Death to Google Ads! Texans Talk Tip Jar! 🍺😎👍
Thanks for your support!

NFL Random Thought of the Day

Half of the 2017 draft Top 10 picks had their fifth-year options declined
Posted by Michael David Smith on May 3, 2020, 5:18 AM EDT

The Top 10 of the 2017 NFL draft had some notable misses.

That’s why half of the Top 10 picks had their fifth-year options declined. Generally speaking, a player who has performed up to expectations will have his fifth-year option picked up, while a player who has fallen short will have his option declined. And by that measure, half of the Top 10 fell short.

Second overall pick Mitch Trubisky, third overall pick Solomon Thomas, fourth overall pick Leonard Fournette, fifth overall pick Corey Davis and ninth overall pick John Ross all had their options declined. First overall pick Myles Garrett, sixth overall pick Jamal Adams, seventh overall pick Mike Williams and 10th overall pick Patrick Mahomes all had their options picked up. Eighth overall pick Christian McCaffrey got a contract extension before the fifth-year option deadline.

Top 10 picks have more expensive fifth-year options than picks 11-32. The fifth-year salary for Top 10 picks is equal to the average of the 10 highest salaries at that player’s position, whereas for players 11-32, the fifth-year option is the average of the third through 25th highest salaries at the position. For example, Mahomes’ fifth-year option is $24.8 million, while 12th overall pick Deshaun Watson‘s fifth-year option is $17.5 million. That means Top 10 picks have to really produce for their options to be worth it.

Looming over the 2017 draft Top 10 is Mahomes, who through three years already has both a regular season MVP and a Super Bowl MVP to his credit. If they’re being honest, all nine teams that passed on Mahomes would say they regret it. But the five teams who passed on Mahomes just to draft a player whose option wasn’t picked up are the ones really kicking themselves.
 
MightyTExan said:
ullspeed.gif
Click to expand...
Horrible. He had the option to throw it down the middle or run it in himself.
 
NFL wants college football to proceed (but if not would likely move games to Saturdays)
May 3, 2020, 11:40 AM EDT


The NFL is indeed discussing the possibility of playing games on Saturdays in the event that college football doesn’t proceed with a season from September through December. As one source with direct knowledge of the discussions tells PFT, however, the league’s strong preference is for college football to happen, as scheduled.

No college football season or a delayed season (a February-May scenario has been mentioned) would dramatically complicate the NFL’s ability to scout players in advance of the 2021 draft.

“If there were to be no season, then we are going to have to scout off of either these guys’ freshman and sophomore tape only or freshman, sophomore, junior tape if they were going to be a rising senior,” Bills G.M. Brandon Beane recently said on the #PFTPM podcast.

If there’s no college season, some otherwise draft-eligible players may decide to stick around for 2021, assuming that they’d get an extra year of eligibility given that there was, you know, no season in 2020. Others, like Clemson quarterback Trevor Lawrence, would likely say “see ya” to Saturday football, even after spending only two seasons there. (On that point, it would be interesting to see whether the NFL and NFLPA agree to extend the artificial three-year barrier to entry into the draft, forcing players like Lawrence to wait another year — and in turn to help college football make up for the money it would have lost in 2020.)

If the college football season plays out from February to May, the NFL would have to delay the draft, which would in turn delay the availability of players to join the offseason program, and which also would dramatically restrict the pre-draft evaluation process. It also would raise a very real question as to whether players who finished a football season in May should be expected to start another one in September.

So the best-case scenario for the NFL entails college football games being played during college football season. But if that can’t happen, the NFL would indeed attempt to backfill Saturdays with games that otherwise would be played on Sundays.

As the source explained it, that most likely would entail making specific games available on Saturdays exclusively via Amazon Prime or ESPN+, with streaming platforms paying a premium for content that would entice zealous NFL fans to in turn pay the premium necessary to watch the games.

