NFL Offseason/Free Agency Thread

[run pMc]

If they bring back Nixon and you can bank on better health (and performance) from Jaire and Stokes, then I agree CB isn't a big need. I'm not sure how good Nixon is as a man corner in the slot...his agility is poor by NFL CB standards. Valentine is a steal for a R7 guy. I think they need to get better at slot corner, and hope for good health. Hope's not a great strategy, and corners get hurt a lot since they are always running around on the field... and the adage about never having too many good ones is true. I wouldn't spend a high round pick on one unless that's where the BPA is, but I could certainly see them take one in the middle rounds.

The safeties were seen league wide by scouts and evaluators as...not good. You absolutely have to improve on that. Even if I like any of the players from last year, there is plenty of room to improve and upgrade. NFL roster building is different in that you can't just stand pat or be content with your guys - you're either getting younger and better, or older and worse. Ford was hurt, but he was also inconsistent and was briefly benched early in the season. Inconsistent actually describes most of the safeties. Owens is ok depth and had a few good games, but he's not good in coverage and got embarrassed tackling more than he should. Johnson Jr., screwed up on the Kittle TD, by that point of the season he should know where to be on the field. Maybe that's coaching, but he's also in his 2nd year of playing safety, I don't know what you can expect from him.

It's not about "grass is greener" elsewhere, it's that the grass in the back end of the defense had a lot of brown spots, and you have to add water and nutrients (by way of draft/FA) to revitalize it.

If a player enters FA and they were 'just ok' or 'not good', why bring them back unless you HAVE to? You've likely already had enough time with them to gauge the extent of their upside and limitations. If there's someone better or more promising out there you have to take a look. Loyalty is a great quality, but not with roster-building -- GMs have to be ruthless or they end up with old injured Randall Cobbs eating up their cap space and costing them their job.

[texaspackerbacker]

It's not just loyalty. What I saw from our Safetys this past season was better than I've seen in a lot of past years. You shouldn't get rid of somebody unless you can replace them with as good or better. Safety, as I said, i one of those positions where college success doesn't always translate to NFL success. The other thing is that unlike Corner where a lot of athleticism is required, Safety is more about being instinctive. You can always point to failures. Generally, though, there weren't that many with the guys some of ya'all want to get rid of. The other other thing is that scheme and coaching has more to do with success in the secondary than anything else. Our new DC has a background as a DB position coach. We really ought to get some better performance all the way around with his people.

As I also said, we won a helluva lot of games even with Barry dragging things down. It's not gonna take too much improvement to win even more.

[Frozen Tundra]

The other other thing is that scheme and coaching has more to do with success in the secondary than anything else. Our new DC has a background as a DB position coach. We really ought to get some better performance all the way around with his people.

I think you and I are in the minority, but I completely agree with you here. I'm not sure why so many people don't seem to think this is going to be a factor.

I'm getting more and more excited about Hafley, because I've been reading a lot about his background and basic defensive philosophy the last few weeks, and one thing that just jumps up off of every page is that his ideas about what's supposed to be happening in the defensive backfield could not possibly be more opposite than what we've seen the Packers doing over the past several years. This guy is all about extreme agression and every defensive player taking the fight to the offense on every play from the instant the ball is snapped, and especially the safeties and CBs. And he expects linebackers to fight the receivers, too.

Our defensive backs in 2024 aren't going to be hanging 8-12 yards off the LOS waiting for the receivers to just set up and do whatever they feel like doing. They're going to be on the line, interfering with the route right from the first step and punching the WR on his first stride, jamming him and steering him away from his route and messing up the timing and limiting the options on his route tree. Break up the route within the first 2 or 3 strides; not just wait for the guy to catch the ball and then try to limit the YAC - spoil the designed play and force the quarterback to throw balls he doesn't want to throw, and then contesting every catch. None of what he expects his DBs to do looks anything like what we've had to watch the last few years.

Every one of the DBs on our roster will be expcted to do things we haven't really seen them do before, so we really don't have a very good idea how well they're going to play in their new roles. So we don't have a clear idea of what they'll be capable of in 2024. I really believe that we're going to learn that some of our DBs are a lot more capable than we thought they were.

[run pMc]

I think a DC with a DB background can absolutely help the secondary, and maybe even elevate average players to occasionally good or above average. I don't think Owens et al. are average players. Moreover, I think that while Barry's scheme protected the safeties to an extent and made the CBs look bad by having them so far off, I think Hafley's scheme will do more to elevate the CB's at the expense of the safeties by having the CBs play closer to LOS, press, play man, etc. more -- which is what Jaire, Stokes, and Valentine are good at. If you only have one safety deep they better have range, instincts, and be able to tackle. Savage had one of those abilities, Ford has maybe two of them, Owens I'm not sure has any... you get the idea. Maybe you play them down as the box safety, but none of them were reliable tacklers last year, and box safeties are easier to find. If you don't have a deep safety who with range to the sideline and ability to reliably get a guy onn the ground, you're exposed.

I think Ford, Owens, Savage might be fine depth, but I wouldn't want them starting for 17+ games. I don't think they will perform well in the new scheme.

[texaspackerbacker]

Do you really think Jaire can still play press man coverage and not get beat most of the time? It sure didn't look that way last year, but looking at it optimistically, maybe it was just the injuries. Valentine did damn good, but I question whether press man is what he's best at. And Stokes? Who knows. You're right, if we play single high safety, the guy better be fast and instinctive. I kinda dread the thought of going to that kind of scheme. I have to agree, Owens isn't fast enough to be that single high guy. I also don't like the thought of putting some rookie back there, even whoever might be available in the first round. If Halfley is dead set on that kind of D, he better be some kind of a magician. I say again, we have had the best defensive success both against the run and the pass playing shell coverage with two or even three safetys deep. I wish they'd do that a lot more.

[Joemailman]

Ian Rapoport
@RapSheet

Source: The #Bengals informed star WR Tee Higgins that they are franchising him.

[ThunderDan]

Ian Rapoport
@RapSheet

Source: The #Bengals informed star WR Tee Higgins that they are franchising him.

Not a shock. They aren't going to sign Higgins to a long-term contract before the get Ja'Marr Chase a contract and they can't do that until next year.

It will be interesting to see if Higgins signs the tag.

[Fritz]

What if he don't? Then what happens?

[Frozen Tundra]

What if he don't? Then what happens?

It's a free country, so they can always refuse. But once their team slaps an exclusive tag on them, they're locked into that team. They can not negotiate with any other club, because their team owns their rights.

If they refuse, they have until July 15 to try to negotiate a better deal with their club. If they're unable to do that, then their next move is to refuse to report to training camp when it begins the following week. At this point, the team can begin to fine them for not reporting. The collective bargaining agreement sets the limits of the fines, but they are progressive and quickly escalate to $50K/day. Every day they sit out. In the past, teams could waive the fines once an agreement was reached, but I'm not sure if that's still the case. Someone else here is bound to know.

If it's an exclusive tag, the original team is the only club who has the right to negotiate with the player. If it's a non exclusive tag, another team can give the player an offer sheet which the first team has the right to match, but there's a risk to that. If the original team refuses to match it, the second team is obligated to sign the player, but they surrender 2 1st round draft choices for the player's rights. That's only happened a couple of times, because it's a hell of a risk. Which is the whole reason it's written in that way.

Also, at any point here, the team can trade the rights to the player who is sitting out. Doesn't happen often, but sometimes they decide they're just not going to meet in the middle no matter what and it's better to get the player off their books now and free up the cap space, because once that tag is applied the offered salary counts against the cap.

The player can hold out as long as Week 10 of the season, but once he hits Week 10 without signing a contract (either with his original team, or a team to which hsi rights may hav ebeen traded), he's done for the year. He's forfeited his rights to negotiate any contract with any team for the rest of the league year. I believe that last happened a few years ago with a Pittsburgh RB who was pissed because he was tagged 2 years in a row and felt that his window for making one last big payday was closig fast.

