NFC West

[mem49er]

but wasn't he a free agent and thus able to leave?

They needed a little help at cornerback and Carlos Rogers came over from Washington.

1) The sentence structure implies it happened now. 2) Even when you look at us resigning him, that's not adding to the talent, that's keeping the status quo.

I'm not saying resigning Rogers wasn't important; I'm saying they are portraying it incorrectly within the article. A more relevant point with the CB's would have been adding Cox. Of course, since he wasn't a splash play and they don't already know that he will contribute, they won't put that in.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

It was kind of a strange sentiment. Not to mention that I'm not sure we do need CB help. Rogers and Brown both played well last year, and Culliver showed a lot of promise. Add in Cox and Brock, and we're in pretty good shape at CB. Of course, these days everyone needs help at CB, but we seem a lot deeper than most. We may go four-deep with starting caliber CBs.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

Top 20 NFL Games of 2011

I haven't been following this list, but Niners are already on there three times, and the Saints game has practically got to be #1. Four appearances and two in the top 3? Not bad work.

 

[deep9er]

1) The sentence structure implies it happened now. 2) Even when you look at us resigning him, that's not adding to the talent, that's keeping the status quo.

I'm not saying resigning Rogers wasn't important; I'm saying they are portraying it incorrectly within the article. A more relevant point with the CB's would have been adding Cox. Of course, since he wasn't a splash play and they don't already know that he will contribute, they won't put that in.

ok, gotcha

 

[deep9er]

It was kind of a strange sentiment. Not to mention that I'm not sure we do need CB help. Rogers and Brown both played well last year, and Culliver showed a lot of promise. Add in Cox and Brock, and we're in pretty good shape at CB. Of course, these days everyone needs help at CB, but we seem a lot deeper than most. We may go four-deep with starting caliber CBs.

in general i agree we appear to be in better shape than others, yet you never quite know without the exceptional pressure by Aldon and Justin?

Rogers may just have had a career year with INT's? he certainly did statistically. i know he's good in coverage, but did the pressure make him appear like an exceptional 'ball hawk'?

Culliver has shown promise but is it real, or does he need to follow up with another "confirming" year?

we don't know how good Cox is after a year off?

Brock is promising too, but also unproven.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

in general i agree we appear to be in better shape than others, yet you never quite know without the exceptional pressure by Aldon and Justin?

Rogers may just have had a career year with INT's? he certainly did statistically. i know he's good in coverage, but did the pressure make him appear like an exceptional 'ball hawk'?

Culliver has shown promise but is it real, or does he need to follow up with another "confirming" year?

we don't know how good Cox is after a year off?

Brock is promising too, but also unproven.

Obviously there are still some uncertainties, but at the end of the day, our pass rush was very good but not exceptional. Especially early in games. And our corners still did a fairly good job. This is all relative, though. Compared to other teams around the league, I think our CB situation is pretty good.

No one's claiming Culliver has arrived by any means, but he was pretty raw coming out of college and he had a strong season. Stronger than I expected, anyway. As for Cox, it's tough to say what he'll bring, but reports are promising. He's already been a starter in the league, granted perhaps a lower-level starter. Still, as a third or fourth guy, he looks pretty good.

As for Rogers, I'd frankly be surprised if he INT numbers didn't drop pretty drastically, but who knows? As long as teams keep targeting him, he'll have his chances. Unlike Goldson, I don't recall a large number of Rogers' picks coming off deflections. He made plays on the ball. That said, he hasn't historically shown the ability to bring those balls in. We shall see what happens this year.

 

[deep9er]

Obviously there are still some uncertainties, but at the end of the day, our pass rush was very good but not exceptional. Especially early in games. And our corners still did a fairly good job. This is all relative, though. Compared to other teams around the league, I think our CB situation is pretty good.
No one's claiming Culliver has arrived by any means, but he was pretty raw coming out of college and he had a strong season. Stronger than I expected, anyway. As for Cox, it's tough to say what he'll bring, but reports are promising. He's already been a starter in the league, granted perhaps a lower-level starter. Still, as a third or fourth guy, he looks pretty good.

As for Rogers, I'd frankly be surprised if he INT numbers didn't drop pretty drastically, but who knows? As long as teams keep targeting him, he'll have his chances. Unlike Goldson, I don't recall a large number of Rogers' picks coming off deflections. He made plays on the ball. That said, he hasn't historically shown the ability to bring those balls in. We shall see what happens this year.

yeah ok, relatively speaking we look ok

 

[BINGO]

Brandon Jacobs' role for S.F.
2:36PM ET
Brandon Jacobs | 49ers

The New York Giants were unable to provide a suitably high offer for bruising RB Brandon Jacobs this offseason, and he fled to the San Francisco 49ers, joining a stacked backfield that also includes Frank Gore, Kendall Hunter and -- after the draft -- LaMichael James. So where does Jacobs fit in?

In the view of Matt Maiocco of CSN Bay Area, Jacobs is the front-runner for the short-yardage role, though he will have to hold off the competition in training camp.

In his preview of 49ers training camp, ESPN NFC West blogger Mike Sando wrote that the addition of Jacobs puts Anthony Dixon's roster spot in jeopardy:

- Tim Kavanagh​

Mike Sando
May be the end of the line for Dixon

"Jacobs' arrival suggests Dixon must step up his game significantly to stick on the roster -- and will probably have to demonstrate special-teams value as well. He won't be able to compete with Bruce Miller or Rock Cartwright in that regard."

 

[BINGO]

Report: Major hurdle arises between Rams and Janoris Jenkins | ProFootballTalk

 

[BINGO]

1.) Arizona Cardinals training camp preview: Wide receivers

2.) Arizona Cardinals training camp preview: Running backs

 

[Crimsoncrew]

Man, the Rams are really sticking it to Jenkins. If I were him, I'd be getting pretty pissed. I understand that a team needs to protect itself, but it's not like this is the first guy in the history of the league with off-field problems.

 

[deep9er]

Man, the Rams are really sticking it to Jenkins. If I were him, I'd be getting pretty pissed. I understand that a team needs to protect itself, but it's not like this is the first guy in the history of the league with off-field problems.

yep, on one hand, i'd want the 49ers to do the same thing if we drafted him. on the other, the Rams had factored in these issues when they drafted him. so IMO these tough neogtiations is part of the calculated risk they took.

in this case, i think Jenkins has more urgency to sign and prove he's a "good citizen". cause he's not only auditioning for the Rams, but maybe future teams?

 

[EaseUrStorm]

The Rams took a top ten talented player in the second round. I totally understand paying a little less up front, but the Rams are going to an extreme with this whole thing. First they couldn't sick their babysitter on him, and now they don't trust him near the cookie jar!

 

[BINGO]

The Rams took a top ten talented player in the second round. I totally understand paying a little less up front, but the Rams are going to an extreme with this whole thing. First they couldn't sick their babysitter on him, and now they don't trust him near the cookie jar!

It's an atrocity what they are doing to Jenkins.

 

[deep9er]

the Aaron Hernandez example makes sense, sign for a little less up front, but the total package is higher. his agent shouldn't be surprised the Rams are protecting themselves.

regarding just the signing bonus in four parts, IF Jenkins intends to be fine off the field, then it shouldn't be THAT big an issue....should it?

yes it IS an issue cause its unprecedented, but saying it shouldn't be that wide.

 

[Bemular]

the Aaron Hernandez example makes sense, sign for a little less up front, but the total package is higher. his agent shouldn't be surprised the Rams are protecting themselves.

regarding just the signing bonus in four parts, IF Jenkins intends to be fine off the field, then it shouldn't be THAT big an issue....should it?

yes it IS an issue cause its unprecedented, but saying it shouldn't be that wide.

