Joey bosa

[CR91]

He refuses to sign his rookie deal. Now I'm not saying for the colts to do this, but would you trade a first round pick to the chargers to get him?

[The Lucky Neck Beard]

no. but I would trade them a 2nd and someone like Sio Moore. ;)

[Valpo2004]

Is he refusing because he doesn't want to play for the Chargers?  

 

How well would he fit in our defensive scheme.

[Valpo2004]

K did a check and it sounds like it's more of an issue with contract language and when he's getting his money.  

 

It's unlikely that there is any trade to be had here.

[NewColtsFan]

48 minutes ago, CR91 said:

He refuses to sign his rookie deal. Now I'm not saying for the colts to do this, but would you trade a first round pick to the chargers to get him?

 

Why would San Diego do a deal for Bosa for a #1?

 

They spent the #3 overall pick....   Our pick next year is likely going to be 21-28.      Not a good deal for the Chargers.      Someone would offer better.

 

And besides,  the Bosa deal will get done....   it's only a matter of time.     It's a matter of when,  and not if....

 

[Superman]

1) Bosa is holding out over offset language, which is typical of at least a handful of first rounders since 2011. That list includes our own Anthony Castonzo. Bosa is NOT holding out because he doesn't want to play for the Chargers. As a matter of fact, terming this a "hold out" isn't accurate, since training camp hasn't started yet.

 

2) No, I wouldn't trade a first rounder for Bosa. I'm not interested in Bosa, haven't been since draft season.

[loudnproudcolt]

Sup is right, it is completely about the language of offsets in the contract. I would not have picked him at 3. He may be good, but I thought he was overrated. I think he looked better due to the fact the defense was loaded. How many from that D were drafted. When drafting like FA, I always want to see who is around a player and are they helping or hurting their play. Bosa was definitely benefiting from guys like Lee, Washington, Bell, etc.

[2006Coltsbestever]

15 minutes ago, loudnproudcolt said:

Sup is right, it is completely about the language of offsets in the contract. I would not have picked him at 3. He may be good, but I thought he was overrated. I think he looked better due to the fact the defense was loaded. How many from that D were drafted. When drafting like FA, I always want to see who is around a player and are they helping or hurting their play. Bosa was definitely benefiting from guys like Lee, Washington, Bell, etc.

I could be wrong but he has bust written all over him. I don't like his speed.

[Gavin]

5 hours ago, loudnproudcolt said:

Sup is right, it is completely about the language of offsets in the contract. I would not have picked him at 3. He may be good, but I thought he was overrated. I think he looked better due to the fact the defense was loaded. How many from that D were drafted. When drafting like FA, I always want to see who is around a player and are they helping or hurting their play. Bosa was definitely benefiting from guys like Lee, Washington, Bell, etc.

Lee wasn't really all that good. He missed a ton of tackles on that same defense that you say was loaded. He is way overrated to me but I think he has a shot whe he gets stronger and if he clean up his tackling. Also players who are average or below average wont suddenly look better next to a great player or a good player. That player will actually have to be good himself to produce consistently...Now whether or not he will be good in the NFL has yet to be seen but I think he will be a good quality player with a chance to be elite

[Defjamz26]

On June 22, 2016 at 2:44 PM, Valpo2004 said:

K did a check and it sounds like it's more of an issue with contract language and when he's getting his money.  

 

It's unlikely that there is any trade to be had here.

Every draft there's a high profile draft pick that signs super late because of language. So this isn't uncommon.

[ColtsBlueFL]

On 6/22/2016 at 2:44 PM, Valpo2004 said:

K did a check and it sounds like it's more of an issue with contract language and when he's getting his money.  

 

It's unlikely that there is any trade to be had here.

 

In addition to offset language already discussed, there are a couple other miscellaneous structural items to be negotiated, IE: bonus payment terms and structure etc.  While the total numbers may be written in stone, how and when bonus allocations are paid and is distributed is negotiable.  So there could be a little glitch there, too.  But training camp is still off in the distance so plenty of time for them all to come to terms.

 

BTW, offset language tussles seems to be a tug-of-war over nothing to me.  Just how many round 1 players have been released early and then sign a lucrative contract with another team and 'double dip' on the salary?  BTW... this is vacation time for NFL coaches and front office folks.  So things like the Von Miller and Joey Bosa deals are likely on the back burner until early July.

[Valpo2004]

1 hour ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

In addition to offset language already discussed, there are a couple other miscellaneous structural items to be negotiated, IE: bonus payment terms and structure etc.  While the total numbers may be written in stone, how and when bonus allocations are paid and is distributed is negotiable.  So there could be a little glitch there, too.  But training camp is still off in the distance so plenty of time for them all to come to terms.

 

BTW, offset language tussles seems to be a tug-of-war over nothing to me.  Just how many round 1 players have been released early and then sign a lucrative contract with another team and 'double dip' on the salary?  BTW... this is vacation time for NFL coaches and front office folks.  So things like the Von Miller and Joey Bosa deals are likely on the back burner until early July.

 

Actually I think I tend to favor the players on the offset language thing.  

 

The teams talk about it like having no offset language is rewarding someone for getting cut.  

 

Really?  Because if a high first round pick gets cut from the team that drafted him, he's at best going to get a minimum salary deal elsewhere.  Sure maybe he makes a little more money in that one year from "double dipping" but the year after that. . . even if he has a great year with that team, they arn't just going to forget that for his first 3 years or so he sucked.

 

Doesn't matter a lot for either side.  But I do think it's dumb for the team to be all that concerned about it.  Playing poorly in order to get cut so you can "double dip" is sabatoging one's entire career just to make a tiny bit more one single season.  It would be out and out stupid to do.  

[Girlzarefanstoo]

I haven't been checking in for a while so I missed this thread.  All I can tell you is that the language is the hang up and Joey would very much like to be on the field.  That said, the veterans have been amazed at his play in practice.  Nothing but the highest praise for his work ethic, smarts and physicality.  I'm looking forward to seeing him in action.

[wig]

I'm not real high on him as a top 5 pick, or in the 34, but of course I would. 

 

Oh, and there's absolutely 0% chance of SD doing it. 

[rock8591]

Trade for a guy, but don't overpay!

 

A compensatory 7th rounder will do!

[Superman]

On 6/24/2016 at 7:59 AM, Valpo2004 said:

Actually I think I tend to favor the players on the offset language thing.  

 

 

Your point is noted, and it's a good one. But for a similar reason, I tend to side against the players on offset language. 

 

How many first rounders expect to be released by the team that drafted them in the first round? And how often does that happen when the player still has guaranteed money remaining? If I'm a first rounder, I fully expect to play out my contract, unless I get an extension with a year remaining. To me, there's no concern about my guaranteed money being offset, because I'm not getting cut.

 

I don't think the players care about offset language. I think this is an agent-driven agenda, and they advise their clients to hold out for no offset language so that the precedent continues to be upheld.

 

On the other end, there are a handful of front offices that continue to fight against this agenda. I've mostly given up trying to follow it because contract details are inconsistently reported, and sometimes we never get clarification on whether offset language was included.

 

In this case, I get the feeling the player will fold right before camp. 

[Valpo2004]

15 hours ago, Superman said:

 

Your point is noted, and it's a good one. But for a similar reason, I tend to side against the players on offset language. 

 

How many first rounders expect to be released by the team that drafted them in the first round? And how often does that happen when the player still has guaranteed money remaining? If I'm a first rounder, I fully expect to play out my contract, unless I get an extension with a year remaining. To me, there's no concern about my guaranteed money being offset, because I'm not getting cut.

 

I don't think the players care about offset language. I think this is an agent-driven agenda, and they advise their clients to hold out for no offset language so that the precedent continues to be upheld.

 

On the other end, there are a handful of front offices that continue to fight against this agenda. I've mostly given up trying to follow it because contract details are inconsistently reported, and sometimes we never get clarification on whether offset language was included.

 

In this case, I get the feeling the player will fold right before camp. 

 

Trent Richardson, Bjorn Werner. . . I have a feeling the list of players drafted in the first round that get cut with guaranteed money still on the contract is longer then you think.

 

As far as first round players, if I was in their shoes I would strongly emphasize preparing financially for the possibility that you may fail and do so miserably.  

 

That's why I don't have any problems with players pushing for no offset language and sympathize with their side on this.  Now I also get that you may not want to cut off your nose to spite your face so to speak so I don't know that I would support some sort of long holdout over the offset language.

 

But I sympathize with any player who is preparing financially including in the way a contract is written for the possibility that they may fail miserably.  

[Superman]

2 hours ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

Trent Richardson, Bjorn Werner. . . I have a feeling the list of players drafted in the first round that get cut with guaranteed money still on the contract is longer then you think.

 

As far as first round players, if I was in their shoes I would strongly emphasize preparing financially for the possibility that you may fail and do so miserably.  

 

That's why I don't have any problems with players pushing for no offset language and sympathize with their side on this.  Now I also get that you may not want to cut off your nose to spite your face so to speak so I don't know that I would support some sort of long holdout over the offset language.

 

But I sympathize with any player who is preparing financially including in the way a contract is written for the possibility that they may fail miserably.  

 

Neither Richardson nor Werner had guaranteed money remaining. Richardson's guarantee was voided because of his suspension -- a point that the NFLPA contested, and I'm not sure what the final outcome was -- and Werner's contract was only guaranteed through Year 3, as is typical of late first rounders.

 

I haven't checked recently for first rounders who are released during their rookie contract, but if I were a betting man I would bet that at least 75% of them have no remaining guaranteed money when they're released. Given the fact that not many first rounders are released early to begin with, I feel confident in saying that offsets aren't a legitimate factor.

 

To the bolded, the issue isn't the guaranteed money. If you fail, you still get your guaranteed money. You're prepared. The question is, if you sign a vet minimum deal with another team (which is probably best case scenario if you flame out on your rookie deal), does the $650k from the new deal offset the remaining $2m from the rookie deal? It's really not an "I might not make it through this contract, so I want all the guarantees I can get" kind of deal. 

 

I understand the agent/player insistence on no offset language. I don't have a problem with a player making an issue of it, up until the point that it keeps him off the field. I'm only saying that, from my perspective, I wouldn't be worried about offset language as a player.

[ColtsBlueFL]

7 hours ago, Superman said:

To the bolded, the issue isn't the guaranteed money. If you fail, you still get your guaranteed money. You're prepared. The question is, if you sign a vet minimum deal with another team (which is probably best case scenario if you flame out on your rookie deal), does the $650k from the new deal offset the remaining $2m from the rookie deal?

 

Yup!  And to clarify for those that may possibly just not know what this means, it {using Sup's example} the  player was cut with $2 mil guaranteed that was left.  The Team that cut the player is still on the hook for that 2 mill even though the player is gone.  Now the Cut player gets a $650k minimum deal from another team and a fresh chance.  No off set language allows that player to collect both the 2 mil and the 650k.  That is the 'double dipping' you sometimes hear about.  If there is offset language, then the Cutting team is only on the hook for 1.35 million (not 2) while the new signing team pays the rest of the 2 mil; the 650k in the new contract.

 

To me, not only is it a very low number of players from round 1 that are cut that have guaranteed money on the books, but those that have large amounts remaining and that can also command a high contract with a new team despite being cut is infinitesimally small. Thus, to me the money difference in amounts is more about ego than absolute sums. My 2¢

[21isSuperman]

On 6/28/2016 at 0:01 PM, Superman said:

 

Neither Richardson nor Werner had guaranteed money remaining. Richardson's guarantee was voided because of his suspension -- a point that the NFLPA contested, and I'm not sure what the final outcome was -- and Werner's contract was only guaranteed through Year 3, as is typical of late first rounders.

 

I haven't checked recently for first rounders who are released during their rookie contract, but if I were a betting man I would bet that at least 75% of them have no remaining guaranteed money when they're released. Given the fact that not many first rounders are released early to begin with, I feel confident in saying that offsets aren't a legitimate factor.

 

To the bolded, the issue isn't the guaranteed money. If you fail, you still get your guaranteed money. You're prepared. The question is, if you sign a vet minimum deal with another team (which is probably best case scenario if you flame out on your rookie deal), does the $650k from the new deal offset the remaining $2m from the rookie deal? It's really not an "I might not make it through this contract, so I want all the guarantees I can get" kind of deal. 

 

I understand the agent/player insistence on no offset language. I don't have a problem with a player making an issue of it, up until the point that it keeps him off the field. I'm only saying that, from my perspective, I wouldn't be worried about offset language as a player.

At this point, Bosa is not reporting to camp. You have a more intimate knowledge of this stuff, so what's the hold up? With the new CBA, aren't things pretty well slotted? How does something like this linger on for so long? 

[2006Coltsbestever]

35 minutes ago, 21isSuperman said:

At this point, Bosa is not reporting to camp. You have a more intimate knowledge of this stuff, so what's the hold up? With the new CBA, aren't things pretty well slotted? How does something like this linger on for so long? 

Out of some of the Draft picks I projected him to be bust. He's too slow for NFL play. I could be wrong and if I am I will later acknowledge it but to me I don't see the hype.

[2006Coltsbestever]

I am also glad we didn't draft Elliott, he wasn't going to be there anyway but imagine how the media and opposing fans would be ripping us had we drafted him. Domestic violence?? Kelly was the perfect pick, I give Grigs an A for that one. The 2 players I wanted was Kelly and Floyd. Floyd was gone so we made the right pick.

[Superman]

1 hour ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Out of some of the Draft picks I projected him to be bust. He's too slow for NFL play. I could be wrong and if I am I will later acknowledge it but to me I don't see the hype.

 

He's not slow at all. I don't think he has the bend and burst to be an explosive pass rusher, but I think he'll be a good player. Just not a double digit sack guy.

[Superman]

1 hour ago, 21isSuperman said:

At this point, Bosa is not reporting to camp. You have a more intimate knowledge of this stuff, so what's the hold up? With the new CBA, aren't things pretty well slotted? How does something like this linger on for so long? 

 

It's offset language. The Chargers are being stupid, and Bosa and his agent are being stupid, so you have a doubly stupid situation. The precedent is well set -- the third pick in the draft should not have offset language in his contract. The Chargers think they can hold strong and force players/agents to accept their standard -- they've been insistent on offset language for rookies since the new CBA -- so you have an impasse. 

 

As I said earlier in this thread, as a player taken at the top of the draft, I wouldn't care about offset language because as far as it depends upon me, I'm not getting cut. I think this is agent driven, but it's up to Bosa to say 'forget that, I'm going to camp, have the contract ready by the time I get there.' So far, he hasn't done that.

[B~Town]

I was reading a article about the situation with Bosa and the chargers it mentioned anther 1st round draft pick had not been signed anyone know who the other unsigned player is ?

[NewColtsFan]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

It's offset language. The Chargers are being stupid, and Bosa and his agent are being stupid, so you have a doubly stupid situation. The precedent is well set -- the third pick in the draft should not have offset language in his contract. The Chargers think they can hold strong and force players/agents to accept their standard -- they've been insistent on offset language for rookies since the new CBA -- so you have an impasse. 

 

As I said earlier in this thread, as a player taken at the top of the draft, I wouldn't care about offset language because as far as it depends upon me, I'm not getting cut. I think this is agent driven, but it's up to Bosa to say 'forget that, I'm going to camp, have the contract ready by the time I get there.' So far, he hasn't done that.

 

 

Turns out it's not just the off-set language.....

 

It's also how fast the signing bonus money is paid out.     Apparently,  there is some wiggle room for the two sides to negotiate how fast that signing bonus is paid.

 

The Chargers,  who may have some cash-flow issues,  want to pay it out slowly.....    Boss,  would like that money as soon as possible.....     So,  that's another hang-up....

 

Here is the ESPN article with that update....

 

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/17170932/unsigned-rookie-joey-bosa-report-san-diego-chargers-training-camp

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

He's not slow at all. I don't think he has the bend and burst to be an explosive pass rusher, but I think he'll be a good player. Just not a double digit sack guy.

But isn't that kind of bust? Just asking. When you are a Top 3 pick you should get double digits sacks. Some in the media had him going #1. He could be decent, we will see. If Andrew Luck went 8-8/9-7 every season I would consider that a bust for example because people expect 11-5 and going deep in the Playoffs which he has at least done. I'll wait and see how Bosa does but I cant even picture him having more than 10 sacks. When I say slow, he was in the combine. Leonard Floyd is much quicker. That is who the Chargers should've took IMO.

[Superman]

19 minutes ago, B~Town said:

I was reading a article about the situation with Bosa and the chargers it mentioned anther 1st round draft pick had not been signed anyone know who the other unsigned player is ?

 

The only other one I knew of was Darron Lee, and he signed a few days ago.

 

Edit: Joshua Garnett, Niners. I wasn't aware of that.

[Superman]

19 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

Turns out it's not just the off-set language.....

 

It's also how fast the signing bonus money is paid out.     Apparently,  there is some wiggle room for the two sides to negotiate how fast that signing bonus is paid.

 

The Chargers,  who may have some cash-flow issues,  want to pay it out slowly.....    Boss,  would like that money as soon as possible.....     So,  that's another hang-up....

 

Here is the ESPN article with that update....

 

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/17170932/unsigned-rookie-joey-bosa-report-san-diego-chargers-training-camp

 

I hadn't heard about the signing bonus issue, or hadn't paid attention to it. The article actually says that's the bigger issue, which is surprising. Plenty of teams defer signing bonus payments, we just don't hear about it because it's not important to us. I would figure that would be easier to work out.

 

To me, the offset stance would seem like the bigger issue because the Chargers always want offset language, but they happen to have picked in a slot where no offset language is the well established precedent. 

 

A key point in that article is made by Telesco:

Quote

 

"It really just comes down to generally this -- there's some things that are negotiable, and money always is negotiable, obviously -- but there's certain things in contracts language-wise, whether you're picked third, 33rd or 203rd, there's certain things of consistency and doing things the same way for everyone on the team," Chargers general manager Tom Telesco said regarding Bosa's contract situation earlier this week.

 

"And we're far from uncommon with how we work. I know a lot of other teams probably operate the same way. We try to keep some things constant in everyone's contract, whether you're Philip Rivers or the 85th guy on the football team. So that's kind of where we are. We're still working through it."

 

 

[Superman]

12 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

But isn't that kind of bust? Just asking. When you are a Top 3 pick you should get double digits sacks. Some in the media had him going #1. He could be decent, we will see. If Andrew Luck went 8-8/9-7 every season I would consider that a bust for example because people expect 11-5 and going deep in the Playoffs which he has at least done. I'll wait and see how Bosa does but I cant even picture him having more than 10 sacks. When I say slow, he was in the combine. Leonard Floyd is much quicker. That is who the Chargers should've took IMO.

 

I personally think the term "bust" is thrown around recklessly anymore. Just because a high pick isn't a star level player doesn't mean he's a bust, IMO. Ideally, you would want the edge player you took at #3 to be a sack machine, but if he's a 7-8 sack/year guy, are you really that disappointed? 

 

QBs are different, but I don't really judge all QBs by win/loss record. To me, truly great QBs basically guarantee their teams a winning record almost every year, barring extreme circumstances. But every guy taken at the top of the draft isn't a "great" QB, and we all know that. A bust is a Johnny Manziel kind of failure.

 

Bosa didn't run a great 40, but he was a top performer in the shuttle and 3 cone, so I don't think "slow" is an accurate description. Floyd is definitely faster and quicker, but I think Bosa is easily the better player. I'm not a Floyd fan at all, I don't think he has a true NFL position, and I can't help but envision him as another Barkevious Mingo. And again, I'm not in love with Bosa, either.

[B~Town]

28 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

The only other one I knew of was Darron Lee, and he signed a few days ago.

 

Edit: Joshua Garnett, Niners. I wasn't aware of that.

Thank You Sir did a quick google and got a bunch of older hold outs figured with all the football knowledge on here someone would have some info .

[2006Coltsbestever]

8 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I personally think the term "bust" is thrown around recklessly anymore. Just because a high pick isn't a star level player doesn't mean he's a bust, IMO. Ideally, you would want the edge player you took at #3 to be a sack machine, but if he's a 7-8 sack/year guy, are you really that disappointed? 

 

QBs are different, but I don't really judge all QBs by win/loss record. To me, truly great QBs basically guarantee their teams a winning record almost every year, barring extreme circumstances. But every guy taken at the top of the draft isn't a "great" QB, and we all know that. A bust is a Johnny Manziel kind of failure.

 

Bosa didn't run a great 40, but he was a top performer in the shuttle and 3 cone, so I don't think "slow" is an accurate description. Floyd is definitely faster and quicker, but I think Bosa is easily the better player. I'm not a Floyd fan at all, I don't think he has a true NFL position, and I can't help but envision him as another Barkevious Mingo. And again, I'm not in love with Bosa, either.

Thanks for the response. I had to log off earlier as something came up. I like Floyd a lot, just love his speed. The Draft is such a crapshoot at times it's really tough to tell who will be Great or just Good or Bad. Johnny Manziel definitely defines the word bust. I also think RG3 has been one as well but that is mainly due to injury which is unfortunate for him. Many thought he would be just as good as Andrew if not better and he's had 1 Very Good season and that was his Rookie season.

[Cynjin]

14 hours ago, Superman said:

 

The only other one I knew of was Darron Lee, and he signed a few days ago.

 

Edit: Joshua Garnett, Niners. I wasn't aware of that.

 

Garnett is now signed.

 

http://www.ninersnation.com/2016/7/30/12331000/golden-nuggets-garnett-signs-his-rookie-deal

[ColtsBlueFL]

21 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

 

Turns out it's not just the off-set language.....

 

It's also how fast the signing bonus money is paid out.     Apparently,  there is some wiggle room for the two sides to negotiate how fast that signing bonus is paid.

 

The Chargers,  who may have some cash-flow issues,  want to pay it out slowly.....    Boss,  would like that money as soon as possible.....     So,  that's another hang-up....

 

Here is the ESPN article with that update....

 

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/17170932/unsigned-rookie-joey-bosa-report-san-diego-chargers-training-camp

 

Yup, I mentioned this in a post in late June-

 

" In addition to offset language already discussed, there are a couple other miscellaneous structural items to be negotiated, IE: bonus payment terms and structure etc.  While the total numbers may be written in stone, how and when bonus allocations are paid and is distributed is negotiable.  So there could be a little glitch there, too. "

 

Total money and guarantees are strict, but how it is distributed and when is totally negotiable.  Both player and agent get paid from it, so they both want more earlier, I'm sure.

[twfish]

Not a fan of boss at all, reminds me way too much of werner 

[lollygagger8]

I don't think Bosa is that good. I also think he was over drafted.

[shakedownstreet]

i concur with the sentiments expressed in this thread

[sreeb2deeni]

Not to be a conspiracy theorist, but could he be hiding something in the way of injury? It seems very obvious that a rookie needs all the time he can get in learning how to be a pro and adjusting to the level of competition he will see every game in the NFL. Nothing to go on here. Just wondering

[loudnproudcolt]

After listening to a discussion about Bosa, the main problem is not the offsets, I believe that can be taken care of easily. Most NFL teams pay their guaranteed money up front once the contract is signed, but not all. Bosa's up front money is 17M. The chargers policy is to pay it in two lump sums. I don't know the breakdown, but you get a percentage of the guaranteed money when signing the contract, and then the rest is paid the following year in March.

In this case, I am on Bosa's side. I want my guaranteed money immediately. I want it to work for me, and not having the team making money off of it, when I could invest it. S.D. has said though they do not pay the entire portion of guaranteed money right away. They never have, and insist they won't. Both sides are dug in.

[dgambill]

On July 29, 2016 at 0:48 PM, Superman said:

 

I hadn't heard about the signing bonus issue, or hadn't paid attention to it. The article actually says that's the bigger issue, which is surprising. Plenty of teams defer signing bonus payments, we just don't hear about it because it's not important to us. I would figure that would be easier to work out.

 

To me, the offset stance would seem like the bigger issue because the Chargers always want offset language, but they happen to have picked in a slot where no offset language is the well established precedent. 

 

A key point in that article is made by Telesco:

 

Yeah...and those consistant ways of operating are reasons why many players have had issues with SD in the past. Not just the contract issues but how the organization is ran in general. Yes some teams don't pay out guarantees right away but over time most top 5 picks have a track record of no offset language and getting their money paid immediately. SD inflexibility makes them look bad....and a team that looks cheap in signing their premier pass rush top draft pick and also has generally failed horribly in getting a new stadium...well it makes the Chargers ownership look bad. No matter what I think of Bosa it's hard to not understand his frustration just like it wasn't difficult to understand why Eli maneuvered his way out of town...same reason elway did it here. Just my feelings.