Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 95

Thread: Lindsay.

  1. #46
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    15,131
    Quote Originally Posted by lvbronx View Post
    Are you saying every UDFA is the same and has the exact same motivations? I don't believe that for a second. As I posted above about "smart businesses" (a classic "plea to authority" logical fallacy) most smart people will have a list of pros and cons.

    Lindsay has outperformed his contract on a historical level doing things no other UDFA in NFL history has done like rushing for 1000 yards in his first two seasons and being named to the Pro Bowl as the first O UDFA rookie to ever do so. Sometimes there are exceptions to "standard operating procedure" and this is one.

    Just because you CAN do something doesn't mean you should.

    PS. Lindsay signed with the Broncos because his mom recommended he stay home. Anyone that knows Taz knows he felt he'd make any team that signed him. Confidence was never his problem.
    I think very few UDFA players will care about Lindsay's situation when they choose which team to sign with. Why would they care about his situation? They'll care about their chances of making the team and their chances of getting playing time if they make the team, not some other player's contract.

  2. #47
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    15,131
    Quote Originally Posted by FR Tim View Post
    Wrong player to take a hard line “ we own you” business stance IMO. His performance over the past two seasons scream for increased compensation.

    Try to re-negotiate a multi year deal that works for both. I have no clue if that is a couple million or 5-6m per year. I’ll let the team and agent find that sweet spot. But at the very least working out a “bonus” should be done.

    Also the idea of performance based contracts. Getting some refunds on the James and Callahan contracts seems warranted. Hell, give Lindsey the $2.5m wasted on T. Riddick last season.
    Nothing indicates they'll take that stance, in fact by all appearances they'll actually do the opposite. But they don't have to do anything if they don't want to. And it takes two sides to come to an agreement, if Lindsay's demands are too high then it's doubtful anything will get done.

  3. #48
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    15,131
    Quote Originally Posted by beastlyskronk View Post
    I wouldn’t go that far. I think if they weren’t sold on Lindsay they would have gave Gordon a longer deal. As it stands now both will hit FA at the same time. I don’t think they buy Lindsay as a workhorse and it’s hard at that size. I think Gordon had more to do with pushing Freeman out. There were rumors at the combine that we were interested in RBs. I think the FO saw an opportunity for a proven player that can contribute immediately and jumped on it vs hoping a 3rd-7th round RB could push Freeman out this year. I see it as a win now move.

    I do expect Lindsay to get a new contract either during the season or in the offseason. It sucks for him though, due to his age, size, and position he will never get compensated as much as you would expect from being a starting/pro bowl caliber RB. He very well could retire never hitting the 10 mil mark. It’s still a lot of money but I can’t blame him for trying to push the envelope now.
    That's what I meant by my post. I don't think they buy him as a workhorse, but they buy him being a part of the team. I don't think there's any chance he's not on the roster for every game this year...barring injury, suspension or some team offering more than they could turn down for him.

  4. #49
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    13,799
    Quote Originally Posted by wmp View Post
    FYI Broncos: Lindsey needs a bump in pay. He may still be the best back we have.
    I have no problem with a player using leverage when they have it to get paid.

    On the flip side I have no problem with a team using their leverage to keep the salaries down.

    It is the current business of football as a result of the CBA that both the players and owners vote on.
    A good plan put into motion today is better than the ideal plan that is always coming sometime in the future.

  5. #50
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    14,361
    Quote Originally Posted by Letswinplz77 View Post
    You mention this a lot, about it never happening before. 1) Nothing has ever happened before until it does. 2) You know what else has never happened before? An undrafted free agent rushing for 1,000+ yards in each of his first two seasons.

    Your points are valid, and they don't have to give him a new contract. They don't even need to. But doing so would be value added, as Lindsay CLEARLY responds to outside stimulus. He has the proven mental attitude that his gratitude would only serve to make him play as hard as he possibly can, and make him WANT to do it for the Broncos. If they slight him, which not rewarding him for outplaying his rookie deal by miles, would most certainly do, he's going to give all that motivation and effort to another team. Is saving 8 to 10 million over 4 years really worth that? Unfortunately for all NFL owners, it's not just a numbers game. You can't simply rely on having the leverage to give you the best results. Sometimes you have to recognize the intangibles in people and be willing to pay to keep those intangibles on your team.
    I mention it a lot because it is valid, in many situations. When people want to think up scenarios and try to act as if something could become a reality, you need to check the tape, the past matters. I also have actually mentioned that point as well, no undrafted running back has eclipsed the 1K mark in back to back seasons to start a career, that is a consideration. However, I don't think it is relevant to anyone but the fan base. What is relevant is what an agent can come to the team and argue effectively in regards to his client, and have some type of plan B if he doesn't like what is on offer, what would that be right now for Lindsay ? What would it be next off-season ? Every scenario favours Denver.

    I also think the Broncos would agree Lindsay deserves some more money, but then the question becomes, how much ? If he plays out this next season on his current deal, then the next year on the 1st round tender, he essentially will earn 5.2 million over the next 2 seasons. I think right now his value probably falls into the 4 million per year range, so I would offer to make it a 3 year deal worth 12 million, and that is it, final offer.

    If he says no, you then make him play this year, if he produces again, great, leave the same contract in place, if he says no, he can test the Restricted Free Agent market. I would assume no one would be willing to give up a 1st round pick and a sizeable contract, so he would sign his tender, play 2021 on the 4.6 million dollar tender, then get to test the Unrestricted Free Agent market. If he leaves, he leaves. You got 4 years out of a guy who you paid nothing for, great work.

    At the end of the day, we all might love Phillip, but running backs just don't produce into their second contracts, and Lindsay is a smaller guy with a lot of wear and tear on his body already. Because of that, I would offer Phillip a 3 year contract, which essentially would add 7 million dollars to the third year of the deal. If Phillip wants to gamble on himself at a position where his team considers him a rotational guy, which they clearly do, then he can, I would bet he will lose out. But he can try it. I think the 3 years and 12 million is actually quite a generous offer.

  6. #51
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Way far away.
    Posts
    1,240
    Quote Originally Posted by johnlimburg View Post
    I mention it a lot because it is valid, in many situations. When people want to think up scenarios and try to act as if something could become a reality, you need to check the tape, the past matters. I also have actually mentioned that point as well, no undrafted running back has eclipsed the 1K mark in back to back seasons to start a career, that is a consideration. However, I don't think it is relevant to anyone but the fan base. What is relevant is what an agent can come to the team and argue effectively in regards to his client, and have some type of plan B if he doesn't like what is on offer, what would that be right now for Lindsay ? What would it be next off-season ? Every scenario favours Denver.

    I also think the Broncos would agree Lindsay deserves some more money, but then the question becomes, how much ? If he plays out this next season on his current deal, then the next year on the 1st round tender, he essentially will earn 5.2 million over the next 2 seasons. I think right now his value probably falls into the 4 million per year range, so I would offer to make it a 3 year deal worth 12 million, and that is it, final offer.

    If he says no, you then make him play this year, if he produces again, great, leave the same contract in place, if he says no, he can test the Restricted Free Agent market. I would assume no one would be willing to give up a 1st round pick and a sizeable contract, so he would sign his tender, play 2021 on the 4.6 million dollar tender, then get to test the Unrestricted Free Agent market. If he leaves, he leaves. You got 4 years out of a guy who you paid nothing for, great work.

    At the end of the day, we all might love Phillip, but running backs just don't produce into their second contracts, and Lindsay is a smaller guy with a lot of wear and tear on his body already. Because of that, I would offer Phillip a 3 year contract, which essentially would add 7 million dollars to the third year of the deal. If Phillip wants to gamble on himself at a position where his team considers him a rotational guy, which they clearly do, then he can, I would bet he will lose out. But he can try it. I think the 3 years and 12 million is actually quite a generous offer.
    Agreed. I don't think they will offer anything this year. I think they should, I just don't think they will. Like I said, I think they are ignoring his intangibles. possibly to the detriment of the team. But we shall see.
    All it takes to win is doing whatever it takes to win: COMMITMENT

  7. #52
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    14,361
    Quote Originally Posted by Letswinplz77 View Post
    Agreed. I don't think they will offer anything this year. I think they should, I just don't think they will. Like I said, I think they are ignoring his intangibles. possibly to the detriment of the team. But we shall see.
    What intangibles ? And how does he lose them without getting a contract extension ? Are you assuming that without a contract extension he changes his attitude and becomes a detriment to the team ? If so he is probably isn't the type of guy you want around. I don't think he will change at all, and I think you are assuming that without a contract he will change, and actually jumping to conclusions based off of nothing at all. I don't think you need to worry about it honestly. Again, it's all fan fiction at this point.

  8. #53
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Bear Valley in The 5280
    Posts
    14,463
    Quote Originally Posted by Letswinplz77 View Post
    Agreed. I don't think they will offer anything this year. I think they should, I just don't think they will. Like I said, I think they are ignoring his intangibles. possibly to the detriment of the team. But we shall see.
    Lindsay and Gordon are going to offer a ridiculous one two punch.

    With Sutton and Fant and hopefully another gem or two coming out of the draft this will be an even bigger offensive nightmare for opposing defensive coordinators throughout the league than that group in KC!

    Have faith, don’t worry about the business side or try to sympathize with how Lindsey might be feeling! We’re about to see an offensive juggernaut for the next few seasons.
    Last edited by Sam_Z; 04-02-2020 at 05:34 PM.

  9. #54
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    13

    Would you trade Lindsay?

    If so, for what? A first rounder? Second? A player? Hes going to be mad he didnt get a raise. We have a lot of money tied up in RB. Just a thought.

  10. #55
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Way far away.
    Posts
    1,240
    Quote Originally Posted by johnlimburg View Post
    What intangibles ? And how does he lose them without getting a contract extension ? Are you assuming that without a contract extension he changes his attitude and becomes a detriment to the team ? If so he is probably isn't the type of guy you want around. I don't think he will change at all, and I think you are assuming that without a contract he will change, and actually jumping to conclusions based off of nothing at all. I don't think you need to worry about it honestly. Again, it's all fan fiction at this point.
    I am assuming you're as aware of his intangibles as I am. And No, I don't think he changes anything, other than his willingness to sign here long term when the Broncos get to the point they HAVE to offer long term or let him walk. There is no scenario where we can force him to stay a Bronco past 30 years old. The longest we can keep him, with tags and tenders, would be 3 more years. Worst case scenario for him, barring significant injuries, is that he's looking for a new team at 28 years old. Good news for him is the next 2 years shouldn't put a lot of wear on his legs because he'll have Gordon eating up a lot of snaps.

    As far as fan fiction goes, it depends on what you're talking about. Can the Broncos get 3 years out of Lindsay without giving him a contract? Of course. People who argue he'll sit out don't understand him, I think. Should the Broncos want more than 3 more years with Lindsay? I personally think they should. We toss around RB numbers as if they are predictors of what he's capable of. I understand they provide likely indicators, but he's already smashed expectations. It is reasonable to believe/hope, however you want to phrase it, that he exists outside the normal running back limitations as far as production and longevity go. Saying that to say this, the Broncos SHOULD want Lindsay on the roster far beyond the 2022 season. If they use their leverage to keep him without extending him, I honestly believe that won't happen. He might be a great guy with a big heart, but he has a big memory too, and the Broncos already have strike 1 (not drafting him).

