View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently November 29th, 2014, 3:36 am



Reply to topic  [ 37 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 Allegedly Stafford to Lions a 'Done deal'-per Stafford-$40M 
Author Message
QB Coach
User avatar

Joined: August 21st, 2005, 3:36 am
Posts: 3148
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Post 
jrd66 wrote:
m2karateman wrote:
If I am wrong, I will freely and gladly admit it.

The Lions, if this report is true, have made their BIGGEST draft blunder....EVER....and it will be high time for those folks who don't want to give up their season tickets in fear of losing them....to shut the f___ up and stop buying those damn things.


I'm kind of thinking you're overreacting a bit here. Mike Williams others have mentioned. Despite that, there's a lot of evidence already in that makes that a steep hill to climb. Drafting a fullback the year Marino came out. Drafting Andre Ware with 2 QBs on the roster already. Passing on Randy Moss for Terry Fair. Trading the #7 pick in the draft for Pat Swilling. I think I could keep going for a long while....

Agree completely. Anyone saying the know at this point who will or will not be a good NFL player is a fool. Nobody knows yet. There are obviously some players who have a better chance to be good than others, but if you really did know who was going to be good and who wasn't, you should be working for an NFL team and be getting paid millions.

If the Lions do draft Stafford and he turns out to be a good QB, I will be looking for your mea culpa on here :wink:

_________________
"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." - John Adams

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” - Neil deGrasse Tyson


April 14th, 2009, 2:13 am
Profile
Mr. Irrelevant

Joined: April 16th, 2005, 3:23 pm
Posts: 941
Location: Hollywood, FL
Post 
That number seems high, but this is Lewand that is working out the deals here... I would like to negotiate with that guy...

I would think thats the most money guaranteed to a player ever...


April 14th, 2009, 2:16 am
Profile
National Champion
User avatar

Joined: December 16th, 2008, 8:44 am
Posts: 843
Post 
Murtyle wrote:
That number seems high, but this is Lewand that is working out the deals here... I would like to negotiate with that guy...

I would think thats the most money guaranteed to a player ever...


As it will be every year at this time.... lol. Someone will get the most guaranteed money every year, that's why the rookie pay escalates.

Matt Ryan (had he went #1, would have made 36-38 mil guaranteed. That number isn't too high or too low, it's going rate for a qb at #1.


April 14th, 2009, 6:26 am
Profile
Varsity Benchwarmer
User avatar

Joined: September 10th, 2007, 5:32 pm
Posts: 239
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Post 
faulkn22 wrote:
Murtyle wrote:
That number seems high, but this is Lewand that is working out the deals here... I would like to negotiate with that guy...

I would think thats the most money guaranteed to a player ever...


As it will be every year at this time.... lol. Someone will get the most guaranteed money every year, that's why the rookie pay escalates.

Matt Ryan (had he went #1, would have made 36-38 mil guaranteed. That number isn't too high or too low, it's going rate for a qb at #1.

It's ridiculous isnt it? If this is true we're going to make stafford the highest paid qb in the nfl. For him to justify that kind of paycheck he is going to have to be the next John Elway


April 14th, 2009, 6:34 am
Profile
National Champion
User avatar

Joined: December 16th, 2008, 8:44 am
Posts: 843
Post 
yvesill wrote:
faulkn22 wrote:
Murtyle wrote:
That number seems high, but this is Lewand that is working out the deals here... I would like to negotiate with that guy...

I would think thats the most money guaranteed to a player ever...


As it will be every year at this time.... lol. Someone will get the most guaranteed money every year, that's why the rookie pay escalates.

Matt Ryan (had he went #1, would have made 36-38 mil guaranteed. That number isn't too high or too low, it's going rate for a qb at #1.

It's ridiculous isnt it? If this is true we're going to make stafford the highest paid qb in the nfl. For him to justify that kind of paycheck he is going to have to be the next John Elway


It's the sad truth of the NFL rookie pay scale until they make some changes. Unfortunately, that change hasn't come before we had to pick at number 1 :( Knowing our luck, we will have a rookie pay scale in effect by the time next draft rolls around while we still have to pay out big money; but hey that's how it goes for us Lions fans :p


April 14th, 2009, 6:37 am
Profile
Modmin Dude
User avatar

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 am
Posts: 12208
Post 
PFT wrote:
Conflict Of Interest Issue Comes Back Into Focus
Posted by Mike Florio on April 14, 2009, 12:36 p.m. EDT

The longer we do this, the more we become numb to the same old themes that continue to come up on a year-in and year-out basis.

