NFL QB Carousel

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
28,488
It's hard to find good sources for the minutiae, but my reading of things is they couldn't do that.
Basically they couldn't sign a deal that would put them over the cap should he report. They would have to wait until he'd forfeited enough game checks to sign players.

If I'm reading it correctly, the league will not approve a contract that would cause you to go over the cap. So if Watson is on the books for 35M, you don't get 35M in cap space back the day he doesn't report... you get a portion back each week as he forfeits checks.

I guess realistically though it might only be a 1 year issue, since you could roll the space over.

It's murky for sure. I see multiple references that a player on the "Did Not Report" list does not count against 90-man or 53-man rosters, but scant mentions of salary cap implications. There is this one:

Reserve/Did Not Report: These players have either quit their teams or quit playing in the NFL and have not yet filed their retirement papers. The player’s salary doesn’t count against the cap, nor does the player count against the 90- or 53-man roster.
SB Nation
 
Last edited:

ZMart100

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2008
2,209
It's hard to find good sources for the minutiae, but my reading of things is they couldn't do that.
Basically they couldn't sign a deal that would put them over the cap should he report. They would have to wait until he'd forfeited enough game checks to sign players.

If I'm reading it correctly, the league will not approve a contract that would cause you to go over the cap. So if Watson is on the books for 35M, you don't get 35M in cap space back the day he doesn't report... you get a portion back each week as he forfeits checks.

I guess realistically though it might only be a 1 year issue, since you could roll the space over.
I think that's right. However, I think HOU could go into the season up against the cap knowing that they will get the necessary in-season room from recovering Watson's salary. Functionally, they get to use cap space by not having to leave room for in season moves. Watson is relatively cheap this year at $11m in salary compared to $35m next season. That both makes it easier for him to sit out 10/16 of a season and for the Texans to absorb him while he sits out.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
68,508
Oregon
If Miami gets Deshaun effing Watson for ONLY Tua and the #3 overall that is highway robbery. I’d be stunned, and as a Pats fan I’d be pissed. It’s far more likely, IMO, that Houston gets Tua and the #3 overall and another #1, if not more. Watson is a top 3 impact player in the league and he’s signed long term.

I can’t imagine how Caserio sleeps at night. It seemed like such a plum gig.

edit typos and clarifying
Where are you seeing that?
 

sodenj5

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
4,742
CT
How steep do you think the acquisition cost would be? I think Tua + #3 gets it done, unless the Texans prefer this year’s #2 to Tua and the Jets are willing to deal.

Not saying the rest of your analysis doesn’t hold together, but I don’t think the Dolphins would be parting with most of their draft capital — they’d just be giving the Texans their pick back from the Tunsil deal.
I mean people have been speculating 3-4 first round picks. Miami and the Jets have similar assets as well, if you think the Texans would take Darnold in a trade.

Tua, 3, 18, and likely another first next year. People have been saying, “what if it’s just Tua and 3 and a second” or things of that nature.

It won’t be. Watson is an MVP candidate hitting the market in his prime. Teams will be backing up the Brinks truck for him. The Jets will offer Darnold, 2, 23, and another first in a heartbeat.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Staff member
Dope
I mean people have been speculating 3-4 first round picks. Miami and the Jets have similar assets as well, if you think the Texans would take Darnold in a trade.

Tua, 3, 18, and likely another first next year. People have been saying, “what if it’s just Tua and 3 and a second” or things of that nature.

It won’t be. Watson is an MVP candidate hitting the market in his prime. Teams will be backing up the Brinks truck for him. The Jets will offer Darnold, 2, 23, and another first in a heartbeat.
Tua + #3 is competitive with that Jets’ package. If you traded #3, you’d get a package at least as good as #23, a 3rd rounder (Darnold’s value imo), and a future 1st.
 

sodenj5

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
4,742
CT
Tua + #3 is competitive with that Jets’ package. If you traded #3, you’d get a package at least as good as #23, a 3rd rounder (Darnold’s value imo), and a future 1st.
Understood. I just think everyone has been underestimating the market value of Watson this entire time. Which is why I’ve been largely opposed to it.

Laremy Tunsil went for two firsts. Matthew Stafford went for two firsts even if you assume that Jared Goff represents negative equity in that trade.

If he gets traded before the draft, which is when Houston would have the most leverage, someone will get desperate enough to essentially hand Houston a blank check.

If Houston plays out this game of chicken, they’re likely walking away with less. By all accounts, Watson isn’t budging. Caserio is doing the right thing by trying keep him, but time is not his ally. He will eventually need to make a decision, and if the end result is losing Watson, he might as well maximize the value and trade him before the draft.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Staff member
Dope
Imagine forcing your way out Houston because the organization was dysfunctional and the owner sucked...just to go to the Jets.
Your point is well taken, but Joe Douglas seems to be calling the shots and knows what he is doing, and I think Robert Saleh was a terrific coaching hire. The Jets are a sneaky-good situation, as Watson will get all the credit in the eyes of the casual fan if he comes to NYC and the Jets start winning. They are arguably about where the Dolphins were a year ago.

Miami is an objectively better situation, but it’s not sneaky-good in any way — Watson will absolutely be expected to win right away if he joins the Dolphins.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
12,340
Honestly... since when did the Jets become a more preferable place to play than New England - IF YOU’RE A GOOD QUARTERBACK?

Can’t say “since Brady left” because you’re a good QB in to replace him. I mean the Pats still have a great owner and the best HC and the most accomplished OC in football. Top notch facilities. And loads of cap space.

I mean we can talk about Saleh but is there a player in the league that REALLY thinks Saleh is a better coach than Belichick?

Oh and the Patriots still finished ahead of the Jets last year, despite their “lack of talent”.

I could see preferring Miami because of the weather but NY is the same as NE basically. Plus... it’s really... New Jersey.
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Understood. I just think everyone has been underestimating the market value of Watson this entire time. Which is why I’ve been largely opposed to it.

Laremy Tunsil went for two firsts. Matthew Stafford went for two firsts even if you assume that Jared Goff represents negative equity in that trade.

If he gets traded before the draft, which is when Houston would have the most leverage, someone will get desperate enough to essentially hand Houston a blank check.

If Houston plays out this game of chicken, they’re likely walking away with less. By all accounts, Watson isn’t budging. Caserio is doing the right thing by trying keep him, but time is not his ally. He will eventually need to make a decision, and if the end result is losing Watson, he might as well maximize the value and trade him before the draft.
I think in a world where an OT goes for two firsts, and a 33yo top 10-15 QB gets two firsts, then Watson is at three firsts at minimum. In the Pats QB thread, I opined that if I were BB I would offer Houston any combo of four assets -- current players and/or draft picks. Since Miami has such a high first this year, I think they could maybe entice Houston with three assets where one is 1/3 this year. But if NYJ offered the same "any there including 1/2" then MIA would have to up there offer.

Is there anyone on MIA's current roster (or NYJ for that matter), that a fan or GM would consider untouchable in such a trade?
 

sodenj5

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
4,742
CT
I think in a world where an OT goes for two firsts, and a 33yo top 10-15 QB gets two firsts, then Watson is at three firsts at minimum. In the Pats QB thread, I opined that if I were BB I would offer Houston any combo of four assets -- current players and/or draft picks. Since Miami has such a high first this year, I think they could maybe entice Houston with three assets where one is 1/3 this year. But if NYJ offered the same "any there including 1/2" then MIA would have to up there offer.

Is there anyone on MIA's current roster (or NYJ for that matter), that a fan or GM would consider untouchable in such a trade?
Not really. Howard is in his prime but his value might never be higher and there are rumblings he wants a pay bump. Tua and Howard are probably Miami’s most valuable assets outside of the third overall pick.
 

nolasoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 11, 2004
4,664
Displaced
I would think the fact that Florida has no state income tax makes Miami a more attractive location for Watson than NY/NJ. At this point, I honestly think Watson is Miami’s to lose. It’s where I would lay my $1 bet, FWIW.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
38,466
I would think the fact that Florida has no state income tax makes Miami a more attractive location for Watson than NY/NJ. At this point, I honestly think Watson is Miami’s to lose. It’s where I would lay my $1 bet, FWIW.
If Miami is interested, they’re definitely the favorites but decent chance they don’t want him for the price Houston would deem acceptable.
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I was just out running errands and caught a bit of NYC-based sports radio (I wasn't paying attention to whether it was ESPN Radio or WFAN, but one of the those two). The host was arguing with a caller that the Jets should be willing to go to four 1st round picks, especially considering that two of them came in the Jamal Adams trade. Looked at that way -- Adams plus two firsts, (presumably including 1:2 this year) -- seems like a reasonable trade for Watson.
 

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
12,310
I was just out running errands and caught a bit of NYC-based sports radio (I wasn't paying attention to whether it was ESPN Radio or WFAN, but one of the those two). The host was arguing with a caller that the Jets should be willing to go to four 1st round picks, especially considering that two of them came in the Jamal Adams trade. Looked at that way -- Adams plus two firsts, (presumably including 1:2 this year) -- seems like a reasonable trade for Watson.
Makes sense. Your post also reminds me that while some people seem to wonder if Watson can force his way out of town it wasn't much trouble for Jamal Adams to do so.
 

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
20,460
Makes sense. Your post also reminds me that while some people seem to wonder if Watson can force his way out of town it wasn't much trouble for Jamal Adams to do so.
The Jets didn’t want to pay Adams/ Houston already paid Watson
 

axx

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
6,976
If Houston plays out this game of chicken, they’re likely walking away with less.
Agreed but I think they can let him sit for the whole season and still get very good value after next season.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
20,792
Add another to the list of guys I'd take over Cam although he was admittedly pretty blah last year so I wouldn't exactly be excited about it.
Um... why? I get his return was a feel good story, but he was significantly worse than Cam last year, as in worse in almost every passing category, and no rushing vs. Cams 600 yards and 12 TDs.

39233
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
43,942
I would assume it's because they don't watch every Alex Smith throw, like they do with Cam.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
20,792
I would assume it's because they don't watch every Alex Smith throw, like they do with Cam.
Yeah, I think a lot of the "Cam is the worst" stuff is people watched a lot of Brady and teams with top QBs and not a lot of the rest of the league, because Cam was bad, but there are a lot of bad QBs in the league it's all a question of balance. Do you want the more explosive guy who is going to sail balls for picks? Do you want the guy who'll take 600 yards in sacks? Or do you want Cam.

I don't particularly want Cam back, but there are worse options, and few of them have as many excuses as Cam for last year so I wonder if he has more upside than most.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
38,466
Um... why? I get his return was a feel good story, but he was significantly worse than Cam last year, as in worse in almost every passing category, and no rushing vs. Cams 600 yards and 12 TDs.

View attachment 39233
I would expect Year 2 after a major injury to be better than Year 1. And Cam can't throw a football. He literally can't throw. Again, I wouldn't be excited for either of them but I would prefer someone else to Cam.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
20,792
I would expect Year 2 after a major injury to be better than Year 1. And Cam can't throw a football. He literally can't throw. Again, I wouldn't be excited for either of them but I would prefer someone else to Cam.
Smith is 37 and if Cam can't throw then Smith certainly can't. Cam has a lot more arm left. He's wildly inconsistent on footwork and angles, but he made throws down the middle last year that Smith can't even come close to at this point. Smith makes Brees look like a flamethrower, he's 100% done.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
12,340
I would expect Year 2 after a major injury to be better than Year 1. And Cam can't throw a football. He literally can't throw. Again, I wouldn't be excited for either of them but I would prefer someone else to Cam.
He actually threw some really nice balls this past season.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VnxRVDhg5Zs


Now I would prefer they move in a different direction. But with a bad group of receivers, he completed 65.8% of his passes. So he quite literally CAN throw a football. He's not the guy I want as the QB next year because I don't think he's good for an NFL quarterback, but he did make some nice throws.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
38,466
He actually threw some really nice balls this past season.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VnxRVDhg5Zs


