Rocky Landing Posted August 11, 2020 Posted August 11, 2020 13 minutes ago, MJS said: Seems like crappy protection. Why not allow teams to protect them for the full week? I assume that's a condition negotiated by the NFLPA. If you're a vet player from a team with plenty of depth, and you get stuck on a PS, without any opportunity to play, imagine how much income they could potentially lose. I assume the same rules for counteroffers apply? 5 minutes ago, Ed_Formerly_of_Roch said: Does Boehn or Kroft have PS eligibility left? Almost certain Kroft does not. You have to have less than 2 accrued seasons played. Not by the new rules for this season. Up to six vet players may be placed on a PS.
Rochesterfan Posted August 11, 2020 Posted August 11, 2020 15 minutes ago, MJS said: Seems like crappy protection. Why not allow teams to protect them for the full week? Because the NFLPA wants to allow these guys the ability to get promoted. Therefore for a day and a half everyone is free. This just gives teams a bit more protection if they know they have a weak area and prevent teams from exploiting that late in the week.
Ed_Formerly_of_Roch Posted August 11, 2020 Posted August 11, 2020 42 minutes ago, atlbillsfan1975 said: I believe from above it states you can place 6 vet players on practice squad this year. 40 minutes ago, Rocky Landing said: I assume that's a condition negotiated by the NFLPA. If you're a vet player from a team with plenty of depth, and you get stuck on a PS, without any opportunity to play, imagine how much income they could potentially lose. I assume the same rules for counteroffers apply? Not by the new rules for this season. Up to six vet players may be placed on a PS. OK did find where that is the rules for this year. But still be surprised if they placed Kroft there and he likely has enough experience that some other team would sign him
GunnerBill Posted August 11, 2020 Posted August 11, 2020 6 minutes ago, Ed_Formerly_of_Roch said: OK did find where that is the rules for this year. But still be surprised if they placed Kroft there and he likely has enough experience that some other team would sign him I think they keep 4 Tight Ends.
Ed_Formerly_of_Roch Posted August 11, 2020 Posted August 11, 2020 6 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: I think they keep 4 Tight Ends. Personally I'd rather see them keep the 4 TE's ad go with only 6 WR. That will alienate all the Duke Williams fans though. But would prefer to keep Sweeney over Williams. Actually if Sweeney shows any improvement in blocking, I'd keep him over Smith.
GunnerBill Posted August 11, 2020 Posted August 11, 2020 3 minutes ago, Ed_Formerly_of_Roch said: Personally I'd rather see them keep the 4 TE's ad go with only 6 WR. That will alienate all the Duke Williams fans though. But would prefer to keep Sweeney over Williams. Actually if Sweeney shows any improvement in blocking, I'd keep him over Smith. They will only keep 6 receivers and I think Duke is about 8th in the pecking order as I have it. 1
Ed_Formerly_of_Roch Posted August 11, 2020 Posted August 11, 2020 1 minute ago, GunnerBill said: They will only keep 6 receivers and I think Duke is about 8th in the pecking order as I have it. I agree with you there too, but to many here it seems he should be around #4 or 5. Admittedly there's a good chance he could produce better than either of the two rookies (regardless of J Browns comments) but you don't allow draft choices to go that you view as better long term assets. 1
Hapless Bills Fan Posted August 11, 2020 Posted August 11, 2020 3 hours ago, JoshAllenHasBigHands said: Correct me if I'm wrong, but those protected spots only protect players starting the Thursday (?) of any given week. In other words, those players are still unprotected Monday through Wednesday. That is my understanding as well
MJS Posted August 11, 2020 Posted August 11, 2020 1 hour ago, Rochesterfan said: Because the NFLPA wants to allow these guys the ability to get promoted. Therefore for a day and a half everyone is free. This just gives teams a bit more protection if they know they have a weak area and prevent teams from exploiting that late in the week. Yeah I get it, but it essentially does nothing. You can stash a player for a few days but then if you want to keep him you have to promote him to the active roster.
eball Posted August 11, 2020 Posted August 11, 2020 Somebody probably already said it, but there is a "poaching period" from Sunday to Tuesday during which no PS players are protected. Then, on Tuesday afternoon a team can protect up to four for the upcoming week. Poaching is likely to be a negligible issue this year, though, because a player won't even be able to get into another team's facility for five days with the testing process. So you poach knowing that guy won't be able to play for you that week.
atlbillsfan1975 Posted August 11, 2020 Posted August 11, 2020 1 hour ago, GunnerBill said: I think they keep 4 Tight Ends. I hope you are wrong. Three would seem to be a better option, with 7 wide receivers.
GunnerBill Posted August 11, 2020 Posted August 11, 2020 5 minutes ago, atlbillsfan1975 said: I hope you are wrong. Three would seem to be a better option, with 7 wide receivers. How so?
Rocky Landing Posted August 11, 2020 Posted August 11, 2020 1 hour ago, GunnerBill said: They will only keep 6 receivers and I think Duke is about 8th in the pecking order as I have it. I guess this is what is meant when they refer to certain players as "polarizing." Never pass up an opportunity for a dig when a player is a fan favorite to some, but not to thee, even when the thread is not about that player.
