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!

     

Why is Delhomme not on IR?


Zod

Recommended Posts

I believe he hasn't been placed on IR because his injury isn't severe enough, Jake knew he was playing horrible and so did Fox, So why not make up an excuse to get him off the field and let some of the youngsters get in some playing time, let's face it everyone knew our season was going to poo after jakes first five starts, but the coaching staff waited to long to sit him and let someone else try to run this offense. This may be random, but Moore shoulda kept the conservative state of mind in the Pats game, and let double trouble run their hearts out. Thats the reason we lost that game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe he hasn't been placed on IR because his injury isn't severe enough, Jake knew he was playing horrible and so did Fox, So why not make up an excuse to get him off the field and let some of the youngsters get in some playing time, let's face it everyone knew our season was going to poo after jakes first five starts, but the coaching staff waited to long to sit him and let someone else try to run this offense. This may be random, but Moore shoulda kept the conservative state of mind in the Pats game, and let double trouble run their hearts out. Thats the reason we lost that game.

that ain't Moore's call....that is Fox/Davidson. Which goes back to DeAngelo only getting 13 carries.......Phins, Eagles, etc, etc, etc.....Fox has made the same mistake all season. Opting not to lean on a strength and opting to pass for balance and killing drives/chances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that ain't Moore's call....that is Fox/Davidson. Which goes back to DeAngelo only getting 13 carries.......Phins, Eagles, etc, etc, etc.....Fox has made the same mistake all season. Opting not to lean on a strength and opting to pass for balance and killing drives/chances.

Maybe it had to do with converting 3 out of 13 third downs. We were in third and long all day due to incomplete passes, penalties and general offensive mismanagement. We did run when it was third and short and made all three of our first downs by running. Moore was inconsistent all day and we had one extended drive in the 3rd/4th quarter and we settled for 3 points. If we had longer drives and makeable first downs we would have run more. As it was we ran 26 times and threw 30. What killed drives was penalties and incomplete passes. Running more wasn't practical given how it was feast or famine all day. We had some big runs but lots of 2 and 3 yarders.

Go back and look at the play by play and get back with me,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My guess is because he wants to keep opponents in doubt as much as possible about who the starting QB is. If Jake goes to IR, then it's obvious who the starting QB will be for the remainder of our games.

I also think Fox wants to leave the door open for Jake to go out in a blaze of glory against the Saints as you suggest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Congratulations do they know who the father is?
    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
×
×
  • Create New...