Jump to content


Photo
* * * - - 2 votes

DeAngelo for Darrelle?


  • Please log in to reply
49 replies to this topic

#1 TruCatzFan

TruCatzFan

    Phil 4:13

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,470 posts
  • LocationAlaska

Posted 17 April 2013 - 12:42 AM

I'm one of, if not the BIGGEST DeAngelo homer on this site... Having said that see exhibits below:

Exhibit A- we already have two solid backs and lack corners

Exhibit B- The Jets lack a Big name solid back, and are trying to trade their star corner

Which leads me to

Exhibit C- This could be a shocker come draft day or perhaps before. The contracts would cancel each other out basically and with Darrelle's injury I'd be willing to say that it's an even trade.

Crazy yes... Possible yes and no... Does it make sense? Absolutely it does, and it takes Revis from a Divisional foe in the process.


Discuss

#2 Udogg

Udogg

    Cardiac Victim since 95

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,257 posts

Posted 17 April 2013 - 12:49 AM

It's been mentioned before.. but trading Deangelo actually cost money. Don't remember the specifics but because of signing bonus and stuff like that.

#3 CarolinaPanthers8789

CarolinaPanthers8789

    Alexander SEMIN!!! FTW

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,570 posts
  • LocationNorth Carolina/Virginia

Posted 17 April 2013 - 12:51 AM

Simple answer, no.

Reason why, we can't afford his contract even if we were able to make the trade for him and it would take a first, a third, and Williams to land Revis. On top of that, we have too many needs to throw away draft picks on him. If you want a good corner, look no further than Xavier Rhodes.

Would I want Revis, yes; if he wasn't such an asshole.

#4 LinvilleGorge

LinvilleGorge

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,777 posts

Posted 17 April 2013 - 12:55 AM

No. We don't have the cap space and I don't want the constant contract headaches that Revis brings. Seems like the guy holds out or threatens to hold out every year. Plus, they're wanting a 1st round pick and then some for him, not a RB pushing 30 with an albatross of a contract. It's a bad deal for both sides.

#5 nickzz

nickzz

    o

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,765 posts

Posted 17 April 2013 - 01:01 AM

lol

#6 PhillyB

PhillyB

    that jungle football

  • ALL-PRO
  • 19,772 posts
  • Locationthird spur east of the sun

Posted 17 April 2013 - 01:07 AM

Exhibit D - you are retarded

#7 TANTRIC-NINJA

TANTRIC-NINJA

    The holy ghost of Mr. Miyagi

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,959 posts
  • LocationColumbia, South Kacky

Posted 17 April 2013 - 01:12 AM

Uh..

#8 Smitty Is Our Savior

Smitty Is Our Savior

    Jesus Shuttlesworth

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,793 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 17 April 2013 - 01:15 AM

The Bucs reportedly want to trade a first, a third, and a fifth for Revis, and the Jets are supposedly trying to get more out of them.

But yeah, they'd probably rather have an old, injury prone RB for Revis straight up.

#9 CarolinaNCSU

CarolinaNCSU

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,987 posts
  • LocationRaleigh

Posted 17 April 2013 - 01:27 AM

I hope this poo is GIF approved by the time I wake up tomorrow.

#10 TruCatzFan

TruCatzFan

    Phil 4:13

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,470 posts
  • LocationAlaska

Posted 17 April 2013 - 01:27 AM

It's been mentioned before.. but trading Deangelo actually cost money. Don't remember the specifics but because of signing bonus and stuff like that.


Pretty sure that trading Darrelle would cost the Jets $ as well.

This possibility makes a lot of sense to me. On the flip side I could play Devil's advocate and say its a horrible idea. I'd just like to generate the discussion. It likely won't happen, but of all the trade propositions that have been mentioned in the media I haven't heard this one. (Not surprising because it involves a Panther) but at any rate, this is an obvious one for one swap.
Whoever stated that we'd have to give up more than just DeAngelo that's just crazy talk.

As for the cap situation... Give Revis DeAngelo's money. We get rid of "dead weight" as many fans put it here. We fill an actual need simultaneously. I'm just throwing it out there.

Maybe if somebody else other than me brought this up it would be received differently? Either way, it's out of the bag, and until Thursday I don't see any reason why we can't all have a healthy and respectful debate about it.

#11 TruCatzFan

TruCatzFan

    Phil 4:13

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,470 posts
  • LocationAlaska

Posted 17 April 2013 - 01:32 AM

The Bucs reportedly want to trade a first, a third, and a fifth for Revis, and the Jets are supposedly trying to get more out of them.

