exist for 1 season and I find it odd that Carr hasn't been optioned yet. This is getting wilder by the day.
 
SESupergenius said:
I think Carr and Young can co-exist for 1 season and I find it odd that Carr hasn't been optioned yet. This is getting wilder by the day.
Click to expand...
craziest off-season yet. Casserly has been neutered, Reeves is still here, and nobody I know knows who is really sailing this ship.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top