NFL 2017

leaguegod wrote:landing sherman is weird, i've disliked him for so long lol

Welshy wrote:Love Sherman and if he gets fully recovered from that Achilles, great signing for an emerging 49ers, but we just resigned Casey Hayward for less.

Welshy wrote:Love Sherman and if he gets fully recovered from that Achilles, great signing for an emerging 49ers, but we just resigned Casey Hayward for less.

surmo13 wrote:If the Ravens aren't the most frustrating team to support in the off-season then they are real fucking close, year after year of watching other teams go out and get playmakers in positions of need, and the Ravens sit around pointing at the cap going 'nope, can't do that' while waiting for other teams to cut guys that used to be good so they can give them whats left...

surmo13 wrote:

or apparently, give guys that have never been good what's left, 7.5 million per year for a Redskins receiver that even their fans are saying 'wait, who fuck is that?"?? good lord...

Welshy wrote:Wowsers did not see the guaranteed money in that Sherman contract! Trust in yourself is one thing but sometimes injuries can’t be help and a torn Achilles is tough to recover from! Hayward deal is well under market value as well! Kid is a lockdown corner

ryno_ wrote:

Pretty crazy last week with all the trades and FA signings. Seems more nuts than usual.

Browns suddenly look really good - or they did until Thomas retired. First ballot HoF in 5 years, lock it in.

Chiefs are... interesting. Went from losing to TEN in the playoffs to trading their best 2 players away. AFCW will be a LAC/DEN shootout this year.

LAR are looking almost unbeatable tbh. Top 5 D, Top 5 O. Theyll go 14-2 this season.

Welshy wrote:
Reckon Goff has a slight reduction in performance when they figure out his and McVays combo, And how do they replace Quinn? But agree they look outstanding on paper, what a turnaround!

I wouldn’t mind Boston getting snapped up for overs so we can potentially make a run at Mathieu, some talk that a few teams are interested in Verrett for a 2nd and late round pick, when healthy he i unbelievable but I’ll take that sort of deal for him now

Are you happy with keenum mate?

ryno_ wrote:Nothing suss in the physical failure? That bloke (although nobody knew about him) hadn’t missed a game to injury yet. Suddenly he fails a physical at a new team? Seems legit.

I like the story that Arizona reaches out to Crabtree but he ran scared from having to play Talib and Sherman twice a season each.

Conspiracy theorists assert the Ravens may have voided Grant’s contract because they had buyer’s remorse when receiver Michael Crabtree became available (more on that below). The timing is the foundation of such a theory, but it makes an assumption and ignores a couple facts.

The assumption is the Ravens regretted the deal they offered Grant just two days prior. Baltimore was widely questioned by fans and media because they believed Grant was being overpaid based on his low production, but that doesn’t mean the Ravens thought the Ravens were overpaying. There was no indication Baltimore regretted the deal, which brings us to facts being ignored.

First, according to WNST’s Luke Jones, the media were put on alert about a potential press conference introducing Grant and Brown Thursday afternoon, after Crabtree was released, indicating they thought the deal would go through.

Second, according to The Baltimore Sun’s Jeff Zrebiec, the Ravens were already trying to add a third receiver, ON TOP OF Grant and Brown, before Crabtree was released (a move that had been rumored from the time the season ended). They were pursuing Jordy Nelson, who was cut by the Green Bay Packers Tuesday afternoon. Reports of the Ravens signing Grant came out Tuesday evening. They knew Nelson was available before agreeing with Grant, and they still continued pursuing him after.

All signs indicated the Ravens expected to sign Brown, Grant AND another receiver. Not either/or.

surmo13 wrote:

the timing of everything makes it look sketchy, but there's an article (full disclosure, it's from the Ravens website), which does a bit of a breakdown of the situation:

ryno_ wrote:

That doesnt make it less sketchy tbh - front offices are having conversations well before the media hear about them or press conferences are implied.

A guy whose played 64 games in 4 years fails a physical and it's not designated a non-football related injury? It seems very dodgy. Not against any rules... but very suss.

Ravens do look a lot better with Crabtree though. Do you still have a revolving door of RBs? Probably a second receiver and a 3 down back away from contending for the division.

Revraiser wrote:Jets traded up. Who will they get for it.

surmo13 wrote:

from all reports the issue is an ankle injury aggravated in the Redskins season finale last year, for the amount of guaranteed money put into the contract, i wouldn't be too thrilled about him coming in nursing an injury two months after it happened either...

it's important to note a few things that have not been said by the Ryan Grant camp:

a) getting failed on a physical while healthy would be the easiest grievance to file with the NFLPA in history, and it has not been filed.
b) when asked about the situation, his manager stated "If there was a game tomorrow, he could play" which is a 'read-between-the-lines" statement if i've ever heard it.

as for your second question, it's pretty much Collins' spot to lose after the way he ran last reason, released Woodhead who promptly retired but we'll get Dixon back, he and Allen should mean we're ok for pass catching backs.