Cowboys 'Not Fair' In Diggs Contract Talks? CB Wants 'Guaranteed' Deal?

[Flamma]

I would taken the 15 yard penalty to lay the wood on Kittles.

True. But I would have been furious when the flag flew. There is no such thing as a defenseless WR when he has the ball. I can understand if it's called when the ball is way over their heads and the DB takes his shot. I thought that was what the rule was intended to eliminate. But the refs take it to another level.

 

[PAPPYDOG]

NFL agents know our Jones boys are idiots and expect Diggs to get pretty much whatever he wants and much earlier than required.
Can you say the word "WEAK" Yep that's our Jones boys!!!

 

[DallasEast]

He was avoiding contact all game. But I will say one thing, had he hit Kittle, I think there is a 99% chance he gets flagged for hitting a defenseless WR. The rules committee wants players to do what Diggs did.

I will preface my opinion by saying I *think* I know what Trevon Diggs was trying to do. I think he was attempting to dislodge the football from George Kittle's grasp by slamming his shoulder into the ball. It is a shame because he would have timed it well WITHOUT launching into Kittle's body. Unfortunately, what Diggs actually did would have likely drawn a flag if he had made contact. Here are the relevant portions of the rule:

https://operations.nfl.com/media/5kvgzyss/2022-nfl-rulebook-final.pdf (pages 58-59)

Rule 12, Section 2, Personal Fouls, Article 9, PLAYERS IN A DEFENSELESS POSTURE. It is a foul if a player initiates unnecessary contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture.
(a) Players in a defenseless posture are:
(2) A receiver running a pass route when the defender approaches from the side or behind...
(3) A player attempting to catch a pass who has not had time to clearly become a runner...

(b) Prohibited contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture is:
(1) forcibly hitting the defenseless player’s head or neck area with the helmet, facemask, forearm, or shoulder, even if the initial contact is lower than the player’s neck, and regardless of whether the defensive player also uses his arms to tackle the defenseless player by encircling or grasping him;
(2) lowering the head and making forcible contact with any part of the helmet against any part of the defenseless player’s body; or
(3) illegally launching into a defenseless opponent. It is an illegal launch if a player (i) leaves both feet prior to contact to spring forward and upward into his opponent, and (ii) uses any part of his helmet to initiate forcible contact against any part of his opponent’s body. (This does not apply to contact against a runner, unless the runner is still considered to be a defenseless player, as defined in Article 9).
Notes:
(1) The provisions of (b) do not prohibit incidental contact by the mask or helmet in the course of a conventional tackle or block on an opponent.
(2) A player who initiates contact against a defenseless opponent is responsible for avoiding an illegal act. This includes illegal contact that may occur during the process of attempting to dislodge the ball from an opponent. A standard of strict liability applies for any contact against a defenseless opponent, even if the opponent is an airborne player who is returning to the ground or whose body position is otherwise in motion, and irrespective of any acts by the defenseless opponent, such as ducking his head or curling up his body in anticipation of contact
___________________

Diggs lowered his head during his attempt. That would have likely drawn a flag if his hit had landed. Instead of a hitstick approach to knocking the ball loose, I believe form tackling would have possibly done what Diggs wanted to do and not drawn a flag.

Form tackling forces the defender's eyes up, which keeps his helmet up. My old football coach (rest his soul) called it 'seeing what you are hitting'. The defender wraps up the ball carrier, keeping his head in the carrier's body and NOT driving the helmet into the head or neck area.

This is what Diggs could have done instead of trying to finesse a big hit on the ball with only his shoulder. The force behind a form tackle, along with putting helmet on the ball, might not have dislodged the ball from Kittle, but it could have. It is a fundamental of basic football players, taught in junior high up, that professional players, in particular, either shy away from because it is not flashy enough and does not deliver the intended force. Or it is a fundamental that is simply forgotten how to perform because it is not practiced routinely.

A proper hard hit form tackle brings the 'Ooos and Ahhhs You Got Jacked Up' from fans. Unfortunately, professional football players do not employ it nearly enough. Diggs certainly didn't.

