rmcjacket23

Source for where trading away players can get you comp picks?

Correct, and that's pretty much how you have to do it. One year of being bad isn't falling off a cliff by NFL standards. Its when you lose your franchise QB and spend 5-10 years or more looking for a new one that you fall off a cliff. There will certainly be growing pains when Joe leaves, and not even using a mid round pick on a QB this year is going to stop that. People like to pretend to think the Patriots are geniuses for drafting guys like Mallett or Garoppolo that early in the draft, but the reality is that any production Garoppolo has in this league is almost certainly not going to come in a Patriots uniform. They used a second round pick on a player that, if everything goes well, will have basically never played for them. They are about the only franchise I know that has that luxury, and we certainly don't. I do find it funny that fans think that this is somehow something that all teams do... they draft a mid round QB and let him sit for a few years while he learns how to become a starter. The last success story I can remember off-hand (and there could be others I don't remember) where that actually worked was Rodgers (and he was a 1st rounder, not a mid rounder), and you're looking back over 10 years at this point. So in over 10 years nobody has successfully done that. Have fans ever asked themselves why that is? I'll give you guys a hint... the value of QBs in today's market is almost strictly limited to their first 4-5 years in the league. That's when they can play at a high level and get paid very little for it. If the objective is to draft a guy who won't play for 3-4 years and then will all of the sudden play well, you're getting MAYBE 1-2 years of actual cheap value out of them. After that, you've got to pay them $20M+ a year, and it affects your roster construction in a big way.

We have many and none of them are consistent or play particularly well. The reason we have so many reflects upon how good the one's we have are. So, in short, they have no trade value.

Nope. DTs who get 4-5 sacks a year with that level of output get paid very well across the board in the NFL. Just confirming that everybody understands this concept.

Jernigan 16 solo tackles 15 assisted tackles. Pierce 19 solo tackles 16 assisted tackles. Let another team over pay TJ in the FA Market. So you're only evaluating them based on tackles? What about sacks? Are they not important?

Jernigan 16 solo tackles 15 assisted tackles. Pierce 19 solo tackles 16 assisted tackles. Let another team over pay TJ in the FA Market. Why bother reply to people like that.... they clearly don't get it no i don't get how you give up a 2nd round player from 2014 and a 3rd round pick for a 3rd round pick I'm siding with most people saying the eagles got the better of this trade by a long shot Time will tell. It would be almost impossible for them to get the better end of the deal if Jernigan doesn't sign a long term extension with them. Giving up 25 spots in the 3rd round for a 1 year rental on a team that clearly isn't going to the SB doesn't sound like you're getting the better of anything.

So you would rather have TJ for one more year then let him leave and get nothing? got it. we would get his production in a contract year or we could have waited until draft day to trade him and we probably would have gotten more Why would you get more on draft day? You're risking the teams that would be interested in him drafting players at the same position and no longer being interested in him. That's a very dangerous game to be playing. Why do you think most of your younger veteran players who are still on the market are so adamant about finding a job before the draft? The draft is where teams fill holes, not add them.

Too soon for that. For starters, somebody you draft will only be on a rookie deal for 4 years, and Joe is very likely to be here that long, so the guy we drafted would likely be a starter on another team after his contract ends as opposed to us. That's also assuming the guy you get is any good, which is very difficult to find these days and even worse when you're talking mid-to-late rounds. Teams don't have to fall off a cliff when their long-term starters career ends. Guys like the Colts and Packers didn't fall off a cliff when Favre or Manning left. Have no idea what the QB situation will look like 4-5 years from now in the draft... could easily find a week 1 starter there.

Correct. The entire month of September is an exercise in trying to avoid having a baseball team and a football team playing in the same city at the same time, which affects the majority of both sports cities.

Don't think that's a requirement at all. Perfect comp for me is Arthur Jones. Interior pass rusher in a 3-4, wasn't healthy for a full season at really any point during his time in Baltimore (Jernigan's actually been healthier), and is a 5-6 sack per season kind of guy. When he signed his deal in 2014, it was a top 10 DT contract in terms of AAV. A top 10 DT contract in next years market is at least $10M a year. Has every bit the production as a Brockers or a Liuget, with pretty close to as much durability. If Jernigan plays in 2017 exactly how he has the last 1-2 years, he's getting a big contract from the Eagles.

Well offensively they weren't exactly horrible, just not great. Had more offensive line and defensive issues than anything. Obviously not going to judge an OC's time based on the teams overall record, because that just doesn't make any sense. He actually had some pretty viable stints in Washington and Cleveland in terms of output, especially considering the talent limitations. Its one of the reasons why he was such a hot commodity. Also certainly don't blame the play calling for their SB loss. Same play calling hung 28 on a Belichick defense in a matter of two quarters. He gets some of the blame, but when you're team gets outscored 25-0 in a matter of about 20 minutes of game time, there's more blame to go around then just the offense.

I seriously doubt either is making this deal thinking "gee I better win in 2017 or I'll be gone". Not that it really matters if they're gone or not, because no new GM or coach is going to come in here and make resigning Jernigan a top priority. He was gone after this season regardless of who's running the show. You're right that it doesn't help the team win in 2017, but it was never about 2017 to begin with.

Well he's going to at least fetch a contract at the value of Brandon Williams, since he's a pass rushing interior lineman. That will probably land him a 4th round comp pick, but that all depends on the size of the bigger contracts next offseason. Would expect the Eagles to sign him to a long term extension if they are trading for him, so they won't get a comp pick at all.

