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!

     

32 teams would've loved to sign Joe Brady


(ATL'ien)CamNewton

Recommended Posts

Just now, 1of10Charnatives said:

32 teams were not looking to hire an OC. Perhaps his decision had more to do with this being his perceived best situation of the available opening than a single factor that suits your preferred narrative.

No. We have certainty at the QB position. Or Brady would have went to a place with more certainty.

You don't have uncertainty, yet land arguably the hottest coaching prospect available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 1of10Charnatives said:

But 32 teams! We have certainty at the Qb position! Cause someone on a msg board said so!

Granted, but I feel fairly certain that the Chiefs, among others, are fairly happy with their current offensive coordinator.

Mind you, I have seen some people asking why we and others didn't hire Eric Bieniemy as our head coach. Given how things played out, that's probably a valid question.

(I just hope it isn't still a valid question a few years from now)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, (ATL'ien)CamNewton said:

No. We have certainty at the QB position. Or Brady would have went to a place with more certainty.

You don't have uncertainty, yet land arguably the hottest coaching prospect available.

You know, I might be more inclined to agree with you if you didn’t take a single context clue and loudly declare it proves with absolute certainty something that might be true, or might not, but that we both know you couldn’t possibly know for sure, but enjoy pretending you do.

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...