Compensatory Picks Issued Today

[Fritz]

Nothing wrong with it, except that the Bucs are fucking idiots. Teams like Chicago and Tampa always doing stupid things in free agency is what helps keep powerhouses like Seattle, Green Bay, New England, and Baltimore in their position. It's a double-edged sword.

Well, that's why it matters who runs your organization. The NFL tries to get perfect parity by such things as rewarding shitty teams with the first picks in each round of the draft - give them an advantage so they can get better. In theory, that was in part what free agency was going to do - to give shitty teams a leg up by letting better teams develop good players who could be then legally poached.

As it turns out, though, if your organization is run badly, you're going to screw up the advantages you're given.

[red]

Nothing wrong with it, except that the Bucs are fucking idiots. Teams like Chicago and Tampa always doing stupid things in free agency is what helps keep powerhouses like Seattle, Green Bay, New England, and Baltimore in their position. It's a double-edged sword.

yeah but its a compensation pick for losing a player. they have not lost the player. the lost him for a year, like an injury.

that IMO, should have brought the comp pick way down or cancelled it out all together

[smuggler]

I disagree. You enforce the rules as they are written all of the time. You don't make an exception when you feel the rules happen to benefit this team or that on this occasion or that. Sucks to suck, Tampa! Good on you, Cincy!

[Fritz]

Hmmm...next year, with Tramon's contract being what it is, could that translate into a fourth round pick?

[Joemailman]

Hmmm...next year, with Tramon's contract being what it is, could that translate into a fourth round pick?

Both Tramon and House I believe.

[smuggler]

Tramon is skirting the line for a 3rd, but most likely will be a 4th.

[Fritz]

Both Tramon and House I believe.

The possibility of three fourth round picks next year is surely causing Ted to bulge.

[Patler]

yeah but its a compensation pick for losing a player. they have not lost the player. the lost him for a year, like an injury.

that IMO, should have brought the comp pick way down or cancelled it out all together

What if they signed a different, but similar player this year? Should they still lose the compensation pick for the FA loss last year? I doubt anyone would even raise the question. Why should it matter who the player is that they sign this year?

To put it in Packer terms, the Packers lost Erik Walden in 2013 and received a compensatory pick in the 2014 draft. They also signed Peppers in 2014 as a street free agent. Should they have lost their compensation for Walden in the 2014 draft because they signed Peppers? Now, what if the Colts had released Walden after 2013, and instead of signing Peppers, the Packers re-signed Walden in 2014. Should they have lost the 2014 compensatory pick if they had signed Walden instead of Peppers?

[Joemailman]

The possibility of three fourth round picks next year is surely causing Ted to bulge.

Time to stock up the offensive line. Sitton, Lang, Tretter and Bakhtiari all 4th round picks.

[smuggler]

Where is talk of the 3rd 4th rounder coming from?

[red]

Where is talk of the 3rd 4th rounder coming from?

next year for tramon and house

[red]

What if they signed a different, but similar player this year? Should they still lose the compensation pick for the FA loss last year? I doubt anyone would even raise the question. Why should it matter who the player is that they sign this year?

To put it in Packer terms, the Packers lost Erik Walden in 2013 and received a compensatory pick in the 2014 draft. They also signed Peppers in 2014 as a street free agent. Should they have lost their compensation for Walden in the 2014 draft because they signed Peppers? Now, what if the Colts had released Walden after 2013, and instead of signing Peppers, the Packers re-signed Walden in 2014. Should they have lost the 2014 compensatory pick if they had signed Walden instead of Peppers?

yes, IMO, they should have lost the pick if they had re signed walden before the next draft

its compensation for a team to help rebuild after losing a guy, if the guy returns to the team before the team uses the comp pick, then they haven't lost anything have they?

so, whats stopping a team and player from getting together and deciding it might be in the players best interest to take a massive one year deal elsewhere. the team will get a high comp pick for him, and the team will resign the player the following year and let him chase a ring?

i don't know, to me this is common sense, if you haven't lost anything, you shouldn't get compensation. guess i'm in the minority on that

[pbmax]

its compensation for a team to help rebuild after losing a guy, if the guy returns to the team before the team uses the comp pick, then they haven't lost anything have they?

He played in Tampa last year. The Bungles lost a year of service.

[red]

so

should the nfl then start handing out comp picks for players who are hurt for full years?

and while we're on it, why not comp picks for players that have their careers ended?

those hurt worse

[pbmax]

so

should the nfl then start handing out comp picks for players who are hurt for full years?

and while we're on it, why not comp picks for players that have their careers ended?

those hurt worse

What part of free agent loss compensation is confusing?