Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

With the first pick of the 2012 draft.


tbimm
 Share

Recommended Posts

Don't they still owe Cassel a small fortune of a thrid world country and the left testy from owner Clark Hunt?

 

I'm not sure the total of Cassel's contract, but the word is he is going to be cut after this offseason regardless of if they win the Luck sweepstakes or not. What people are failing to look at is the new Rookie Salery scale. Luck will be the #1 pick regardless of which team has the pick. That's even if say Jax wins it. Luck is just too valuable at that price. You draft him and then worry about everything else later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure the total of Cassel's contract, but the word is he is going to be cut after this offseason regardless of if they win the Luck sweepstakes or not. What people are failing to look at is the new Rookie Salery scale. Luck will be the #1 pick regardless of which team has the pick. That's even if say Jax wins it. Luck is just too valuable at that price. You draft him and then worry about everything else later.

 

How much do you think Luck is kicking himself in the a$$ for not coming out last draft? :wacko:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't they still owe Cassel a small fortune of a thrid world country and the left testy from owner Clark Hunt?

 

link

 

7/14/2009: Signed a six-year, $63 million contract.

 

The deal contains $28 million guaranteed, including a $10 million roster bonus in the first year.

 

2011: $4.75 million (+ $7.5 million option bonus),

2012: $5.25 million,

2013: $7.5 million,

2014: $9 million,

2015: Free Agent

 

So if KC were to cut Cassel after this season, they would save $21.75M over the next 3 years, but would have to absorb a $14M cap hit for his accelerated bonuses.

 

That would amount to an $8.75M cap hit against the 2012 cap if he were cut before June 1st, 2012. They would then save all of his 2013 and 2014 salaries and have their 2013 cap clear of him.

 

If he were cut on or after June 1st, 2012, KC would take a $1.75M cap hit against 2012 and would have to carry a $7M cap hit into 2013, but would save in overall salary by not carrying his 2013 $7.5M salary - meaning they would save $0.5M overall in 2013. They would then save his 2014 salary.

 

The second scenario seems to be very feasible, and therefore likely, were KC to manage to play its way into pick 1.01 of the 2012 draft.

 

They could also carry Cassel for one more year at $5.25M, which is pretty reasonable for a NFL backup QB, and then cut him after June 1st 2013 for a $2.83M cap savings in 2013 and carrying a $4.33M hit against 2014, but weighted against his 2014 salary of $9M that wouldn't be paid - saving overall $4.33M against the 2014 books. That also seems very feasible and therefore very possible, and would give a guy like Luck a security blanket in his 1st year.

Edited by Bronco Billy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Despite MIN's "best" effort, that week 5 IND vs KC game seems to have immense implications.

 

Well, and this weeks game against Minnesota.

 

If the Chiefs play like they did this past weekend, we may just play our way out of the Luckstakes because I could actually see them winning the game this week and against Indy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How much do you think Luck is kicking himself in the a$$ for not coming out last draft? :wacko:

Because of the new rookie cap? It was already in place for this past draft class.

 

Now, I don't think the cap changes things so much that a team that just drafted a QB high and likes him will take Luck if they get #1. For instance, Jacksonville. They're likely going to have an entire year to see Gabbert. And if he's progressing, they may not want to scrap everything and start over. Of course, if he's playing well enough that they want to keep him, they may not end up with the worst record.

 

However, what it does mean is that whomever ends up at #1, provided they have a QB they like already, will be able to get some real value for that pick, far more than in recent years when teams didn't want to give up much for the "right" to pay some kid $60 million before he ever stepped on the field.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because of the new rookie cap? It was already in place for this past draft class.

 

Now, I don't think the cap changes things so much that a team that just drafted a QB high and likes him will take Luck if they get #1. For instance, Jacksonville. They're likely going to have an entire year to see Gabbert. And if he's progressing, they may not want to scrap everything and start over. Of course, if he's playing well enough that they want to keep him, they may not end up with the worst record.

