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!

     

Start Bryce from here on out….


TheBigKat
 Share

Recommended Posts

57 minutes ago, TheBigKat said:

Season is done

 

need to see if there’s ANY improvement (doubtful)

 

having him at the helm is a guaranteed #1 overall pick, it’s the least he can do for us

So you want to see us lose 38-0 every game?

  • Pie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No.

I care more about the development of of the young guys on the offense. They won't get that with Bryce. 

I would put Plummer in before I put Bryce in, because there is at least a 0.001% chance that he can be developed. Bryce sucks, and that just is what it is.

Edited by ProcessBlue2
  • Pie 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bryce is poo on the bottom of our teams shoe and we can't afford to have it there. It's too many young players not getting evaluated trying to save him and he's not saveable.XL looked terrible the 1st two weeks. Competent QB play he looks like the future. Chubba can run free because the D can't stack the box. Sanders is coming along. Brooks may play this season. Johnson looks like a steal with the trade. So go back to unwatchable football to save a boat anchor naw. 

  • Beer 2
  • Flames 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Davidson Deac II said:

If the object is to win a Super Bowl, getting the number one overall pick is irrelevant.  If memory serves, the last overall #1 pick to win a SB is Matt Stafford, and he didn't win it on the team that picked him.  Joe Burrow and Cam Newton did come close though.  

Were gonna end up getting the number 1 pick anyway because of how bad our defense is. Dont know why people can't see that. 

  • Pie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, kungfoodude said:

This is dumb. Our rookies need to be evaluated since we invested so heavily in offense. This is impossible starting Bryce.

He should not see the field again this year barring injury.

The focus should be on guys like Legette, Sanders, Coker, etc.

Definitely. Our focus should be on getting these guys reps with a competent QB. 

I was a little down on Sanders because he seemed overwhelmed by position. I didn't realize he's on 21. However after watching Thomas look like a turtle running a route on that interception I'd rather see Sanders in there more often just to keep Thomas off the field. 

XL is showing growth and that TD should be a "GOT MOSSED" highlight. This shows there in potential. Coker was a good find and will continue to grow. I am hoping Brooks comes off the IR and gets some snaps. 

All of this goes to waste if we put Young in there. We need to suck it up and admit it was a terrible pick and move on. Trade him and let him restart somewhere else. Young's happy feet will hinder the growth of the rest of the offense. 

  • 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

    • 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.
    • adamantium? adam? adam thielen super bowl game winning catch ?
    • You're really gonna pass up the opportunity to make a joke about skidmarks in underwear here?  Alright fine.
×
×
  • Create New...