PDA

View Full Version : Stafford signs, per PFT.com



stlrz d
04-24-2009, 11:17 PM
http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/04/ ... -stafford/ (http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/04/24/417-million-guaranteed-for-stafford/)


$41.7 Million Guaranteed For Stafford
Posted by Mike Florio on April 24, 2009, 10:59 p.m. EDT

Wow.

Itís done.

The Lions have agreed to terms with quarterback Matthew Stafford.

According to Jay Glazer of FOXSports.com, Staffordís deal is worth $78 million over six years, with $41.7 million guaranteed.

Wow.

The league needs a rookie cap...the sooner the better.

flippy
04-25-2009, 08:23 AM
http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/04/24/417-million-guaranteed-for-stafford/


$41.7 Million Guaranteed For Stafford
Posted by Mike Florio on April 24, 2009, 10:59 p.m. EDT

Wow.

Itís done.

The Lions have agreed to terms with quarterback Matthew Stafford.

According to Jay Glazer of FOXSports.com, Staffordís deal is worth $78 million over six years, with $41.7 million guaranteed.

Wow.

The league needs a rookie cap...the sooner the better.

i heard Peter King say yesterday, the worst team should get to pick the draft slot they want first.

I don't mind the rookie money so bad. It rewards guys for being a top college player and it incents the bad teams in the NFL not to be bad.

stlrz d
04-25-2009, 08:59 AM
http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/04/24/417-million-guaranteed-for-stafford/


$41.7 Million Guaranteed For Stafford
Posted by Mike Florio on April 24, 2009, 10:59 p.m. EDT

Wow.

Itís done.

The Lions have agreed to terms with quarterback Matthew Stafford.

According to Jay Glazer of FOXSports.com, Staffordís deal is worth $78 million over six years, with $41.7 million guaranteed.

Wow.

The league needs a rookie cap...the sooner the better.

i heard Peter King say yesterday, the worst team should get to pick the draft slot they want first.

I don't mind the rookie money so bad. It rewards guys for being a top college player and it incents the bad teams in the NFL not to be bad.

And it also cripples a team's salary cap if they guy they picked doesn't work out for whatever reason. Plus teams have to make room for a salary like this. That means getting rid of guys who may not be stars, but who contribute.

That has a trickle down effect.

Also, giving unproven players more guaranteed money than proven players is going to have an effect sooner or later too. Think about it...Ben in 2008, after playing for 4 seasons and proving he could compete, got just over $36 million guaranteed. Stafford hasn't played a down in the NFL and got more.

Last season, the deal that Matt Ryan signed would pay him more per season than what Ben makes if they both play out their existing contracts. Again, Ben had proven he could compete on an NFL level and Ryan had yet to play a down.

At some point the vets are going to have a say about this and it isn't going to be pretty.

JDSteeler
04-25-2009, 11:19 AM
That is absolutely ridiculous!!!!!!

A college player that hasn't taken one snap as a NFL QB,
is making more guaranteed money than veteran players
that have been in the league and proved themselves on
the field.

I think a salary cap for the rooks is needed for the top
ten picks!!

This is exactly the reason why the Lions are losers!!!

JD

frankthetank1
04-25-2009, 11:21 AM
That is absolutely ridiculous!!!!!!

A college player that hasn't taken one snap as a NFL QB,
is making more guaranteed money than veteran players
that have been in the league and proved themselves on
the field.

I think a salary cap for the rooks is needed for the top
ten picks!!

This is exactly the reason why the Lions are losers!!!

JD

just heard and i gotta agree. the first thing i said is that is why the lions suck haha. get ready for one of the all time biggest busts. how can you pay a guy that much who has never played one down in the nfl. im all for a cap for the first 5-10 picks, i think it would make a lot of sense

WoodleyofTroy
04-25-2009, 11:24 AM
I agree that these contracts for rookies are obnoxious, but luckily for the Lions it's Matt Stafford and not Jamarcus Russell.

frankthetank1
04-25-2009, 11:26 AM
I agree that these contracts for rookies are obnoxious, but luckily for the Lions it's Matt Stafford and not Jamarcus Russell.

i dunno i think i would rather have russell. its tough to judge these guys because they always play for awful teams and have nothing around them

WoodleyofTroy
04-25-2009, 11:28 AM
That is absolutely ridiculous!!!!!!

A college player that hasn't taken one snap as a NFL QB,
is making more guaranteed money than veteran players
that have been in the league and proved themselves on
the field.

I think a salary cap for the rooks is needed for the top
ten picks!!

This is exactly the reason why the Lions are losers!!!

