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!

     

Saints could be making a move for Carr


ncfan
 Share

Recommended Posts

Not all GMs are geniuses,The Chargers chose Rivers over Brees, with due respect to PR, Brees turned out to be the better player , and I doubt it was all Paytons coaching 

And Remember that TE the bears didn't want anymore, currently set to call the superbowl, and they traded him while he was producing on the field, Morons, but it worked out for us lol 

And we just traded a generational talent to SF, not because we wanted to, but because he didn't want to be here, and that situation can turn toxic real fast

My point is not all players are traded or released because they are bad, sometimes they are just not in the right system, like Matt Stafford on the Lions

Honestly though, if we can't land a good veteran bridge QB, Sam is good enough to win games if his defense doesn't get shredded by the same play , draft some CBs instead, can CJ Henderson 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

When has Carr ever been the man?

If we can't win the division because of Derek Carr we have some issues.

 

 

 

OK--here is how you specifically support your comment:  Who in the current NFC South is better than Carr at QB? 

 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, SmokinwithWilly said:

When he starts playing for an organization that isn't being run like a Delta Tau Chi party. 

That guy is a troll.  He comes to a discussion board and attacks points with no support.  It all started when they allowed the mixing of prescription drugs and low-cost wi-fi.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've said it before, I'll say it again, every danged team in the NFCSouth will be in the mix when it comes to hiring Carr.

He's better than anyone any of the teams has at QB now and a one year upgrade would be massive. Each of the teams involved has receivers and at least a modest offensive line. Whoever grabs him has a massive leg up on this coming season and maybe for a year or two after.

 

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 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.
    • adamantium? adam? adam thielen super bowl game winning catch ?
×
×
  • Create New...