RealGM

Now that Jordan Love is extension eligible, how do you guys want his extension structured? Would you rather go the Jalen Hurts/Lamar Jackson route where the teams minimized the cap hits in the early years to try and go all in but then have massive cap hits on the back end, or would you rather go the more traditional route of spreading the cap hit fairly evenly across every year?

MVP2110 wrote:Now that Jordan Love is extension eligible, how do you guys want his extension structured? Would you rather go the Jalen Hurts/Lamar Jackson route where the teams minimized the cap hits in the early years to try and go all in but then have massive cap hits on the back end, or would you rather go the more traditional route of spreading the cap hit fairly evenly across every year?

I'd probably go the mahommes type route where there are lots of roster bonuses that guarantee each year and give a bigger yearly base, but then teams have the option to turn the bonuses and bases into signing bonuses and spread out over the length of the contract. This gives the team flexibility the first few years and also later on.

MVP2110 wrote:Now that Jordan Love is extension eligible, how do you guys want his extension structured? Would you rather go the Jalen Hurts/Lamar Jackson route where the teams minimized the cap hits in the early years to try and go all in but then have massive cap hits on the back end, or would you rather go the more traditional route of spreading the cap hit fairly evenly across every year?

With the Rodgtiari disasters coming off the books, pay as much as you can up front. The team is a contender now so extend the window as long as possible.

ReasonablySober wrote:

Read on Twitter

If this was a vote, Love would come in third and I love that. Let people keep doubting him.

I think he's going to have a monster year. MVP I'll say. Homerism but more solified line, a leap from rookies.

There are some absolutely gorgeous throws in this video

?t=8EmJrWilAjXHoIBiGq-CBg&s=19

M-C-G wrote:10 to 15 years ago it was the standard to sit a rookie 2 or 3 years and I think there were good reasons for it. I’d suspect if you isolated QBs drafted top 10, you’d find sitting is better but that’s just my guess.

For back half of 1st round or later, I’d bet the evidence supports more development prior to playing yields better results but just my gut feel.

So either way . . .

nagawicka wrote:

M-C-G wrote:10 to 15 years ago it was the standard to sit a rookie 2 or 3 years and I think there were good reasons for it. I’d suspect if you isolated QBs drafted top 10, you’d find sitting is better but that’s just my guess.

For back half of 1st round or later, I’d bet the evidence supports more development prior to playing yields better results but just my gut feel.

So either way . . .

Huh?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

nagawicka wrote:

M-C-G wrote:10 to 15 years ago it was the standard to sit a rookie 2 or 3 years and I think there were good reasons for it. I’d suspect if you isolated QBs drafted top 10, you’d find sitting is better but that’s just my guess.

For back half of 1st round or later, I’d bet the evidence supports more development prior to playing yields better results but just my gut feel.

So either way . . .

How is him saying he thinks sitting is better an "either way"? lol

Sent from my SM-S918U using RealGM mobile app

RRyder823 wrote:

nagawicka wrote:

M-C-G wrote:10 to 15 years ago it was the standard to sit a rookie 2 or 3 years and I think there were good reasons for it. I’d suspect if you isolated QBs drafted top 10, you’d find sitting is better but that’s just my guess.

For back half of 1st round or later, I’d bet the evidence supports more development prior to playing yields better results but just my gut feel.

So either way . . .

How is him saying he thinks sitting is better an "either way"? lol

I think it's just because he seems to be drawing a contrast between top-10 QBs vs. QBs drafted later, but then comes to the conclusion that sitting is better for both groups, which means there's no need to draw a contrast.

Would CJ Stoud be better this year had he not played last season?

Sent from my SM-F731U using RealGM mobile app

WeekapaugGroove wrote:Would CJ Stoud be better this year had he not played last season?

Sent from my SM-F731U using RealGM mobile app

Maybe?

coolhandluke121 wrote:

RRyder823 wrote:

nagawicka wrote:So either way . . .

How is him saying he thinks sitting is better an "either way"? lol

I think it's just because he seems to be drawing a contrast between top-10 QBs vs. QBs drafted later, but then comes to the conclusion that sitting is better for both groups, which means there's no need to draw a contrast.

Yeah I’d probably say a(not all but most) top 10 guy sits for a year where a late first or later may need two or three years. Again just a gut feeling


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

coolhandluke121 wrote:

RRyder823 wrote:

nagawicka wrote:So either way . . .

How is him saying he thinks sitting is better an "either way"? lol

I think it's just because he seems to be drawing a contrast between top-10 QBs vs. QBs drafted later, but then comes to the conclusion that sitting is better for both groups, which means there's no need to draw a contrast.

Yah, early draft picks are better off sitting to develop, later round picks are better off sitting to develop. Training up your 7th round qb and training up your 1st round qb before unleashing 'em seems like sound practice.