Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

If Hardy is found Innocent we really need to reconsider letting him go


t96

Recommended Posts

If you watched that game and thought the absence of Greg Hardy was the sole difference maker, then well I think we were watching 2 different games.

 

Never said it was "the sole difference maker" but with Hardy they don't run for 275 yards against us. With Hardy they don't even run for 100 yards against us. That running gave them ball control and made our defense tired. If we could've stopped there run with Hardy we could've controlled the ball and clock and made their defense tired and ours wouldn't have been. Without that 81 yard Bell run which Hardy would've stopped, they don't get all that momentum. Yes there were a lot of other factors to us losing but if we had Hardy we would've overcome those and won.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think hardy has the presents of mind to get in the passing lane of those screens, also think he would have did a better job collasping the gap and helping with the run.......Hard would have made a big difference in this game

 

Exactly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think hardy has the presents of mind to get in the passing lane of those screens, also think he would have did a better job collasping the gap and helping with the run.......Hard would have made a big difference in this game

I think a lot of people around here underestimate how important he was to our defense last year. There is a reason the GM and coaches felt like he was worth franchising.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • lol, that second part is quite literally one of the dumbest things ever. Having or not having guaranteed contracts has absolutely nothing to do with how much these billionaires have to pay.  Because there is a hard cap and a minimum cap spend requirement, and teams either use their cap or roll it over to use it all the next year, so the owners have to pay the same amount of money in the end no matter what. Having fully guaranteed contracts in the NFL would only hurt salary cap management, and thus would end up screwing over the team and its fan base when teams kiss on signings as they take up cap room that is needed to improve the roster. Look at the Browns with Watson, they gave him the fully guaranteed deal and all it’s doing is sucking up massive cap space now.  If they hadn’t done that, the owner would still be paying the same amount of money each year as that cap space would still be used elsewhere. If you want to argue for fully guaranteed contracts because the players deserve it, that’s an entirely different argument and a fair one to discuss.  But anyone against fully guaranteed deals isn’t doing it to argue for the billionaire owners.
    • Start posting in threads in the other forums instead of just creating threads. No one comes over here so you aren't starting conversations.  Get your ass up to 100 posts. It's not that hard. Don't create 100 posts. Contribute to conversations. 
    • Ryabkin could be the steal of the draft, he was a Top 10 pick heading into last season and had a rough year.  Lots of GMs passed on him because of that and his workouts. Pick has really high upside and Svech should be able to translate Rod tearing his arse a new one for making dumb plays since Svech has had several years of it.  🤣😂
×
×
  • Create New...