Expansion draft...
Tru_Blu
been on IR at season's end? If that's right, let's see who the consensus 8
are.
1) Shultz: Too slow and becoming less dependable
2) Scroggins: Definitely as has-been. He didn't even play his usual 1/2
season this year.
3) Aldridge: Same as Schultzy. Was a solid journeyman, but is no longer a
significant contributor.
4) Kowalkowski: He's had his fun. Time to say bye...
5) Lyght: I won't say anything about him that his performance hasn't already
said.
6) Joyce: A solid backup, but is worth risking in the draft. A dime a dozen
player.
7) Pritchett: Can still play in the league, but if you have to make a choice
between him and some younger talent, he draws the short straw.
8) Droughns: He *is* still on the roster right??? Why?
We've gotta keep Batch IMO because he can still help the club. (Unless M&M
are serious about drafting another QB in the 1st round.) So I'm hoping
Morny decides to develop what QBs we have and fill the more pressing needs.
There're so many holes to fill, that I'm pretty certain this draft will be
a failure unless we can trade our #3 overall for extra picks... Our number
two may be a valuable trade commodity as well.
Grey Matters
>
> We've gotta keep Batch IMO because he can still help the club.
> (Unless M&M are serious about drafting another QB in the 1st round.)
For my first "Mark My Words" I'll say that Batch does NOT get exposed in
the Expansion Draft.
If he hadn't been on IR, I'd say he's hung up to dry. However, I think
that M&M are going to use their one IR slot to leave Boyd or Rice or
someone else unprotected. I think their strategy is going to be to
maximize their likelihood of achieving cap savings, and I think they're
too risk averse to put Batch out there and then not get a bite.
> So I'm hoping Morny decides to develop what QBs we have and fill the
> more pressing needs. There're so many holes to fill, that I'm pretty
> certain this draft will be a failure unless we can trade our #3
> overall for extra picks... Our number two may be a valuable trade
> commodity as well.
I'd say in general that they should go for big dynamite in the draft and
not trade down. I'd rather see them suck with a few good players and a
lot of bad ones than suck with less good players and a greater number of
second tier guys.
Adam
> What is it.. 8 players must be made available?
I think its five actually tru.
> 1) Shultz: Too slow and becoming less dependable
I'm sad, cause I really liked Schultz in his first season he was here, but we
can't have him on this team anymore im afraid.
>
> 2) Scroggins: Definitely as has-been. He didn't even play his usual 1/2
> season this year.
Actually he won't be on this list. Word is, he's retiring.
>
> 3) Aldridge: Same as Schultzy. Was a solid journeyman, but is no longer a
> significant contributor.
Might be on the list, isn't he a FA though this year? definitely won't be back
if he's a FA.
>
> 4) Kowalkowski: He's had his fun. Time to say bye...
From what i've read, people in the organization are still happy with this
special teams work.. he'll be back.
>
> 5) Lyght: I won't say anything about him that his performance hasn't already
> said.
>
I believe he's also another FA. let's pray he won't be back. if we keep our pick
in the first round, the liklihood of us taking Quentin Jammer is pretty high.
>
> 6) Joyce: A solid backup, but is worth risking in the draft. A dime a dozen
> player.
No, we need to keep him. He played way too much this year cause of injuries, but
he's a valuable lineman who can play any position outside of center. definitely
a keeper for cheap veteran money.
>
> 7) Pritchett: Can still play in the league, but if you have to make a choice
> between him and some younger talent, he draws the short straw.
didn't he sign a 1 year contract last year? i think he should be back.
>
> 8) Droughns: He *is* still on the roster right??? Why?
dunno about that one.
>
> We've gotta keep Batch IMO because he can still help the club. (Unless M&M
> are serious about drafting another QB in the 1st round.) So I'm hoping
> Morny decides to develop what QBs we have and fill the more pressing needs.
> There're so many holes to fill, that I'm pretty certain this draft will be
> a failure unless we can trade our #3 overall for extra picks... Our number
> two may be a valuable trade commodity as well.
Batch is a must pick for the expansion draft list. he has such a large contract
that we would end up winners if Houston took him. I'm not saying Charlie
couldn't shine elsewhere, but he's used up hi current stay in Detroit and he
needs to move on, even though he doesn't wanna leave Michigan.
Adam
SkippyPB
enlightened us:
Here's the deal with the expansion draft rules as I know them.
1) Each team must unprotect 5 players;
2) The unprotected player must be on the active roster or another
team's NFL roster at the start of the 2001 season;
3) You can't place anyone who will be an unrestricted free agent in
2002 on the unprotected list;
4) Teams could place one player from injured reserve on the list, and
one player with 10 or more years experience. No punters or kickers
could be placed on the list.
5) Players who will be restricted free agents may be placed on the
list.
As for who the Lions will put on the list, I would suspect there will
be 4 scrubs and Batch. If they don't put Batch on the list, then we
have to assume they are probably not going to get another QB via free
agency. However, they might draft one. We'll see.
Regards,
////
(o o)
-oOO--(_)--OOo-
"Security here in New York City is still very tight. Hookers in Time
Square now are demanding two forms of fake ID." -David Letterman
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Remove nospam to email me.
Steve
Grey Matters
> 1) Each team must unprotect 5 players;
>
> 2) The unprotected player must be on the active roster or another
> team's NFL roster at the start of the 2001 season;
>
> 3) You can't place anyone who will be an unrestricted free agent in
> 2002 on the unprotected list;
>
> 4) Teams could place one player from injured reserve on the list, and
> one player with 10 or more years experience. No punters or kickers
> could be placed on the list.
>
> 5) Players who will be restricted free agents may be placed on the
> list.
Why does the NFL make it so easy on expansion clubs?
Given the recent history of expansion clubs quickly jumping past a lot
of established teams and getting into the playoffs, I wonder why the
owners are willing to make it easy to build their clubs.
Basically, they get a clean cap, #1 draft pick, and the chance to pick a
new roster from 155 NFL players. Now, a lot of them are overpaid,
beatup, or you'll still get maybe 15-20 decent vets from the expansion
draft.
Plus, every time a new club passes the Lions by, for example, it's got
to hurt the Lions' bottom line.
So if you're sitting in WC Ford's seat, for example, why would you agree
to let someone come in who can raid your team, jump ahead of you in the
draft, and then by the time you get a chance to play them, find out
they're better than you, like what happened with the Browns this year.
If there was a problem lining up potential owners, I could see adding
incentives like what the expansion teams get.
But people are so desperate to throw money at the NFL just to get a
franchise that I believe you could require expansion teams to play with
a 35 man roster, get no draft picks until the 5th round, and start the
Grammatica brothers at OL, and you'd still get Dan Snyder types throwing
hundreds of millions of dollars around trying to join the club.
SkippyPB
<greyma...@ya-who.com> enlightened us:
Well its not that good for the expansion team. Look at the Browns.
Two years and under 500 both years. The Panthers and Jaguars did jump
out to early success, but look at them now. The Panthers, e.g., only
have 1 player on their team that was part of the expansion draft.
It is true the expansion teams get some cap room, but that really only
comes into play if they chose a restricted free agent from the pool.
Typically the NFL teams, unless they are wanting to clear cap space,
are not going to put any starters on the unprotected list.
Grey Matters
> Well its not that good for the expansion team. Look at the Browns.
> Two years and under 500 both years.
Yeah, but they're getting better at a pretty good rate.
> The Panthers and Jaguars did jump out to early success, but look at them now. The Panthers, e.g., only have 1 player on their team that was
part of the expansion draft.
Sure, but that's a part of the natural cycle of events. Now that
they're full fledged teams in the NFL, they're suffering from the same
problems as a lot of other clubs. My point is that they seem to get too
much help getting to the top of the cycle without paying their dues.
> It is true the expansion teams get some cap room, but that really only
> comes into play if they chose a restricted free agent from the pool.
> Typically the NFL teams, unless they are wanting to clear cap space,
> are not going to put any starters on the unprotected list.
No, but since they're getting to pick from 150 guys available, plus the
practice squads, plus the free agents, add in the fact that they're not
saddled with cap debt from the past, and they have a lot of flexibility
to structure their rosters.
They may start out with only a small core of talent in the first year,
but it's a lot easier for an expansion team to build off of their core
than it would be for a typical 2-14 club.
I'm not saying that it's necessarily any fairer to give the stumblebums
of the NFL an advantage over the expansion clubs. I'm just surprised
that a bunch of uncharitable guys like the NFL owners would allow the
new guys such an easy initiation.
News & Views
> be 4 scrubs and Batch. If they don't put Batch on the list, then we
> have to assume they are probably not going to get another QB via free
> agency. However, they might draft one. We'll see.
>
> Regards,
>
> ////
> (o o)
> -oOO--(_)--OOo-
>
Yup...I think you are dead-on....you have to Batch on there....For nothing
else than the contract....
1. Its a deterrent for any expansion team to take that contract
2. If they do, then the team has tons of manuevering cap-wise.
They are just dying to get rid of that contract and the only hope is this
list...But I dont think even exposed, Charlie wont be taken....and they know
it, its a free slot...
D
All the News
> else than the contract....
>
> 1. Its a deterrent for any expansion team to take that contract
> 2. If they do, then the team has tons of manuevering cap-wise.
>
> They are just dying to get rid of that contract and the only hope is this
> list...But I dont think even exposed, Charlie wont be taken....and they
know
> it, its a free slot...
I dunno... I think, stats-wise, Batch _can_ look attractive.
A GM/coach may think that with the right scheme and
right support, Batch could be a winner (and they may or
may not be right).
Stranger things have happened. People kept picking up
Jeff George for instance.
Chris
Grey Matters
>
> Yup...I think you are dead-on....you have to Batch on there....For nothing
> else than the contract....
>
> 1. Its a deterrent for any expansion team to take that contract
> 2. If they do, then the team has tons of manuevering cap-wise.
>
> They are just dying to get rid of that contract and the only hope is this
> list...But I dont think even exposed, Charlie wont be taken....and they know
> it, its a free slot...
Huh. I just realized you're looking at it from the perspective that the Lions
*don't* want players to be picked.
I've been looking at it all along as the Lions *do* want guys to be taken. The
more the better. And if they put Batch on the list, when he's not likely to be
taken, they're taking away a slot from someone who, when picked, would give them
more cap relief.
Shawn M. Winnie
> I'm just surprised that a bunch of uncharitable guys like the
> NFL owners would allow the new guys such an easy initiation.
No charity required.
Early respectability allows expansion franchises to sell tickets.
(Jags, Panthers and Browns were all respectable very quickly.)
That cuts losses in the early years of the franchise. Since any
businessman cares more about $1 today than $1 next year, that
means the franchise is worth more...
...and the NFL owners didn't give the franchise to Houston. They
sold it. Remember, the NFL got $700 million for the Houston
franchise, in the same year that the Redskins were sold for $800
million with a stadium tossed into the deal. (That's $22.5 million
per team.)
The short answer is that liberal draft/expansion draft rules make
an expansion team more valuable, and the existing owners get to
divvy that larger pie up. If memory serves, the tough entry rules
helped made Tampa Bay a joke after the '76 expansion. So the owners
went to the other extreme with the Jags and Panthers (extra draft
picks) and both new teams made the conference finals in their second
season. That went too far, so the draft picks for Cleveland (in '99)
and Houston (in February) are a little less juicy.
Nice article describing the draft pick structure and the underlying
assumption (must be "competitive within three years") that went into
the NFL selling a franchise to Bob McNair:
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/sports/fb/texans/1114517
--
"The way to become richer is you borrow money at a
certain rate and invest it at a higher rate and
pocket the difference."
-Roberto Goizueta, quoted in Fortune 133:2
Grey Matters
>
> Grey Matters wrote:
> > I'm just surprised that a bunch of uncharitable guys like the
> > NFL owners would allow the new guys such an easy initiation.
>
> No charity required.
>
> Early respectability allows expansion franchises to sell tickets.
> (Jags, Panthers and Browns were all respectable very quickly.)
> That cuts losses in the early years of the franchise. Since any
> businessman cares more about $1 today than $1 next year, that
> means the franchise is worth more...
Sure, it makes the new franchise worth more. But the more successful
the new franchise, the greater the chance they're taking away a playoff
spot from your team, and that cuts into your bottom line in terms of
ticket sales and merchandising.
> ...and the NFL owners didn't give the franchise to Houston. They
> sold it. Remember, the NFL got $700 million for the Houston
> franchise, in the same year that the Redskins were sold for $800
> million with a stadium tossed into the deal. (That's $22.5 million
> per team.)
Right. I'm just saying that the demand for an NFL teams is so high that
I think if they had lowered the incentive they still would have made
$22.5 per, or close to it. I don't think NFL owners are really all that
driven to ownership because of short term cash flow. I think it's ego
first, long term appreciation second, and short term profits a distant
third.
It's just like these guys don't buy a Picasso because they like abstract
art. They buy the Picasso so that they can be a guy who owns a Picasso,
and so that they can turn around and sell it in 20 years for a big
bundle more.
C Burton1
What would you guys think if the expansion team had to compensate the team the
player played for by giving them a future draft pick in the same round said
player was drafted in, sometime within 5-10 years down the road, or something
to that effect? I know that could hinder the new team's ability to grow, but it
would compensate the league each time it got the itch to start a new team...
SERIOUS INQUIRIES ONLY PLEASE
www.ezinfocenter.com/3628939
-Cliff Burton
Tru_Blu
acquired by trade? An expansion team has nothing to compensate with... so
forget that one.
My remedy has already been ignored. I wouldn't have allowed any expansion
teams (including Tampa and Seattle) into the league to begin with, and would
have found a way to keep the Rams in LA.
"C Burton1" <cbur...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020117023909...@mb-fd.aol.com...
C Burton1
Well, in this instance, the team might pay an amount equal to that player's
first contract. If a guy like Ron Rice was ever taken in an expansion draft,
that would be quite a steal.
George C. Ford
Batch should be made available and a top college QB should not be taken high in
the College draft - Reason being that although Batch is highly motivated his
skill level is at best mediocre which defines most of the free agent QB's
available after (and sometimes before) training camp cuts every year that can be
signed by other teams - eg. Jim Miller (cut by Pittsburg and others) - Tony
Banks and Kent Graham of the Redskins, and Trent Dilfer come to mind. Any one
of these would be a significant improvement over Batch and all were available
recently.
Top college QB's are risky bets - eg. Ryan Leaf, Akili Smith, and Tim Couch
come to mind. It is just not possible to tell whether or not a college QB can
adjust to the speed (or in Couch's case the mental requirements) of the pro
game; it is a crap shoot at best - let the other teams waste their money on
this.
The lions need better, faster, and more durable players at almost every
position. Lets trade the high draft choices for more choices lower in the
draft.
On a final note - the thinking that turned a 9-7 team into a 2-14 team has
significant flaws. Let us hope that these mistakes are not repeated.