SmokinwithWilly

Teddy really wasnt much different.

There should be some relief for teams in a situation like that. Luke retired for medical reasons. That's not a performance thing, or a contract move. I think teams should have to eat about half of whatever cap hit there is if a player retires. If he comes back, whatever team is signing him would need to pick up the difference.

Hard to say. Bill O'Brien was never officially in the GM role but acted as GM and he was just... well... the Texans were probably jealous of us for having Hurney.

If nothing else, being involved in every deal, even if you dont make it does 2 things I consider huge. 1. Gets you a deal you might not otherwise know about. Could we have had Hopkins for last year's 2nd? Its possible, but you never know I'd you're not in the conversation. 2. It keeps teams honest when reading your interest. If you only call when you're really interested, the asking price automatically goes up because others know you're more likely to pay.

If I remember correctly, there was also talk of Star wanting out. I always though Star was more important than KK and the better player, but if he lacked the desire to stay in Carolina, it would make sense why we extended KK instead.

With all his new revenue, Igo has ordered his first leg of Moose Knuckle IPA.

Exactly. Unless its required for a trade involving a player of Watsons caliber, those guys are untouchable. I'm not advocating trading them, just that of our "assets", CMC, because of that contract, I would rank 5th.

That's what I keep saying. Our biggest trade assets are Brown, Chinn, Burns and Moore. All young, all still on rookie deals, all able to be extended on the trading teams terms.

To prove we dont need Marty Hurney to do something stupid.

So you're telling me my all 99 safety that averaged 9.5 sacks a game wasnt realistic?

Man thong Thursday?

Darnold is the most intriguing of the bunch to me. Gase was so terrible. His ability to take a team and make them look abysmal is the only thing he was good at as an NFL head coach. I think he still has potential if he's taken out of that scenario.

I never said I want the trade because I have no idea what they will ask in compensation and I dont know what coaches think of this years QB prospect. I think they will ask 4-5 1sts or 3 1sts with 2 players of 1st round caliber. If I'm Houston, I ask for Burns, Moore, and 2 1sts. Would likely settle for Burns, Moore, 8 and next years 2nd. That is a haul for a franchise QB. Also, to rebuild they arent going to want to take on another high paid RB. They will want cap room to extend Moore and Burns when rookie deals expire. But we are talking trade value and you have to consider many different aspects of any trade. If the price is right, I'm all for it. Nobody thought last year Hopkins could be had for Johnson and a 4th.

I dont think anyone is so naive to think he will single handedly turn around the franchise. What he does give you, barring injury, is an above average to excellent skill level at the most important position on the field for the next 10 years. That is one hell of a piece to build around. Every team has holes and always will. A good GM can fill them well enough in a couple of years or less to field a contender.

I prefer to think of him in this situation as a franchise self destruct button.

At least we know he wont have to coach Teddys short game.

So is Indy officially in the QB hunt as well? One more team in need of a QB because Brissett obviously isnt it.

Even if we dont add Watson or Stafford, a QB coach who's actually coached some pretty good passing QBs is ok by me.

I hear John Riggins is a free agent.

Chuck's real name is Sybil.

This is the best poo sandwich I've ever eaten said absolutely nobody. When all your options are turds you cant really argue about which one tastes best.

Starts and takes the first snap, hands off CMC, TD. Next series, different QB and away we go.

I dont think they would want CMC. If they wanted a trade and players were involved, I would see them wanting Burns or Moore. They already have a high priced RB. People are speculating CMC because he's one of the best RBs in the NFL and he would probably be needed to make a trade of this magnitude work. I think they would want Burns, 2 1sts and 2nds. I dont see us making this move, but if we did, it wouldn't surprise if CMC had to be involved to make it work.

I'm not talking about him wanting to come here or the current state of our o-line etc. I'm talking about the career positional value of Watson vs CMC. Both are upper end of their respective positions, but the QB position is by far more valuable than the RB position. IF I was forced to choose between having Watson OR CMC, I would choose Watson based solely on the likelihood his career would be longer and the value of a franchise QB exceeds that of a franchise RB.

Chuck 14.0???