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!

     

Take QB out of the equation


AU-panther
 Share

Recommended Posts

I’m going to try to be positive here.


I understand a lot of people wanted Fields.  I would have considered him myself, but for whatever reason the team wasn’t that high on him.

A lot of us wanted Sewell, but he was gone.

A lot of us would have liked to trade down, no idea what type of offers they had.

If you take QB or trading down out of the equation, we got a really good prospect at a high value position that was also a position of need.

Outside of Fields or trading down, who would you have really preferred? 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have to. There's no choices now, it's Sam and no prospect in the next years draft that they'll be able to get to.

This is similar to the Jake days, but only if Jake came in as a certified bust.

Maybe we'll get lucky one year and have so much talent throughout almost every position on the team that we can lose another Super Bowl.

  • Pie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ace420 said:

The longer i think about it, the more that i like horn for our pick. I am just worried that sam darnold is not the answer, just like teddy wasnt... and i think it will be a while before we have a chance to draft a decent qb prospect. Even if darnold sucks, our team is good enough to go 8-8 perpetually. It may be a while before we get a shot at another qb

Follow you instinct and you'll make it to game 8 of next season still posting, and not hiding after an off-season of chest thumping.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m not sold on darnold at all, he was one of the worst rated qbs, they are doing the same thing with darnold as they did Teddy, if what they saw from fields wasn’t enough to warrant the pick, I’m cool with that as long as that shows on the field, when he plays, cause if he’s great and darnold flops, I will lose what little trust in the front office 

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Cpt slay a ho said:

I’m not sold on darnold at all, he was one of the worst rated qbs, they are doing the same thing with darnold as they did Teddy, if what they saw from fields wasn’t enough to warrant the pick, I’m cool with that as long as that shows on the field, when he plays, cause if he’s great and darnold flops, I will lose what little trust in the front office 

No he wasn't lol. Darnold would be a top 3 pick in this draft nd they have gone over this already many times lol.

  • Poo 2
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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • This is gonna be longest six weeks ever 
    • 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
    • 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...