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!

     

REPORT: Nick Caserio: Texans have “zero interest” in trading Deshaun Watson

WarPanthers89

By WarPanthers89,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

Scott12345 Grand Master

Scott12345

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, TheRumGone said:

He got the no trade clause in because of that. Which means he gets to veto any trade to a team he doesn’t want to go to. So in essence it gave him a position of power to sign that contract and get out. 
 

some rumblings on the Texans boards this has been his plan since hopkins was traded. 
 

 

How stupid was Houston on that contract?

I guess shouldn’t blame him for wanting out of there

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheRumGone Grand Master

TheRumGone

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, Scott12345 said:

How stupid was Houston on that contract?

I guess shouldn’t blame him for wanting out of there

Outside of Washington they are the worst run franchise in the league. I don’t blame Watson one bit. I hope more of these players use whatever leverage they can to better their situations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SizzleBuzz Grand Master

SizzleBuzz

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, TheRumGone said:

Also deshaun has said he doesn’t wanna go to a team that has to mortgage their future to get him. this to me signifies his price tag is going to drop. He has wiped all Texans related things off social media and is said to be ready to play hardball. He’s dug in.

 

What does "hardball" mean?

Can Deshaun afford it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheRumGone Grand Master

TheRumGone

Posted
Posted
36 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

A lot of people aren't convinced that the Texans can be talked into trading Watson at all (I'm dubious myself).

But after seeing what the Lions got for Stafford today, if they do, the price is gonna be obscene.

Completely different situations. 

42 minutes ago, SizzleBuzz said:

 

What does "hardball" mean?

He’s willing to sit out. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, TheRumGone said:

Completely different situations. 

I seriously doubt that matters to the Texans.

Word out of Houston was that they would have already been looking for an "unprecedented" deal if they relented. This news isn't going to change that. More likely it reinforces it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheRumGone Grand Master

TheRumGone

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

I seriously doubt that matters to the Texans.

Word out of Houston was that they would have already been looking for an "unprecedented" deal if they relented. This news isn't going to change that. More likely it reinforces it.

Then they won’t have the qb play for them this season. The no trade clause and deshaun’s willingness to sit is unprecedented for a franchise qb. Deshaun has a ton of leverage right now and has already said he won’t be traded to a team that mortgages their future. The Texans are gonna have to give in some. I just don’t see deshaun playing for them ever again and I don’t see someone giving 4 or 5 first round picks or something stupid like that. I could see the same kind of deal as the Stafford/rams one. Can’t look at deals in a vacuum and say well this qb got this so this one will get more. There is nuance to this.

Edited by TheRumGone
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, TheRumGone said:

Then they won’t have the qb play for them this season. The no trade clause and deshaun’s willingness to sit is unprecedented for a franchise qb. Deshaun has a ton of leverage right now and has already said he won’t be traded to a team that mortgages their future. The Texans are gonna have to give in some. I just don’t see deshaun playing for them ever again and I don’t see someone giving 4 or 5 first round picks or something stupid like that. I could see the same kind of deal as the Stafford/rams one. Can’t look at deals in a vacuum and say well this qb got this so this one will get more. There is nuance to this.

It's already been reported that they're willing to let him sit out the season, fine him and go after his signing bonus.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Mistuh Jones
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By Mistuh Jones · Posted

      This is gonna be longest six weeks ever 
    • PNW_PantherMan
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By PNW_PantherMan · Posted

      This 1000%.  Hey who wants to sign with the guy that couldn't even get his client the guaranteed contract of a 3rd round pick?  Lmao
    • tukafan21
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By tukafan21 · Posted

      I don't think it's any weird or unique clause, it's the offset language, same thing so many contract disputes are over. It just means that including it, if a player is cut and then signed by another team, the original team would be able to subtract how much they're getting paid by the new team from what they still owe him on their guaranteed money. For example, it's why Russell Wilson signed for the minimum last year with the Steelers as that was included in his Denver contract.  So if he signed with the Steelers for $1 million, he'd get $1 million less from the Broncos, if it was $2 million, he'd get $2 million less, basically he couldn't make any more money than he was already going to make, so you sign for the minimum to not take unnecessary cap room from your new team while giving extra cap room to your old one. The problem with trying to include it in rookie deals is that a team trying to include it, it says they think they don't really believe the player will make it 4 years with the team before they cut them.  And this usually comes up with one or two rookies in most seasons, the difference is it's usually handled much more quietly and not as public and ugly as this one. The other difference is that it's happening with the Bengals, which I believe I saw are one of the few (or only?) team that doesn't have protections for rookies in rookie and mini camps to be able to participate even if they haven't signed their contract yet.  The other teams have injury protections that allow them to still play, but the Bengals do not, which is also why this one is so public and ugly, as most the time this happens, the rookie is still participating in the rookie and subsequent mini camps, giving them more time to get the contract done before training camp when they'd then hold out.
×
×
  • Create New...