Some of the day 2 DT's if the team goes in another direction in rd 1

[gimmesix]

Yes ...Stephon
This offer sounds like Stephen........Stephen! (lol)
Seriously, I agree with the structure but I think it is going to take something closer to $10M guaranteed.

Maybe. I could live with $5 million each year guaranteed. Drop the Pro Bowl and All-Pro incentives back to $1 million each.

We could do a $2.5 million base for each year, with a $5 million signing bonus. That way he gets $7.5 million up front, with the opportunity to turn that first year into $15.5 million. I believe the incentives in this case would be Unlikely to Be Earned, so they would not count toward this year's cap.

We could even add a $2.5 million roster bonus to the second year as an extra incentive. If he doesn't bounce back from his injury, then we let him go with no extra hit in 2026 besides the $5 million.

That may seem like a lot of money to some of our fans (especially those who eat only at all-you-can-eat buffets, so they can make sure they get their money's worth), but it's the cost of doing business in the NFL, where the top receivers are making $30 million-plus AAV.

 

[Hawkeye0202]

I absolutely agree on Graham: If he gets close enough to strike, it's worth it to get a potentially elite player at DT. I don't think he will get close enough, but I'm still leaning toward Nolen at 12 if he's gone. It would be hard for me to pass up Jeanty, though. I could go Jeanty-Collins in the first/second or Nolen-Kaleb Johnson (or Henderson) in the second and be happy (although in this RB strong draft, I'd like to see us take a second one in the sixth, maybe someone like Bhayshul Tuten). I'd also like to see us draft at least one more DT, even if we re-sign Odighizuwa. We "lost" our bargain-bin backups and should make every effort not to have to dig into the bin again.

We have TWO starting free agents ( may not return ) at RB AND DT..........so yea, it would make a lot of sense to double dip both positions but with so many holes to fill, a lot will depend on free agency.

 

[Hawkeye0202]

Maybe. I could live with $5 million each year guaranteed. Drop the Pro Bowl and All-Pro incentives back to $1 million each.

We could do a $2.5 million base for each year, with a $5 million signing bonus. That way he gets $7.5 million up front, with the opportunity to turn that first year into $15.5 million. I believe the incentives in this case would be Unlikely to Be Earned, so they would not count toward this year's cap.

+1.......sometimes with players, it's not so much the money ( they have plenty ) but the respect they have given the game. I know lots of fans will roll their eyes it matters with players. The contract is telling his peers what you think of him.........remember the term brotherhood.

 

[gimmesix]

We have TWO starting free agents ( may not return ) at RB AND DT..........so yea, it would make a lot of sense to double dip both positions but with so many holes to fill, a lot will depend on free agency.

I'd like to see us go after Nick Chubb in free agency, because I think his asking price will be a little lower since he had a bad season. However, I'd expect us to bring back Dowdle.

I'd offer Chubb something like three years, $21 million. $9 million of that would be bonus, with a $2 million base for this year ($5 million hit), $4 million base next year ($7 million hit) and $6 million the next year ($9 million hit). I think it will take a similar amount to bring Dowdle back since he had a 1,000-yard season and averaged 4.6 per carry, and I trust Chubb to return to form (no years under 5.0 per carry until last year when he fell to 3.3) more than Dowdle to repeat his success.

Even if I signed Chubb, I'd still prioritize RB in the draft because he is not a long-term solution. Could throw in some incentives on top of the contract numbers to get Chubb here.

So my two offseason additions on offense would be Diggs and Chubb for a $10 million hit for 2025. Yes, they are coming off injuries, but that's the only way we get them that cheap. Yes, there is risk involved, but you negate that some at RB by still adding an RB fairly early. That allows us to not be absolutely wedged, though, into taking a back in the first or second (although I'd still want to take one in the second if the draft fell right).