Rocky Landing Posted August 11, 2020 Posted August 11, 2020 1 hour ago, GunnerBill said: I think they keep 4 Tight Ends. I feel like they're going to carry three QBs, and four RBs with Jones. I also think five DEs is a distinct possibility. An additional O-linesman, as well would not be surprising, as I think they are perceived as most vulnerable to attrition. The only sure fire way to keep these guys protected is to keep them on the 53. JMO.
atlbillsfan1975 Posted August 11, 2020 Posted August 11, 2020 29 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: How so? I think Knox, Kroft, and Smith are active with Sweeney to PS. I’d like to see Sweeney beat out Smith, but I will believe it when I see it because how much McD likes vets. WR’s- Beasley, Brown, Diggs, Roberts,Davis,Foster, and Hodges. Roberts and Foster are special team guys. The early reviews are that the rookies know the playbook. I like their potential over the other guys. Duke maybe goes to PS.
GunnerBill Posted August 11, 2020 Posted August 11, 2020 14 minutes ago, Rocky Landing said: I guess this is what is meant when they refer to certain players as "polarizing." Never pass up an opportunity for a dig when a player is a fan favorite to some, but not to thee, even when the thread is not about that player. I didn't bring Duke up. But I do genuinely think he is behind Diggs, Brown and Beasley. He was behind McKenzie all last season who has a very specific role in what the OC does. They are not cutting Davis whatever the "everyone has to earn it" rhetoric is and Roberts is a lock as the return guy. So that is 6 he is behind. Then I think the draft pick they spent on Hodgins probably means they have more invested in him.
Rocky Landing Posted August 11, 2020 Posted August 11, 2020 2 minutes ago, atlbillsfan1975 said: I think Knox, Kroft, and Smith are active with Sweeney to PS. I’d like to see Sweeney beat out Smith, but I will believe it when I see it because how much McD likes vets. WR’s- Beasley, Brown, Diggs, Roberts,Davis,Foster, and Hodges. Roberts and Foster are special team guys. The early reviews are that the rookies know the playbook. I like their potential over the other guys. Duke maybe goes to PS. I always chuckle a little when an NFL color commentator refers to Smith as, "blocking tight-end Lee Smith," when he's on the field. But, that (along with his vet presence, I suppose) is his value, and it isn't going to be replaced by Sweeney (or Kroft, for that matter).
GunnerBill Posted August 11, 2020 Posted August 11, 2020 2 minutes ago, atlbillsfan1975 said: I think Knox, Kroft, and Smith are active with Sweeney to PS. I’d like to see Sweeney beat out Smith, but I will believe it when I see it because how much McD likes vets. WR’s- Beasley, Brown, Diggs, Roberts,Davis,Foster, and Hodges. Roberts and Foster are special team guys. The early reviews are that the rookies know the playbook. I like their potential over the other guys. Duke maybe goes to PS. Foster does have a shot based on him making big teams improvements last year as a gunner. His issue is Davis projects as a potential gunner option too. If Foster doesn't win the main gunner job he is toast. 15 minutes ago, Rocky Landing said: I feel like they're going to carry three QBs, and four RBs with Jones. I also think five DEs is a distinct possibility. An additional O-linesman, as well would not be surprising, as I think they are perceived as most vulnerable to attrition. The only sure fire way to keep these guys protected is to keep them on the 53. JMO. I do think they will carry 3 QBs. If they carry Taiwan Jones it is a special teamer to play gunner so you are losing a receiver or a DB to do that. He isn't taking a tight end spot.
Rocky Landing Posted August 11, 2020 Posted August 11, 2020 4 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: I didn't bring Duke up. But I do genuinely think he is behind Diggs, Brown and Beasley. He was behind McKenzie all last season who has a very specific role in what the OC does. They are not cutting Davis whatever the "everyone has to earn it" rhetoric is and Roberts is a lock as the return guy. So that is 6 he is behind. Then I think the draft pick they spent on Hodgins probably means they have more invested in him. I feel like you've agreed with me in the past, though, that McKensie's value has, at least to some degree, been supplanted by Diggs. I'm not even saying this as an argument for putting Duke above him, but I would certainly think that McK's place on the roster is far less certain than it was this time last year.
GunnerBill Posted August 11, 2020 Posted August 11, 2020 Just now, Rocky Landing said: I feel like you've agreed with me in the past, though, that McKensie's value has, at least to some degree, been supplanted by Diggs. I'm not even saying this as an argument for putting Duke above him, but I would certainly think that McK's place on the roster is far less certain than it was this time last year. Nah I don't think Diggs supplants McKenzie. They haven't brought Diggs here to run sweeps and reverses. They have brought him here to make plays down the field. Why do they think they drafted two bigger bodied receivers who make contested catches? It isn't because they think Duke is about to break out. McKenzie is at more risk than last year, because there are 5 locks - Diggs, Brown, Beasley, Davis and Roberts - and that still leaves them with a draft pick unaccounted. Teams don't like cutting draft picks so if Hodgins shows anything he will get the 6th spot. Duke is a big bodied, non separator, with good not great hands, who doesn't play teams and was inactive almost all of last year. He has to take a significant leap to jump over any of those guys.
Recommended Posts