JD

just heard and i gotta agree. the first thing i said is that is why the lions suck haha. get ready for one of the all time biggest busts. how can you pay a guy that much who has never played one down in the nfl. im all for a cap for the first 5-10 picks, i think it would make a lot of sense

Stafford a bust...why? He's got everything you need in a QB. A head on his shoulders. Can win games WITHOUT stats (we all know about that here), and can make every throw on the field. I think the Lions lucked out when Sam Bradford went back to school. Your typical stat QB (Bradford) that throws up huge numbers in College, winning the heisman, sucking in the pro's. Stafford is a Matt Ryan. Just gets it done. And has football written all over him regardless of system.

Detroit deserves no credit. They got lucky Stafford is #1 here. Like I said, Bradford comes out, they would take him. Typical Detroit drooling over the statistics and missing the "it" factor.

WoodleyofTroy
04-25-2009, 11:30 AM
I agree that these contracts for rookies are obnoxious, but luckily for the Lions it's Matt Stafford and not Jamarcus Russell.

i dunno i think i would rather have russell. its tough to judge these guys because they always play for awful teams and have nothing around them

See above.

JDSteeler
04-25-2009, 11:30 AM
I agree that these contracts for rookies are obnoxious, but luckily for the Lions it's Matt Stafford and not Jamarcus Russell.

i dunno i think i would rather have russell. its tough to judge these guys because they always play for awful teams and have nothing around them

True, and that is the case. But when I think of Russell, I see an overweight,
lazy, and confused QB. He wouldn't scare me if he was starting for the Pats*...

JD

BURGH86STEEL
04-25-2009, 12:10 PM
This will probably get resolved in the next CBA.

SteelCzar76
04-25-2009, 12:49 PM
On one hand i'm all for the "free market" philosophy. (As the these owners most certainly make a great deal of money because of the talent of the players on the field.)

But then again, there is a part of me that says it's asinine to pay someone whom has not taken a single snap at the professional level that kind of money. Not to say that they may not deserve it at some point,....but damn,...at least let them prove as much first.

stlrz d
04-25-2009, 12:50 PM
http://www.airlineempires.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/merge2.gif

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=6403 (http://planetsteelers.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=6403)

:nono

frankthetank1
04-25-2009, 01:37 PM
That is absolutely ridiculous!!!!!!

A college player that hasn't taken one snap as a NFL QB,
is making more guaranteed money than veteran players
that have been in the league and proved themselves on
the field.

I think a salary cap for the rooks is needed for the top
ten picks!!

This is exactly the reason why the Lions are losers!!!

JD

just heard and i gotta agree. the first thing i said is that is why the lions suck haha. get ready for one of the all time biggest busts. how can you pay a guy that much who has never played one down in the nfl. im all for a cap for the first 5-10 picks, i think it would make a lot of sense

Stafford a bust...why? He's got everything you need in a QB. A head on his shoulders. Can win games WITHOUT stats (we all know about that here), and can make every throw on the field. I think the Lions lucked out when Sam Bradford went back to school. Your typical stat QB (Bradford) that throws up huge numbers in College, winning the heisman, sucking in the pro's. Stafford is a Matt Ryan. Just gets it done. And has football written all over him regardless of system.

Detroit deserves no credit. They got lucky Stafford is #1 here. Like I said, Bradford comes out, they would take him. Typical Detroit drooling over the statistics and missing the "it" factor.

stafford is much better than bradford i agree with that. i just thing stafford is too inconsistent, i wasnt all that impressed with him last season. i wouldnt want the steelers to draft him if we had the number 1 pick. stafford is definetly no matt ryan. imagine if matt ryan had the team stafford had. they would have been national champs easily.

frankthetank1
04-25-2009, 01:44 PM
I agree that these contracts for rookies are obnoxious, but luckily for the Lions it's Matt Stafford and not Jamarcus Russell.

i dunno i think i would rather have russell. its tough to judge these guys because they always play for awful teams and have nothing around them

True, and that is the case. But when I think of Russell, I see an overweight,
lazy, and confused QB. He wouldn't scare me if he was starting for the Pats*...

JD

if russell dropped some pounds it would really help him out. he is absolutely huge but i think he has a lot of potential. if he was on the pats i would wouldnt be scared but after a couple more years under his belt i would be. he has such a strong arm. if the raiders ever built a good team around him i think he would be a very good qb, but they wont. they love throwing money away on bad free agents

stlrz d
04-25-2009, 01:55 PM
On one hand i'm all for the "free market" philosophy. (As the these owners most certainly make a great deal of money because of the talent of the players on the field.)

But then again, there is a part of me that says it's asinine to pay someone whom has not taken a single snap at the professional level that kind of money. Not to say that they may not deserve it at some point,....but damn,...at least let them prove as much first.

I agree. My problem isn't with the players getting as much as they can under the current system...my problem is with the system.