RFAs--are they starting to look more attractive?

[fishgutmartyr]

I'm really talking out of my ass here, but think it might be an interesting discussion.

 

Considering the cost of UFAs, even ones being hired for backup purposes, how much longer before restricted free agents start to look more attractive to teams?

 

1) they already have an NFL track record, which is more than what could be said about the potential draft choice player lost;

2) relatively speaking, getting them into a new contract probably wouldn't be as expensive as a UFA financially. The new team could always say "Hey, we're already giving up a ____ pick to get you."

 

I don't know, I'd consider it. Particularly with NFC east RFAs--even if you don't get them, you fuck with their cap space.

[fishgutmartyr]

Wow. I guess not. :lol:

[BronxRik]

Wow. I guess not. :lol:

That's what you get for talking out of your ass. :::::chirp::::::: ::::::::chirp::::::::

[fishgutmartyr]

I'm bumping this a final time, dammit, because I'm stubborn and with the Leetch deal going on, it's not an outrageous concept.

 

Might also want to talk about the large amounts of trades going on. It's not business as usual this offseason.

[Sephiroth]

Considering the cost of UFAs, even ones being hired for backup purposes, how much longer before restricted free agents start to look more attractive to teams?

 

 

It depends on how many beers they've had.

[fishgutmartyr]

Considering the cost of UFAs, even ones being hired for backup purposes, how much longer before restricted free agents start to look more attractive to teams?

 

It depends on how many beers they've had.

 

And of course, whether or not the NFL team is gay. (If you can't beat them... )

[NeMesiS]

I'm really talking out of my ass here, but think it might be an interesting discussion.

 

Considering the cost of UFAs, even ones being hired for backup purposes, how much longer before restricted free agents start to look more attractive to teams?

 

1) they already have an NFL track record, which is more than what could be said about the potential draft choice player lost;

2) relatively speaking, getting them into a new contract probably wouldn't be as expensive as a UFA financially. The new team could always say "Hey, we're already giving up a ____ pick to get you."

 

I don't know, I'd consider it. Particularly with NFC east RFAs--even if you don't get them, you fuck with their cap space.

Well it all depend on how high of a draft pick and type of player we are getting. To me, its never worth it for a team to after a RFA if they have to give up a draft pick higher than a 4th round. I think your killing your team if your constenly doing it. Look at the Redskins for example...They're do that year in and year and now look at where they are.