JR didn't "bag the season" on purpose. He knew Fox was on his way out and wanted to see what there was as far as talent with the young players that Fox refused to play, so he got rid of some under performing veterans that Fox was ridiculously loyal to. There was no reason for JR to worry about money, he's always been one of the top owners in spending every year, I mean how many times have we bitched about being too close to the salary cap... There were a lot of other issues as well, you couldn't pass the team over to Matt and still have Jake around, it just wouldn't work. It'd still be Jake's team. And don't even get me started on the poo logic of saying that Matt somehow lost something with Jake not there, he admitted pretty openly that he just didn't take things seriously enough going into 2010.
Exactly how many of the players we let go in 2010 went on to do anything for any team since they left? Zero. Chris Harris went on to be ineffective on multiple teams, Damione Lewis faded into oblivion, Kemo was injured all the time for the Redskins (shocker there), Hoover retired after no team really went after him and Jake continued to show that he'll never be able to be a starting QB in this league again.
The fact of the matter is you blame that season on players YOU were loyal to leaving the team. It had very little if anything to do with that. That season was a clusterfug from the moment Fox was returning without a contract for the next year. You could see him openly being defiant, playing Brian fuging St. Pierre as a starter. Think about that for a second. That season was doomed, Fox made sure he wasn't going to need to put in more effort than he needed to for an owner he wasn't getting along with very well anymore.
You can try to shift blame strictly to JR but his actions paved the way for this team to actually stay around. Do you think we'd be able to afford CJ or Kalil if we still had all of those contracts on the books? Not without gutting the team.
Another gullible fan who doesn't have the ability to analyze the situation critically and buys the bill of goods that Hurney sold. Your whole premise appears to be that if a player on our team who we cut didn't play well for another team that justified getting rid of them. So following that logic then we shouldn't have picked up a player who wasn't good on another team to begin with right? So because Moose wasn't effective in Chicago went we traded him,. we should never have brought him back, right? Because Jake was a backup on the Saints*** we shouldn't have brought him in right? Of course not, right?? Just because they didn't play well for other teams has no bearing on how they will play here, you say. One thing is not connected to the other, right?? Well Einstein the same logic applies when they leave here to go elsewhere. Just because they chose to retire or didn't star elsewhere has no bearing on how they would have done here in our system. Hoover had some minor injury issues in 2009 but played at a very level whereas his replacement Fiametta had a history of severe concussions and was cut at the end of 2010, how did that young guy work out? And what about Clausen and Moore who were the young replacements who we sacrificed Jake for?? Yeah that worked out....... And what about Brown who we had as Peppers replacement. Another guy worth going young for. And how about Godfrey who is our young replacement for Harris. A real pro bowler right??? And how about drafting Edwards and getting rid of Moose. Brilliant!!! Sure you can say it was for LaFell or Gettis but frankly we could have kept Moose and still drafted both of them. I suspect both of them could have sat behind Moose and learned quite a bit.
The one area we agree on is that Fox had no business being the coach in 2010 and anyone with half a brain knew that. Makes you wonder why Richardson forced him to play the last year as a lame duck coach as if that was going to work out. I think he didn't like Fox in the end and was punishing him by cutting the talent and making him coach the leftovers. Fox knew if he complained or quit, it would make him look bad so he kept his mouth shut for the most part and did some passive aggressive stuff behind the scenes. Once again the Panthers were sacrificed to satisfy some game Richardson was playing with Fox. Sure the 5 million was a factor but lets be real unless we go back to the cheap theory which you want to discount, the only reasons you keep a lame duck coach on staff was money and saving as much as you could expecting a prolonged lockout which you figure you can engineer given you are the chief negotiator (which is going cheap) or some personal agenda. And in the end the team sucked so bad we had to overplay for every player we signed and kept in order to assure they would play for us. I am sure that added up to more than 5 million.
No your logic is like the other apologists. It just doesn't hold up. It was Richardson's fault from beginning to end and he was wrong on all counts. Saying Richardson's actions paved the way to stay around is ridiculous. Richardson didn't have a shortage of money, the Panthers weren't hurting. And none of the veterans who were cut would have been around at the end of 2010 when we had to pay Kalil or Johnson. There seems to be a train of thought that cutting those veterans saved long term contracts but that is totally false. The only guy who had a long term contract who we got rid of was Harris who we traded. Diggs had a 3 year contract but that again was Richardson's fault because they gave him a 3 year extension in January and cut him 3 months later. The salaries of Jake, Kemo, all had clauses which allowed us to make them one years deals which would have made them expire after 2010. Hoover was on his last year of his deal and Moose Peppers and Lewis were free agents. There was virtually little if any benefit to cutting any of those veterans beyond the salaries saved in 2010 (read cheap). Go back and look at the facts instead of parroting the spin and you will see I am right on all counts.