Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Things Gettleman has said in the past and what we can learn from them...

63 posts in this topic

Posted

actually, yes, we are devoid of talent at WR and LT.

same could be said for the secondary as well since the guys we had who were good enough to start are now with other teams and we've done nothing to replace them.

hurney had this huge problem in that he was overly confident and unwavering in his philosophy of building/managing a team to the detriment of the team. it appears that gettleman might be suffering from the same illness.

he has a plan, but what if things don't fall the way he thought. what is plan b? is he able willing to adjust to changing situations that impact his plan? was he counting on there being more FAs available when the market settled down? is he willing to deviate from his draft philosophy if we still have a blank slate at WR/LT/CB/S?

is he married to the idea of keeping hardy and handicapping the rest of the team just so we have a killer pass rush (even if that means we don't protect cam or decent WRs)?

his success last year doesn't give him a free pass this year. he hasn't helped build a consistent winner yet. he has one season under his belt. one winning season. is year two going to see a regression? how big of a regression?

i appreciate what he did last year, but i need more before i herald him as a magic man. i may have bought it before and i may have been on his bandwagon before the hire, but i need to some more than what we've seen this year.

and again, just because i know someone is going to say it, i am not wanting movement for movement's sake. there are good moves to be made and we need to make them.

if the cap is so bad that we can't afford to fill out a roster, then we shouldn't have tagged hardy. if we have no WRs on the team and only saved $2mil from cutting smith and still have no money to bring anyone in, then cutting smith was a mistake. if WRs are saying they'd rather not play here because of cutting smith, then cutting smith was a mistake.

did gettleman think through all possibilities before tagging hardy and cutting smith? i don't know. probably. the problem is, did he care what the possible negative impacts would be by doing those two things or was he going to do it regardless of outcome and impact?

all there are right now are questions about gettleman and very little to warrant a positive view. right now those two main movements (tagging hardy and cutting smith) have had no positive impact on the team.

 

 

Ok but now you are making the assumption that tagging Hardy and cutting Smith directly coincides with our lack of free agency moves. That is pure speculation on your part and holds no water. How do you know Gettleman wouldn't have sat on most of that 13.1 mill that Hardy is getting? We don't know. How do you know he would've overpaid (yes he would've had to overpay) to get one of the top receivers or tackles on the market? From everything Gettleman is saying, he would've executed free agency this way whether he had 8 million or 18 million to spend. It's about philosophy. You keep your core, you draft smart, and don't pay a guy more than he is worth when plugging holes in free agency. We will be riding out the first wave of free agency every season unless we are able to get a guy we want at his fair-market value, period. This is how our new GM works and what most of us asked for when we were dealing with Hurney's stupidity in contract negotiations.

 

Is this easy for me to sit through? Absolutely not. Am I worried? You're damn right. But hell, what am I supposed to do about it? I'll just have to see it through like everyone else.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Ok but now you are making the assumption that tagging Hardy and cutting Smith directly coincides with our lack of free agency moves. That is pure speculation on your part and holds no water. How do you know Gettleman wouldn't have sat on most of that 13.1 mill that Hardy is getting? We don't know. How do you know he would've overpaid (yes he would've had to overpay) to get one of the top receivers or tackles on the market? From everything Gettleman is saying, he would've executed free agency this way whether he had 8 million or 18 million to spend. It's about philosophy. You keep your core, you draft smart, and don't pay a guy more than he is worth when plugging holes in free agency. We will be riding out the first wave of free agency every season unless we are able to get a guy we want at his fair-market value, period. This is how our new GM works and what most of us asked for when we were dealing with Hurney's stupidity in contract negotiations.

 

Is this easy for me to sit through? Absolutely not. Am I worried? You're damn right. But hell, what am I supposed to do about it? I'll just have to see it through like everyone else.

 

tagging hardy absolutely does coincide with our ability to make free agent moves.

 

the smith effect on FAs coming in is speculation, but the fact that cutting the only viable option we had on the roster and still not having enough to pay for any WR capable of even just replacing his production puts us behind the 8 ball. we had more than enough holes to fill at WR without cutting smith. that just made the need even greater.

 

so far all he's done is create more needs while taking away the ability to pay for filling them.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

tagging hardy absolutely does coincide with our ability to make free agent moves.

 

the smith effect on FAs coming in is speculation, but the fact that cutting the only viable option we had on the roster and still not having enough to pay for any WR capable of even just replacing his production puts us behind the 8 ball. we had more than enough holes to fill at WR without cutting smith. that just made the need even greater.

 

so far all he's done is create more needs while taking away the ability to pay for filling them.

 

 

Tagging Hardy reflects ABILITY. It doesn't indicate that we WOULD have spent 13 million on other players at need positions at all. Therefore, it's speculation. Hell we might have tried to roll a lot of that into next season trying to get out of the hole quicker. We just don't know. In the end, Gettleman determined Hardy was worth the tag. So what's done is done, and our front 7 remains elite.

 

If we let Hardy walk, defensive end becomes a need. Wide receiver was already a need. He actually prevented another hole by tagging him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Tagging Hardy reflects ABILITY. It doesn't indicate that we WOULD have spent 13 million on other players at need positions at all. Therefore, it's speculation. Hell we might have tried to roll a lot of that into next season trying to get out of the hole quicker. We just don't know. In the end, Gettleman determined Hardy was worth the tag. So what's done is done, and our front 7 remains elite.

 

If we let Hardy walk, defensive end becomes a need. Wide receiver was already a need. He actually prevented another hole by tagging him.

c'mon, you don't think that we would have picked up an LT or WR or a DB if we had the money?

 

and if we let hardy walk, DE isn't a need. it's weaker, but not nearly the need that exists at WR, DB, and LT where we really have none.

 

and again, by tagging him he handicapped our ability to address multiple positions and ensured that we would have major issues filling those needs.

 

and also again, the DL would still be dominant without hardy and the front seven would remain elite. the amount of improvement that star and short should make and the growth of klein will make it easy for whoever fills in for hardy.

 

i don't see how creating a situation where you are inable to rebuild your depleted team is a good thing. if the ability to sign FAs to fill big holes is there and you choose not to, that's one thing. but actually creating a situation that you take that ability to choose away only hurts you and leaves you looking for excuses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Letting Hardy walk is giving away something of huge value for free.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Letting Hardy walk is giving away something of huge value for free.

 

no. it's making a decision whether or not you want to buy a mercedes and live on ramen noodles the rest of your life or settle for a honda and be able to eat normal foods.

 

he was a free agent that we bought for $13mil and that decision forces us to look for table scraps.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

c'mon, you don't think that we would have picked up an LT or WR or a DB if we had the money?

 

and if we let hardy walk, DE isn't a need. it's weaker, but not nearly the need that exists at WR, DB, and LT where we really have none.

 

and again, by tagging him he handicapped our ability to address multiple positions and ensured that we would have major issues filling those needs.

 

and also again, the DL would still be dominant without hardy and the front seven would remain elite. the amount of improvement that star and short should make and the growth of klein will make it easy for whoever fills in for hardy.

 

I can only speculate as to what we would have done. I don't see how we would have taken on the contracts some of those guys got though. Would I have liked to grab a WR and a LT? You bet. But WOW at some of the contracts these guys got.

 

If we lose Hardy, our front 7 goes from elite to above average at best. What Hardy does for this team is being slighted a bit here. 15 sacks and 30+ pressures with the ability to shut down the run doesn't just fall out of the sky every day. Having both Hardy and Johnson makes our corners go from embarrassing to average and our safeties from mediocre to solid. We lose Hardy, Johnson gets double-teamed every play and that neutralizes most of our pass rush. When the pass rush is neutralized, the corners are exposed. We barely have corners soooo.... game over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

We also retained the ability to trade him.... Again, didn't let him go for free. And the final roster and cap situation isn't nearly set in stone. That 13 mil wouldn't have made everything come up roses, and Hardy would be gone.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I can only speculate as to what we would have done. I don't see how we would have taken on the contracts some of those guys got though. Would I have liked to grab a WR and a LT? You bet. But WOW at some of the contracts these guys got.

 

If we lose Hardy, our front 7 goes from elite to above average at best. What Hardy does for this team is being slighted a bit here. 15 sacks and 30+ pressures with the ability to shut down the run doesn't just fall out of the sky every day. Having both Hardy and Johnson makes our corners go from embarrassing to average and our safeties from mediocre to solid. We lose Hardy, Johnson gets double-teamed every play and neutralizes most of our pass rush. When the pass rush is neutralized, the corners are exposed. We barely have corners soooo.... game over.

 

i think you are slighting the rest of the front line. calling them average without hardy? lol.

 

hardy is great. i just don't think keeping him was worth crippling our ability to get solid players at LT, WR, and in the secondary.

 

if by tagging him we still had at least $10mil of cap space to spend, it wouldn't have been so bad. tagging him and leaving us with just a couple million bucks is pretty ridiculous.

 

and yes, we could probably get by with some of the WRs available now and in the draft, but LT is kind of important. if there is one position you really should be overpaying a little bit on, it's probably that. but we can't because we tagged hardy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

hes overpaying the DE position.

franchising hardy handicapped us. the decision to tag him took away opportunity to not just improve in several areas, but fill holes with less than starter level ability. we have no money to fill holes because we tagged hardy. sure, there's a lot of time left, but what's going to be available at that point? a legit starting LT? lol

No. Drafting crappy WR, CB and safeties is what handicapped us. Gettleman just found a way to cover it up until we can get it sorted out. He'll of a job if you ask me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

i think you are slighting the rest of the front line. calling them average without hardy? lol.

 

hardy is great. i just don't think keeping him was worth crippling our ability to get solid players at LT, WR, and in the secondary.

 

if by tagging him we still had at least $10mil of cap space to spend, it wouldn't have been so bad. tagging him and leaving us with just a couple million bucks is pretty ridiculous.

 

and yes, we could probably get by with some of the WRs available now and in the draft, but LT is kind of important. if there is one position you really should be overpaying a little bit on, it's probably that. but we can't because we tagged hardy.

 

I'm not slighting the rest of the line at all. I'm slighting our backup DEs. None of them have done anything to show they can start. Therefore, the offense schemes us differently. They can ignore our RDE because they know Star, KK, and Johnson are the real issues. Handling 3 is doable, handling 4? Well.... we saw how most teams did against us last year. And with another year of continuity and growth, the sky is the limit for this group of guys.

 

His number is too big as it stands right now, but the end game likely isn't to keep it that way. The deal couldn't be reached in time so they did what they had to do and tagged their guy. They will work to get a long term deal and get his cap number down. Have we lost out on talent because of it? Perhaps. Was there a guy on the market that was more valuable than Hardy? I'd say no. Therefore, I can't fault Gettleman for making the decision he did.

 

Of course we have holes, but we are just getting started. No need to jump off the ledge just yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

At this point I don't think there is anything Gettleman can do to piss some of you guys off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites