- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Early Predictions for Most Surprising NFL Veteran Cuts
Posted on 5/9/17 at 9:01 am
Posted on 5/9/17 at 9:01 am
Yeah I know, bleacherreport but I found it amusing enough to post. How dare they even mention this with his 5.1 YPC!!
Gotta love the offseason!
"Before I go any further here, a disclaimer.
The New Orleans Saints, who are upside down by about $2.5 million once the rookie pool is accounted for, have an easy path toward getting in the black. All they have to do is cut punter Thomas Morstead after June 1. Problem solved.
But discussing the release of a veteran punter is neither exciting nor surprising, so we'll look at another candidate who could save the team some cheese.
It wasn't long ago that Mark Ingram was the unquestioned lead back in the Big Easy. The lead dog. The big enchilada.
Then the team signed Adrian Peterson.
As Josh Katzenstein of the New Orleans Times-Picayune reported, head coach Sean Payton insisted Peterson was being brought in to help Ingram, not replace him.
"I think the role will be very clear and defined," Payton said. "It's a tough, long 16-week season. I think that he's someone that certainly will be able to complement Mark. Those guys are different in some ways, and yet we feel like we've added another quality player."
Then, just three days later, the Saints traded a seventh-round pick and a 2018 second-rounder to move up and select Tennessee tailback Alvin Kamara.
Suddenly, that clear status as the Saints' lead back was as muddy as the mighty Mississippi.
Ingram's a decent running back coming off the first 1,000-yard season of his six-year career. And he insisted to Mark Inabinett of AL.com that he wasn't surprised by the team's additions.
"Listen, man, it's nothing new," Ingram said. "I've been sharing the ball with one or two, maybe even three, guys since I got there. I figured we were going to draft somebody or get somebody in free agency. We still might. I figured that was going to happen, so it's not surprising to me.
Ingram's also a player who hasn't lived up to expectations, who has had flareups with Payton and whose release would net the team over $3 million against the cap.
Just saying."
BR
Gotta love the offseason!
"Before I go any further here, a disclaimer.
The New Orleans Saints, who are upside down by about $2.5 million once the rookie pool is accounted for, have an easy path toward getting in the black. All they have to do is cut punter Thomas Morstead after June 1. Problem solved.
But discussing the release of a veteran punter is neither exciting nor surprising, so we'll look at another candidate who could save the team some cheese.
It wasn't long ago that Mark Ingram was the unquestioned lead back in the Big Easy. The lead dog. The big enchilada.
Then the team signed Adrian Peterson.
As Josh Katzenstein of the New Orleans Times-Picayune reported, head coach Sean Payton insisted Peterson was being brought in to help Ingram, not replace him.
"I think the role will be very clear and defined," Payton said. "It's a tough, long 16-week season. I think that he's someone that certainly will be able to complement Mark. Those guys are different in some ways, and yet we feel like we've added another quality player."
Then, just three days later, the Saints traded a seventh-round pick and a 2018 second-rounder to move up and select Tennessee tailback Alvin Kamara.
Suddenly, that clear status as the Saints' lead back was as muddy as the mighty Mississippi.
Ingram's a decent running back coming off the first 1,000-yard season of his six-year career. And he insisted to Mark Inabinett of AL.com that he wasn't surprised by the team's additions.
"Listen, man, it's nothing new," Ingram said. "I've been sharing the ball with one or two, maybe even three, guys since I got there. I figured we were going to draft somebody or get somebody in free agency. We still might. I figured that was going to happen, so it's not surprising to me.
Ingram's also a player who hasn't lived up to expectations, who has had flareups with Payton and whose release would net the team over $3 million against the cap.
Just saying."
BR
9
Posted on 5/9/17 at 9:05 am to t00f
quote:
All they have to do is cut punter Thomas Morstead after June 1. Problem solved.
national press picking up steam.
Posted on 5/9/17 at 9:08 am to t00f
The guy who wrote this doesn't watch football.
Posted on 5/9/17 at 9:20 am to t00f
This is some of the worst clickbait I've ever seen. It makes zero sense for the Saints to cut Ingram, even if they wanted to get rid of him he has trade value they wouldn't simply cut him. This writer is a jackass.
Posted on 5/9/17 at 9:25 am to t00f
First and foremost his numbers are wrong.
We sit at $7 mil under. The rookies will take up about $4 mil effective cap (they replace someone in the top 51, meaning each costs about $500k less, or at least $3.5 mil less than what this guy is figuring).
On top of that we get $7.8 mil back from Byrd come June 1st.
In other words, no vet is getting cut due to salary. It would have happened already. So the whole article is fricking pointless.
We sit at $7 mil under. The rookies will take up about $4 mil effective cap (they replace someone in the top 51, meaning each costs about $500k less, or at least $3.5 mil less than what this guy is figuring).
On top of that we get $7.8 mil back from Byrd come June 1st.
In other words, no vet is getting cut due to salary. It would have happened already. So the whole article is fricking pointless.
This post was edited on 5/9/17 at 9:26 am
Posted on 5/9/17 at 9:31 am to t00f
cutting ingram saves 2mil (3.3mil dead)
june 1 cut him saves 3.7mil (1.6mil dead)
in terms of equal savings:
strief: 2.9mil saved (2.2mil dead)
morstead: 3.0mil saved (1.6mil dead)
ellerbe: 2.5mil saved (700k dead)
june 1 cut him saves 3.7mil (1.6mil dead)
in terms of equal savings:
strief: 2.9mil saved (2.2mil dead)
morstead: 3.0mil saved (1.6mil dead)
ellerbe: 2.5mil saved (700k dead)
Posted on 5/9/17 at 9:33 am to bonethug0108
To not just bitch about how wrong this guy is, I'll name another surprise cut (though I very much doubt it happens).
We suddenly crowded the LB position with a bunch of bodies. If the new guys prove they are up to the task and the staff feels he won't play the whole year anyway (because he hasn't played a whole year in years), Ellerbe could get the axe.
Again I do NOT think this will happen (thus why it's a surprise cut), but you can make a case for it with the depth of the position, the injury history of the player, and the money he will save.
We suddenly crowded the LB position with a bunch of bodies. If the new guys prove they are up to the task and the staff feels he won't play the whole year anyway (because he hasn't played a whole year in years), Ellerbe could get the axe.
Again I do NOT think this will happen (thus why it's a surprise cut), but you can make a case for it with the depth of the position, the injury history of the player, and the money he will save.
Posted on 5/9/17 at 9:35 am to htran90
Does that account for the guy(s) replacing them in the top 51 (saves about half a mil less)?
And funny Ellerbe looks the most cuttable on paper and you post that as I was typing up the next post.
And funny Ellerbe looks the most cuttable on paper and you post that as I was typing up the next post.
Posted on 5/9/17 at 9:51 am to lionward2014
quote:
This is some of the worst clickbait I've ever seen. It makes zero sense for the Saints to cut Ingram, even if they wanted to get rid of him he has trade value they wouldn't simply cut him. This writer is a jackass.
Peterson is Bell
Ingram is Pierre
Kamara is Bush
What's so freaking hard to understand?
Posted on 5/9/17 at 9:59 am to SaintEB
quote:
The guy who wrote this doesn't watch football.
Don't disagree as I don't think in any shape or form they would cut Ingram but this is his bio:
"A member of the Fantasy Sports Writers Association and Pro Football Writers of America who resides in Columbus, Ohio, Gary has been featured on a number of fantasy websites and in nationally circulated publications.
These publications include the USA Today Fantasy Football Preview and the magazines distributed by Fantasy Sports Publications Inc., for whom Gary is a both a contributing author and associate editor.
Gary is a two-time FSWA Award finalist, and his article "To Gronk or Not to Gronk" was honored by the FSWA as the 2015 Print Article of the Year.
Gary also appears regularly on Sirius XM Radio (including live from Radio Row at Super Bowl XLIX), KDUS Radio in Phoenix, Arizona and is the co-host of The Fantasy Football Feeding Frenzy, a weekly podcast on Blog Talk Radio.
Gary was one of the co-founders of, and Head Writer at, Fantasy Football Oasis before joining Fantasy Sharks as an IDP Senior Staff Writer in 2011.
Gary joined Bleacher Report in 2011 and is now an NFL Analyst for B/R, covering the latest happenings in the National Football League and reporting on how they affect the fortunes of fantasy football fanatics everywhere.
He knows football. Or so he's heard."
bio
Posted on 5/9/17 at 10:01 am to t00f
Lol so he's a fantasy football writer, makes total sense now that he's "qualified" to discuss roster cuts.
Posted on 5/9/17 at 10:07 am to lionward2014
And, he won an award!
Posted on 5/9/17 at 10:26 am to t00f
quote:
Suddenly, that clear status as the Saints' lead back was as muddy as the mighty Mississippi.
So you're the 33 year old with knee surgeries and a rookie makes Ingram being the lead back unclear?
That's a pretty ludicrous statement.
Posted on 5/9/17 at 10:54 am to t00f
AP is 32 years old and going to be on the team for 1 or maybe 2 years.
Kamara never had more than 18 carries in a single game in college and is rookie and thus unproven.
Lasco is unproven on offense. Murphy and Cadet are utterly worthless.
Kamara never had more than 18 carries in a single game in college and is rookie and thus unproven.
Lasco is unproven on offense. Murphy and Cadet are utterly worthless.
Posted on 5/9/17 at 11:19 am to lsutigers1992
quote:
Peterson is Bell
Ingram is Pierre
Kamara is Bush
What's so freaking hard to understand?
I don't get why people refuse to understand the offense has been prime in years where we have 3 healthy backs.
Posted on 5/9/17 at 11:26 am to t00f
quote:
Predictions
quote:the most surprising events are the ones nobody predicted. The entire premise of the article is moronic.
Most Surprising
Posted on 5/9/17 at 11:31 am to htran90
Yup 2009 and 2011. Would have been 2007 if Deuce doesn't go down.
Posted on 5/9/17 at 2:29 pm to SaintEB
quote:
The guy who wrote this doesn't watch football.
IDK he did call Ingram an average back...
Posted on 5/9/17 at 4:51 pm to t00f
Well it would be surprising so there's that
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News