Meanwhile Jimmy Haslam says sorry you're triggered. Oh, my bad, he actually didn't say sorry. And he says Watson is remorseful, which is a lie.
From the statement: "Continue the work"
Yes, from Late Stage Capitalism 2, Chapter 6, Verse 14, "Thou shalt continue the work such that they shall know thee by thy words and deeds, but mostly that thou art of money and shall feel no pain."
Deebo Samuel's deal includes incentives that are tied to rushing yards and rushing TDs. That's one way to bridge any divide on how he's being used.
He gets money if he has over 380 rushing yards in a season, and he gets money if he has 3 or more rushing touchdowns in a season.
He's actually never had 380 yards in a season (last year's total was 365), though he's hit the 3 touchdown mark twice (8 TDs last year, and 3 TDs in his rookie year).
I expect he'll have fewer carries per game than his streak over the second half of last year (when all the Niners RBs were hurt), but he'll get steady ground game touches somewhere between his late 2021 usage and his pre-2021 usage.
If you're Deebo, why do you agree to that? Or are these big stretch money goals that don't make up the meat of the contract?
If you're Deebo, why do you agree to that? Or are these big stretch money goals that don't make up the meat of the contract?
They're fairly small bonuses, relative to his deal.
$650K for the yardage bonus, $150K for the touchdowns, with a cap of just shy under $2m for the life of the extension.
It's enough to let him leapfrog a couple of guys that are right in front of him on the WR salary chart, but not enough that it's going to make or break the deal. But even guys making $20+ mil a year still show up to get those $500K workout bonuses in the offseason. So Deebo can at least feel like he's getting a little extra something for the extra ground touches.
Basically, if he gets one yardage bonus, he'll bypass DK Metcalf's take-home. If he strikes out on all his bonuses, DK will edge him out.
Okay. Probably the funniest fake headline I have seen this morning is:
Calvin Ridley suspended additional year after betting on DeShaun Watson trial outcome
Big Edit: NFL suspends Stephen Ross for tampering with Sean Payton, Tom Brady:
Well, well, well.The most overlooked story of the 2022 offseason is overlooked no longer.
On Tuesday, the NFL suspended Dolphins owner Stephen Ross for the first six weeks of the 2022 season for tampering with former Saints coach Sean Payton and Buccaneers quarterback Tom Brady.
Mary Jo White, who was hired to investigate the allegation that Ross and the Dolphins tried to tank in 2019 in order to improve 2020 draft position, ended up investigating whether and to what extent Ross and the Dolphins tampered with Payton and Brady. She found that they did.
“The Dolphins had impermissible communications with quarterback Tom Brady in 2019-20, while he was under contract to the New England Patriots,” the league said in a statement. “Those communications began as early as August 2019 and continued throughout the 2019 season and postseason. These numerous and detailed discussions were conducted by Mr. Beal, who in turn kept Mr. Ross and other Dolphins executives informed of his discussions with Mr. Brady.
The NFL stripped Miami of the team’s first-run pick in 2023, and its third-round selection in 2024. Ross is barred from the team’s facility through October 17, and he cannot represent the club at any team or league event. He is barred from any league meetings before March 2023, and he has been fined $1.5 million.Beal, the vice chairman and limited partner of the Dolphins, has been barred from all league meetings through the end of the year and fined $500,000.
Woo, the rare 1st round pick penalty.
Of course, the Dolphins still have San Francisco's 1st round pick next year from the Trey Lance deal. But Miami has been setting draft capital on fire lately.
They gave up an extra 1st to get the Jaylen Waddle pick.
They gave up a 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 6th for Tyreek Hill.
And now they're penalized a 1st and a 3rd for flirting with Brady.
I think even the Rams would look at this and say, "dude, calm down."
That's an awful lot of draft capital to burn through just to get 2 wide receivers, one of which you still had to pay a ceiling-busting contract like he was an unrestricted free agent. They could have rebuilt half their roster with all this.
If Tua isn't "the guy", those surrendered picks were a big part of the ammunition they had to move up in the draft to target a QB next year.
Oh, and I love how they describe Stephen Ross's suspension as "through October 17" instead of calling it a "6 game suspension" (Miami's 6th game is October 16th) because uh oh let's not draw THAT comparison right now!
Woo, the rare 1st round pick penalty.
Of course, the Dolphins still have San Francisco's 1st round pick next year from the Trey Lance deal. But Miami has been setting draft capital on fire lately.
They gave up an extra 1st to get the Jaylen Waddle pick.
They gave up a 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 6th for Tyreek Hill.
And now they're giving up a 1st and a 3rd for flirting with Brady.
I think even the Rams would look at this and say, "dude, calm down."
That's an awful lot of draft capital to burn through just to get 2 wide receivers, one of which you still had to pay a ceiling-busting contract like he was an unrestricted free agent. They could have rebuilt half their roster with all this.
If Tua isn't "the guy", those surrendered picks were a big part of the ammunition they had to move up in the draft to target a QB next year.