As to some issues, the fact that we seem to be the only ones who care about the situation contributes to the inevitable desensitization we experience.

One such issue relates to conflicts of interest among agents who represent multiple players in the draft pool.

Though agents generally have realized that the representation of guys who play the same position and who are regarded as being equivalent prospects can create very real problems, an issue still exists as to players deemed to be at the top of the draft, regardless of position.

Last year, the representation of tackle Jake Long and linebacker Vernon Gholston by Tom Condon and Ben Dogra of CAA raised some eyebrows. (But, in the end, nothing was done.)

Peter King of SI.com recently recognized the issue, but didn’t fully develop it, as it relates to quarterback Matthew Stafford and tackle Jason Smith. Both players reportedly (more on that later) are represented by CAA, and both players are believed to be on the Lions’ radar at No. 1 (along with linebacker Aaron Curry), and it’s also believed that the Lions will sign the player with whom they can do the best deal.

Wrote King: “This could be a weird story. Condon and Dogra could drive a harder bargain on Stafford because of the position he plays, and it’s conceivable they could push the Lions to target Smith, if he’s No. 2 on their list, because of the signability factor. Conceivable, but not likely.”

But if signability, as King belives, is the main factor, the problem runs far deeper than whether the demands made on behalf of Stafford might cause the Lions to decide to do a deal with Smith. The reality, as we see it, is that a reverse auction should be going on, with Stafford’s agent and Smith’s agent undercutting each other in the hopes of making their respective client the first overall pick.

The stakes are particularly high for Stafford. Unless someone trades into the No. 2 or No. 3 spot, Stafford won’t be taken until No. 4 at the earliest, if he’s not taken at No. 1. So his basement should be the contract he expects to get at No. 4 — and he should factor into that analysis the additional marketing potential he’ll have if he’s the first overall pick.

Of course, the bigger issue here is that all agents put the broader agenda of maximizing the contracts paid to the players at the top of round one, even if it’s in the best interests of their current clients to strike a below-market bargain.

The basic problem is that the individual players and their families don’t know enough about the subtleties of the business to pose hard questions to the agents about whether the agents are trying to advance the interests of the players, or the interests of the agents.

Sooner or later, one of these players and/or his parents will have the intelligence to spot the issue and the ability to articulate the concern in a manner that the agent can’t fast-talk his way out of.

Maybe the time has come. Maybe the guy is Stafford.

For reasons still not known (but we’re looking into it), NFLPA records as of April 6 identify no agent for Stafford. So either Condon has yet to file the Standard Representation Agreement with Stafford, or something has happened recently to cause the player and the agent to part ways.

Either way, stay tuned.

http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/04/ ... nto-focus/


If that last part is indeed true (Stafford having no agent), the there's no way that the aforementioned rumor could be true, right? Unless Stafford is pulling a Culpepper and representing himself... :confused:

I think the LOST important question for Lions fans about Stafford is: Is he Matt or Matthew???
We all know how the Joe vs Joey crap turned out!

PS: I can't wait for the draft to be over...this stuff is giving me a HUGE headache! :shock: :lol:


April 14th, 2009, 1:16 pm
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: June 26th, 2006, 1:03 pm
Posts: 13429
Post 
Quote:
PS: I can't wait for the draft to be over...this stuff is giving me a HUGE headache!


A-Freaking-Men

_________________
regularjoe12 - "You are crackin me up! really! HILARIOUS um let me quote some intellgent people in this coneversation: Steensn:"


April 14th, 2009, 1:30 pm
Profile
Heisman Winner
User avatar

Joined: March 28th, 2005, 7:50 pm
Posts: 805
Location: Burbs of De-town
Post 
I just threw up in my mouth a little bit.

Please no.


