cle23

I know he didn't play well last year, and he may continue down that path, but I think it is much more likely that he packed it in last year and really didn't care. That's not good either, but he didn't suddenly lose the ability to play, I think he lost the will to play in GB anymore.

Hunt is different than Chubb. Chubb, as powerful as he is, is a cut and go. He avoids the 1st tackle or 2 and then plows through people. Hunt is straight ahead full speed. Not nearly as good as Chubb, but he is very good. Much better than Singletary in my opinion. And Hunt is a very good receiver as well.

That, and why would they want the 1st next year seeing as the draft is in a month.

The dude won MVP barely a year ago.

1 pm I believe.

He'd retire before going back to GB.

Obviously over the course of the next five years he's going to go downhill at some point. That doesn't mean after one down year he's suddenly gonna continue to be what he was last year. That's why I had said in the previous post that long term obviously it's Allen over him but next year could be a toss up.

They just win the Super Bowl and somehow the Bengals are more of a problem than the Chiefs? Plus, rumor of Tunsil to KC as a possibility. That would keep Taylor at RT.

I would agree more if it wasn't for the fact that Rodgers has been pissed at GB for a couple years, and last year it seemed to come to a head. I may be wrong, but I don't see much of a chance of him dropping off that much 1 year to the next, 39 or not.

Yes. Rodgers had 1 down year. He had won 2 straight MVPs before that, and 4 total. Obviously long term, Allen > Rodgers. If Rodgers continues downhill, then obviously Allen > Rodgers. But Rodgers was a top 2-3 QB in the NFL for 12+ years. 1 down disgruntled year doesn't guarantee he is suddenly trash. I could see Rodgers playing lights out next year just to prove the Packers wrong.

I can give you possibly Allen > Rodgers, with even that being debatable, but who else is better in the East?

Signing bonus, yes, they can ask for the money back. But I am pretty sure salary that was converted to a bonus they can't, especially if it was guaranteed salary.

If the player retires, it accelerates any bonus money amount to the immediate year. So yeah, you could add $5M a year for 20 years to spread it out, but when the player retires after 10, you'd get $50M upfront onto your cap.

When you covert salary into a bonus, it spreads the bonus out evenly over the remaining years, plus over any added years. So if you convert $30M into a bonus, and you have 4 years remaining, it would lower the 1st year by $22.5M, but add $7.5M to the other 3 years.

People keep saying its a mediocre QB class, and I don't disagree fully, but how many truly "great" QB classes are there? 2020, and then maybe 2017. Before 2017, I can't find a "great" class in years. All it takes is for Carolina to now select 1 great QB and it doesn't matter. This year was supposed to be the "great" QB class with Young, Stroud, Levis, etc. coming into the year.

JaMarcus Russell had the potential to be a good passer too. The mere thought of Richardson going 1st is insanity. The dude was average at best in college, and well below average when they played power 5 competition. He has the potential, but who trades that haul for a guy who MAY be good, or equally could be the worst QB taken in the 1st round. It has to be Stroud or Young, and Stroud scares me too. He is the best pure QB in the draft but he just doesn't seem to have any fire to him at all.

The total trade package for the 1st pick was 2 1sts, 2 2nds, and Moore. It's simple.

Just grouping up and agreeing not to have contracts like that are colluding all the same. That's the point. You can't have 32 owners get together to discuss contracts between 1 player and 1 team, no matter the players.

Wheezing during his cadence.

Kyle Pitts.

With interest rates at record lows, tons of people bought new(er) houses. More than during typical years. So of course mortgage debt rose. That's just common sense. Not saying everything is rainbows and sunshine because it's not, and inflation IS a major problem. Where exactly did all the "free" money come from?

The student loan forgiveness thing is the dumbest course of action I've seen in a long time. Are the loans predatory? Absolutely. So force the loans to be restructured to a reasonable situation, penalize the loan companies who intentionally caused the problem to enrich themselves, and then pay what you borrowed back with a reasonable interest situation. The penalties should also pay back the loans that are paid in full, but that were forced to pay way more than a reasonable amount. No student loan for $50K should take $120K to pay back. I was lucky enough to pay mine and my wife's off within 5-6 years of graduation, but we sacrificed a lot in order to do that. The loan forgiveness is just students and the loan companies benefitting from their dumb decisions, while the country eats it.

The "career" lifestyle was incentivized as well. It was a cheap way to buy votes. And everyone point fingers at the "welfare queen" Democrats, but it's a problem that both sides have taken advantage of for years. No one has the balls to restructure because it WILL cost them votes. There is no simple answer to solve all the problems, but we have to start heading that direction somehow.

I think most "welfare" programs need reigned in, but I don't care who they are benefitting more when saying it. I believe our country should provide some kind of safety net for people who fall on hard times, but it shouldn't be a career, no matter which side of the aisle is taking advantage of it. These programs have morphed over the years into something they were never intended to be, and both Red and Blue are responsible.