 

However, what it does mean is that whomever ends up at #1, provided they have a QB they like already, will be able to get some real value for that pick, far more than in recent years when teams didn't want to give up much for the "right" to pay some kid $60 million before he ever stepped on the field.

 

I agree with most of what you're saying, but regardless of the teams QB situation sitting at #1 Luck will be the pick. I think there's going to be more value taking him than even trying to trade the pick. That's even if say Carolina gets #1. They will take Luck and trade 1 of the 2 QB's they would have.

 

Keep in mind we're talking about the top QB prospect of all time.

Edited by Capt. Stanky
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's also realize with the new rookie cap. even if teams don't finish with the worst record that it is much more feasible to trade into the top of the 1st round now than it used to be - especially for a franchise QB who has very few flaws in his game and is pro-ready.

 

So I agree that Luck would be the first pick, and even if a team had 1.01 and had its QB in place, they could field the best offers from needy teams and actually pull off that trade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with most of what you're saying, but regardless of the teams QB situation sitting at #1 Luck will be the pick. I think there's going to be more value taking him than even trying to trade the pick. That's even if say Carolina gets #1. They will take Luck and trade 1 of the 2 QB's they would have.

 

Keep in mind we're talking about the top QB prospect of all time.

Which is why the trade value already exists. Thing is, the only thing you're going to learn in camp and practice is that he's "getting it". You're a few years away from knowing if you've truly gotten a guy worthy of the hype. That is, unless you bench the kid who you just drafted to be the QB of the future right away and hand the reigns to Luck, despite the fact that the other kid has made good progress and you've got a ton of money and time invested in him.

 

Only, in the meantime, you've got big money tied up in him and pretty big money tied up in whatever QB you took high this year (Newton, Gabbart, what-have-you). Also, you've got a messed up QB controversy going on constantly. You think it's ugly in Denver right now? And that's because of a project QB who many don't think has the skill set to make it as a pro QB. Can you imagine what crap storm it would be if someone had a 2nd year QB who looks like he's got the goods and the most coveted QB prospect in years?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's also realize with the new rookie cap. even if teams don't finish with the worst record that it is much more feasible to trade into the top of the 1st round now than it used to be - especially for a franchise QB who has very few flaws in his game and is pro-ready.

 

So I agree that Luck would be the first pick, and even if a team had 1.01 and had its QB in place, they could field the best offers from needy teams and actually pull off that trade.

 

This is a really good point.

 

If the Chiefs actually end up in this spot, I could see them trading OUT more than taking Luck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not so sure Peyton would be so keen on the idea. If he completely heals from this neck thing, I'd bet he has designs on sticking around another 3-4 years at least. Doubt that you can leave Luck holding a clipboard for that long.

Colts got caught with their pants down - it won't happen again. Much better problem to figure out what to do with two really good QB's than not having any.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't watch college ball. With that being said, is Luck really THAT good? People have been crowning him the next coming since February.

Currently yes, he is. It's a long season and anything can happen (they were saying the same things last year about Locker) but had he come out he would almost certainly have been #1 overall this year, and at worst top 5.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Colts got caught with their pants down - it won't happen again. Much better problem to figure out what to do with two really good QB's than not having any.

Yes, but with the #1 overall if you plan on playing Peyton for 3+ more years??? Don't think so. There are other ways to get a decent backup.

Edited by SecondString
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, but with the #1 overall if you plan on playing Peyton for 3+ more years??? Don't think so. There are other ways to get a decent backup.

Yes, because there is no certainty it's 3+ years. He might already be done. He might get hit in week 1, feel the scraping of a screw along his freaking SPINE and decide he'd rather be the only Manning that can speak without slobbering all over himself. He might play 3+ years and, like Rogers, allow the QB behind him to learn at a more natural pace. Again, nice problem to have vs. the debacle the team is at the moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information