Inqui

Even if the demand's there, my question is one of logistics. As an NZ sports fan, we have three notable teams in Australian leagues: one each for basketball, football (soccer) and rugby league. You have to factor in time zones (maximising primetime spots: the owner of the London franchise would be rather unhappy if they had their home schedule designed for maximising an American TV audience. You have to try and cash in on every market or you'll look like you're neglecting a team), immigration issues (they seem pretty smooth in the NHL and in the Australian leagues, but I suspect they'd be more complicated with with a US-UK league), but most importantly you have how it would skew the travel schedules. Yeah they're professional athletes, but one look at how the Kiwi teams do in Australian leagues should tell you how tough that really makes things over a season. The home advantage is nice and all, but the perks of having every team come over once (ie, the disadvantages for that team once a season) are far outweighed by the problems of having to fly to a different country every other week (imagine when they face the NFC West!). I feel like with all the hoops you have to jump through to make a potential London team work, it wouldn't be worth the benefits you get from expanding the market. The one game a week thing, I think it's best to have a maximum of eight games in [London/Europe/Canada] to prove it's no novelty. Work to 16 from there.

It wasn't me who -1ed that comment, but why can't the FO sign both? Sounds like they've been working on both contracts for a while, but Pitta just managed to ice his deal first.

This. It sounds like we're deep in contract talks, and for all we know they could have decided a franchise tag would be seen by Monroe as a gesture of bad faith that derailed the contract talks. Where there's smoke there's fire (except smoke machines ), but we don't actually know much about the fire until we see it. We just know that it's there.

Probably shouldn't bust out the keg just yet, but it sounds good so far.

Tbh I'd almost say overpay - especially with the cap increasing and supposed to increase further over the next two seasons. He's a quality LT entering his prime and I think we're picking too late to get someone as good (and as sure a thing) as him.

If Monroe tests the market, I'm going to feel sick.

The 2012 QB class is in for a nice set of contracts.

That, plus I don't think he's as flash as someone will no doubt pay him out to be. I think any changes a cap raise would have to our current plan would be negligible: sign our most important guys, and add FAs at a good value. That much more room would only let us do it more effectively.

If we could sign Arthur Jones for $8 a year I'd be doing cartwheels. Dunno how he'd manage to pay his bills, mind.

Am I the only one who'd like to see the FO use the extra space to just front-load a few contracts (give Monroe a big hit for next season, for example)? Looking ahead to the next offseason, we have Smith brothers up for big paydays and I think Ozzie would be happy if guys like Monroe and Pitta already had a decent chunk of their contracts sorted. I mean, there's obviously a good reason I'll never be an NFL GM and all, but...

I'm not saying he is, but I do think Pitta's agent would be looking at it as a basis for his own deal, and possibly push up Pitta's price too far.

They were saying on NFL Live that while both parties want the deal, they're not that close to it. I obviously hope we hang onto him, but he's not worth putting too much money into. I'd almost be tempted to say let him walk and pick up Amaro at 16/17 if he asks too much. Especially if Jimmy Graham gets that monster contract first.

Every Joe Flacco discussion takes us somewhere new and exciting, and I especially love how brisk they can be. I mean, I'd be thoroughly sick of those arguments if they took up 30+ pages of every thread they touched or re-hashed the exact same same points every time, but I love how they never get that way.

Has to be Monroe. SURELY. I'd be disappointed if we re-signed Pitta but not Monroe.

Yeah, apparently he was. Which actually raises all kinds of other questions.

I get NFL Game Pass so I get to watch them anyway. Most of the games seem pretty average, but I like the chance to watch on a Friday afternoon if it's a decent match-up.

I absolutely respect his talents and all, but it just feels like there're a lot of double standards going on (from both sides I guess). As for his place in the greatest QB convo, I don't really get into it that much because times change so much that all we're doing is speculating, but I think he'll be remembered as a better version of Dan Marino. Great player that (almost) never got it done.

It's funny how all the Peyton fans are blaming the team for his dismal Superb Owl performance. If they'd been there when he broke records by running up the score on teams like the Raiders and the NFC East sides and saying those records were a team performance, I might respect that opinion.

Probably more intense than the SB too.

Tbf, defence didn't really win it for us (aside from that last drive) but you have a point. I think it's generally more accurate to say you need a defence to win.

I loved watching Denver get dismantled, but generally I'd agree.

I wonder what the process is for dropping the confetti. Must take a while to get all of that stuff up there to drop.

Denver has Moreno, Woodyard, DRC, Ayers, Adams, Decker, Jammer and Harris as UFAs. Be interesting to see what they do this offseason.

Fair play, and I think we can all agree this is a step down from a team like the Steelers or Patriots getting flogged, but only a small one.