2025-2026 NFL Season Thread

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by imsounoriginal

Tagging players more than once needs to be stopped in the next CBA. That's the real problem here.

While we’re at it, how about players giving money back(deducted from the cap) for underperforming?

[imsounoriginal]

Originally Posted by rickah88

While we’re at it, how about players giving money back(deducted from the cap) for underperforming?

Isn't that what incentives are for?

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by imsounoriginal

Isn't that what incentives are for?

Incentives are above the mean. What happens when performance falls below the mean? Currently the answer is nothing, short of being cut or released.

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by Tony208

Good for le'veon. Can't let teams abuse the tag, especially on a RB.

You do know there's at least a small chance Elliott gets tagged in 2020, right?

[imsounoriginal]

Originally Posted by rickah88

Incentives are above the mean. What happens when performance falls below the mean? Currently the answer is nothing, short of being cut or released.

That's the gamble teams take. The players are gambling with their health on every down, the teams can afford to gamble a bit too.

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by imsounoriginal

That's the gamble teams take. The players are gambling with their health on every down, the teams can afford to gamble a bit too.

Even if injured the players will receive a settlement depending on the severity of the injury. Plus they also have insurance. The team receives a glaring hole at the position, and is forced to scramble to fix it.
The door should swing both ways. If players are producing everyone wins. If they don’t, they don’t earn as much and it will allow the team some added flexibility for roster changes.
It will never happen because the players union would never allow it, but it would truly put an emphasis on incentive.

[Bigdog]

Originally Posted by rickah88

Even if injured the players will receive a settlement depending on the severity of the injury. Plus they also have insurance. The team receives a glaring hole at the position, and is forced to scramble to fix it.
The door should swing both ways. If players are producing everyone wins. If they don’t, they don’t earn as much and it will allow the team some added flexibility for roster changes.
It will never happen because the players union would never allow it, but it would truly put an emphasis on incentive.

Lmao you make little to no sense here, if it goes both ways then teams should then be forced to pay more if a player over performs, that is if you think they should have a right to take away if under performing. The system is fine how it is imo only that franchises need to be stopped from abusing the franchise tag imo which is the case here with Bell.

They should only get one season to place a tag on someone, I think that is completely fair.

[Batman1980]

Considering what Bell did for that franchise and the fact that they weren't going to pay him, they got what they deserved. It should be against the CBA to franchise RBs, especially 30 year olds like Bell who probably only have 3-4 seasons left at most.

[fatediesel]

Originally Posted by Batman1980

Considering what Bell did for that franchise and the fact that they weren't going to pay him, they got what they deserved. It should be against the CBA to franchise RBs, especially 30 year olds like Bell who probably only have 3-4 seasons left at most.

Bell is 26. The players hate the franchise tag but it affects so few players that it isn't worth a big fight. To get the owners to get rid of the franchise tag the players would have to give something up, and it's just not worth a concession for something that usually affects 5-6 guys per year.

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by fatediesel

Bell is 26. The players hate the franchise tag but it affects so few players that it isn't worth a big fight. To get the owners to get rid of the franchise tag the players would have to give something up, and it's just not worth a concession for something that usually affects 5-6 guys per year.

Ah right, mixed up his age and Brown's. Still agree with those who say the franchise tag shouldn't be used this much. Squealers lucked out that Comer looks like the next Bell anyway.

[Samus Aran]

Originally Posted by RageATL

He's no different than any other guy that's held out or done something similar. He'll get his money regardless.

I'd take him every day of the week and twice on Sunday, baby!!!

Bell's never getting a contract that will make up for the $14.5 he lost. Also, anyone willing to pay him what he wants probably won't be very good, maybe have a QB still under his first contract for it to work financially. Jets?

[Bigdog]

Originally Posted by Samus Aran

Bell's never getting a contract that will make up for the $14.5 he lost. Also, anyone willing to pay him what he wants probably won't be very good, maybe have a QB still under his first contract for it to work financially. Jets?

I'm thinking Raiders but the Jets will certainly be in play imo.

[RageATL]

Originally Posted by Samus Aran

Bell's never getting a contract that will make up for the $14.5 he lost. Also, anyone willing to pay him what he wants probably won't be very good, maybe have a QB still under his first contract for it to work financially. Jets?

The NYJ fit the bill. $100M+ under the cap and what will be a 2nd year QB on his rookie contract to take the heat off of him in the run game and swing pass game.

[Batman1980]

Jets go get themselves a #1 WR to go with Enunwa and Anderson and Bell and they might be able to make some noise in that division.

[BizCat]

Originally Posted by Bigdog

Lmao you make little to no sense here, if it goes both ways then teams should then be forced to pay more if a player over performs, that is if you think they should have a right to take away if under performing. The system is fine how it is imo only that franchises need to be stopped from abusing the franchise tag imo which is the case here with Bell.

They should only get one season to place a tag on someone, I think that is completely fair.

He could have signed the offer...

[Tony208]

300+ touches for a RB is considered being run into the ground. Le'veon had that last year PLUS 85 catches.

We did the same shit to Demarco Murray before letting him go.

[RageATL]

Originally Posted by Batman1980

Jets go get themselves a #1 WR to go with Enunwa and Anderson and Bell and they might be able to make some noise in that division.

Problem is, they're gonna need a whole new coaching staff at the end of this season when they're all fired.

[RageATL]

Originally Posted by Tony208

300+ touches for a RB is considered being run into the ground. Le'veon had that last year PLUS 85 catches.

We did the same shit to Demarco Murray before letting him go.

And that's precisely what the NYG are also doing with Barkley.

[BizCat]

Crybabies.

[fatediesel]

Some good flex changes coming to Sunday Night Football:

Ian Rapoport
‏Verified account @RapSheet
Flex! In Week 13 (Dec. 2), the #Chargers-#Steelers game was moved from 1 pm to 8:20 PM ET on NBC. ... In Week 14 (Dec. 9), the #Rams-#Bears game that was at 1 PM will move to 8:20 PM ET on NBC.

Week 13 was supposed to be 49ers at Seahawks, and week 14 was supposed to be Steelers at Raiders, so major upgrades.