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!

     

Rhule: Moton is the top RT and second LT behind Erving.


SgtJoo
 Share

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, CRA said:

I pray some old vet LT gets cut later and we can rent them for a year.

 

I don't wish serious injury on anyone, but I hope Erving stay dinged up just enough not to play and forces our hand to play Moton at LT and Christensen at RT just to see if the answers might actually be on the roster because LT would be one helluva box to check off moving forward.

  • Pie 4
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, LinvilleGorge said:

I don't wish serious injury on anyone, but I hope Erving stay dinged up just enough not to play and forces our hand to play Moton at LT and Christensen at RT just to see if the answers might actually be on the roster because LT would be one helluva box to check off moving forward.

I just hate actually having a really good RT....and then moving him so we end up not having any actually good lineman.  

Not doubt Moton is the best option likely at LT.  But I'd rather us get at LT.  Crazy, I know. 

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, CRA said:

I just hate actually having a really good RT....and then moving him so we end up not having any actually good lineman.  

Not doubt Moton is the best option likely at LT.  But I'd rather us get at LT.  Crazy, I know. 

Ideally, me too. But then what was the point of drafting Christensen and then focusing on him playing RT? A 3rd round pick is a steep price to pay for a guy you plan on just being a backup.

  • Pie 7
  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Ideally, me too. But then what was the point of drafting Christensen and then focusing on him playing RT? A 3rd round pick is a steep price to pay for a guy you plan on just being a backup.

well, seems like a bad plan.  If that was the plan.   We had 4 spots on the OL we aren't very good at...and one we are very good at.  

  • Flames 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, CRA said:

well, seems like a bad plan.  If that was the plan.   We had 4 spots on the OL we aren't very good at...and one we are very good at.  

It's a bad plan if that's the plan. I think they pretty much realize that Moton is gonna end up at LT this season. Honestly, it's a good thing. Let's find out of he can be the answer there. We're gonna hope that Erving can stay healthy but the guy couldn't even make it though the shorts and t-shirt days of camp before he was already injured. It's just highly doubtful he's going to remain available and I honestly think that's why they've focused on RT for Christensen. Moton at LT and Christensen at RT this season feels inevitable even if it's not plan A.

  • Pie 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...