    So if the only goal is 3 more years of PL in the backfield, you're correct, nothing to worry about. If the goal is to get all his good snaps in a Denver uniform, well, he needs a new contract. Seems pretty simple.
    Last edited by Letswinplz77; 04-03-2020 at 12:12 AM.
    All it takes to win is doing whatever it takes to win: COMMITMENT

  11. #56
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    FORT COLLINS COLORADO
    Posts
    8,562
    Quote Originally Posted by Letswinplz77 View Post
    I am assuming you're as aware of his intangibles as I am. And No, I don't think he changes anything, other than his willingness to sign here long term when the Broncos get to the point they HAVE to offer long term or let him walk. There is no scenario where we can force him to stay a Bronco past 30 years old. The longest we can keep him, with tags and tenders, would be 3 more years. Worst case scenario for him, barring significant injuries, is that he's looking for a new team at 28 years old. Good news for him is the next 2 years shouldn't put a lot of wear on his legs because he'll have Gordon eating up a lot of snaps.

    As far as fan fiction goes, it depends on what you're talking about. Can the Broncos get 3 years out of Lindsay without giving him a contract? Of course. People who argue he'll sit out don't understand him, I think. Should the Broncos want more than 3 more years with Lindsay? I personally think they should. We toss around RB numbers as if they are predictors of what he's capable of. I understand they provide likely indicators, but he's already smashed expectations. It is reasonable to believe/hope, however you want to phrase it, that he exists outside the normal running back limitations as far as production and longevity go. Saying that to say this, the Broncos SHOULD want Lindsay on the roster far beyond the 2022 season. If they use their leverage to keep him without extending him, I honestly believe that won't happen. He might be a great guy with a big heart, but he has a big memory too, and the Broncos already have strike 1 (not drafting him).

    So if the only goal is 3 more years of PL in the backfield, you're correct, nothing to worry about. If the goal is to get all his good snaps in a Denver uniform, well, he needs a new contract. Seems pretty simple.
    No one drafted him so would everyone not have that strike

  12. #57
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    DENVER
    Posts
    7,665
    Quote Originally Posted by S037474 View Post
    If so, for what? A first rounder? Second? A player? Hes going to be mad he didnt get a raise. We have a lot of money tied up in RB. Just a thought.
    Right now, I would for a 2nd or 3rd. He may be a backup RB, but he has plenty of talent and can be had on the cheap for 2020 and 2021.

  13. #58
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    910
    Quote Originally Posted by Papa-pwn View Post
    Right now, I would for a 2nd or 3rd. He may be a backup RB, but he has plenty of talent and can be had on the cheap for 2020 and 2021.
    That might be fair value but I wouldn't do it. There is no guarantee you find a guy that productive in this draft. There definitely are some guys who could match that production but I think you would have to take one in rd 2 or 3.

  14. #59
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    991
    Quote Originally Posted by WYBRONCO View Post
    That might be fair value but I wouldn't do it. There is no guarantee you find a guy that productive in this draft. There definitely are some guys who could match that production but I think you would have to take one in rd 2 or 3.
    The risk/reward argument.

    Cam Akers in round 2 or early 3 would be an ideal replacement in this scenario

  15. #60
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    5,353
    Quote Originally Posted by Papa-pwn View Post
    Right now, I would for a 2nd or 3rd. He may be a backup RB, but he has plenty of talent and can be had on the cheap for 2020 and 2021.
    Isn’t Lindsey “on the cheap” already? Even if they worked out deal without getting ridiculous. I would be seeing if he would accept a 2yr/ $5-6 m deal. Gives him a much deserved pay raise for the same amount of time the control his contract as of today.

    Instead of questioning replacing Lindsey, I question whether that drafted rookie (like Akers or several others) would have been a better choice then Gordon. And his salary spent on another position. But what is done is done.

    Find a way to pay Lindsey and let him and Gordon earn the playing time on the field. Both will be needed over a long season.

    IMO they should not be trading Lindsey. Use his proven talents as a complimentary piece with Gordon.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •