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!

     

So San Diego...


Ricky Spanish

Recommended Posts

marty can't win in the playoffs. it's no coincidence, and he wasn't just getting unlucky.

the only questionable decision was hiring norv turner, who has actually done surprisingly well.

as well as phillip rivers has played in san diego, i'm sure its hard to swallow a super bowl where peyton manning (1 pick away from having him) and drew brees (let him walk for nothing) squared off.

I think you need to go back and watch some of those playoff losses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And poor San Diego was one pick away from getting their hands on Peyton Manning, but instead ended up with Ryan Leaf.... it just shows what a crap shoot the draft is, even with high picks.

So the Chargers had Brees and let him walk and got so close to Peyton Manning they could taste it... god that's awful, LOL

The also had their hands on another SB winning QB in Eli, if only for a few moments. Not that Eli is in the same league as Brees or Peyton.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...on the other had we drafted Jason Peter that same year over Vonnie Holliday, so nobody is perfect.

What's the moral of the story you ask? When given the choice, always go with a Tarheel!

The 1998 draft, the year of Ryan Leaf and Jason Peter who combined have done more drugs than the Rolling Stones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL, here's what I don't get - they fire Marty because he hasn't taken them to the promised land and they replace him with Norv-FRIGGIN-Turner????

Man I totally agree.

Watching Turner try and manage their playoff game this post season was infuriating, even for someone who isn't a Chargers fan.

The guy is like a retarded version of John Fox, if you can imagine such a thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have changed my avatar, signature, and my custom user title to show you how dedicated I am to agreeing with you every time you post. I want you to know that I mean business and that you can always count on me to have your back in any argument that you may encounter on the internet.

You're a real a-hole dude.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Chargers only mistake in all that have been brought up in this thread, was not keeping Turner. The GM wanted him, the team wanted him, but the ownership wanted to keep LT...that was a mistake.

Norv is a pretty good HC, I know that many "fans" out there don't think so, but take a close look at what he has been able to do in SD over the past few years.

As for letting Brees walk, that's just part of the game. They had a high first rounder sitting on the bench, that they though the ceiling was higher on. They, along with the Saints were the ONLY teams in the NFL that extended Brees a contract. Think about that for a minute. 30 teams passed on him, and he took the one with the most guaranteed money.

The Chargers have been to the playoffs 4 straight years, they will get over the hump. The Chargers and Colts, until their SB run are very similar in nature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest DrewBreesIsGod

The Chargers only mistake in all that have been brought up in this thread, was not keeping Turner. The GM wanted him, the team wanted him, but the ownership wanted to keep LT...that was a mistake.

Norv is a pretty good HC, I know that many "fans" out there don't think so, but take a close look at what he has been able to do in SD over the past few years.

As for letting Brees walk, that's just part of the game. They had a high first rounder sitting on the bench, that they though the ceiling was higher on. They, along with the Saints were the ONLY teams in the NFL that extended Brees a contract. Think about that for a minute. 30 teams passed on him, and he took the one with the most guaranteed money.

The Chargers have been to the playoffs 4 straight years, they will get over the hump. The Chargers and Colts, until their SB run are very similar in nature.

back to defend Phillipe eh? hahaha, yeah Rivers has what it takes to go 32-39 with no picks. Yeah....RIGHT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

back to defend Phillipe eh? hahaha, yeah Rivers has what it takes to go 32-39 with no picks. Yeah....RIGHT.

Please go to a SAINTS forum.

Nope, just defending the Chargers choices. The Saints took a gamble, it has worked out very nicely for them, good for them.

Why do you even care? Your team got a good QB, do you take joy in saying that the Chargers made a mistake in letting Brees walk in FA? Personally I don't think that they did, but to each his own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this still seriously an argument?

Hmm, lets see.

1) San Diego has 2 outstanding quarterbacks in Brees and Rivers.

2) One was coming off a recent shoulder injury that could have been career ending, one wasn't

Who the fug do you think they're going to take? Seriously. They're BOTH outstanding quarterbacks and neither side 'got robbed'. The biggest mistake San Diego has ever made was keeping LT instead of Michael Turner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's the moral of the story you ask? When given the choice, always go with a Tarheel!

The 49ers seem really happy with that strategy in taking Kentwan Balmer in the first round. Oh and our Bobcats are also happy that they made Sean May a lottery pick so that he could eat his way into a 12th man role for another team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this still seriously an argument?

Hmm, lets see.

1) San Diego has 2 outstanding quarterbacks in Brees and Rivers.

2) One was coming off a recent shoulder injury that could have been career ending, one wasn't

Who the f**k do you think they're going to take? Seriously. They're BOTH outstanding quarterbacks and neither side 'got robbed'. The biggest mistake San Diego has ever made was keeping LT instead of Michael Turner.

YUP.

It was an easy choice, and the right one for the Chargers and the Saints.

The LT thing was a huge mistake, one that ownership wishes they could take back, but water under the bridge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest DrewBreesIsGod

YUP.

It was an easy choice, and the right one for the Chargers and the Saints.

The LT thing was a huge mistake, one that ownership wishes they could take back, but water under the bridge.

do believe we have ourselves a closet Charger fan here boys

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • 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.
    • Get any shot you can at humane society, so much cheaper
×
×
  • Create New...