The signing bonus is a big issue if they are going to take a $2m signing bonus and reduce it a $500,000 signing bonus then three successive $500,000 roster bonuses.

Furthermore, if they do agree to spread the payments on a fully guaranteed $2m signing bonus, then you get into an interest issue as well. So, I have to disagree here on the signing bonus, Deep, it is/will be or can be a big issue.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

The Aaron Hernandez model makes some sense. He got about 2/5 of his bonus upfront, and roughly half by his first game ($200K up front, $76K roster bonus due that first year). He also has a chance to make almost $100K more in guaranteed money than his slot would normally provide (guy ahead of him got $508K, he's slated to earn $588K if he stays on the team). So he got about half the guaranteed money right away and a chance to make more than he otherwise would. Details are a bit hazy on the Jenkins situation, but if PFT is right, Jenkins doesn't get any additional money (Amini Silatolu went one spot after him and got a $2 million bonus) and he wouldn't hit the 50% mark until his second season.

As Ease said, the only reason Jenkins was on the board when the Rams took him is because of his off-field problems. They knew he had concerns. I'm all for teams taking reasonable steps to protect themselves, but the combination of falling out of the first round, the financial planner thing, and now this, might just sour the player's relationship with the team. No complaints if that happens. But at some point, you took the kid and you either trust him to some extent or you admit you made a mistake and move on.

 

[Bemular]

The Aaron Hernandez model makes some sense. He got about 2/5 of his bonus upfront, and roughly half by his first game ($200K up front, $76K roster bonus due that first year). He also has a chance to make almost $100K more in guaranteed money than his slot would normally provide (guy ahead of him got $508K, he's slated to earn $588K if he stays on the team). So he got about half the guaranteed money right away and a chance to make more than he otherwise would. Details are a bit hazy on the Jenkins situation, but if PFT is right, Jenkins doesn't get any additional money (Amini Silatolu went one spot after him and got a $2 million bonus) and he wouldn't hit the 50% mark until his second season.

As Ease said, the only reason Jenkins was on the board when the Rams took him is because of his off-field problems. They knew he had concerns. I'm all for teams taking reasonable steps to protect themselves, but the combination of falling out of the first round, the financial planner thing, and now this, might just sour the player's relationship with the team. No complaints if that happens. But at some point, you took the kid and you either trust him to some extent or you admit you made a mistake and move on.

Exactly! The cost of Jenkins risk has been paid in full - If StL wanted to hedge their bet further they should have traded back and crossed their fingers.

If Shareef (Jenkins agent) encourages Jenkins to go along with any part of this circus act he should be kicked in the nuts - just prior to being fired.

 

[deep9er]

The signing bonus is a big issue if they are going to take a $2m signing bonus and reduce it a $500,000 signing bonus then three successive $500,000 roster bonuses.

Furthermore, if they do agree to spread the payments on a fully guaranteed $2m signing bonus, then you get into an interest issue as well. So, I have to disagree here on the signing bonus, Deep, it is/will be or can be a big issue.

if you stay 'clean' off the field, would the roster bonus' be in jeopardy? if you're Jenkins and intend to stay 'clean', then accept this schedule in return for a higher total amount.

the Rams should handle the interest the same as any player. IF they have to give him a lump sum for just interest, then do it.

again, it IS an issue i agree, but is it so big you can't get this deal done? is it so big you're going to hold out? in the larger picture, if Jenkins is leaving all his issues behind him, then these things aren't THAT big. he needs to look past this first contract, all other teams are watching.

for the immediate......this is what happens when you 'make your bed' in college.

 

[Jikkle]

Agreed that the Rams are taking this way too far. I don't mind taking some steps to watch your back but this is overboard.

You picked the guy so either you trust him to keep his nose mostly clean and stay relatively out of trouble or you don't.

If you don't trust him and you have to take this many steps to protect yourself than you should've never drafted the guy in the first place.