NFL Week 16 Thread

[da man]

When Clausen starts, only 17 of the 32 teams will have remained constant with their starting QB this season. Five teams have gone through three starters, which would seem to be the epitome of desperation.

It's usually the epitome of injury.

 

[Captain_Kirk]

I think this is an attempt by Trestman to keep his job. If for some reason the Bears can beat the Lions, maybe he can make that case.

Admitted, it is a desperate attempt.

Also, worst Thursday night game of the year by a mile. Is this the only primetime game for both teams?

Do Nantz and Simms have an opt-out clause where they don't have to broadcast this one? When's the last time Nantz did a Jags game--the 20th century?

 

[bigpern23]

I can't wait to hear how great some of these guys are.

 

[RecoveringJournalist]

Isn't there some kind of rule that each team has to play one game in prime time?

 

[bigpern23]

I think they all have to play one Thursday game, right?

 

[RecoveringJournalist]

I think they all have to play one Thursday game, right?

I'm not sure. I know a couple teams (Bears, Cowboys) played two, granted, only one was in prime time. Packers and Seahawks also played twice on Thursdays.

 

[RecoveringJournalist]

I think the Lions and Eagles were the only teams that didn't play a Thursday "night" game, but both played on Thanksgiving.

 

[Chef2]

"You're looking LIVE at EverBank Field in Jacksonville, Florida........"

 

[Chef2]

I'll never know why they don't move them out of this wretched hellhole.

 

[bigpern23]

I think the Lions and Eagles were the only teams that didn't play a Thursday "night" game, but both played on Thanksgiving.

Yeah, I think the rule is simply that they must play at least one Thursday game. Doesn't have to be a night game. Keeps the scheduling equitable and boosts Thursday ratings by making sure it's not all just games scheduled between the cellar dwellers.

 

[LongTimeListener]

All right -- I don't know if this is the team trying to muddy the waters and find a bidder, or if people are just wrong or what, but now there's a train of thought that getting rid of Cutler would NOT destroy the Bears' salary cap. Shutdown Corner is just a blog aggregator, but it quotes OverTheCap.com (don't know what their credibility level is) saying he would only be $4 million in dead money.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-s...5-landing-spots-for-jay-cutler-144721467.html

Is there anything to this? We've heard before how much guaranteed money a guy has coming -- Donovan McNabb in Washington was supposed to have $40M guaranteed, but when they cut him a year later I don't think his total take ended up being even a third of that.

 

[Morris816]

All right -- I don't know if this is the team trying to muddy the waters and find a bidder, or if people are just wrong or what, but now there's a train of thought that getting rid of Cutler would NOT destroy the Bears' salary cap. Shutdown Corner is just a blog aggregator, but it quotes OverTheCap.com (don't know what their credibility level is) saying he would only be $4 million in dead money.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-s...5-landing-spots-for-jay-cutler-144721467.html

Is there anything to this? We've heard before how much guaranteed money a guy has coming -- Donovan McNabb in Washington was supposed to have $40M guaranteed, but when they cut him a year later I don't think his total take ended up being even a third of that.

The cap hit Shutdown Corner refers to, is how much it would be if the Bears trade Cutler, rather than just release him.

If the Bears do trade Cutler, though, I suspect the Bears will have to agree to pay part of the salary.

There is a difference between fully guaranteed money and "guaranteed for injury only," but I don't know if that applied to McNabb. With Cutler, the money he's due in 2015 is fully guaranteed.