Those games would be removed from the FOX and CBS Sunday inventory, with the networks receiving a rebate (which would come in handy this year, given reduced advertising revenue) and with the NFL expecting to make back that cash and more via the next wave of broadcast deals.

It’s also possible that the league would expand its in-house Game Pass feature to include live Saturday games, selling the content directly to consumers who would, given the absence of college football, quite possibly fork over the kind of collective cash that the traditional broadcast networks couldn’t or wouldn’t for Saturday games.

However it plays out, don’t expect to see Saturdays play out like Sundays, with free content on three-letter networks (except in the home markets of the teams who play on Saturdays). The broadcast networks simply won’t want to buy those extra games, because it will be virtually impossible to for the broadcast networks turn a profit in the current climate.

THE REST OF THE STORY
**************************************************************************************************

Fans..................

1588533973030.png
 
Answered by ProFootballTalk:

From @thomasmckoskey: “Will the NFL change the rules of the supplemental draft this year because of COVID-19?”

This question has come up several times recently. Without delving into the niceties of player eligibility for the supplemental draft, it’s hard to imagine the NFL doing anything that would undermine the potential availability of college football players to play college football, either during college football season or from February through May.

The supplemental draft was devised for narrow and specific purposes. Broadening those categories to give players a way to escape an uncertain college football season will hamper the ability of college football to make as much money as possible from a workforce it doesn’t pay. And that alone is enough reason for the NFL to tread very lightly.
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
Answered by ProFootballTalk:

From @thomasmckoskey: “Will the NFL change the rules of the supplemental draft this year because of COVID-19?”

This question has come up several times recently. Without delving into the niceties of player eligibility for the supplemental draft, it’s hard to imagine the NFL doing anything that would undermine the potential availability of college football players to play college football, either during college football season or from February through May.

The supplemental draft was devised for narrow and specific purposes. Broadening those categories to give players a way to escape an uncertain college football season will hamper the ability of college football to make as much money as possible from a workforce it doesn’t pay. And that alone is enough reason for the NFL to tread very lightly.
Click to expand...

I understand what you're saying, but with the rules what they are this doesn't really apply unless there's collusion going on and the NFL risks this being an example of collusion if this goes to a court of law.

Do you really hink the NFL is willing to put themselves at risk for ruining the system over one messed up year due to Covid-19?

I cant see this happening.
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
Half of the 2017 draft Top 10 picks had their fifth-year options declined
Posted by Michael David Smith on May 3, 2020, 5:18 AM EDT

The Top 10 of the 2017 NFL draft had some notable misses.

That’s why half of the Top 10 picks had their fifth-year options declined. Generally speaking, a player who has performed up to expectations will have his fifth-year option picked up, while a player who has fallen short will have his option declined. And by that measure, half of the Top 10 fell short.

Second overall pick Mitch Trubisky, third overall pick Solomon Thomas, fourth overall pick Leonard Fournette, fifth overall pick Corey Davis and ninth overall pick John Ross all had their options declined. First overall pick Myles Garrett, sixth overall pick Jamal Adams, seventh overall pick Mike Williams and 10th overall pick Patrick Mahomes all had their options picked up. Eighth overall pick Christian McCaffrey got a contract extension before the fifth-year option deadline.

Top 10 picks have more expensive fifth-year options than picks 11-32. The fifth-year salary for Top 10 picks is equal to the average of the 10 highest salaries at that player’s position, whereas for players 11-32, the fifth-year option is the average of the third through 25th highest salaries at the position. For example, Mahomes’ fifth-year option is $24.8 million, while 12th overall pick Deshaun Watson‘s fifth-year option is $17.5 million. That means Top 10 picks have to really produce for their options to be worth it.

