Compensatory Picks

[Joemailman]

http://www.nfl.com/draft/story/0ap1000000151670/article/nfl-awards-32-compensatory-draft-picks-to-16-teams

Packers get a 5th. I was hoping for a 4th. The fact that Saturday played more than Wells and made the Pro Bowl, and Flynn didn't start at all probably hurt here.

[Bretsky]

no suprises here.......we were drinking the kool aide last year thinking we'd get at least a 3rd and probably another pick. For the record I knew TT could not tag Flynn last year.....but trading him a year earlier in retrospect would have been wise. It's just too bad luck was not on our side and the while world got to see, as some already knew, that Russell Wilson was the second best QB in the state in his senior year of college.

You can never bank on shit for these stupid draft paybacks. Jennings could get hurt next year, and then have four Hall of Fame seasons in a row and we'd get next to nothing.

That is why you always sign and trade as TT did with Corey Williams, when you can. Unfortunately Jennings injury screwed that plan up.....if he stays healthy and had a stellar season I think TT would have successfully went to round two of doing the same thing

[Joemailman]

That is why you always sign and trade as TT did with Corey Williams, when you can. Unfortunately Jennings injury screwed that plan up.....if he stays healthy and had a stellar season I think TT would have successfully went to round two of doing the same thing

Did cap and trade go out with the new CBA? Doesn't seem like anybody is doing it. If the Packers could have done it with Jennings, why didn't the Steelers do it with Wallace? Or Miami with Jake Long?

[Guiness]

SF finagled an extra pick in there somehow. They lost 3, signed 1 and still got 3 picks, and the one they picked up was Manningham, so not a vet minimum guy.

[Bretsky]

Did cap and trade go out with the new CBA? Doesn't seem like anybody is doing it. If the Packers could have done it with Jennings, why didn't the Steelers do it with Wallace? Or Miami with Jake Long?

I agree it's harder
I thought Pitt had agreed not to tag Wallace...I might be wrong...but it was clear there was not good blood between Wallace and the Steelers...and they didn't want to be stuck with him.
Long was not tagged IMO....because Miams wanted to tag Starks instead and they were afraid of his injury

[pittstang5]

Did cap and trade go out with the new CBA? Doesn't seem like anybody is doing it. If the Packers could have done it with Jennings, why didn't the Steelers do it with Wallace? Or Miami with Jake Long?

I think it had been frowned upon, but teams did it anyway. Since the new CBA, I'm not sure if any team has done it.

[smuggler]

Basically, you're being deceitful if you tag and trade. The purpose of the tag is to retain players that you can't part with.

How can you then follow that up with a trade?

[Patler]

I agree it's harder
I thought Pitt had agreed not to tag Wallace...I might be wrong...but it was clear there was not good blood between Wallace and the Steelers...and they didn't want to be stuck with him.
Long was not tagged IMO....because Miams wanted to tag Starks instead and they were afraid of his injury

Long was in the same situation as Mario Williams was last year. His salary was higher than the tag amount, so they would have had to pay him 120% of his salary to tag him. I think it was going to be something like $16M.

[hawaii50]

SF finagled an extra pick in there somehow. They lost 3, signed 1 and still got 3 picks, and the one they picked up was Manningham, so not a vet minimum guy.

That's the first thing I wondered. How does SF get 3 picks (including a 4th) for losing 3 mediocre players?!? Somethings wrong there.

[pbmax]

I think it had been frowned upon, but teams did it anyway. Since the new CBA, I'm not sure if any team has done it.

Its explicitly against the rules and was for both agreements. But the practical matter would be to render a Tagged player un-tradeable for a season and the League doesn't seem to want to do that. So if no one complains, then no one investigates.

[3irty1]

no suprises here.......we were drinking the kool aide last year thinking we'd get at least a 3rd and probably another pick. For the record I knew TT could not tag Flynn last year.....but trading him a year earlier in retrospect would have been wise. It's just too bad luck was not on our side and the while world got to see, as some already knew, that Russell Wilson was the second best QB in the state in his senior year of college.

You can never bank on shit for these stupid draft paybacks. Jennings could get hurt next year, and then have four Hall of Fame seasons in a row and we'd get next to nothing.

That is why you always sign and trade as TT did with Corey Williams, when you can. Unfortunately Jennings injury screwed that plan up.....if he stays healthy and had a stellar season I think TT would have successfully went to round two of doing the same thing

Don't think Flynn would have been worth much without his 6TD game. I think TT played the Matt Flynn situation the best he could have.

[KYPack]

SF almost has to make some trades. They've got too many picks to manage.

They are in the best situation to pull a deal for Reavis, for instance.

[Guiness]

That's the first thing I wondered. How does SF get 3 picks (including a 4th) for losing 3 mediocre players?!? Somethings wrong there.

The WR they lost, Josh Morgan, signed a bigger deal than they paid for Manningham. Surprised me. Still, doesn't seem to be a good reason for them to get an extra pick.