But yeah, they'd probably rather have an old, injury prone RB for Revis straight up.


Its funny how the media always gets these Blockbuster trades wrong and the details wrong. DeAngelo isn't injury prone either, so lets keep up with the times and have valid points if we're gonna disagree.

I'm gonna laugh when he goes to Cincinnati for a 3rd rndr and conditional picks at the last second. There's always a team not in the reported mix that swoops right in for way less.

Personally if MUCH rather keep DeAngelo than get Revis. I do think its worth noting and bringing up the possibility which exists.

#12 jtnc

jtnc

    Resident Asshole

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,403 posts
  • LocationNorth Carolina

Posted 17 April 2013 - 01:41 AM

Trutcatzfan always brings the lolz.

Posted Image

#13 CarolinaNCSU

CarolinaNCSU

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,987 posts
  • LocationRaleigh

Posted 17 April 2013 - 01:55 AM

I'm one of, if not the BIGGEST DeAngelo homer on this site... Having said that see exhibits below:

Exhibit A- we already have two solid backs and lack corners

Exhibit B- The Jets lack a Big name solid back, and are trying to trade their star corner

Which leads me to

Exhibit C- This could be a shocker come draft day or perhaps before. The contracts would cancel each other out basically and with Darrelle's injury I'd be willing to say that it's an even trade.

Crazy yes (should've stopped)... Possible yes and no... Does it make sense? Absolutely it does, and it takes Revis from a Divisional foe in the process.


Discuss

Pretty sure that trading Darrelle would cost the Jets $ as well.

This possibility makes a lot of sense to me. On the flip side I could play Devil's advocate and say its a horrible idea (still should've stopped). I'd just like to generate the discussion. It likely won't happen, but of all the trade propositions that have been mentioned in the media I haven't heard this one (I wonder why). (Not surprising because it involves a Panther) but at any rate, this is an obvious one for one swap. (Lulz)
Whoever stated that we'd have to give up more than just DeAngelo that's just crazy talk (DWill for Revis, straight up, is not crazy talk? Lulz again).

As for the cap situation... Give Revis DeAngelo's money. We get rid of "dead weight" as many fans put it here. We fill an actual need simultaneously. I'm just throwing it out there. (Shouldn't have)

Maybe if somebody else other than me brought this up (I'm sure they did, and we laughed at too) it would be received differently? Either way, it's out of the bag, and until Thursday I don't see any reason why we can't all have a healthy and respectful debate about it. (Insane OP's typically don't get respect for obvious reasons)

Its funny how the media always gets these Blockbuster trades wrong and the details wrong. DeAngelo isn't injury prone either, so lets keep up with the times and have valid points if we're gonna disagree.

I'm gonna laugh when he goes to Cincinnati for a 3rd rndr (After the Bucs offer? Oh yeah, the media and people who may know something got that news wrong. But Dwill for Revis makes sense...) and conditional picks at the last second. There's always a team not in the reported mix that swoops right in for way less.

Personally if MUCH rather keep DeAngelo than get Revis (Hurney?). I do think its worth noting and bringing up the possibility which exists.


A lot more I could've done I'm sure, but you can't turn chicken poo into chicken salad.

#14 TruCatzFan

TruCatzFan

    Phil 4:13

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,470 posts
  • LocationAlaska

Posted 17 April 2013 - 02:08 AM

A lot more I could've done I'm sure, but you can't turn chicken poo into chicken salad.


You should have just said this:
"I don't really have anything to add to this conversation, so I'll just poke fun at TCF for the lolz and then add a really played out one liner at the end, worth at least 5 Internet brownie points"

When anybody wants to have a legitimate discussion about it PM me. I'm beyond tired of the immature back and forths on this site. Just want to talk about football and possible moves.

#15 jtnc

jtnc

    Resident Asshole

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,403 posts
  • LocationNorth Carolina

Posted 17 April 2013 - 02:13 AM

You should have just said this:
"I don't really have anything to add to this conversation, so I'll just poke fun at TCF for the lolz and then add a really played out one liner at the end, worth at least 5 Internet brownie points"

When anybody wants to have a legitimate discussion about it PM me. I'm beyond tired of the immature back and forths on this site. Just want to talk about football and possible moves.

IT'LL NEVER HAPPEN!

I can bet my account that trading Revis for Dwill will not happen, it is even foolish to think so, you actually think they'll give up their ONLY star, the guy they build a defense around for Deangelo fuging Williams? You're a caricature.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com