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!

     

Josh Norman agrees to terms with Redskins...


Jeremy Igo

Recommended Posts

Just now, usmcpanthers said:

Well I for one know I just lost a superbowl, id have unfinished business. He basically sold his chance at another superbowl over more money.

Josh did us a favor.  He is a good player but we would have been over paying him for the scheme we run even at 11 per year. That money is much better served going to kk.  As long as he doesn't start going all dlo I have no problem with him

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Datawire said:

Would you be happy if the Panthers would have dished out 50MIL G to have him stay, and to under mind the hard work that has been put in to get the cap situation resolved?

No im glad we didnt handcuff the team paying 50 mil. Im still feel betrayed Josh put that number out there and caused this. He got what he wanted and that's my last response on this matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Datawire said:

Would you be happy if the Panthers would have dished out 50MIL G to have him stay, and to under mind the hard work that has been put in to get the cap situation resolved?

I would have been happy keeping the tag on him

which was an option we chose.  The whole "he probably would have signed it" defense just doesn't hold water...no one way he doesn't sign it 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, CRA said:

I would have been happy keeping the tag on him

which was an option we chose.  The whole "he probably would have signed it" defense just doesn't hold water...no one way he doesn't sign it 

I would agree. Tag him, negotiate at the end of the year. We now know he that is not what he wanted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, CRA said:

Well in fairness....tell Steve Smith about loyalty

i mean if hurney was still here the "loyalty" talk might mean something considering that's generally how he did things.

both parties in this understand that it's a business.  i highly doubt dave gettleman looks at norman as disloyal or something else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, CRA said:

I would have been happy keeping the tag on him

which was an option we chose.  The whole "he probably would have signed it" defense just doesn't hold water...no one way he doesn't sign it 

He was 100% committed to fully holding out and forcing the Panthers to do what they did or sign him to the long term deal he felt he was worth. 

 

On the market he was worth 15m per season and that was proven. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, CRA said:

I would have been happy keeping the tag on him

which was an option we chose.  The whole "he probably would have signed it" defense just doesn't hold water...no one way he doesn't sign it 

 I am not a blind Gettleman worshiper, however I due agree with him on the decision to pull the tag. Just too much to invest for a year rental. Also had potential to cause a locker room distraction, or even could hurt Normans play if the situation got in his head too much.

I was pissed when they franchised Hardy(before the domestic abuse news broke), knowing there was little to 0 chance a long term deal could work out. That year we could have actually spent the money on offensive tackle help, instead of blaming cap hell for rolling with Bell and Chandler.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Bartin said:

Sherman shut him down last year

Big Ben threw for 450+ yards and didn't even play the whole game.   Brown didn't have a huge game individually.  He did catch 6 balls and Pitt went up and down the field all over the secondary. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Chief Keek said:

5 Yrs./$75M goodness gracious, welp he got paid as for the Redskins though.....

 

Redskins gonna Redskins

I gotta be honest, when I heard he was visiting with the Redskins, I was all like...well, it is the Redskins, but Maybe Snyder has learned from things in the past. Haynesworth, RGIII, mega picks, Nah they have wised up. Then Boom! I guess some things really don't change. 
 

Delta gonna have one hell of a stable now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • There always has been collusion, as long as I have been a fan. It sure looks like they tweaked outcomes too. Good luck proving it. As much as I despise a lot of the ownership I'm still not sure what would happen if it was forced to change.
    • I had started typing my post hours ago and didn’t finish it and just came back to finish it, posted it, then saw yours and saw we were pretty much saying the same thing - even the games that stick out to us most.  I don’t think a lot of people remember that SF playoff game, but I felt like I had just got mugged in broad daylight.  I remember them calling Mitchell for unnecessary roughness, and then I remember watching Boldin take a super late cheap shot, dead in front of the ref and then showing him watching the whole thing in replay…  the refs let them have a fuging field day and didn’t do jack poo, but if we so much as breathed the wrong way it was fuging 15 yards.  Each team playing under two completely different sets of rules.  poo hurt.  I was enraged.  I’ve never went back to watch either that game or SB50 and never will.  fuging robbery.
    • I’ve said it a million times since, but it’s impossible to keep them from affecting the game.  In SB50, they literally took the game from us, and they did it early.  Cotchery’s no-catch?  The miraculous amount of times we converted for a first down only to have it suddenly called back make it a 3rd down and 15+ against the best defense in the league that specialized in rushing the passer and man coverage on the back end?  And you do that enough times, you kill the morale and confidence of the team you’re doing it against.  It’s telling the one team “you can do whatever with impunity” and the other “you can’t do whatever they’re allowed to do.”  It changes the aggression level.  It essentially neuters one team and allows the other to do whatever the fug they want.  Imagine you call the police for help and they get there and tell you to sit still while the other party beats the poo out of you and you can’t defend yourself.  That’s what the officials do.  There is no way to avoid them affecting the game.  And more often than not, it’s the most subjective calls they use to do so.  Even in SB50…  you saw the Broncos commit more egregious penalties than anything we did, and barely any of it was called.  Their OL was holding all fuging game and the refs did nothing.  We already had our work cut out for us against two future HOF edge rushers and the refs played to their advantage with that.  From what I remember, both Oher and Remmers were called for holding at various times and their hands were in the INSIDE of the defender.  It was garbage, but all by design. Also, if there is any video of it anywhere, go look at what the refs did against us back in 2013 against SF.  The fix was in there too.  They stepped in early and often and ensured we knew we were not allowed to play with the same aggression or intensity SF was.  It was disgusting as well. at this point, I hope Vince McMahon, errr, I mean Goodell just finally scripts us to win it, because this poo is not won via competition or off merit.
×
×
  • Create New...