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!

     

Thank u Christian Kirk


Rags
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, toldozer said:

You pay your number 1 guy and your number 2 needs to be on a rookie deal. If your drafted 2 balls out he gets the next contract and you trade number 1 before reupping their contract. Cinncy will have issues If they pay Chase and Higgins along with Burrow

You need THREE receivers in the league now, not just two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jon Snow said:

Makes drafting skill positions more important than ever. Let someone else sign the huge contracts for so so WRs.  

I've been thinking a lot about this. And I agree wholeheartedly. 

Too many mid-level guys out there getting big money contracts (or even bottom tier guys like Sideshow Bob) for positions that aren't in on every play. And I've said it before, and I'll keep saying it, if your star player is a WR your team has a whole host of problems.

Draft RBs, Edge and WRs high, use the four low cost years of their contract, and a fifth if they are really good, and then send them out to get the big paychecks somewhere else. 

Pay the men on the line to keep them, pay the QB when you have a good one, and keep decent pay to your DBs and LBs. And if you have a hoss at NT, pay the man to keep him happy.

But $18 million for a WR2? We're doing something like that already and it just isn't working out.

 

  • Pie 2
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

WR and RB should really only be addressed through the draft and neither should be given a second contract. 

RB because it's just too easy to replace and second contracts aren't really worth it.

WR because they are getting just too pricey. 

every once in a while you can find a bargain, but those will be rare and rarely worth the effort regardless of price.

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Miller being less raw and more pro ready makes sense of why they picked him. With us having a capable starter in Walker the lower floor higher ceiling player makes sense for us as well. I agree with that. 
    • I'm from Michigan and have had this discussion with my Lions friends, and they all agree with me, they were never going to take Freeling over Miller.  As, yes, you are correct, they could have left Sewell at RT and taken Freeling, but they are in a SB contention window right now. An OL with Freeling at LT and Sewell at RT is not as strong as Sewell at LT and Miller at RT would be for this upcoming season and likely at least next year as well. 5 years it could be looked back upon as a long term "mistake" to take Miller over Freeling, but for a franchise like the Lions, you can't worry about the long term when you have current SB aspirations.  It's all about maximizing their current SB window over the next 1-3 years. And it's not about style, it's about day 1 readiness, and a lot of "experts" aren't even sure if Freeling is ready to play Week 1 yet at the position he's used to, let alone switching to a side he hasn't played before, but a career starting RT is going to be more than ready to fill that role for them Week 1. I'm 100% convinced that if our draft positioning was swapped, we'd have still taken Freeling, they'd have still taken Miller, and both teams would have got the OT that they preferred due to what each team needs right now and what their current realistic aspirations are for the 2026 season. We're in a position where we can let our drafted OT sit and learn for a bit, they needed a week 1 starter, for me that's where this discussion becomes very easy to understand why each team took the player they did.
×
×
  • Create New...