April 14th, 2009, 1:35 pm
Profile
National Champion
User avatar

Joined: September 8th, 2006, 2:56 pm
Posts: 905
Location: lansing MI
Post 
stafford just probably boasting to his college beer buddies... :lol:

"hell yeah man, its a done deal Dude"....... :roll:

...



screw Condon, and his Agency
Draft Curry. :D


April 14th, 2009, 2:53 pm
Profile
Fired Head Coach (0-16 record)
User avatar

Joined: April 5th, 2007, 5:51 pm
Posts: 2289
Post 
Exactly. Draft Curry, Forget dealing with CAA at all (now and future) and move on with no Drama AND the best player in the draft.


April 14th, 2009, 3:16 pm
Profile ICQ WWW
National Champion
User avatar

Joined: December 16th, 2008, 8:44 am
Posts: 843
Post 
A long shot, but maybe...

The Lions sensed some immaturity; they told him it was all but a done deal to see if he'd run and tell everyone (probably way too smart for us to pull off) which would make a smoke screen even thicker because then they wouldn't even have to tell Stafford to keep his mouth shut or to lie, he'd just do the work for them...

But I highly doubt it. That's borderline pipedream but it's something I would think of doing if I'm in charge of the team and I'm giving a kid that much money and responsibility. I'd test him.

Anyways, if this is true (about the deal being done), I don't believe its the end of the world; We have a strong armed, young quarterack. He's signed (that is a bigger deal than most think). He already knows the footwork for taking snaps at the huddle (majority of NFL plays start this way), so he only needs to absorb a playbook that is presumably less pass and more run than we've seen in the past.

He can sit for at minimum this season while we spend this draft and the next upgrading a support system for him (mainly a defense that doesn't give up 21 in the first quarter and a o-line that doesn't surrended tops in the league again and again). The only negative to this is that yes, we will be paying him big bucks to sit, but we aren't paying Culpepper much so I don't look at that as a total wash. Plus, this would explain why we left enough cap room for this season, to absorb his bench time.

At 20 though; I don't believe that we absolutely have to take tackle at the next pick, and mainly for two reasons.

1. Stafford isn't playing until next year, we can target tackles early next draft. We should just try to get a guard and or center later on if they fall on or near bpa.

2. Taking a tackle here would likely (I say likely because the "run" probably will have already started by now on tackles, meaning if we take one the value is lower than our choice should have). That would mean drafting need two times in a row and that's a huge loss of value in the long run. Doing it for a quarterback at #1 is acceptable and I can get over that, but I myself wouldn't want to make a habit of it.


April 14th, 2009, 3:40 pm
Profile
QB Coach
User avatar

Joined: August 21st, 2005, 3:36 am
Posts: 3148
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Post 
faulkn22 wrote:
A long shot, but maybe...

The Lions sensed some immaturity; they told him it was all but a done deal to see if he'd run and tell everyone (probably way too smart for us to pull off) which would make a smoke screen even thicker because then they wouldn't even have to tell Stafford to keep his mouth shut or to lie, he'd just do the work for them...

But I highly doubt it. That's borderline pipedream but it's something I would think of doing if I'm in charge of the team and I'm giving a kid that much money and responsibility. I'd test him.

Anyways, if this is true (about the deal being done), I don't believe its the end of the world; We have a strong armed, young quarterack. He's signed (that is a bigger deal than most think). He already knows the footwork for taking snaps at the huddle (majority of NFL plays start this way), so he only needs to absorb a playbook that is presumably less pass and more run than we've seen in the past.

He can sit for at minimum this season while we spend this draft and the next upgrading a support system for him (mainly a defense that doesn't give up 21 in the first quarter and a o-line that doesn't surrended tops in the league again and again). The only negative to this is that yes, we will be paying him big bucks to sit, but we aren't paying Culpepper much so I don't look at that as a total wash. Plus, this would explain why we left enough cap room for this season, to absorb his bench time.

At 20 though; I don't believe that we absolutely have to take tackle at the next pick, and mainly for two reasons.

1. Stafford isn't playing until next year, we can target tackles early next draft. We should just try to get a guard and or center later on if they fall on or near bpa.

