Come on man … my intent isn’t to talk down. Sorry you feel that way. I know tone is difficult to get on a message board but my intent is to always have an intelligent conversation.
Means I’m spelling out my point one more time. Here’s my take. Let me summarize my point one more time.
Sorry you read that as someone talking down towards you.
But you really should read your post my friend. Your being awfully aggressive there.
Peace
Mike Glennon made $1,161,719 I would take him over Chase an He is ufa
Air i understand what you mean but i see know problem letting hi go an sign a vet cheaper backup an hell get a UDFA QB as number 3
I don’t think I’m the one who is being aggressive, I waited for some time to mention it. You are hell bent to “explain” to everyone how a guy with 7 career starts in how many seasons is too valuable to move. Your points with re to what he brings to the table were ridiculous, Charlie Batch was an actual starting QB for years with over 40 starts before he came to Pittsburgh, what he brings and what Daniels brings aren’t comparable even though that was your point. You are basically accusing others of not being able to have an intelligent conversation when you aren’t making intelligent points. If we can get a veteran for the price of Winston or Flacco I’m in, Daniels has been stealing money since the first day he joined the NFL. I want a young, mobile QB OR a veteran who at least is a “has been” vs a “never was”. I’m done, have at it, there is nothing you can say that would make me believe that keeping Daniels is “smart”.
Flacco made a million is all last seasons as backup this 2.6 million for Chase just doesn’t add up Air
So if you cut Chase your cap savings is 2.3 mil in 2021.
You still need a back up - do you go out and sign someone like Jeff Driskol who made 2.5 mil last year? For a cap loss of .2 mil?
Or do you or do you replace him with a rookie for about 1 mil?
Have a little more of a clarification to make on the cap change if Chase Daniel is cut.
Cutting does indeed save $2.3 million on the 2021 cap.
However, a replacement paid $850K does not necessarily “add” $850K to the cap.
The reason?
The Lions currently have a handful of players making $660,000 counting towards the cap as the top 51 salaries count. Over The Cap shows 6 of them, Spotrac shows only 3 of them.
The next salary level up is $780,000, and it looks like 6-8 players hit this level.
The Lions have 15 free agents in 2021 that had cap numbers >$850K in 2020.
After the Lions sign their draft picks and any free agents needed to fill holes from those 15 players not currently under contract… it is very likely the bottom salary counting towards the cap will be at least $850,000 for the top 51 salaries… regardless of whether they were to draft a QB or sign a free agent.
Therefore, a new QB that has a $850K million cap charge in 2021… would not “add” anything to calculated cap after all is factored in to the situation. Therefore, the “net” savings for cutting Daniel is still $2.3 million in this scenario.
So anyone you disagree with is ridiculous and you don’t think that’s aggressive?
Funny Campbell said nearly the same things as I did when describing the importance of a veteran back up QB. Is our new HC ridiculous as well?
Where did I do this? … I never said anything of the such. And aren’t you doing exactly what your accusing me of?
I made similar points to what our own HC made.
That’s not how it works. If you cut someone from the top 51, you have to add someone to it, whether it’s the #52 cost on the roster or a new backup QB signing. If you want to go that route, when you cut Daniels, you really only save $1.54M ($2.3M- $660K replacement cost). But the only thing you are doing is making things confusing.
The backup QB is going to be on the roster when we do final cuts in September and all players on the roster count toward the cap. So If you are going to cut Daniels and replacement him with a $1M guy, you actually only save $1.3M for cutting Daniels.
Only if you replace his roster spot with a rookie salary. The average NFL backup is making more than a mil. Like I showed above Driscoll made 2.5 mil.
What do you propose as a solution for a backup QB? … I believe that if you really think out what the options are that you’ll see my point.
Do you want carry one or two backups?
Realize that due to Covid almost everyone is going to carry two.
The main argument comes down to. Let’s cut chase and replace him with a rookie salary wage. So we can save money on the cap.
We can do this for every position. Cut the vet and replace him with a rookie. But does that really make sense? There are good reasons to have veterans in back up rolls.
That’s the point I’m trying to get across.
Thanks Deadstroke. - I made this very point above myself but it fell on deaf ears.
For me the minimal savings isn’t worth losing what a veteran back up brings to the table. Just to replace that with a practice squad level of a QB.
It really comes down to value. Apparently some believe the backup QB has no value and we should go as cheaply as possible. I do not.
My argument is that a veteran back up adds more value than we save by cutting him in 2021.
In 2022 the savings are much larger and Daniels is a year older. At that point I’d look for a cheaper veteran back up. But I believe in having an experienced backup.
didn’t fall on deaf ears you can get better than Chase for one million i listed two which fell on deaf ears… Chase is a waste of roster space so move on take the savings an signa 1 million like i listed an more will be listed
I could see moving on from Daniel if we go after someone very specific like Tyrod Taylor, who has connections with Lynn and should understand the system. But other than that, I can’t see them moving on from Chase for a random backup QB. Chase has connections to Dan Campbell the coach and Dan Campbell the player.