[bobblehead]

It's a free country, so they can always refuse. But once their team slaps an exclusive tag on them, they're locked into that team. They can not negotiate with any other club, because their team owns their rights.

If they refuse, they have until July 15 to try to negotiate a better deal with their club. If they're unable to do that, then their next move is to refuse to report to training camp when it begins the following week. At this point, the team can begin to fine them for not reporting. The collective bargaining agreement sets the limits of the fines, but they are progressive and quickly escalate to $50K/day. Every day they sit out. In the past, teams could waive the fines once an agreement was reached, but I'm not sure if that's still the case. Someone else here is bound to know.

If it's an exclusive tag, the original team is the only club who has the right to negotiate with the player. If it's a non exclusive tag, another team can give the player an offer sheet which the first team has the right to match, but there's a risk to that. If the original team refuses to match it, the second team is obligated to sign the player, but they surrender 2 1st round draft choices for the player's rights. That's only happened a couple of times, because it's a hell of a risk. Which is the whole reason it's written in that way.

Also, at any point here, the team can trade the rights to the player who is sitting out. Doesn't happen often, but sometimes they decide they're just not going to meet in the middle no matter what and it's better to get the player off their books now and free up the cap space, because once that tag is applied the offered salary counts against the cap.

The player can hold out as long as Week 10 of the season, but once he hits Week 10 without signing a contract (either with his original team, or a team to which hsi rights may hav ebeen traded), he's done for the year. He's forfeited his rights to negotiate any contract with any team for the rest of the league year. I believe that last happened a few years ago with a Pittsburgh RB who was pissed because he was tagged 2 years in a row and felt that his window for making one last big payday was closig fast.

I don't think they can fine him while tagged and not signed. Pretty sure the player doesn't lose a dime until he loses game checks.

The other thing you may have not explained quite right is that they lose the league year if they don't sign by week 10. i.e. the team can tag that player again next year for the exact same thing. In Pitt, whats his name reported and signed in week 10 because that gave him credit for signing and the league year. If they had tagged him a second time the amount was obscene. If he didn't report they tag him as if he had never been tagged a first time.

[Frozen Tundra]

I don't think they can fine him while tagged and not signed. Pretty sure the player doesn't lose a dime until he loses game checks.

The other thing you may have not explained quite right is that they lose the league year if they don't sign by week 10. i.e. the team can tag that player again next year for the exact same thing. In Pitt, whats his name reported and signed in week 10 because that gave him credit for signing and the league year. If they had tagged him a second time the amount was obscene. If he didn't report they tag him as if he had never been tagged a first time.

Thanks, I knew I had a couple of things either only half-right or left out completely. Not to make excuses, but they really did make this one complicated as hell.

I knew somebody else would know and set it straight. Appreciated!

[Joemailman]

Jeremy Fowler
@JFowlerESPN

Source: #Chiefs are releasing wide receiver Marquez Valdes-Scantling.

Saves Kansas City $12 million on the cap.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Jeremy Fowler
@JFowlerESPN

Source: #Chiefs are releasing wide receiver Marquez Valdes-Scantling.

Saves Kansas City $12 million on the cap.

2 years, 20+ million frogskins in the bank. 2 rings. Not bad for a former 5th rounder from some no name swamp college in Florida.

Apparently, after the latest Roman numerals game, the dammed media asked MVS to explain why P-Ma is way better a rock thrower than Butte. MVS refused to bite. Said he has fond memories of pimping with Butte. This guy is gonna be a Jester, soon, no doubt.

[run pMc]

Mecole Hardman certainly bit when asked about KC vs. NYJ. Basically made it sound like the offensive staff was a clown car and said certain players got preferential treatment. Shocking, I know.

[Joemailman]

There are reports that Bears and Falcons have agreed to a trade for Justin Fields. If true, any trade wouldn't become official until March 13.