quick thoughts on the fucking bills

[Chaka]

Originally Posted by omahacolt

9) smith has been fine at rt. but i still don't think this is our best 5. i hope that doesnt come back to haunt us.

Thank you for the analysis, it is appreciated. Quick question about this point: who do you think are the best 5? Good instead of Smith? And do you have any thoughts on Glowinski's performance thus far?

[VeveJones007]

After today, the Colts have scored 4 more points than they have given up this season.

[daedge]

Only Mahomes (22) has more TD passes than Luck (20).

[Racehorse]

Originally Posted by daedge

Only Mahomes (22) has more TD passes than Luck (20).

Brady did something today that was so Brady. The ball was on the 1. The RB (White) was in motion. Brady could have placed the ball right into his hands. However, he sort of tossed it forward, making it a passing TD instead of a rushing TD for the RB. The guy will do anything to make himself look better than he is.

[DrSpaceman]

Originally Posted by Racehorse

Brady did something today that was so Brady. The ball was on the 1. The RB (White) was in motion. Brady could have placed the ball right into his hands. However, he sort of tossed it forward, making it a passing TD instead of a rushing TD for the RB. The guy will do anything to make himself look better than he is.

I am as critical as anyone about Brady and his short passes with YAC yards adding to his stats, but lots of teams are running this type of play now. Technically a "pass" because its tossed forward, but its really a running play. Have seen it several times.

Its not a bad idea, really, because if its dropped, its not a fumble but an incomplete pass instead, no risk of fumble recovery.

If you want to really see what kind of "greatness" you get from Brady though look at his "game winning drive" from last week. They ran the ball and he threw a few screens, they are driving down the field, then he throws one long pass to Gronk, admittedly a great pass but Gronk was open, not a hard pass to complete. Then they kick a FG to win. He literally did nothing that half the QBs in the league could not do, but he is BRADY!!!! So its so great!!!

I always imagine we live in an alternate universe where somehow EVERYTHING has gone Tom Brady's way his whole career to make him seem WAY more valuable than he is to the team. Look at yesterday's game. The Bears COMPLETE A HAIL MARY, but are stopped short of the TD and still lose. Somewhere there is another universe where AV missed the Oakland kick, Brady never became the starter in NE, went back to selling insurance after 4 years as a career back up

[omahacolt]

Originally Posted by Chaka

Thank you for the analysis, it is appreciated. Quick question about this point: who do you think are the best 5? Good instead of Smith? And do you have any thoughts on Glowinski's performance thus far?

I think smith at guard and either Good or Clark at rt would be the best 5. Glowinski appears to be playing good enough.

I plan on watching the last 2 games on gamepass and watch these guys again. I have been impressed with how they have played with one watch.

[1965southpaw]

Originally Posted by omahacolt

I think smith at guard and either Good or Clark at rt would be the best 5. Glowinski appears to be playing good enough.

I plan on watching the last 2 games on gamepass and watch these guys again. I have been impressed with how they have played with one watch.

Speaking of Good and Glowinski......I was looking up some bio info on Glowinski since I seem to have missed when Ballard signed him and I learned that in the off season he restructured both Good and Glowinski's contracts so we have both of them for the price of one......they both have the opportunity if they hit certain performance milestones to re-earn back the pay cuts they took. I don't remember seeing anything on this back in January but I like the approach....pay for performance. Maybe next season he was do the same with the receivers and get some of those drops dealt with.

[omahacolt]

Originally Posted by 1965southpaw

Speaking of Good and Glowinski......I was looking up some bio info on Glowinski since I seem to have missed when Ballard signed him and I learned that in the off season he restructured both Good and Glowinski's contracts so we have both of them for the price of one......they both have the opportunity if they hit certain performance milestones to re-earn back the pay cuts they took. I don't remember seeing anything on this back in January but I like the approach....pay for performance. Maybe next season he was do the same with the receivers and get some of those drops dealt with.

I actually don’t like that in that scenario. They were making peanuts. We have all the cap space. No need to nickel and dime the back end like that. Unless I missed something about that scenario

[1965southpaw]

Originally Posted by omahacolt

I actually don’t like that in that scenario. They were making peanuts. We have all the cap space. No need to nickel and dime the back end like that. Unless I missed something about that scenario

The article I read didn't discuss the rationale for the restructure and I wondered about that since we are sitting on a pile of cash. The only thing I would surmise is going back to that timeline (Dec/Jan) we had several other oline prospects / planned adds and perhaps he had a fixed $$ / % of budget he was willing to put into the line but wanted as many shots on goal as he could get knowing some would wash out.......can't really think why else he'd do it.....you're right, there is plenty of money....

[sherck]

Originally Posted by 1965southpaw

Speaking of Good and Glowinski......I was looking up some bio info on Glowinski since I seem to have missed when Ballard signed him and I learned that in the off season he restructured both Good and Glowinski's contracts so we have both of them for the price of one......they both have the opportunity if they hit certain performance milestones to re-earn back the pay cuts they took. I don't remember seeing anything on this back in January but I like the approach....pay for performance. Maybe next season he was do the same with the receivers and get some of those drops dealt with.

Smoke and mirrors.

They both did indeed have base salary reduced, i.e. a "pay cut," but then that exact same amount of money was moved to "Likely to be Earned" incentives which basically means that if they stay on the roster, they will get paid.

I had not actually known about the contract changes until you mentioned it and I looked them up today because the reported contract numbers never changed. Teams have to included "Likely To Be Earned" incentive numbers in their contract numbers for salary cap purposes but do not have to include "Unlikely To Be Earned" incentive numbers.

My guess is that Ballard was unsure if either of them would stick on the roster over the course of the season and was looking for a way to recoup some money if they did not.

I agree that this seems unncessary but based on how Glowinski is playing, there is zero chance of him not being on the squad at the end of the season (unless he is on IR).

Good? That boy needs to get healthy and on the field.

Good find but, ultimatly, if both men play the season, they will probably get paid about the same as they would have.

Glowinski? He keep playing this way, he will be earning a veteran's starter contract at the end of the season.

Walk Worthy,