Maybe I’d view it different if we saved a bunch of money by cutting Chase, but we don’t.
air–you are right ----i wasn’t thinking
Cutting Chase doesn’t keep you from signing a vet QB for less than the $2.3 million that you are saving and getting another QB to put on the PS. In fact teams typically have 4 QB’s going thru training camp. Flacco, Winston, Trubisky, actual NFL starters will be available for cheap. I’m willing to get better at backup, interesting that some people don’t think that’s important.
I pointed out above that the average veteran back up is costing around 2.5 mil. Driscoll is getting paid that.
Help me understand your point. Are you advocating cutting Chase (saving 2.3 mil) and signing someone like Driscoll for 2.5 mil? Or someone even more costly like Tyrod Taylor, Andy Dalton, or Marcus Mariota?
I doubt your getting Winston, Trubisky or Flacco to come to DET and make less than 2.3 mil.
Or are you thinking we will sign someone for around 1.3 mil? Thus cutting the cap savings down to 1 Mil? Last season 1.3 mil got you Blain Gabbert, Gino Smith etc? …I think at this point your just cutting him for the sake of cutting him because you just don’t like him. I don’t think this makes us a better team.
Personally I think Chase is better (or at least equal) to Driscoll, Gabbert and Smith… and I’m not really wanting to use up more of our available cap space on a back up. Chase wouldn’t be my choice for our backup but we’ve already spent the money and I feel his contract ties us to him for another season.
Like Wes pointed out above. Unless your going after someone specific like Tyrod Taylor. (Who made 7.5 mil last year) Who knows the offensive system and would help your other QB’s to grasp that system then it doesn’t make a lot of sense to spend more.
For these reasons I’d be surprised if we cut him.
Peace
Air, you’re forgetting how easy it is to just go get someone on a “team friendly” deal. Or a “prove it” deal.
That makes the salary considerations just go away.
Your right … we should just do that for every position.
Let me just point out that the savings isn’t just what we save this year. If you wait a year to cut him, he still has a 0.75 million cap hit of dead money against NEXT years salary cap. It’s a compounded situation as well.
Teams are limited from stockpiling huge cap numbers into one or two years by the NFL’s 89% rule. The 89% rule means that in any four-year period a team must spend more than 89% of its cap in “cash spending.”
What this means essential to the point of discussion is you can “bank” your savings for awhile, but eventually you need to spend it to the tune of an 89% AVERAGE over a four year period. However, you can neither bank nor spend what you are blowing on non essential personnel.
Let me set the following example. The Lions select a 4th round QB and sign him to a 4 year contract that averages 1 million per year and has a first year cap number of 0.8 million. You have now saved 1.5 million by cutting Daniel, which can be applied to your rollover money. You ALSO save the 0.75 million cap hit from NEXT year giving you a 2.25 million savings over the course of 2 years.
It doesn’t sound like much, but it’s drops in a bucket that add up when you consider the overall scope of a rebuild, because eventually you’re going to want to go free agent shopping and extend the players you want to keep.
I understand your position that what Daniel brings to the table in 2021 outweighs the money that would be saved and applied to future acquisitions that could aid the team when the rebuild is nearing completion. I simply disagree that with every aspect of your analysis of his benefits, but I do understand it.
You feel that the intangibles that Daniel brings to help in the quarterback room, in practice against the defense, and knowledge during games far outweighs his costs and provides an intrinsic value that is difficult to quantify.
My analysis of the currently evolving and fluid situation leads me to the conclusion, that within the larger scope of forward thinking team goals, that this does not serve the team best going into the future.
In my analysis, the benefits include rollover savings to be applied towards finishing the rebuild, and immediately developing an asset which has the chance to provide future returns on the field, as a tradable commodity, all in a cost controlled package. For where the team is at, I see this as best serving the scope of the overall plan. You feel differently, and that’s fine, however both angles have a valid basis.
See I think your flaw is misunderstanding his value. Earlier in the thread you referred to Chase as a “viable” backup. Really?
Yes we will pay a little extra to replace him or draft a rook in later rounds at no extra cost. Both superior options than someone who should be at home on the couch or holding a clipboard as an actual coach. Brunell + Goff clinches this as the clear, logical move to make.
Yep.
That’s not how it works. If you cut someone from the top 51, you have to add someone to it, whether it’s the #52 cost on the roster or a new backup QB signing. If you want to go that route, when you cut Daniels, you really only save $1.54M ($2.3M- $660K replacement cost). But the only thing you are doing is making things confusing.
My post was a little lengthy because I tried to explain how I predict the #51 salary cap number for the Lions rising to $850,000.
Therefore, signing a QB for $660,000 does NOT result in cap savings of only $1.54 million.
That QB would not count against the cap at all, so all of the $2.3 mill would be cap savings.
Paying guys like Chase Daniel is why the Lions are currently greater than $10 million over the cap with one of the worst rosters in the NFL.