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!

     

Per Jonathan Alexander, Browns were willing to eat 50% of Bakers salary($9m) and Panthers said no. Apparently, the max we want to take is $5m, playing hardball with them.


Julio
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Hell, we kinda have to because of all the money Darnold is gonna eat up.

 

Not to mention we need to roll over as much cap as possible if we want to extend Burns and not be bottom feeders in next years free agency.

  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Aussie Tank said:

I wonder what the draft capital will be that will affect me more as a fan I’m not paying the $$$$

I wouldn't be offering anything. I would actually request a pick to be honest. 

  • Pie 6
  • Beer 1
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Aussie Tank said:

I wonder what the draft capital will be that will affect me more as a fan I’m not paying the $$$$

Yep.  I don’t give a rip about money.   What would a team that gave up 3 picks for Sam give up for Baker. 

only other concern is the depth chart.  Camp would start with Matt Corral 4th on the depth chart.  We probably never see him and we generally already know the 3 ahead of him aren’t answers.  Rhule probably keeps on the practice squad.  That’s the primary reason I don’t want Baker. 

  • Beer 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 about getting open and YAC....and the QB we have.  You basically are just highlighting average depth when targeted vs 2 players. .  And yeah, I often say AT is a small slow reliable TE in terms of what he does for us.   That's what he is.   I think a couple of you want to make this into a Renfrow argument.   I'm a Renfrow fan.  Renfrow does not check the box of what a BY O needs either at the slot.  Renfrow just a niche roleplayer at this level.  it's easy to look up how horrific AT is with the ball in his hands and in terms of getting open.....and it's also easy to look up what a low ceiling of an offense the steady AT diet produces w/ BY. 
    • The one time he's actively tried to lose was the best we've ever done.
    • I simply acknowledge BY is the QB.  And just like we did when we drafted him.....the type O you would need to setup around him for success was always pretty simple.  But we have done virtually the opposite.  XL dropping some passes isn't why we were ranked the 32nd O and 30th passing the past 2 years.  *Ricky Prohel was brought up only in regards to role function he served on the team.  Niche/specialist.   He wasn't eating up the snaps in the O.    AT should have a similar snap %. People could MAUL Ricky Prohel and put hands all over him.   We got to the Super Bowl in part because we were mauling guys (our slot CB).   You can't do that now.  AT has a MUCH easier life and still can't get open.  Or run.    If you live in 3 WR sets, with a weak armed QB, and you choose to put someone who can't get open or run in the slot.......well, your are going to have a weak pass O.  That's by design IMO.  
×
×
  • Create New...