Is Miami just an historically poorly run franchise? I remember Ditka trading away his entire draft for Ricky Williams who played like two seasons there before deciding he would rather smoke the ganj than carry a ball.
Is Miami just an historically poorly run franchise?
Under Stephen Ross, yes. Under his stewardship, it went from one of the winningest and most celebrated franchises to a perennial joke these last twenty years.
Is Miami just an historically poorly run franchise?
+1 to what Rat Boy said.
Wow, that's twice in two days that an "unprecedented" violation means "sit out 6 games".
A coworker of mine and I were discussing the Watson palaver and wondered aloud if there is an odd incentive for Watson to not appeal a suspension even if one is extended to the entire season. Hear us out.
If Watson is suspended for the entirety of 2022, the details of his contract stipulate that he stands to lose a whopping $1 million. That may seem like a lot to mere mortals like us, but I assure you that to him that is cigar lighting money.
If he appeals, due to the timing, it is highly unlikely that his case will be heard until the 2022 season is concluded. If we are to take the Brady case as precedent, he would be allowed to play while the appeal is still pending and any upheld suspension would apply to the 2023 season. Considering he stands monetarily to lose more from ONE WEEK in 2023 than he does for the entirety of 2022, it may be in his interest to just eat the season than accept the high likelihood of losing at least 6-7 TIMES as much money for a similar six week suspension that applies to next year.
For a second I thought he did worse in COD during double XP weekends.
If he appeals, due to the timing, it is highly unlikely that his case will be heard until the 2022 season is concluded.
This is, in fact, something that is being discussed, except coming from the other direction. I think it was Albert Breer talking about this very notion on Rich Eisen's show yesterday, in reference to why Goodell might be disinclined to push for a full year suspension of Watson.
If the idea of suspending Watson is to placate public perception, having a punishment get appealed and allowing Watson to play all of 2022 would be the league's nightmare scenario.
Your point on Watson's 2023 salary being a lot more to forfeit than his 2022 salary is an interesting wrinkle. I think, though, there's other factors that must be considered.
First, the league can still punish Watson monetarily in 2022, through a fine. Watson might not have much in terms of game checks in 2022 to give up, but they can still hit that "untouchable" guaranteed money by imposing a hefty fine. And supposedly, a fine is exactly one of the things the league had on the table when negotiating with the NFLPA.
Also, one other thing to consider with your scenario: at any point in time, the Browns could restructure Watson's deal to move money out of salary and into a new signing bonus. So while he might currently have a giant $46m salary figure for 2023 that would be at risk of being lost to suspension, that number isn't written in stone. There's no guarantee that number is still $46m once we actually get to that point in time.
Is Miami just an historically poorly run franchise?
Speaking of poorly run franchises, Drew Magary is out with the first installment of the 2022 Why Your Team Sucks: the Jags.
It's brutal. Legion, look away. The rest of you, enjoy.
Why wasn't Legion consulted for the fan section?
Paleocon wrote:If he appeals, due to the timing, it is highly unlikely that his case will be heard until the 2022 season is concluded.
This is, in fact, something that is being discussed, except coming from the other direction. I think it was Albert Breer talking about this very notion on Rich Eisen's show yesterday, in reference to why Goodell might be disinclined to push for a full year suspension of Watson.
If the idea of suspending Watson is to placate public perception, having a punishment get appealed and allowing Watson to play all of 2022 would be the league's nightmare scenario.
Your point on Watson's 2023 salary being a lot more to forfeit than his 2022 salary is an interesting wrinkle. I think, though, there's other factors that must be considered.
First, the league can still punish Watson monetarily in 2022, through a fine. Watson might not have much in terms of game checks in 2022 to give up, but they can still hit that "untouchable" guaranteed money by imposing a hefty fine. And supposedly, a fine is exactly one of the things the league had on the table when negotiating with the NFLPA.
Also, one other thing to consider with your scenario: at any point in time, the Browns could restructure Watson's deal to move money out of salary and into a new signing bonus. So while he might currently have a giant $46m salary figure for 2023 that would be at risk of being lost to suspension, that number isn't written in stone. There's no guarantee that number is still $46m once we actually get to that point in time.
It was transparently false when the Browns management claimed that the structure of the contract was not to circumvent any attempt by the NFL to make a suspension financially meaningful to Watson, but insist on it they did. Forcing them to restructure a contract to again accommodate the serial sex offender would make them own even more of the PR bag o shit over that. It wouldn't prevent them from doing it, but at least it wouldn't be on the league.
Is Miami just an historically poorly run franchise? I remember Ditka trading away his entire draft for Ricky Williams who played like two seasons there before deciding he would rather smoke the ganj than carry a ball.
That was New Orleans, and Williams went to Miami later. The Dolphins have been consistently just mediocre in a post-Marino era, and a quick cut and paste into Excel says they've averaged 7.5 wins and 8.5 losses. That's exactly where you don't want to be; just bad enough to miss the playoffs or barely limp in, just good enough to miss out on the best prospects. They've more or less Jeff Fishered their way through the millennium.
Paleocon wrote:Is Miami just an historically poorly run franchise? I remember Ditka trading away his entire draft for Ricky Williams who played like two seasons there before deciding he would rather smoke the ganj than carry a ball.
That was New Orleans, and Williams went to Miami later. The Dolphins have been consistently just mediocre in a post-Marino era, and a quick cut and paste into Excel says they've averaged 7.5 wins and 8.5 losses. That's exactly where you don't want to be; just bad enough to miss the playoffs or barely limp in, just good enough to miss out on the best prospects. They've more or less Jeff Fishered their way through the millennium.
I have said this before. I really think that anyone who doesn't make the playoffs should be entered into a lottery for draft position. The perverse incentive to tank if you aren't making the playoffs needs to be removed.
A draft lottery is a solution in search of a problem; there have been very few games historically where I thought somebody was actually tanking, and, if you look at, say, the Jets winning a couple late to lose out on Trevor's Beautiful Locks, it's far more likely that players will play hard to save their own careers than try not to win. Basketball's much more overt so makes sense, but in football your career's probably so short there's really nothing in it for you if you try to lose.
Yeah, coaches can do that, sure, but it doesn't seem common enough to mess with what works.
It was transparently false when the Browns management claimed that the structure of the contract was not to circumvent any attempt by the NFL to make a suspension financially meaningful to Watson, but insist on it they did. Forcing them to restructure a contract to again accommodate the serial sex offender would make them own even more of the PR bag o shit over that. It wouldn't prevent them from doing it, but at least it wouldn't be on the league.
You're not wrong. I just don't think the Browns care about adding to the PR failure. Everyone who's going to get out has already gotten out at this point. Anyone still embracing the Browns probably doesn't think Watson did anything wrong to begin with, and probably would think "protecting" his compensation to be justified.
But yeah, the plausible deniability would be stretched to near the breaking point. Though I could also see the Browns signing other players to frontloaded extensions in 2023 so that they just HAVE to restructure Watson to open up more 2023 cap room.
A draft lottery is a solution in search of a problem; there have been very few games historically where I thought somebody was actually tanking, and, if you look at, say, the Jets winning a couple late to lose out on Trevor's Beautiful Locks, it's far more likely that players will play hard to save their own careers than try not to win. Basketball's much more overt so makes sense, but in football your career's probably so short there's really nothing in it for you if you try to lose.
Yeah, coaches can do that, sure, but it doesn't seem common enough to mess with what works.
The players have zero incentive to tank, but they are not the ones in the greatest position to affect the outcome. The Stephen Ross stuff is only the most visible of cases, but the practice is a lot more widespread than we care to admit. If the NFL is truly concerned at all about the "integrity of the game", they need to remove the incentive to engage in this kind of f*ckery. Effectively ending players' careers over betting on games they aren't in is just a bit of slave beating to pretend you care.
Yeah, except even if the owners have an impetus, coaches don't. If Ross pressured Flores to lose in 2019 . . . they won their last two games, and then had winning records the next two years. And, sure, little things can happen; in the last game of IIRC 2014, the Bucs sat several starters in the second half so they could "win" the opportunity for Jameis, but, at that point, who cares? It's not anything overt, and, again, players and coaches are more concerned with their own careers than what the owner wants.
Ridley should have been suspended for a year, minimum, because that is very much removing the impetus to gamble on games, and an individual player with a stake in the outcome sure as hell could flip things. Fumble twice, blow a pattern, whatever, and you can switch the game. It's not "slave beating", it's "don't bet on goddamn games your team is playing in" as a basic rule, and there are massive and overt risks to the game that don't exist when it's just some owner talking out of their ass. Owners can screw up a team in the offseason, but their ability to do so mid-season is far more limited.
Apparently, league sources believe that Goodell will indeed appeal the Watson ruling to himself, and impose a harsher penalty.
The league and player's union both were given 3 days from the decision to file an appeal, so we'll know in the next couple of days.
Training camp scuffles are an expected thing. Fred Warner starts some pretty much every year in 49ers camp, including yesterday with some of the receivers, but generally everyone's chill with each other right after.
New Orleans' first round pick, offensive tackle Trevor Penning, however, is something different. He was kicked out of Saints practice today, after having apparently gotten into fights with Saints defenders in three straight days of practice.
Same guy started a bunch of near-fights at the Senior Bowl this year.
It might not surprise you that Penning led the nation in penalties for offensive linemen last year, and had a high rate of penalties throughout his career.
Sounds like a New Orleans Saint to me. If Gregggggggg was still there, he'd probably make Penning switch to defense.
"I, Roger Goodell, am appealing the Watson ruling to Roger Goodell."
Tony Buzbee scheduled a press conference for tomorrow, which he announced yesterday.
The stated purpose is “to update the public on the status of the Deshaun Watson and Houston Texans cases and to provide comment regarding the pending NFL proceedings.”
Pages