Jump to content

NFL thread


Perky1106

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I'd be surprised if they keep him unless he does well on special teams. St Louis have one of the best pass rushes in the league, can't see a spot for him on that.

 

Really? I'd be surprised if we didn't keep him. Sure, we have one of the best D-lines in the league but we don't have much beyond Long/Brockers/Donald/Quinn apart from Langford and Hayes. He'd be good as depth, especially after Fisher said in an interview that they had a much higher draft grade on him than a 7th rounder.

 

Not to mention, he could be shifted to an OLB, what with him being severely undersized. We are very thin at the linebacker spots too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Talk about license to print money. I heard on the radio last night that the salary cap in the NFL is $125M (not sure if you get marquee palyers above that), but the TV money alone is $240M for each team!!! You can't go wrong, no financial fair play worries for them!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Talk about license to print money. I heard on the radio last night that the salary cap in the NFL is $125M (not sure if you get marquee palyers above that), but the TV money alone is $240M for each team!!! You can't go wrong, no financial fair play worries for them!

$125M doesn't sound so much considering how many players the team has.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But there's no transfer fees or anything like that. So all the money is on the players. But as said above, 52 men on a roster so you can't afford to have a team full of stars and still be under salary cap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They only play for 16 weeks.

The problem is that one hit could be career-ending, no more money. And despite the league adding rules every year to increase safety, it's a competitive league, which means everyone wants to win, so bad tackles happen. Players see it as get your money from whoever is paying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

aka it's a more interesting, exciting, explosive game for athletes... not fat plodders who have to pass backwards before ambling into the nearest **** infront of them.

 

take your ***** to the relevant thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's slow, it's made up of 4 quarters, it has time outs, they need 50 players, they can't tackle properly, wear pads, only one player has ball handling skills, only one player knows how to kick. You obviously haven't watched a game of rugby before. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's slow, it's made up of 4 quarters, it has time outs, they need 50 players, they can't tackle properly, wear pads, only one player has ball handling skills, only one player knows how to kick. You obviously haven't watched a game of rugby before.

I reckon the receivers have better handling skills than a lot of rugby players. The pace the ball arrives at them, the varying heights and nearly always getting hit at the point of catching.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have friends who don't know anything about rugby or american football but all of them agree that rugby players don't look like athletes and are no way near with the skillset that players have in american football. I cannot understand how anyone could see rugby players as better athletes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...