 

[Flamma]

CB may be the position fans are the hardest on, next to QB.

Some solid CB's like Carr, Scandrick, Jones, were not liked, in no small part because they weren't ball-hawking interception getters.

Now we have a legit ball hawk and he is not liked because he is not a fierce hitter.

As far as guaranteed contracts go... I wouldn't hate to see the league go the way of guaranteed contracts. Of course this would mean shorter contracts, no more huge signing bonuses/upfront money and the big one... much less flexibility in manipulating the cap.

Instead of 4 years, 160 million, 66 million signing bonus and 126 million guaranteed, it would be 4 years 31.5 million/year, all guaranteed .... end of story.

My first preference would be to get rid of the cap completely so we wouldn't have to care at all about what these guys can get from the owners.

I wouldn't like guaranteed contracts because I think a lot of these players would lose incentive. As it is, these players work their tails off their entire life to make a big payday, not to win. I think most don't put winning high on their priority list. Many probably couldn't give a crap about winning.

It's not like the 60s, 70s, and 80s where you didn't get paid that much, and the only reason you played is because you loved the game and wanted to win. That's no longer the case. You think Randy White cried when he got drafted? Players cry and hug the commissioner now because they see a big payday, nothing to do with the game.

They'll never get rid of the cap. That's the owners baby as it keeps salaries down. That's the primary reason for the cap. Parity is the convenient excuse. However, it also helps owners as well.

 

[kskboys]

Correct. But Diggs needs to show us why he's worth the contract this season. Let him earn it this year.

Trevon is probably the most underrated on the team.

Or the most overrated. We're fixing to find out.

 

[Flamma]

I will preface my opinion by saying I *think* I know what Trevon Diggs was trying to do. I think he was attempting to dislodge the football from George Kittle's grasp by slamming his shoulder into the ball. It is a shame because he would have timed it well WITHOUT launching into Kittle's body. Unfortunately, what Diggs actually did would have likely drawn a flag if he had made contact. Here are the relevant portions of the rule:

https://operations.nfl.com/media/5kvgzyss/2022-nfl-rulebook-final.pdf (pages 58-59)

Rule 12, Section 2, Personal Fouls, Article 9, PLAYERS IN A DEFENSELESS POSTURE. It is a foul if a player initiates unnecessary contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture.
(a) Players in a defenseless posture are:
(2) A receiver running a pass route when the defender approaches from the side or behind...
(3) A player attempting to catch a pass who has not had time to clearly become a runner...

(b) Prohibited contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture is:
(1) forcibly hitting the defenseless player’s head or neck area with the helmet, facemask, forearm, or shoulder, even if the initial contact is lower than the player’s neck, and regardless of whether the defensive player also uses his arms to tackle the defenseless player by encircling or grasping him;
(2) lowering the head and making forcible contact with any part of the helmet against any part of the defenseless player’s body; or
(3) illegally launching into a defenseless opponent. It is an illegal launch if a player (i) leaves both feet prior to contact to spring forward and upward into his opponent, and (ii) uses any part of his helmet to initiate forcible contact against any part of his opponent’s body. (This does not apply to contact against a runner, unless the runner is still considered to be a defenseless player, as defined in Article 9).
Notes:
(1) The provisions of (b) do not prohibit incidental contact by the mask or helmet in the course of a conventional tackle or block on an opponent.
(2) A player who initiates contact against a defenseless opponent is responsible for avoiding an illegal act. This includes illegal contact that may occur during the process of attempting to dislodge the ball from an opponent. A standard of strict liability applies for any contact against a defenseless opponent, even if the opponent is an airborne player who is returning to the ground or whose body position is otherwise in motion, and irrespective of any acts by the defenseless opponent, such as ducking his head or curling up his body in anticipation of contact
___________________

Diggs lowered his head during his attempt. That would have likely drawn a flag if his hit had landed. Instead of a hitstick approach to knocking the ball loose, I believe form tackling would have possibly done what Diggs wanted to do and not drawn a flag.

Form tackling forces the defender's eyes up, which keeps his helmet up. My old football coach (rest his soul) called it 'seeing what you are hitting'. The defender wraps up the ball carrier, keeping his head in the carrier's body and NOT driving the helmet into the head or neck area.

This is what Diggs could have done instead of trying to finesse a big hit on the ball with only his shoulder. The force behind a form tackle, along with putting helmet on the ball, might not have dislodged the ball from Kittle, but it could have. It is a fundamental of basic football players, taught in junior high up, that professional players, in particular, either shy away from because it is not flashy enough and does not deliver the intended force. Or it is a fundamental that is simply forgotten how to perform because it is not practiced routinely.

A proper hard hit form tackle brings the 'Ooos and Ahhhs You Got Jacked Up' from fans. Unfortunately, professional football players do not employ it nearly enough. Diggs certainly didn't.

Understood. But with most penalties, there is an alternative to avoid the penalty. What was Diggs alternative? Or any DB in a similar situation that gets flagged for it? There isn't one. The alternative is to let him catch it or let him run free. That doesn't pass the IQ test. I used that since we can say the R word.

 

[Pass2Run]

If anyone should know about "not fair," it would be Dez.

That was a catch.

 

[kskboys]

I wouldn't like guaranteed contracts because I think a lot of these players would lose incentive. As it is, these players work their tails off their entire life to make a big payday, not to win. I think most don't put winning high on their priority list. Many probably couldn't give a crap about winning.

It's not like the 60s, 70s, and 80s where you didn't get paid that much, and the only reason you played is because you loved the game and wanted to win. That's no longer the case. You think Randy White cried when he got drafted? Players cry and hug the commissioner now because they see a big payday, nothing to do with the game.

They'll never get rid of the cap. That's the owners baby as it keeps salaries down. That's the primary reason for the cap. Parity is the convenient excuse. However, it also helps owners as well.

The cap helps everyone, players and owners.

 

[Pass2Run]

Or the most overrated. We're fixing to find out.

Diggs is a baller bro. He's a big piece of the puzzle.

In my mind, the four most important players right now are Parsons, DLaw, Lamb, and Diggs.

Tyler Smith would be the 5th.

Anyone else is replaceable.

 

[kskboys]

CB may be the position fans are the hardest on, next to QB.

Some solid CB's like Carr, Scandrick, Jones, were not liked, in no small part because they weren't ball-hawking interception getters.

Now we have a legit ball hawk and he is not liked because he is not a fierce hitter.

As far as guaranteed contracts go... I wouldn't hate to see the league go the way of guaranteed contracts. Of course this would mean shorter contracts, no more huge signing bonuses/upfront money and the big one... much less flexibility in manipulating the cap.

Instead of 4 years, 160 million, 66 million signing bonus and 126 million guaranteed, it would be 4 years 31.5 million/year, all guaranteed .... end of story.

My first preference would be to get rid of the cap completely so we wouldn't have to care at all about what these guys can get from the owners.

So, you are for the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer?

 

[kskboys]

Diggs is a baller bro. He's a big piece of the puzzle.

In my mind, the four most important players right now are Parsons, DLaw, Lamb, and Diggs.

Tyler Smith would be the 5th.

Anyone else is replaceable.

He is, and I do like him. However, there are holes in his game, and overpaying CBs is not the road to a super bowl.

Four most important players? Parsons, Tyler Smith, Zach Martin, Mazi/Hankins. The D was not the same last season when Hankins wasn't in, BTW.

Next on my list is DLaw, same can be said about his play. He's a difference maker, one of the rare difference makers at DE w/o huge sack totals.

 

[DallasEast]

Understood. But with most penalties, there is an alternative to avoid the penalty. What was Diggs alternative? Or any DB in a similar situation that gets flagged for it? There isn't one. The alternative is to let him catch it or let him run free. That doesn't pass the IQ test. I used that since we can say the R word.

I included Digg's alternative in my reply.

 

[Flamma]

The cap helps everyone, players and owners.

How does the cap help players?

 

[Vtwin]

I wouldn't like guaranteed contracts because I think a lot of these players would lose incentive. As it is, these players work their tails off their entire life to make a big payday, not to win. I think most don't put winning high on their priority list. Many probably couldn't give a crap about winning.

It's not like the 60s, 70s, and 80s where you didn't get paid that much, and the only reason you played is because you loved the game and wanted to win. That's no longer the case. You think Randy White cried when he got drafted? Players cry and hug the commissioner now because they see a big payday, nothing to do with the game.

They'll never get rid of the cap. That's the owners baby as it keeps salaries down. That's the primary reason for the cap. Parity is the convenient excuse. However, it also helps owners as well.

Pretty much agree with everything.

Only quibble is that in my scenario the player would be getting the same guaranteed money in either case. I used Dak's contract as an example. If he was cut in year one he would have still received the 126 million that was guaranteed. I think most times the guaranteed portion is the real amount the player will see over the course of the contract anyways. The only incentive to the player is if he wants to chase that next contract.

Unlikely my scenario ever happens as the players likely wouldn't want to forgo the massive signing bonuses and the owners wouldn't want to lose the cap flexibility.

I've never bought parity as the real reason for the cap. Especially with the revenue sharing model in place. Is there really any such thing as a "small market" team anymore? Like you say, it's all about keeping costs down and maximizing profits.

 

[kskboys]

How does the cap help players?

By distributing money to everyone, as opposed to the top players getting all the money. Baseball is providing a very solid example of an uncapped league. Trout and Judge get all the top money, while many good players get less. And here's the biggest factor. W/ a cap comes a minimum. If baseball had a, say, 220 mil or so minimum, then the players as a whole would make a ton more money. They only ones who might get a bit less would be the top guys, who would have to settle for 300 mil instead of 400 mil. All the uncapped league accomplishes is to get the stars huger money.

 

[kskboys]

Pretty much agree with everything.

Only quibble is that in my scenario the player would be getting the same guaranteed money in either case. I used Dak's contract as an example. If he was cut in year one he would have still received the 126 million that was guaranteed. I think most times the guaranteed portion is the real amount the player will see over the course of the contract anyways. The only incentive to the player is if he wants to chase that next contract.

Unlikely my scenario ever happens as the players likely wouldn't want to forgo the massive signing bonuses and the owners wouldn't want to lose the cap flexibility.

I've never bought parity as the real reason for the cap. Especially with the revenue sharing model in place. Is there really any such thing as a "small market" team anymore? Like you say, it's all about keeping costs down and maximizing profits.

And that includes maximizing profits for everyone, especially the just good players who don't get the big contracts. See baseball.

When you have an uncapped league, you end up w/ way too many Oak A's and KC Royals. Their attendance is just so bad, it drives down the revenue. Smaller revenue means less money for players.

 

[G2]

He's among the best in the NFL, he's already showed this. If the franchise wants to keep him, they should extend ASAP. This is a no-brainer.

 

[Vtwin]

So, you are for the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer?

I don't think that would be the case, anymore than it already is.

All contracts have a guaranteed portion as it is. Most players end up seeing that amount anyways, before they are moved or restructured/extended.

Like I said though, my preference would be to have no cap and open the door to the players getting a bigger piece than they already do.

 

[DallasEast]

By distributing money to everyone, as opposed to the top players getting all the money. Baseball is providing a very solid example of an uncapped league. Trout and Judge get all the top money, while many good players get less. And here's the biggest factor. W/ a cap comes a minimum. If baseball had a, say, 220 mil or so minimum, then the players as a whole would make a ton more money. They only ones who might get a bit less would be the top guys, who would have to settle for 300 mil instead of 400 mil. All the uncapped league accomplishes is to get the stars huger money.

I am interested to know what the non-stars are making because what the stars are making is dictated by the market. I would not believe a non-star MLBer receiving a minimum high six-figure or low seven-figure per year guaranteed contract is detrimental to both the player or the league.

 

[G2]

Keep in mind, very much because of the staff drafts and Dan Quinn, we're not extremely pigeon-holed in the secondary. If push comes to shove, mail him to Buffalo w/ big bro. I'm fine either way.