LittleHurt05 Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 Now ESPN is reporting that Peyton Manning has been cleared to play football again. Until it comes out of Rob Lowe's mouth or Twitter account, I won't believe it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 QUOTE (SOXOBAMA @ Feb 2, 2012 -> 05:51 PM) Morons in Lions management. Nearly a third of their CAP is "eaten" by two players! (Stafford and CJ). I must say that if there are any two players to spend a third of the cap on it's a franchise QB & the most unstoppable receiver in the league. Cardinals were 35 seconds away from winning a Super Bowl mostly due to Warner/Fitzgerald. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Feb 2, 2012 -> 06:56 PM) Now ESPN is reporting that Peyton Manning has been cleared to play football again. Until it comes out of Rob Lowe's mouth or Twitter account, I won't believe it. Again, if he's cleared to play by 2 doctors right now, I can't believe he's untradeable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gatnom Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 QUOTE (SOXOBAMA @ Feb 2, 2012 -> 05:51 PM) Morons in Lions management. Nearly a third of their CAP is "eaten" by two players! (Stafford and CJ). I don't remember exactly, but weren't the two of them number 1 picks in the old draft where a number 1 pick would essentially command the money of a top free agent? If so, you really can't blame them... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 QUOTE (gatnom @ Feb 2, 2012 -> 08:17 PM) I don't remember exactly, but weren't the two of them number 1 picks in the old draft where a number 1 pick would essentially command the money of a top free agent? If so, you really can't blame them... They weren't both #1, Stafford was, but yes, it was impossible to have those 2 top picks without a huge cap hit. The Rams got killed by that this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrunkBomber Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 2, 2012 -> 07:06 PM) Again, if he's cleared to play by 2 doctors right now, I can't believe he's untradeable. Did you see the cap info I posted the other day? He isnt untradeable because of his perceived value. The easiest way to explain why trading him is virtually impossible is because in order to trade him theyd have to pay him his roster bonus of 28 million and then that money is added on to his guaranteed money to make his cap hit, which if they traded him would be 44 million over 2 seasons. You cant eat that much dead cap space, especially considering they dont have that good of a cap situation to begin with. If they cut him the cap hit is only 16 million (80% of his 20 million guaranteed) over the next 2 seasons. Its also worth noting these arent JUST cap numbers, they would also have to actually give him this money. They have 3 options. 1. Cut him, lose 8 million of cap space each of the next 2 seasons. 2. Keep him, have his cap number go down per season while he retained. 3. Trade him, hand him a check for 28 million dollars to go play for another team and have 44 million of dead cap space over the next 2 seasons in exchange for whatever he is traded for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 3, 2012 Author Share Posted February 3, 2012 JimIrsay Jim Irsay Peyton has not passed our physical nor has he been cleared to play for The Indianapolis Colts. Team statement coming on Friday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSox_Sonix Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 Goodell said that if the NFL brings a team to the LA market it would most likely be a new team and that they'd want to add another as well to keep an even number of teams. That would make 34 teams. Personally I'd be all for it. Love football and I don't think more teams would dilute the game at all as the talent pool is large enough to sustain it. No mention of where that other team would be. Memphis? San Antonio? Portland? SLC? Toronto? Montreal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Feb 3, 2012 -> 08:48 AM) Goodell said that if the NFL brings a team to the LA market it would most likely be a new team and that they'd want to add another as well to keep an even number of teams. That would make 34 teams. Personally I'd be all for it. Love football and I don't think more teams would dilute the game at all as the talent pool is large enough to sustain it. No mention of where that other team would be. Memphis? San Antonio? Portland? SLC? Toronto? Montreal? I really don't believe those words at all. I think he's trying to keep support for the LA Project going, but he doesn't want to undermine one of the franchises that could move there by saying their name in public. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodAsGould Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 3, 2012 -> 07:52 AM) I really don't believe those words at all. I think he's trying to keep support for the LA Project going, but he doesn't want to undermine one of the franchises that could move there by saying their name in public. Really there should not be a team in Jacksonville, they don't support them at all.....so if they make a new team in LA they'd have to find 2 cities for a new team and the Jaguars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 QUOTE (GoodAsGould @ Feb 3, 2012 -> 08:53 AM) Really there should not be a team in Jacksonville, they don't support them at all.....so if they make a new team in LA they'd have to find 2 cities for a new team and the Jaguars. Cincinnati has a real problem with never selling out their stadium/being on TV, the Rams are agitating for a new stadium and have already been in L.A., and then there's poor Buffalo. When you've got a list of 4+ franchises that are struggling and really bieng supported by the rest of the league, you're not going to expand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 3, 2012 -> 07:13 AM) JimIrsay Jim Irsay Peyton has not passed our physical nor has he been cleared to play for The Indianapolis Colts. Team statement coming on Friday. This whole situation just keeps getting weirder & weirder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodAsGould Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 3, 2012 -> 08:00 AM) Cincinnati has a real problem with never selling out their stadium/being on TV, the Rams are agitating for a new stadium and have already been in L.A., and then there's poor Buffalo. When you've got a list of 4+ franchises that are struggling and really bieng supported by the rest of the league, you're not going to expand. I think Cincy will be fine if they have some sustained success, Jacksonville has actually been pretty competitive most seasons and still get nothing. I think fans show up for Rams games so they might need a new stadium but just like the Vikings I don't think you move them from a city that has fans who show up. I honestly don't know anything about Buffalo to comment on them... still don't think they can have it as bad as Jacksonville. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 3, 2012 -> 08:00 AM) Cincinnati has a real problem with never selling out their stadium/being on TV, the Rams are agitating for a new stadium and have already been in L.A., and then there's poor Buffalo. When you've got a list of 4+ franchises that are struggling and really bieng supported by the rest of the league, you're not going to expand. Cincinnati would be fine if they had a different owner. Fans are just fed up with him, that's why they didn't come out this year to see a playoff team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Feb 3, 2012 -> 07:48 AM) Goodell said that if the NFL brings a team to the LA market it would most likely be a new team and that they'd want to add another as well to keep an even number of teams. That would make 34 teams. Personally I'd be all for it. Love football and I don't think more teams would dilute the game at all as the talent pool is large enough to sustain it. No mention of where that other team would be. Memphis? San Antonio? Portland? SLC? Toronto? Montreal? I think most major pro sport leagues are over saturated with teams. The NFL is not over saturated, but adding 2 more teams will do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dasox24 Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Feb 3, 2012 -> 08:48 AM) Goodell said that if the NFL brings a team to the LA market it would most likely be a new team and that they'd want to add another as well to keep an even number of teams. That would make 34 teams. Personally I'd be all for it. Love football and I don't think more teams would dilute the game at all as the talent pool is large enough to sustain it. No mention of where that other team would be. Memphis? San Antonio? Portland? SLC? Toronto? Montreal? As much as I hate to say it (being from Memphis), I don't think Memphis would support a NFL team very well. The people of Memphis have really adopted the Titans as their team and they tend to be fair-weather about going to sporting events. When the team is good (e.g. The Grizzlies last season), the city gets behind them 100%. But when they're bad, nobody cares. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrunkBomber Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 To me the NFL has the best division structure in sports. 4 divisions of 4 teams in each conference seems perfect. The playoff structure is good too. Id hope theyd relocate before they expand. I think they should move to a city that has never had a team though. Florida and California will always struggle with new franchises because a large portion of the population are transplants and they will never get the fan support like a city that has been starved for an NFL team forever, even if the population is smaller. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 QUOTE (DrunkBomber @ Feb 3, 2012 -> 04:45 PM) To me the NFL has the best division structure in sports. 4 divisions of 4 teams in each conference seems perfect. The playoff structure is good too. Id hope theyd relocate before they expand. I think they should move to a city that has never had a team though. Florida and California will always struggle with new franchises because a large portion of the population are transplants and they will never get the fan support like a city that has been starved for an NFL team forever, even if the population is smaller. In LA, it might be the case that there are a number of transplants, but the city just overwhelms any trend like that with size. There are literally 10 Jacksonville Metro Area's of population in the L.A. basin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SOXOBAMA Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 I wish that the 49ers new stadium was still in San Fran but glad the new stadium deal is done.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
South Paw Posted February 4, 2012 Share Posted February 4, 2012 Going to 34 teams just doesn't make much sense. One of the great things about the NFL is that winning your division actually means something and with 34 teams they would probably have to go to an NBA-like system Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted February 4, 2012 Share Posted February 4, 2012 (edited) QUOTE (SOXOBAMA @ Feb 3, 2012 -> 04:24 PM) I wish that the 49ers new stadium was still in San Fran but glad the new stadium deal is done.. SFGate - The 49ers now have the final $200 million needed to leave San Francisco, their home of 66 years, for a new, long-awaited stadium in Santa Clara. The National Football League announced Thursday it would give the team $200 million in loans and straight payments for its $1 billion, 68,500-seat facility. Site work began in January on the venue, which could open next to Great America as soon as the 2014 season. “This means we are fully funded for Santa Clara,” said 49ers CEO Jed York. “We are building a football stadium in Santa Clara.” Project leaders previously expected $150 million from the NFL. The extra $50 million is more than welcome, said Santa Clara Mayor Jamie Matthews. “We were only counting on $150 million, but it just goes to show the continued strength and support of the NFL and the owners of the team toward what will be an iconic building,” he said. The deal fell into place weeks after the five-time Super Bowl champions entered the playoffs for the first time since 2002. Their season ended in a loss to the New York Giants. San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee was not willing to concede the team was leaving the city, but his spokeswoman, Christine Falvey, acknowledged what city officials have privately said for years: Santa Clara will have to stumble for 49ers games to stay in San Francisco. “San Francisco has always said that we have a solid plan B in place,” Falvey said. “San Francisco will always be there.” Do the 49ers drop the "San Fransico" part of their name? California 49ers? Santa Clara 49ers? Edited February 4, 2012 by Athomeboy_2000 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knightni Posted February 4, 2012 Share Posted February 4, 2012 QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Feb 4, 2012 -> 02:59 PM) SFGate - Do the 49ers drop the "San Fransico" part of their name? California 49ers? Santa Clara 49ers? No Cal Niners? Golden State Niners? Bay City Niners? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted February 4, 2012 Share Posted February 4, 2012 QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Feb 4, 2012 -> 01:59 PM) SFGate - Do the 49ers drop the "San Fransico" part of their name? California 49ers? Santa Clara 49ers? San Jose 49ers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted February 4, 2012 Share Posted February 4, 2012 San Francisco 49ers of Santa Clara Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 How the f*** does Cris Carter not make the Hall of Fame? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts