View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently October 23rd, 2014, 4:25 am



Reply to topic  [ 279 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ... 19  Next
 Avril's Contract: Within 2 weeks? 
Author Message
Hall of Fame Player
User avatar

Joined: May 7th, 2005, 3:25 pm
Posts: 7441
Location: Earth/Sagittarius Dwarf Galaxy
Post Re: Avril's Contract: Within 2 weeks?
Lionfanatic wrote:
Blueskies wrote:
I was under the impression that tagging and trading a player was extremely difficult, which is why its almost never seen in the NFL (unlike, say the NBA where it happens all the time).


You are right. I am sure someone will correct me if I misunderstand the language, but here is how I understand it.

It is difficult for a couple reasons. Franchising a player, especially one at a big $ position, guarantees a player a big number. For example, I think I read that Matt Flynn's franchise number would be around $14.4 million. The original team, in this case Packers, wouldn't want to work out a new deal for Flynn. A new deal would come with signing bonus money that the Packers would then take a cap hit for the very next year. Lets say Flynn signs a 6 year $60 mil deal with $20 mil signing bonus and then Packers trade him right after the deal is done so he doesn't even play 1 year with the Packers. That means the Packers will have $20 mil of dead money in 2013. So the Packers signing him ahead of time is bad.

The $20 mil of dead money is bad obviously, but so is $14.4 mil of dead money. What I mean by this is if the Packers cannot find a trade they like, they will be on the hook for $14.4 mil to pay to Flynn, which obviously counts against the total cap number.

The team trading for Flynn would want to know what he is looking for $ wise since they don't want to have the same problem. Lets say the Dolphins trade a 1st this year and a 2nd next year for Flynn (just go with it). The Dolphins would only have him for the 1 year without resigning him. If Flynn is wanting Peyton Manning money, the Dolphins will not be willing (I am assuming) in paying him that much and they would have given up 2 big draft picks to acquire Flynn for only 1 year. Obviously they could try to do the franchise tag/trade things as well, but it would be even harder given what happened to the Dolphins the previous year.

Thus the team giving up draft picks would have to 'tamper' to figure out what Flynn would want for a contract to determine if they are willing to pay that much for him.

So now goes the chess game. The only way the Packers would franchise Flynn is if there is a 'wink, nod' agreement made with a trade partner on compensation, as well as Flynn's agent on a new contract. This also gives the player all the control as if he doesn't want to play for a team, he can just say he wants a 20 year $300 mil contract and the Packers will never be able to find a trade partner.

Hopefully this makes sense...



All the Packers would need to do is authorize any potential trade partner to work out a contract with Flynn after they have come to terms on compensation for the trade. If that team can't work out a contract with Flynn, the deal falls apart and they go back to the drawing board.

It is not rocket science.


February 26th, 2012, 11:15 am
Profile
Red Shirt Freshman

Joined: February 28th, 2007, 10:37 pm
Posts: 505
Location: Corona, CA
Post Re: Avril's Contract: Within 2 weeks?
If the Packers gave permission to another team to speak with the agent of, Flynn, wouldn't Flynn have to technically be under contract with Packers? Which means wouldn't Flynn have had to sign his franchise tender? I honestly don't know the answer to this question so I really am asking, it isn't rhetorical.

The exclusive franchise tag does not give the player (agent) the right to speak to other teams. The other version does give the player the right to speak to other teams but it costs that team 2 first round picks if they sign the player.

i guess other reasons why there are not more tag and trades is what if the player feels they can make more money by being a FA and having multiple teams bid for them. A team might not have the compensation to do a trade but might have more money to burn in a signing.

Teams might also decide not to trade for a player and give up draft picks and decide only to bid on him in the open market. Arizona's trade for Kolb is not looking so good after 1 year. Teams may not want to risk losing draft picks for an unproven player.

There is also the timing of everything. A team might be willing to trade after the draft if a player, or position, is not filled during the draft. Due to the timing of when the new league year begins, when unsigned players become free agents, and the draft taking place ~6 weeks later, there is too much uncertainty. It doesn't leave a lot of time for teams to work out a trade deal and have the player/team agree on terms of a contract. I mean teams franchise players to give them more time to work out a long term deal, I don't know why a deal to tag/trade would be any easier to get worked out before the deadline when players become FA. If the Packers wanted to chance it they could tag him and hope a trade can be worked out later. Doing so would put them in great financial risk which is what I explained in my last post.

Billy I do not know everything about the business side of football, I am sure I don't even know 3% of the business side of football, I am simply trying to come up with reasons why there are not so many tag/trade deals. I don't think it is rocket science, but there has to be a reason why teams don't do this more often. Have any ideas? Maybe it is really simple and it is just frowned upon like the "poison pill" that was included in only a couple contracts and has now been classified illegal by the NFL? Maybe it is a combination of everything I posted; finding the right team, the right compensation, the player agreeing to a contract, and the short amount of time they have to get all of this done?

Anyway, here is to rocket science! :cheers:

_________________
Adopted Matthew Stafford -
Season Stats 216/362 59.7% 2508yds 20TD 8INT 89.9Rating


February 26th, 2012, 7:22 pm
Profile
Player of the Year - Defense

Joined: September 25th, 2007, 3:20 am
Posts: 2795
Post Re: Avril's Contract: Within 2 weeks?
Here's the reason there is so few tag & trade deals:

Tenders. When players become restricted free agents, they receive a tender and then have the freedom to either accept that deal or the other team assumes the cost of whatever the tender does. The original team also has the right to match, so it basically lets other teams do the negotiating for the original team.
IF a team does find a good deal but doesn't want to redo the deal yet, they can have them sign the old tender and work out a trade. Again, the team wanting the player would have to do all the work, give up compensation in the trade and still work out a new deal which isn't always feasible.

Franchise tag is the only tag that teams have on unrestricted free agents. The automatic jump to top 5 $ means that any trade would have to include that contract as well as work out a new contract or the player could walk the next year. Its a high risk up front, as well as not being able to work out the new contract deal until after the trade is already complete, so more risk tacked on to the receiving team. It almost forces the original team to save that player, which makes sense as its the franchise tag. Every other unrestricted agent can't be tagged, so they obviously can't be traded unless they sign a new deal which at that point they could just sign a new deal with the team interested in the trade.


February 26th, 2012, 8:08 pm
Profile
Player of the Year - Defense

Joined: September 13th, 2007, 12:43 pm
Posts: 2699
Post Re: Avril's Contract: Within 2 weeks?
Also, if there were a lot of tag+trade deals, why would comp picks exist?

I'm sure that if Avril signs a lucrative deal with another team, the Lions will automatically get a third round pick for him.


February 27th, 2012, 1:49 am
Profile
NFL Veteran

Joined: November 28th, 2007, 12:50 pm
Posts: 1386
Location: Newport Beach, Ca
Post Re: Avril's Contract: Within 2 weeks?
Everyone is making this way too complicated. The reason there are not a lot of tag and trades is because the team trading for the player has to pay a big contract and give up assets. A player would have to be elite to entice a team to give-up so much and if he is that good most teams find a way to keep them.

If the Lions do decide to tag and look for a trade partner I really hope Avril's contract demands don't scare everyone away.


February 27th, 2012, 2:46 am
Profile
Rookie Player of the Year
User avatar

Joined: August 24th, 2010, 9:54 pm
Posts: 2310
Post Re: Avril's Contract: Within 2 weeks?
rao wrote:
Everyone is making this way too complicated. The reason there are not a lot of tag and trades is because the team trading for the player has to pay a big contract and give up assets. A player would have to be elite to entice a team to give-up so much and if he is that good most teams find a way to keep them.

If the Lions do decide to tag and look for a trade partner I really hope Avril's contract demands don't scare everyone away.


Somebody would pay it--especially now with teams being able to 'roll over' cap space from last year.

_________________
Driver of the Jim Caldwell bandwagon. Climb aboard.


February 27th, 2012, 9:38 am
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pm
Posts: 9891
Location: Where ever I'm at now
Post Re: Avril's Contract: Within 2 weeks?
Lionfanatic wrote:
If the Packers gave permission to another team to speak with the agent of, Flynn, wouldn't Flynn have to technically be under contract with Packers? Which means wouldn't Flynn have had to sign his franchise tender? I honestly don't know the answer to this question so I really am asking, it isn't rhetorical.


If the Packers were to franchise tag Flynn, then he's considered to be under contract with them, even if he doesn't sign it.

Lionfanatic wrote:
The exclusive franchise tag does not give the player (agent) the right to speak to other teams. The other version does give the player the right to speak to other teams but it costs that team 2 first round picks if they sign the player.


The team that tags the player can give that players agent permission to seek a deal with another team. This is something that has been done before, so it's not like it's impossible.

Lionfanatic wrote:
i guess other reasons why there are not more tag and trades is what if the player feels they can make more money by being a FA and having multiple teams bid for them. A team might not have the compensation to do a trade but might have more money to burn in a signing.


The biggest reason why there aren't more tag and trade deals is because teams don't want to lose those players. Look at the Lions with Avril. They simply don't want him to go to another team. Retaining talent is something that gets a team wins and into the playoffs. Replacing talent is not just a snap of the fingers. In the case of Green Bay, we are talking about a backup player for them. In the Lions case, we are talking about a starter.

Lionfanatic wrote:
Teams might also decide not to trade for a player and give up draft picks and decide only to bid on him in the open market. Arizona's trade for Kolb is not looking so good after 1 year. Teams may not want to risk losing draft picks for an unproven player.


Teams don't want to get into a bidding war, and players want security. There are risks for both sides. There's been numerous cases of players who have decided to go into free agency and didn't get close to what they wanted. In some instances, the teams they left offered them better deals than the ones they ended up signing. If a team covets a player, they don't want other suitors. Think of your girlfriend. You don't want other guys coming around trying to offer her more. You aren't too afraid of the ugly bums, but the rich guys with movie star looks get you nervous.

Lionfanatic wrote:
There is also the timing of everything. A team might be willing to trade after the draft if a player, or position, is not filled during the draft. Due to the timing of when the new league year begins, when unsigned players become free agents, and the draft taking place ~6 weeks later, there is too much uncertainty. It doesn't leave a lot of time for teams to work out a trade deal and have the player/team agree on terms of a contract. I mean teams franchise players to give them more time to work out a long term deal, I don't know why a deal to tag/trade would be any easier to get worked out before the deadline when players become FA. If the Packers wanted to chance it they could tag him and hope a trade can be worked out later. Doing so would put them in great financial risk which is what I explained in my last post.


Teams want to know what they are getting in return. Trading before the draft positions by each team are known is risky to both sides. When the Lions traded Roy Williams, they didn't know if they were getting the first pick in eachy round, or the last pick. That's one of the reasons trades after the draft involving high round picks are so rare. Teams want to get just compensation, and know just exactly what picks they are getting.

Lionfanatic wrote:
Billy I do not know everything about the business side of football, I am sure I don't even know 3% of the business side of football, I am simply trying to come up with reasons why there are not so many tag/trade deals. I don't think it is rocket science, but there has to be a reason why teams don't do this more often. Have any ideas? Maybe it is really simple and it is just frowned upon like the "poison pill" that was included in only a couple contracts and has now been classified illegal by the NFL? Maybe it is a combination of everything I posted; finding the right team, the right compensation, the player agreeing to a contract, and the short amount of time they have to get all of this done?

Anyway, here is to rocket science! :cheers:


As I said before, I believe the reason is that teams are not willing to give up on high caliber talent so easily. In most cases, the franchise tag is given to a player that the team wants to retain and not see walk away. They typically are working on a long term deal, but simply haven't come to terms. Each side is looking for an advantage. The player is threatening to sit out camp, pre-season and regular season games. The team is threatening that the player could not have the security blanket of a long term deal. Javon Walker is a prime example of a player who had a long term deal before him, but he wanted more money. He plays under the franchise tag, blows out a knee, and is never the same. Had he taken the deal that Green Bay gave him, he would have been in much better financial position today. Green Bay could have tagged and traded him, but didn't want to face him on any given Sunday.

_________________
Driver of the 'we need a coaching change' bandwagon. Climb aboard.


February 27th, 2012, 9:46 am
Profile
Hall of Fame Player
User avatar

Joined: May 7th, 2005, 3:25 pm
Posts: 7441
Location: Earth/Sagittarius Dwarf Galaxy
Post Re: Avril's Contract: Within 2 weeks?
Lionfanatic wrote:
If the Packers gave permission to another team to speak with the agent of, Flynn, wouldn't Flynn have to technically be under contract with Packers? Which means wouldn't Flynn have had to sign his franchise tender? I honestly don't know the answer to this question so I really am asking, it isn't rhetorical.

The exclusive franchise tag does not give the player (agent) the right to speak to other teams. The other version does give the player the right to speak to other teams but it costs that team 2 first round picks if they sign the player.

i guess other reasons why there are not more tag and trades is what if the player feels they can make more money by being a FA and having multiple teams bid for them. A team might not have the compensation to do a trade but might have more money to burn in a signing.

Teams might also decide not to trade for a player and give up draft picks and decide only to bid on him in the open market. Arizona's trade for Kolb is not looking so good after 1 year. Teams may not want to risk losing draft picks for an unproven player.

There is also the timing of everything. A team might be willing to trade after the draft if a player, or position, is not filled during the draft. Due to the timing of when the new league year begins, when unsigned players become free agents, and the draft taking place ~6 weeks later, there is too much uncertainty. It doesn't leave a lot of time for teams to work out a trade deal and have the player/team agree on terms of a contract. I mean teams franchise players to give them more time to work out a long term deal, I don't know why a deal to tag/trade would be any easier to get worked out before the deadline when players become FA. If the Packers wanted to chance it they could tag him and hope a trade can be worked out later. Doing so would put them in great financial risk which is what I explained in my last post.

Billy I do not know everything about the business side of football, I am sure I don't even know 3% of the business side of football, I am simply trying to come up with reasons why there are not so many tag/trade deals. I don't think it is rocket science, but there has to be a reason why teams don't do this more often. Have any ideas? Maybe it is really simple and it is just frowned upon like the "poison pill" that was included in only a couple contracts and has now been classified illegal by the NFL? Maybe it is a combination of everything I posted; finding the right team, the right compensation, the player agreeing to a contract, and the short amount of time they have to get all of this done?

Anyway, here is to rocket science! :cheers:


If the Packers franchise Flynn, I guarantee you, Flynn will sign that tag so fast he will break a finger. He has never earned anything but chump change in the NFL. He will be ecstatic to guarantee himself $14 Million for 1 season. He would be retarded if he didn't.

Teams just haven't done it in the past very often because it kind of flies in the face of the spirit of the Franchise Tag. If the guy is deemed good enough to be considered your franchise player, And now you want to trade him? Eyebrows get raised. I think the Patriots were the 1st to do it with Matt Cassell.


February 27th, 2012, 10:54 pm
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pm
Posts: 9891
Location: Where ever I'm at now
Post Re: Avril's Contract: Within 2 weeks?
BillySims wrote:
If the Packers franchise Flynn, I guarantee you, Flynn will sign that tag so fast he will break a finger. He has never earned anything but chump change in the NFL. He will be ecstatic to guarantee himself $14 Million for 1 season. He would be retarded if he didn't.

Teams just haven't done it in the past very often because it kind of flies in the face of the spirit of the Franchise Tag. If the guy is deemed good enough to be considered your franchise player, And now you want to trade him? Eyebrows get raised. I think the Patriots were the 1st to do it with Matt Cassell.


Billy, the NFL is a business. Do you REALLY think other teams give a damn about whether or not the Packers do a tag and trade with Flynn? No, they don't. Because if they were in the same scenario as the Packers, with a QB firmly entrenched as an elite starter and a backup who has some teams buzzing about his hitting the FA market, those teams would do the same thing. This is a QB driven league, and the teams in need at that position could care less. The Lions secondary should get a kickback from whatever contract Flynn ends up getting for putting him into a position to get paid big bucks and have an honest shot at starting.

The Franchise Tag is a business tool, nothing more nothing less. It was something that the players originally wanted, but the teams have found ways to make it advantageous for themselves. I don't know if the Packers will tag Flynn or not, but it certainly seems they have taken the steps to do so. With a roster full of talent and so few needs to fill, they can afford to do it.

_________________
Driver of the 'we need a coaching change' bandwagon. Climb aboard.


February 27th, 2012, 11:58 pm
Profile
Post Re: Avril's Contract: Within 2 weeks?
M2 - Thank you for addressing Lionfanatic's post. Lots of factual inaccuracies there.

A team that uses the franchise tag doesn't have any cap hit in trading that player, period. IMO the main reason that it isn't done all that often is teams generally use that tag to KEEP players, not get rid of them. I don't think that should be the case for Avril.

NE did use a tag and trade scenario to move Cassel, but they only got a 2nd round pick (albeit a close to a first rounder) for a player that looked to some like he was capable of being a franchise Qb. IMO, the reason the compensation was so low was that everyone knew that the Pats would have to remove the tag or cut the guy if the season really came around. They couldn't carry two $14 million dollar + Qbs on their roster. That said, I imagine there was a small bidding war for his services and that's the max that anyone was willing to pay, but remember, they ALSO gave up Vrabel who was a decent LB at the time they gave him up.


The Cassel situation is probably similar to the Packer's situation with Flynn. I just looked at it as a case of "why give up a draft pick when they can get the player for free later," but in the NFL they do like guarantees and they don't like bidding wars. Some team will probably be willing to give up at least a 2nd to guaranty that they get him opposed to waiting until he hits the open market. The Packers will WANT the team getting him to have a contract in place with him before the trade so that the Packers will get the biggest value for the player. Remember, the more the team is getting, the more they're likely to give up. There's no reason the new team and the player wouldn't have a long-term deal in place before the trade.


The nice part about the scenario with Avril is - we can tag him AND keep him if we need to. He's not a backup Qb that we can't utilize if we're stuck with him. Not that I want to keep him for $10.5 million dollars or whatever it is, but other teams will realize that we're probably not going to be cutting him and if they want him they're going to have to pay up. That said, his value is probably around a late first to early 2nd at best. He will want a lot more coin than any rookie DE coming out this year.


February 28th, 2012, 5:12 pm
Post Re: Avril's Contract: Within 2 weeks?
m2karateman wrote:
wjb21ndtown wrote:
My FA prediction - we keep and over-pay Avril (mistake), we draft Mike Adams (mistake) and we left Backus go this year (mistake), and if we land a new FA its C. Finnigan (mistake).

My FA wishlist - keep Tulloch, sign Porter, tag and trade Avril, draft Kontz (if Kontz isn't there then we should be able to grab a good DE or LB, or Glenn). I'd rather convert a big CB to play FS than draft Barron, given his coverage skills.


You know wjb, if you could be any more of a Debbie Downer, I don't know how. Everything this team does is a mistake to you. Even things that haven't happened, and may not happen, is a mistake to you. 10-6 and a playoff berth must have been sheer luck, huh? What's your prediction for next season? 2-14?

I am as big a critic of this team as anyone. But I'm willing to give the current coaching staff and administration their due. I can recall there were a number of folks who complained about us giving up late picks for Rob Sims, Corey Williams, Chris Houston, Shaun Hill, etc. And all those moves have turned out quite well. The free agent signings have, for the most part, turned out quite well. I'm not going to sit here and say they have the Midas touch, but for God's sake give credit where credit is due and have a little faith.



Look at the Javid Best scenario. I said right from the beginning that it was going to be a cluster phuck and a HORRIBLE decision, and it HAS BEEN. I said right from the start that he was going to be injury prone and he has NEVER in his COLLEGIATE career ran well when he's banged up, and he's ALWAYS BANGED UP. And that was in college! I have done the same thing with numerous other prospects and I'm always told "you have no crystal ball... you don't know what's going to happen." And alacazam!!! He sucks...

I loved the Rob Sims acquisition, along with Houston and Williams. I didn't know much about Shaun Hill, but I was peeved that we got rid of Kitna, whom I saw as a viable backup, even though his preaching was annoying as hell. That said, I didn't complain about getting Hill, and I have been impressed by him.

I just get disappointed every year around draft time when we draft a bunch of "projects" or high risk players and we pass on legitimate starters. That's why I repeat over and over - I don't care who it is, I just want them to help this team THIS YEAR. Not in 3 years after we could potentially lose on of our three stars, not in 5 years when we don't know what our squad will look like, THIS YEAR. I want next years team better than last years team. I don't care if they don't get "as lucky" and they lose more games, I just want them to be better. I want our offense to be more dynamic and versatile, and I want our defense to be more solid, period. What I see from a lot of posters is that they want this project LB or this project FS (that can't cover), or this project CB that won't be an upgrade for us until a year or two down the road, is going to make some rookie mistakes that cost us games in the mean time, and that are likely going to cause this team to regress next year, even if they may be better in the long-run.

IF there wasn't a player(s) available that wouldn't do both (improve the team next year, and years down the road) I would be ok with a project. New England drafts projects all the time. Most people were shaking their heads when they drafted Logan Mankins in the first round, and many draft sites had him listed as a 3rd rounder. That's fine with me, IF no one is on the board that can start right now. But the fact is we will have a pick of more than one WR, OG, OC and MAYBE one OT (I do like Martin, but I hate, hate, hate Mike Adams, and it has NOTHING to do with OSU), and we should take that player, the guy that can start and make our team better THIS YEAR over some project that's going to make mistakes and cost us games.


February 28th, 2012, 5:25 pm
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pm
Posts: 9891
Location: Where ever I'm at now
Post Re: Avril's Contract: Within 2 weeks?
In truth, there were a number of us who weren't all that pleased with the Lions moving up to take Best. I didn't even want him with the 34th pick, due to his injuries. But that's one mistake out of many good moves. It can't be harped on forever. Not every move works out for every team. That's the NFL. I'm sure there have been more than a few players you've wanted the Lions to take that have turned out to be less than good. I'm sure there's been at least one pick they've made that you hated that has turned out to be a solid selection. In my case it was the Stafford pick. I didn't feel he would turn out as good as he did.

In your example you chose four moves, and all of them were mistakes in your eyes. I'm interested in knowing why you feel this off-season is going to be so mistake riddled, when previous off-seasons under this administration have been anything but. Sorry wjb, but you seem to continually focus on the negatives in a very hardline way, and completely ignore all the positives. I understand you are a true Lions fan, I'm not questioning that at all. But the Lions have turned the corner and it's because of this current staff. I know criticism will continue to happen, and I'll be among the critics. But at least have some belief that the world isn't going to crash down on this franchise in 2012.

_________________
Driver of the 'we need a coaching change' bandwagon. Climb aboard.


February 28th, 2012, 10:52 pm
Profile
Stadium Announcer

Joined: December 6th, 2005, 10:44 am
Posts: 73
Post Re: Avril's Contract: Within 2 weeks?
I love Avril but not for big time de money aka (Allen, Ware, Peppers) Granted that was only Avrils 4th year in the league, but lets just take a look at these 4 guys with a couple of stats for the last 3 yrs.

Total Tackles...Assists...Sacks...FF...Int
Allen
11' 48...18...22...4...1
10' 45...15...11...1...2
09' 43...8...14.5...5...1

Ware
11' 47...11...19.5...2...0
10' 56...10...15.5...2...0
09' 45...12...11...5...0

Peppers
11' 33...4...11...3...0
10' 43...11...8...3...2
09' 36...6...10.5...5...2

Granted these are all pro bowl level De's which is the kind of money Avril is going to be asking for lets examine his numbers the last 3 yrs.

Avril
11' 29...7...11...6...1
10' 23...10...8.5...1...0
09' 27...14...5.5...3...0

See what I mean...I know he is still young but we also have two very good Defensive ends waiting on the roster to get their shot. I love Avril and he had a killer year, but if he wants to go you can throw lo-Jack in his spot and rotate young at both positions with KVB and take the cap space and grab some oline or corners. I love Avril but the numbers don't justify the $numbers$ if you know what im saying...would love to keep him and see what happens when there is a healthy fairly in the middle with him.

_________________
We need Joey back...Jk but seriously.


March 1st, 2012, 11:58 am
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pm
Posts: 9891
Location: Where ever I'm at now
Post Re: Avril's Contract: Within 2 weeks?
bishop, to my knowledge nobody on this forum feels Avril is worthy of top 5 money for DEs in the league. But comparing the stats is a tad unfair, since the Lions institute a rotation at DE. Is that because Avril isn't that good? According to Schwartz it's because it keeps the players fresh. Truth? Well, only Schwartz knows for sure, but I can see where it's a huge advantage for the defensive tackles, so why not the ends as well. After all, we platoon with Suh.

And looking at Avril's 2011 stats, he's right there with Peppers in that regard. If Avril wants an eight figure per year salary average, I have no doubt the Lions will allow him to leave. He simply isn't worth that money.

_________________
Driver of the 'we need a coaching change' bandwagon. Climb aboard.


March 1st, 2012, 1:21 pm
Profile
Millen Draft Pick - Epic Bust
User avatar

Joined: December 30th, 2005, 6:55 pm
Posts: 732
Location: Connecticut
Post Re: Avril's Contract: Within 2 weeks?
Just saw on rotoworld that Avril was tagged by the Lions today. There's a good chance he may hold out.... guess we are oing to find out what Cliff is made of.

_________________
Rebuilding since 1957.


March 5th, 2012, 12:27 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 279 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ... 19  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: DayDreamer, Exabot [Bot], Growler and 8 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.