2. Taking a tackle here would likely (I say likely because the "run" probably will have already started by now on tackles, meaning if we take one the value is lower than our choice should have). That would mean drafting need two times in a row and that's a huge loss of value in the long run. Doing it for a quarterback at #1 is acceptable and I can get over that, but I myself wouldn't want to make a habit of it.

Well reasoned post. The only thing I would take issue with is the general comments I've seen here about him telling his friends being a maturity issue. He's 20, and telling his friends/teammates that he's going to be the #1 pick isn't really an immature thing to do. I think it's a completely normal thing to do. I think the people who want to use this as a knock against him already had their minds made up that he's the wrong person to pick at #1, so it wouldn't have mattered if he said nothing.

_________________
"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." - John Adams

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” - Neil deGrasse Tyson


April 14th, 2009, 4:20 pm
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pm
Posts: 9958
Location: Where ever I'm at now
Post 
Touchdown Jesus wrote:
jrd66 wrote:
m2karateman wrote:
If I am wrong, I will freely and gladly admit it.

The Lions, if this report is true, have made their BIGGEST draft blunder....EVER....and it will be high time for those folks who don't want to give up their season tickets in fear of losing them....to shut the f___ up and stop buying those damn things.


I'm kind of thinking you're overreacting a bit here. Mike Williams others have mentioned. Despite that, there's a lot of evidence already in that makes that a steep hill to climb. Drafting a fullback the year Marino came out. Drafting Andre Ware with 2 QBs on the roster already. Passing on Randy Moss for Terry Fair. Trading the #7 pick in the draft for Pat Swilling. I think I could keep going for a long while....

Agree completely. Anyone saying the know at this point who will or will not be a good NFL player is a fool. Nobody knows yet. There are obviously some players who have a better chance to be good than others, but if you really did know who was going to be good and who wasn't, you should be working for an NFL team and be getting paid millions.

If the Lions do draft Stafford and he turns out to be a good QB, I will be looking for your mea culpa on here :wink:


As I said, I would freely and gladly admit it IF the Lions draft Stafford and IF he turns out to be more than another notch in a long line of first round blunders in the draft post at Allen Park.

I have offered my opinion. I am not stating matter-of-factly that Stafford will be a complete bust. However, unless he becomes a full fledged Pro Bowler who makes this entire team better with his play, then they will have wasted that pick.

And to jrd66: comparing a number one overall pick to Andre Ware or Mike Williams, with a guarantee of $40M is a fools game in which you will lose. Many other teams passed on Moss for a reason. Moss proved them wrong, but 20 other teams passed on him as well as the Lions.

We are talking about the Lions (possibly) taking a quarterback (and we have THREE on the roster already) with the top overall pick, when in fact that player is not seen by a great majority of experts as the top overall prospect in this draft. Some don't even consider him the top prospect at his position.

Sorry, but he better light up scoreboards and be the second coming of Favre to earn that draft spot AND his cash.


April 14th, 2009, 4:58 pm
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: January 26th, 2005, 9:34 pm
Posts: 10337
Location: Sycamore, IL
Post 
Has to be simply a rumor. It's nearly 2 weeks from draft day. I don't see them signing him for THAT much THAT early. Doesn't make sense.

I bet Stafford had talks with Condon who said Stafford wanted $40M and the Lions said let's negotiate.

_________________
_____
I have no faith this team will win a game the rest of the year. The kitties finish at 7-9 and Miss the playoffs as GB wins out and takes it from the kitties.
Image


April 14th, 2009, 6:39 pm
Profile
Walk On

Joined: November 2nd, 2008, 1:29 am
Posts: 427
Post 
I agree on the timing and the contract size. It just doesn't make sense to sign a contract THAT big when we have some leverage. I'd imagine we could settle on a contract that size if we signed him draft day.

Faulkn22- I don't really get the argument about not needing a LT if we are not playing Stafford. If it is a need, we should address it. If not, then don't. I doesn't matter if we start Daunte, your starter is worth protecting. It will also make your starter better. If we don't address it, we run a higher risk of injury to the starter/backup, and could end up being forced to play the rookie. It happened last year, for goodness sake.

-ILMP


April 14th, 2009, 7:58 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 37 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.