Now I would prefer they move in a different direction. But with a bad group of receivers, he completed 65.8% of his passes. So he quite literally CAN throw a football. He's not the guy I want as the QB next year because I don't think he's good for an NFL quarterback, but he did make some nice throws.
I mean, sure, that was hyperbole but I watched every single throw he made this season. He was absolute trash and the numbers back it up. I'm fine if people don't want another trash/toast QB in Smith. I'm just stating that I want anybody but Cam next year, which is admittedly both a rational and irrational position based on who the comparison is being made to.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
43,942
If the Patriots somehow get Lance or Fields (maybe Jones, but I'm not sure where I'd slot him yet), I would have no issues with Cam being back. He has a great work ethic that you'd want a young QB to emulate and, especially with Lance, a lot of similarities in their games. Not to mention, hopefully a longer offseason for the offense to be on the same page.
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
11,871
Santa Monica, CA
Yeah, I think a lot of the "Cam is the worst" stuff is people watched a lot of Brady and teams with top QBs and not a lot of the rest of the league, because Cam was bad, but there are a lot of bad QBs in the league it's all a question of balance. Do you want the more explosive guy who is going to sail balls for picks? Do you want the guy who'll take 600 yards in sacks? Or do you want Cam.

I don't particularly want Cam back, but there are worse options, and few of them have as many excuses as Cam for last year so I wonder if he has more upside than most.
There are worse options on Earth. There are not worse options that will be NFL starters next year.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
13,251
Mansfield MA
There are worse options on Earth. There are not worse options that will be NFL starters next year.
If we look at ANY/A (probably my favorite quick-and-dirty QB stat, but one that does not include rushing value), Cam was 27th out of 36 qualifying QBs at 5.44. Among the worse starters were Drew Lock (30th, 5.31), Daniel Jones (31st, 4.92), Sam Darnold (34th, 4.16), and Carson Wentz (36th, 3.98), all of whom are probably starters somewhere. Tua, technically, as well (28th, 5.40), though of course he was a rookie.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
20,792
If we look at ANY/A (probably my favorite quick-and-dirty QB stat, but one that does not include rushing value), Cam was 27th out of 36 qualifying QBs at 5.44. Among the worse starters were Drew Lock (30th, 5.31), Daniel Jones (31st, 4.92), Sam Darnold (34th, 4.16), and Carson Wentz (36th, 3.98), all of whom are probably starters somewhere. Tua, technically, as well (28th, 5.40), though of course he was a rookie.
I feel quite confident that if Cam is the Patriots' starter next year he will not be the worst starting QB in the league statstically, even without taking his rushing into account.
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
11,871
Santa Monica, CA
If we look at ANY/A (probably my favorite quick-and-dirty QB stat, but one that does not include rushing value), Cam was 27th out of 36 qualifying QBs at 5.44. Among the worse starters were Drew Lock (30th, 5.31), Daniel Jones (31st, 4.92), Sam Darnold (34th, 4.16), and Carson Wentz (36th, 3.98), all of whom are probably starters somewhere. Tua, technically, as well (28th, 5.40), though of course he was a rookie.
I'll happily make a charity wager about whether any of those guys post a less productive 2021 season than Cam Newton.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
6,996
Dallas
I'll happily make a charity wager about whether any of those guys post a less productive 2021 season than Cam Newton.
You’re on with the condition that without knowing where he lands it’s hard to make that bet with you.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
6,996
Dallas
I don’t think Daniel Jones, Drew Lock, or Sam Darnold will be starting in 2 years. Wentz is down to his last life. I wouldn’t be shocked with him getting back to being a quality starter or washing out. I think Cam would have stronger numbers with a better supporting cast. Plus I would only have to have 1/4 of those guys be worse.

But if Cam isn’t going to be a starter I’d probably lose the bet.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Staff member
Dope
If we look at ANY/A (probably my favorite quick-and-dirty QB stat, but one that does not include rushing value), Cam was 27th out of 36 qualifying QBs at 5.44. Among the worse starters were Drew Lock (30th, 5.31), Daniel Jones (31st, 4.92), Sam Darnold (34th, 4.16), and Carson Wentz (36th, 3.98), all of whom are probably starters somewhere. Tua, technically, as well (28th, 5.40), though of course he was a rookie.
None of those guys, except maybe Wentz, would sniff a starting job if they were Cam’s age.