Maybe this quick analysis will make you see why this is much more probably gonna end up being a good move than a bad one And if you're familiar with RSR, you know that Tony Lombardy isn't the guy who will defend everything about the Ravens organization's actions. Sorry bio, I will take a motivated Timmy and his production and a possible 3rd round comp pick next draft over moving up 25 spots in the third round this draft any day. IMHO Lombardi is the one who is wrong. He did not convince me one bit with his argument. What if the comp pick were a 4th rounder? Does that change it? I generally agree that the compensation doesn't quite seem like enough, BUT, I'm not sure we should be assuming a 3rd round comp pick either.

Well certainly no coach is evaluating ANY individual player based on the record of the entire team, because that makes zero sense. If they did, then every team in the league would just cut almost their entire roster after such a season, and would never extend any of the players associated with it OR sign any players that played on a team that bad. If coaches don't think he's very good, its because they watched film on him individually and determined that. Its not because some of the guys next to him weren't playing well or his team wasn't playing well. They don't give everybody a free pass, but they do give some players a free pass, because there's no shortage of bad football teams with good or even great players on them.

The idea of trading him makes all the sense in the World. The issue I have is the compensation. It just doesn't seem enough. Giving up one year of quality production for a 3rd round pick 25 spots earlier just doesn't seem like good value to me.

LOL, because mine isn't an opinion. Mine is a reflection of how NFL players and teams view these types of games. We know this because they publicly acknowledge it on almost an annual basis. They hate Thursday games. They hate Monday games. We all know this at this point. And obviously there's a very large difference between expressing an opinion that benefits yourself and your own personal wishes and expressing an opinion that would actually benefit the team more by a wide margin. The difference there displays the difference in what kind of fan you are and what kind of fan you want to be. Obviously the amount of money or time you invest is irrelevant, because all that buys you is entertainment. It doesn't buy you entertainment when and where you choose to have it. Nothing more and nothing less.

Every team goes through it ONCE when they play on Thursday night football. Not every team plays on MNF, and those that don't are not going through it and are probably better off for it. You summed it up perfectly. Its a great idea to YOU. Only one problem of course... the Ravens aren't seeking your counsel for what is best for them or even what is best for you as a fan, because they don't care. Great lesson for all the kids posting on these boards. Best to look out for the actual product instead of looking out for whatever it is that you personally want.

Or you could just play it in the late slate on Sunday, or on Sunday night, which has become common. I like how you brushed off the main point of them having to play another opponent on a short week following that. Could easily be a road game too. Sounds like a great idea. Lets play a MNF home game in mid or late season against the Steelers, then play a road game the following week on Sunday afternoon. I'm sure the team will be in great shape for that one, given how great we play on the road typically and how much more energy and health we have the week after a Steelers game. Certainly no concerns there. Sounds like you're really looking out for what's in the teams best interest on this one. God forbid if you aren't able to watch other teams play (if only there were a device that allowed you to record and watch live events later?).

Can be? How about will be? Well, lets be clear. Most of the time the FO tells us what they're going to do (both in terms of the draft and in FA), and they almost always go out and do it. Problem seems to be that the fanbase has for some reason come to the conclusion that the FO lies to them all the time, and that whatever they say is just a "smoke screen". Every year the FO tells us a position they will target in the draft, and every year they get at least one player from that spot.

I don't understand why people want to play the Steelers at home on MNF. For starters, most people hate the late games, since you're waiting around all day for it to play then have to stay up til midnight for it to end (on a work night for most people). Most importantly, unless we have a bye the following week (which is unlikely), I have zero interest in playing another team on a short week after the Steelers game. Its almost as bad as playing them on a Thursday night after a Sunday game. Hate the idea of only three days off before playing a physical game.

Short answer... its hard. They have to plan around other sports schedules, look for travel logistics, AND simultaneously attempt (not guaranteed) to make it so that 32 NFL teams have reasonable travel schedules... all while taking into account network demands and promoting certain games in certain timeslots. They also have to manage bye weeks. Frankly, if the average Joe Schmo attempted to do this, it would take weeks or months and it still probably wouldn't be anywhere close to being right. Think of it this way... there's plenty of fans who whine and complain about the unfairness of EVERY teams schedule, including our own. And that's AFTER the league probably spent weeks or even months putting it together. Imagine what would happen if they shorten the amount of time put into it?

Well there's certainly valid reasons for criticism, given how some of the more recent drafts, and in particular high draft picks, have performed. 2012 draft class was a complete joke, save for one player, we got mega busts out of our top two picks in 2013, and the entire 2015 draft class is looking very shaky right now after two seasons. Belichick whiffs in the draft plenty as well. Nobody is immune from criticism, especially when its the biggest reason we are in the position we are in right now.

Shanny would have been 1 and done too. And I'm still not sold on him being a "top" OC or Coach (see play calls in SB - 4th quarter). It's the Falcons - pretty easy to play call for them. 1. Throw the ball to Julio 2. See #1 3. Hand off to Freeman or Coleman 4. When all else fails, see #1 Well they weren't world beaters on offense before he got there, and had largely the same offensive personnel. Can argue they actually have less talent on offense than they have in the past during the Ryan/Julio era.

Or it says nothing at all...