Looming over the 2017 draft Top 10 is Mahomes, who through three years already has both a regular season MVP and a Super Bowl MVP to his credit. If they’re being honest, all nine teams that passed on Mahomes would say they regret it. But the five teams who passed on Mahomes just to draft a player whose option wasn’t picked up are the ones really kicking themselves.
Click to expand...
According to a Bears website some guy named Ryan Pace is their GM and he's had that job since 2015 which means he's the guy who drafted Trubisky with the third overall in 2017 and in so doing left both MaHomes & Watson on his Board.
I dunno how is that guy still the GM in Chitown ?
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
The NFL just announced that ALL NFL games this season will be played in the US. Imagine that!
Click to expand...
Not a globalist C&D ?
Anyway they say the schedule in its entirety is to be released this Thursday night, May 7.
Wonder what chance there is that we play the champs in KC for the NFL opener ?
 
How are they going to determine who the 17th game is against?

Far as I know preseason games are a relatively random process. Is the NFL going to take a more structured approach to that 4th preseason game?
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
From The Kansas City Star

Here’s the speculation on who Chiefs might face in season opener (banner night)
BY PETE GRATHOFF
MAY 04, 2020 09:46 AM, UPDATED MAY 04, 2020 09:46 AM
Click to expand...
That's an easy pick because clearly it would be the Pats, except for the absence from the NE roster of one middle-aged fellow who's moved south this year to FLA. BTW I see that KC is playing Brady this year but @ TB not in Arrowhead.
I always dread seeing the Texans & Chiefs meet because as a native of the KC area I was a Chiefs fan well before being a Texans fan.
But I got a real kick out of seeing the Chiefs win their second SB a couple months ago.
But back to the season opener and it looks like its down to the Texans and the Raiders. Even though there's always interest in a MaHomes vs Watson contest, but we all know the Texans aren't any kind of a national draw therefor I see the Raidrs and Chiefs opening the
2020 NFL season in Arrowhead.
 
IDEXAN said:
That's an easy pick because clearly it would be the Pats, except for the absence from the NE roster of one middle-aged fellow who's moved south this year to FLA. BTW I see that KC is playing Brady this year but @ TB not in Arrowhead.
I always dread seeing the Texans & Chiefs meet because as a native of the KC area I was a Chiefs fan well before being a Texans fan.
But I got a real kick out of seeing the Chiefs win their second SB a couple months ago.
But back to the season opener and it looks like its down to the Texans and the Raiders. Even though there's always interest in a MaHomes vs Watson contest, but we all know the Texans aren't any kind of a national draw therefor I see the Raidrs and Chiefs opening the
2020 NFL season in Arrowhead.
Click to expand...
The label of a "revenge" game may make the KC vs Houston match up more enticing. [BTW. I also grew up in KC as a strong Chiefs fan and still have a warm spot for them.]
 
KoolAid Sipper said:
Can you quote the article? Its asking for a subscription...
Click to expand...
Sorry, it let me in earlier, but now I'm blocked. The Texans were felt to be the one of the top 2 likely to play in the Chiefs opener (can't remember who was the other, but it wasn't the Patriots or the Raiders).......and in the end, if I remember, the Texans ended up at the top of their list.
 
The Jags have decided to keep Leonard Fournette as serious trade partners were nowhere to be found. This is going to be interesting, after he lobbied publicly for getting Cam Newton in over Minshew. :popcorn:
 
OptimisticTexan said:
Did OB ever contact them?
Click to expand...
I can't answer that question with certainty at this time, but I have heard from reliable sources that teams for many reasons were hesitant to touch him in trade based on past injury history (ankle and hamstring) and his response to rehabbing, past poor conditioning efforts, past problems with picking up and playing within the offense (focusing only on gaining yds for padding his own stats [yet only producing a total of 3 TDs last season] while sacrificing the passing and rest of the team's game), past on field and off field discipline issues, wanting a long-term big contract without feeling that he needs this year to be a "prove it'" year [as with Clowney, teams are afraid that last year with all of his stat "padding" was for setting up his desired big contract.......and when he gets it, he will go back to his old ways.........or worse].
 
