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!

     

Ian Thomas getting Restructure


Hoenheim
 Share

Recommended Posts

57 minutes ago, panthers55 said:

Hopefully you aren't as premature in other areas like you are in making judgements. 

Hahahaha. See last year. It's not like he was just hired here. Those garbage pros last year where on hia watch which he did with his friend and boss. If you want to live in fantasy land by all means have fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, panthers55 said:

Obviously Canales thinks differently. Plus with Hurst gone  we have to find a number 1 tight end already so it was a low risk low reward move. I am sure we will bring in a draft pick and maybe a vet on the cheap.

So did Rhule and Reich lol. Hirst was never even there anyways. Again thanks Morgan.

There is no solid way of justifying keeping a known dud in a player.

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Waldo said:

Hahahaha. See last year. It's not like he was just hired here. Those garbage pros last year where on hia watch which he did with his friend and boss. If you want to live in fantasy land by all means have fun.

And you were there when the decision was made so you know who was for or against it. Seems you are the one making things up. I guess he was in on the Hurst and Bozeman decisions so why is he canning them.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Waldo said:

So did Rhule and Reich lol. Hirst was never even there anyways. Again thanks Morgan.

There is no solid way of justifying keeping a known dud in a player.

You mean like Tampa keeping Baker and Canales taking them to the playoffs with him after other teams dumped him. Because players can't thrive under one system and suck under another. How long have you been watching football?

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, chknwing said:

hes a blocking TE that doesnt care about his stats.  no sense in creating a need until you have something better to plug in

But, he cannot block worth a poo!  Surely, you can find a blocking TE for cheaper who can actually block. 

And don't give me the line that it isn't his fault how he is used. It is totally his fault, as he has proven he can't do anything they ask him to do. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, panthers55 said:

You mean like Tampa keeping Baker and Canales taking them to the playoffs with him after other teams dumped him. Because players can't thrive under one system and suck under another. How long have you been watching football?

Lol Tampa went to the playoffs because the NFCS was trash. If there was one good team last year Tampa wouldn't have made it. If that's your standard it's no wonder why you always pick such sad hills to make a fool of yourself.

And Baker is a jag and Thomas is basically PS level player that always stays here so grest comp lol

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, panthers55 said:

Last year is irrelevant. It is 2024. Why do you save money keeping him? His dead cap hit is right at 3.8 million. His cap hit now appears to be right at 4.5. But to replace him at the rookie minimum it is 750,000 so replacing him with someone with any vet experience will cost as much or more than replacing him.

So no it wasn't wrong to keep him if Canales has use for him in his offense.

Last year isn’t irrelevant, any cap saved gets rolled over and we could have been done with Thomas in 2023. You don’t save money. You are thinking about 2024 cap only. He has at least $1.75M in new salary money (likely more if restructuring bonus) that is added to any dead cap that does not change.

What you are calling saving money is spending more total money but pushing some out to future years.

We aren’t competing for a championship any time so so we shouldn’t be restructuring to spend more money this year. We are just eating into next year’s cap for a bad player.

We should have released him last year and drafted a TE in that crazy strong TE class. Then we wouldn’t have paid an extra $2.7M in 2023 (his salary and restructuring bonus) and now all that money we could have saved is that dead cap you keep fussing about in 2024. We have that dead cap in 2024 because we made this stupid call last year.

It’s easy to understand. Restructuring Thomas last year kicked the dead cap can down the road, but your good decision means we will have paid Thomas $3.4M+ in new money in 2023/2024 that we could have actually saved.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Waldo said:

Lol Tampa went to the playoffs because the NFCS was trash. If there was one good team last year Tampa wouldn't have made it. If that's your standard it's no wonder why you always pick such sad hills to make a fool of yourself.

And Baker is a jag and Thomas is basically PS level player that always stays here so grest comp lol

Comparing Baker, who has accomplished so much more in his career, even if he sucked for us, to Thomas is laughable. Thomas is the equivalent of Matt Corral, not Mayfield. I don’t get these fans who disappear in season the past 6 years as we’ve sucked balls only to reappear every offseason defending every move the team makes.

It’s Ian freaking Thomas. He sucks. All we see of him is lowlights. He’s supposedly a great blocker and yet there are always videos of when he gets blown up by a LB or when he gets taken down easily by a smaller DB. I certainly don’t recall the last team we talked about him doing something good, but by all means we should keep paying him new money and not drafting TEs.

Edited by WhoKnows
  • Beer 2
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

    • Dude... you're just all over the place. You're the one who said T-Mac is better right now than Chark was at his best.
    • When I say "average NFL WR", for me, that's comparing him to all WRs in the league during that season/span of time.  He was of course better than those #4-6 WR's that can't even get on the field, but talent/ability wise, he probably wasn't any better than a #3 WR for most NFL teams, he just happened to be on one of the teams in 2019 with even worse WR's so he put up solid stats for the season. Here's more or less how I'm looking at it. Take T-Mac right now and Chark at his best, put them on every NFL team at this very moment, and where would they fall on the depth chart come Week 1 (basically, the teams that don't put the rookies at #1 to "make them earn it in camp" don't count, it's projecting week 1 depth charts). T-Mac would be at worst the #2 WR on the majority of teams this season, (hell, he's likely our #1 at this very moment right now already), peak Chark would not.  Yes, T-Mac still has to prove himself at this level, but his current ability, even as a rookie who hasn't played a snap yet, would have him above Chark on any team's week 1 depth chart. Because again, you can't just fall back on "well Chark had a 1,000 yard season" and use that as the reason for having him above T-Mac.  As he didn't have that 1k yards because he was a beast, it was because he was the only halfway decent receiving option on a bad team that was always losing and passing the ball (the Jags had the 7th worst scoring differential that season).
    • We clearly need to add a veteran stopgap at safety one way or the other.
×
×
  • Create New...