averagejoe
You fell victim to one of the classic blunders.
Team graph is updated in the article.
its a rb, thats a grinder, , and they knew they didnt want em, i bet best they could getI'd read that too, but a 6th rounder? Gotta be something more to it.
I read that its not even truly a sixth, a 2020 conditional pick that could become a sixth, which means, it might end up being a seventh? And not even an immediate benefit..that's about as low as it gets as far as compensation goes
So one baby step up from almost nothingIts a 6th that can become a 5th
So one baby step up from almost nothing
Maybe it's tied to where the Eagles finish? A good finish means a 5th. Bad finish means a 6th?so a sixth, next year, possibly a fifth. Surely there are benchmarks that trigger that condition, linked to his production, right? Games started or played, touches, yards..something like that. Which means, that if a 4 back rotation gets the job done, they have an incentive to NOT use Howard more. Great
Cap issues maybe, but trade contingencies not so much.Maybe it's tied to where the Eagles finish? A good finish means a 5th. Bad finish means a 6th?
Isn't @HaroldSeattle the contract expert?
I may be wrong but those types of deals are most likely based on where a team finishes. Not how the player does. Player performance is usually what drives incentives and bonuses.everything i saw regarding Bears/Eagles deal was that the conditions to determine 5th vs 6th hadn't been released yet - no clue if they technically even have to release that info, as long as the two teams are in agreement.
It could also be his percentage of snapsI may be wrong but those types of deals are most likely based on where a team finishes. Not how the player does. Player performance is usually what drives incentives and bonuses.
But again...![]()
Naw...they have AMEER!!I find it hard to believe that the Vikings wouldn't offer more just to replace Lativius Murray.
I may be wrong but those types of deals are most likely based on where a team finishes. Not how the player does. Player performance is usually what drives incentives and bonuses.
But again...![]()
Anderson is a plodder and that would be okay if he provided value as a blocker or receiver, but he is below average in both of those areas and would just be a less talented Blount for us.