NFL 2018 OFF-Season thread

[Raiders]

Two more games would just be too punishing for the players. But getting rid of at least one pre-season would be good. They won't because of $$.
BTW, I heard GB is a top contender for Mack.

Trading Mack to the NFC would be smart, but the Raiders need equal compensation.

[SUPERECWFAN1]

Mahomes continues to look like a play making guy who is growing each week. From lighting up the Bears the 1st series or two to his deep passes. The only thing is Mahomes will need to carry Kansas City over a suspect defense which is being revamped with youth again. (Derrick Johnson , Tamba Hali , Marcus Peters , etc) are all gone. The Chiefs replaced them with youthful defensive guys. Who clearly are learning as they go. Its not gonna be a great defensive year. The next draft will likely all be defense.

[Kirby101]

Trading Mack to the NFC would be smart, but the Raiders need equal compensation.

The problem with GB is even a #1 pick might not be worth it to the Raiders. Mack could put them in the Superbowl, and that would make it pick # 31 or #32.

[Raiders]

The problem with GB is even a #1 pick might not be worth it to the Raiders. Mack could put them in the Superbowl, and that would make it pick # 31 or #32.

I agree, Raiders need to get GB best pass rusher and a number one pick.

[SUPERECWFAN1]

Trading Mack to the NFC would be smart, but the Raiders need equal compensation.

I agree, Raiders need to get GB best pass rusher and a number one pick.

A team would be stupid to again do an addition by subtraction of their best defensive player for another defensive player. If your building a defense and making a trade for someone like Mack , why give up someone to weaken that ? They would likely look at trading a solid offensive player to do the deal with a #1 draft pick. But given that the Raiders are loaded offensively ...what would they get there ?

The Raiders will have to seriously debate this. They can keep Mack through franchise tags the next season or two. But he'll be disgruntled I'm sure and there is likely some heat with Gruden now. So they will have to examine whether keeping him and demanding the greatest value as that is an off-field issue. Or moving him as time passes.

I'd say they will get a few draft picks for him (some 1st and 2nd's) as a best case move.

[Raiders]

A team would be stupid to again do an addition by subtraction of their best defensive player for another defensive player. If your building a defense and making a trade for someone like Mack , why give up someone to weaken that ? They would likely look at trading a solid offensive player to do the deal with a #1 draft pick. But given that the Raiders are loaded offensively ...what would they get there ?

The Raiders will have to seriously debate this. They can keep Mack through franchise tags the next season or two. But he'll be disgruntled I'm sure and there is likely some heat with Gruden now. So they will have to examine whether keeping him and demanding the greatest value as that is an off-field issue. Or moving him as time passes.

I'd say they will get a few draft picks for him (some 1st and 2nd's) as a best case move.

Best thing is the Raiders need to sign Mack and pay him what he is worth. Gruden needs to cool his big ego.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

The problem with GB is even a #1 pick might not be worth it to the Raiders. Mack could put them in the Superbowl, and that would make it pick # 31 or #32.

He's holding out over a contract dispute so literally every team is going to hold that against the Raiders in a trade "I'm going to have to pay him a fortune anyways". He's worth maybe a first and two with change. You aren't mortgaging a team for that. When you add Mack's contract (especially if the Packers who will add Rodgers) you are going to be heavily reliant on drafting well for the next 4-5 years to remain competetive.

[SUPERECWFAN1]

He's holding out over a contract dispute so literally every team is going to hold that against the Raiders in a trade "I'm going to have to pay him a fortune anyways". He's worth maybe a first and two with change. You aren't mortgaging a team for that. When you add Mack's contract (especially if the Packers who will add Rodgers) you are going to be heavily reliant on drafting well for the next 4-5 years to remain competetive.

The best team to take Mack would be the Cleveland Browns really. They have the draft picks and salary cap space to pay Mack the $60+ million in guarantees. This would give the Browns 2 big LB's really .

But a big factor is having Mack agree to a contract with whoever trades for him 1st. A team will want that extension done 1st before they give up draft picks. Its what led Kansas City to do the trade of Alex Smith to Washington this off-season. The Browns were gonna give a 2nd round pick and possible player (or later draft pick) for Smith. But the Chiefs and Smith wanted him to have a new contract in place. When the Browns refused to do an extension for him , they contacted Washington who did one for Smith and got trade done.

[worstblogever]

It's only the preseason, I keep telling myself.

Arizona forces 8 turnovers against the Cowboys, is +8 for the game in the turnover battle, and +16 for the preseason overall.

I'll settle for this sort of play carrying over to the regular season.

[SUPERECWFAN1]

In NFL News , Eric Decker (WR) announced his retirement today after 8 seasons. Decker had signed before camp opened with New England but was struggling with dropped passes in camp and had little impact on field. Decker was even expected to be a roster cut in a couple days as well. Its said Decker was never the same after hip surgery and he lost what speed he had as a receiver.

[SUPERECWFAN1]

SB Nation ran a brilliant video series on the downfall of Ole Miss football and how it all began...with the sabotage of Laremy Tunsil on draft day back in 2015. The NCAA was looking at Ole Miss already and the recruiting class of 2013 made them really go after the college as everyone knew they were paying players. That you don't land 3 of the top blue chip athletes and at a college like Ole Miss suddenly.

[Raiders]

The best team to take Mack would be the Cleveland Browns really. They have the draft picks and salary cap space to pay Mack the $60+ million in guarantees. This would give the Browns 2 big LB's really .

But a big factor is having Mack agree to a contract with whoever trades for him 1st. A team will want that extension done 1st before they give up draft picks. Its what led Kansas City to do the trade of Alex Smith to Washington this off-season. The Browns were gonna give a 2nd round pick and possible player (or later draft pick) for Smith. But the Chiefs and Smith wanted him to have a new contract in place. When the Browns refused to do an extension for him , they contacted Washington who did one for Smith and got trade done.

If they trade Mack, they should trade him to a weak NFC team

[Kirby101]

OBJ and the Giants agree on a 5 year $95 million deal. $65 million guaranteed.

https://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2018/8/...ey-money-money

[HowitzerJoe]

Raiders shouldn't trade Mack, and I don't expect them to. You don't trade a 27 year old pass rusher that is on a HOF pace, and hasn't had any injury problems. Wouldn't do it for three first round picks.

Mack will report to the Raiders. His other option is to sit out, and lose game checks. He'll fold. Then he'll get tagged for two more years if a deal isn't reached. He's basically stuck there for the next three years or so.

[SUPERECWFAN1]

Raiders shouldn't trade Mack, and I don't expect them to. You don't trade a 27 year old pass rusher that is on a HOF pace, and hasn't had any injury problems. Wouldn't do it for three first round picks.

Mack will report to the Raiders. His other option is to sit out, and lose game checks. He'll fold. Then he'll get tagged for two more years if a deal isn't reached. He's basically stuck there for the next three years or so.

As I posted above they can approach it that way of course and keep him locked down. But do you want the distraction of that happening ? A lot of teams wouldn't want that and would try to move someone from it. Its really up to the Raiders. But its amazing it took Gruden coming in to really start this situation.