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!

     

Day 3 needs


shaqattaq
 Share

Recommended Posts

As I see it, our biggest needs are still CB, and OL. I would love to land one of the following:

CB: Ringo or Rush. Both are big, fast guys and excellent value at this point of the draft.

OL:  Zavala, Emil Ekiyor Jr., or Braeden Daniels 

Bonus: Roschon Johnson. Big, punishing RB that loves to block and doesn't fumble. Yes please.

  • Pie 4
  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doubt Ringo will fall to us, and I wanted the DE from Northwestern at our last pick, but passing on him to trade up for another pass rusher probably eliminates him as an interest of ours here.

I wouldn't be against MLB Henry To'oTo'o from Alabama (also then force him to wear #22 just because it would be funny).

I know we need some OL depth, but I think we can still take someone here in the 4th who could have a bigger impact this season than a backup OL.  I'd rather sign some vets who get cut in camp and/or use the 5th rounder on an OL, but if we use the 4th on one, I'd like it to be someone with experience at multiple spots on the line like Cade last year, give us a bunch of backups who can play multiple positions.

Edited by tukafan21
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, micnificent28 said:

I'm still baffled at the DJ Johnson pick...

Me too I just can’t talk myself into understanding it..

Trading up and getting a developmental project that’s 25 years old already??? I don’t get it..

Edited by WOW!!
  • Pie 3
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, micnificent28 said:

I'm still baffled at the DJ Johnson pick...

Fitterer has gone full Gettleman mode, but instead of going with freakishly big players, Fitt goes with the swiss army knife project players. No need to use the draft to build a team. 5 picks a year and trading away 1st round picks during year 1 of a rebuild will lead to a dynasty. No windows for players or coaches here.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, WOW!! said:

Me too I just can’t talk myself into understanding it..

Trading up and getting a developmental project that’s 25 years old already??? I don’t get it..

Same. I would have been fine with him at pick 132 and he probably still would have been there

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...