Last edited:
CloakNNNdagger said:
I can't answer that question with certainty at this time, but I have heard from reliable sources that teams for many reasons were hesitant to touch him in trade based on past injury history (ankle and hamstring) and his response to rehabbing, past poor conditioning efforts, past problems with picking up and playing within the offense (focusing only on gaining yds for padding his own stats [yet only producing a total of 3 TDs last season] while sacrificing the passing and rest of the team's game), past on field and off field discipline issues, wanting a long-term big contract without feeling that he needs this year to be a "prove it'" year [as with Clowney, teams are afraid that last year with all of his stat "padding" was for setting up his desired big contract.......and when he gets it, he will go back to his old ways.........or worse].
Click to expand...

Fournette will learn the same tragic lesson as Clowney. Unless his desire is to wait and see when the XFL will kick-off again, he's going to have to suck it up and play on a prove it type of contract.
 
IDEXAN said:
That's an easy pick because clearly it would be the Pats, except for the absence from the NE roster of one middle-aged fellow who's moved south this year to FLA. BTW I see that KC is playing Brady this year but @ TB not in Arrowhead.
I always dread seeing the Texans & Chiefs meet because as a native of the KC area I was a Chiefs fan well before being a Texans fan.
But I got a real kick out of seeing the Chiefs win their second SB a couple months ago.
But back to the season opener and it looks like its down to the Texans and the Raiders. Even though there's always interest in a MaHomes vs Watson contest, but we all know the Texans aren't any kind of a national draw therefor I see the Raidrs and Chiefs opening the
2020 NFL season in Arrowhead.
Click to expand...
https://twitter.com/x/status/1258110926584197122
 
Report: Earl Thomas threatened at gunpoint by wife in domestic incident
Posted by Curtis Crabtree on May 6, 2020, 11:42 PM EDT

Baltimore Ravens safety Earl Thomas had a gun held to his head by his wife after she caught him cheating in an incident last month, according to a report from TMZ.

Per the police report acquired by TMZ, Thomas’ wife, Nina, confronted him and his brother, Seth, after tracking him to a rental home via his snapchat account. Thomas had left home after a disagreement over his drinking earlier in the day. His wife then logged into his social
THE REST OF THE STORY :bat::gun:
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
Report: Earl Thomas threatened at gunpoint by wife in domestic incident
Posted by Curtis Crabtree on May 6, 2020, 11:42 PM EDT

Baltimore Ravens safety Earl Thomas had a gun held to his head by his wife after she caught him cheating in an incident last month, according to a report from TMZ.

Per the police report acquired by TMZ, Thomas’ wife, Nina, confronted him and his brother, Seth, after tracking him to a rental home via his snapchat account. Thomas had left home after a disagreement over his drinking earlier in the day. His wife then logged into his social
THE REST OF THE STORY :bat::gun:
Click to expand...

I wonder if his life flashed before him.
 
thunderkyss said:
The referees obviously won this round. They bottom line refused to reverse all but the most egregious oversights.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, there were even notable egregious oversights they refused to reverse. Since these reviews were made via high ranking referee intermediaries, it was quite obvious that the NFL Referees Association resented being forced by the League office to so publicly on-the-spot acknowledge and correct their errors (rather than after-the-fact behind closed door). They viewed this as harassment instead of an attempt to attain fair and correct rulings.........many of which could determine the course of a game. Bottom line, from the beginning, the NFLRA had no intentions of cooperating with what they saw as an "insulting" mandate.
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
Unfortunately, there were even notable egregious oversights they refused to reverse. Since these reviews were made via high ranking referee intermediaries, it was quite obvious that the NFL Referees Association resented being forced by the League office to so publicly on-the-spot acknowledge and correct their errors (rather than after-the-fact behind closed door). They viewed this as harassment instead of an attempt to attain fair and correct rulings.........many of which could determine the course of a game. Bottom line, from the beginning, the NFLRA had no intentions of cooperating with what they saw as an "insulting" mandate.
Click to expand...

I dont know what the answer is to break up these band of thieves.

Maybe it's time to start looking into not only the refs bank accounts but their relatives bank accounts. This should only happen if a Rams/Saints situation happens in a game. The NFL should never let a guy with ties to an org or city ref a game that the team plays in.
 
When they are reviewing a catch, notice how they use slow motion to try and detect things. It would seem on catches they would need to run it a regular speed. Slow motion seems to change things too much
 
bigmck said:
When they are reviewing a catch, notice how they use slow motion to try and detect things. It would seem on catches they would need to run it a regular speed. Slow motion seems to change things too much
Click to expand...
The egregious calls were review of the on-field pass interference "no calls".....................where slow motion should have greatly enhanced and made easy the ability to detect contact and to reverse errant calls. As I've always told my step kids............."Nothing is easy for the unwilling."
 
I've repeatedly have questioned how the NFL can proceed in a realistically safe manner with hopes of completing a season, even with fanless stadiums.................what will be the regimen of testing (something which does not ensure real time day-to-day valid usable information).............identifying positives (with 1/3 false negatives).................what to do after a player (especially a starting QB) tests positive (quarantine only that player...........or the whole team...............or include the opposing team).

The NFL has said that they intend to present the "COVID rules" prior to TC. This is going to be very interesting to follow. As things stand now, it would be difficult for me not to be skeptical concerning the possibility of a successful 2020 NFL season. Only time will tell

1589202043955.png
 
Last edited:
Pass interference review did not work and has definitely been nixed. However, the Competition Committee on May 19 will be discussing a replacement option.

***************************************************************************************************

“There’s options that we’re going to be reviewing,” Cowboys exec and Competition Committee member Stephen Jones told #PFTPM on Friday. “[W]hat we don’t want to do is make a decision that does have unintended consequences that aren’t in the best interest of the game. We know we got a great game. . . . There’s certainly some solutions that I think moving forward can make our game better. We’ll focus on those. We’ll hopefully get into a situation sooner than later where we can continue business as usual in the future where can really vet these and vet all the unintended consequences that may come along with these solutions.”

The owners will meet in virtual fashion on May 19. At that time they definitely won’t be extending replay review for pass interference for another year, and Jones is OK with that.

“I’m certainly on board that we needed to move away from what we did last year,” Jones said. “These officials do a great job. They’re not gonna be perfect. This game’s fast moving. But overall they do a great job. We need to support them. Hopefully, we won’t have that type of situation again but we will look at solutions moving forward.”

Absent something like Sky Judge or a similar device for fixing an egregious error immediately, the league will be running the risk of another horrible outcome that creates a major controversy. With legalized gambling spreading (the spread could accelerate as the various states try to rebuild their budgets post-pandemic), the next bad-call controversy could be the one that prompts politicians to do political things, and/or prosecutors to do prosecutorial things. So it’s in the league’s best interest to have a system that works.

The last system didn’t. While some blame execution of the replay-review function when it comes to interference calls, Jones said he thinks that the concept simply doesn’t work when it comes to pass interference.

“It’s just the subjectivity that comes with what is what isn’t pass interference and being consistent with it,” Jones said. “I think that’s the hard part is the consistency that every coach wants, that our owners want, that our fans want. Everyone wants consistency. These guys are great athletes. There’s a lot of hand fighting on every play. I think our fans like to see our players play. They don’t want to see a lot of flags. I just think it was very difficult on judgment calls to really get down and have that be part of replay.”

Whatever the reason, the one-year experiment didn’t work. Soon, we’ll find out whether the NFL will have a new experiment, or whether the league will simply hope that there’s no repeat of Rams-Saints until the folks charged with making these decisions have retired.
LINK

***************************************************************************************************

It is sad but not expected that the introduction of NFL gambling would have so much influence on the game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top