I agree that some QB will end up putting up worse numbers in 2021 than Cam did in 2020, but for my money the Pats’ QB situation is second-worst in the league, only ahead of Washington. It’s just a rough combination of poor recent performance and lack of potential.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
20,792
None of those guys, except maybe Wentz, would sniff a starting job if they were Cam’s age.

I agree that some QB will end up putting up worse numbers in 2021 than Cam did in 2020, but for my money the Pats’ QB situation is second-worst in the league, only ahead of Washington. It’s just a rough combination of poor recent performance and lack of potential.
I'd say the following are definitely worse:
1. Bears- Foles w/ $10M+ in dead cap
2. Teddy B with $20M+ in dead cap
3. Saints- Taysom Hill with $11M in dead cap

Not having a QB but having cap is better than having a terrible QB with a big cap hit.
I think you could make a case for DET and PIT as well, but less clear.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Staff member
Dope
I'd say the following are definitely worse:
1. Bears- Foles w/ $10M+ in dead cap
2. Teddy B with $20M+ in dead cap
3. Saints- Taysom Hill with $11M in dead cap

Not having a QB but having cap is better than having a terrible QB with a big cap hit.
I think you could make a case for DET and PIT as well, but less clear.
Good point on the Saints.

I’m assuming Trubisky will be back in Chicago, and he has upside. Maybe that’s not the right way to think about it.

TBW is cuttable after 2021 and is a better bridge than Cam. Reasonable opinion can differ, but I’d take the Panthers’ situation over the Pats’ situation. I’d also trade the Pats’ situation for the Lions’ if it came with the draft capital (at least a 1st round pick) that the Lions got for absorbing Goff’s contract. But that’s because I think Goff isn’t terrible; if you think he sucks, the two-year commitment is obviously rough.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
20,792
Good point on the Saints.

I’m assuming Trubisky will be back in Chicago, and he has upside. Maybe that’s not the right way to think about it.

TBW is cuttable after 2021 and is a better bridge than Cam. Reasonable opinion can differ, but I’d take the Panthers’ situation over the Pats’ situation. I’d also trade the Pats’ situation for the Lions’ if it came with the draft capital (at least a 1st round pick) that the Lions got for absorbing Goff’s contract. But that’s because I think Goff isn’t terrible; if you think he sucks, the two-year commitment is obviously rough.
yeah I had the same thought on DET. For TBW... I'm less sure. I think he kinda sucks and that's a lot of cap.
With the Bears, you can't assume Bisquit is back, he could as easily be on the Patriots as the Bears come camp. So right now all they have is a bad QB on a bad contract.
 

EvilEmpire

paying for his sins
Staff member
Dope
Gold Supporter
Apr 9, 2007
12,609
Washington
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/30997706/new-york-jets-gm-joe-douglas-open-sam-darnold-offers-downplays-idea-trading-star-player
Not even a little bit of a surprise, but the Jets are now open to offers for Sam Darnold.

FLORHAM PARK, N.J. -- The New York Jets, who once considered quarterback Sam Darnold an untouchable asset, are open to listening to trade offers.

"I will answer the call if it's made," general manager Joe Douglas said Wednesday in a videoconference with reporters, confirming previous reports that the Jets are willing to field inquiries.
Douglas also downplayed trading for an established QB, though that could change quickly when Houston starts actively trying to trade Watson.
Absent that, Zach Wilson, come on down.

A domino that (almost) everyone expects to fall is wobbling.
 

67YAZ

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2000
3,391

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
12,154
The chances of Prescott moving always seemed to be a long shot. And the chances of him coming to New England seemed almost nil.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
20,792
Who is coming off a brutal leg injury he hasn't even proven that he'll be able to get back to peak from. Typical Dallas.
On the other hand... their offense was really good with him and terrible without him. Given their roster they almost had to bring him back regardless of price unless they wanted to blow it up