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!

     

BREAKING NEWS: Multiple teams interested in trading for Bryce Young


TheSpecialJuan
 Share

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, TLGPanthersFan said:

They are waiting to see where we draft. If we draft in the top 3 Bryce is gone.

Why would it matter? I mean, Dalton gets in a freak car wreck buying Bryce another chance and Bryce looked like Bruce again. He is what he is. Draft or no draft you gotta just move on. It'd be a different story if he was showing promise in terms of flashing talent but just struggling with reads or turnovers or something. But the guy just doesn't look like he belongs on an NFL field from a talent perspective. I don't see how you can hope to fix that.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Why would it matter? I mean, Dalton gets in a freak car wreck buying Bryce another chance and Bryce looked like Bruce again. He is what he is. Draft or no draft you gotta just move on. It'd be a different story if he was showing promise in terms of flashing talent but just struggling with reads or turnovers or something. But the guy just doesn't look like he belongs on an NFL field from a talent perspective. I don't see how you can hope to fix that.

Yeah, you’re right. My thinking is they will keep him if Ward or Sanders are out of reach and bring in someone else to compete with him. 
But that is the worst case scenario. I am with most people on this board that even if we can’t get a QB we need to part with Bryce. 
Heck a QB room with Dalton and Plummer right now sounds a lot better. Than Dalton and Bryce. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, TLGPanthersFan said:

Yeah, you’re right. My thinking is they will keep him if Ward or Sanders are out of reach and bring in someone else to compete with him. 
But that is the worst case scenario. I am with most people on this board that even if we can’t get a QB we need to part with Bryce. 
Heck a QB room with Dalton and Plummer right now sounds a lot better. Than Dalton and Bryce. 

If a rookie is "competing" with Bryce he better be a day three pick or a UDFA or else that pick is a serious disappointment.

  • Pie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, The Lobo said:

They aren’t gonna trade him. It’s like I’ve said before, he’s going to play just mid enough to where they think he can do it he just needs x,y,z. We will string this out until half way into next season and be in the exact same place.

X. Best OL in the NFL

Y. Best receiver corps in the NFL

Z. Best D in the league

Given that situation, we might be able to contend for a wildcard spot with Bryce at QB 

  • Pie 2
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

X. Best OL in the NFL

Y. Best receiver corps in the NFL

Z. Best D in the league

Given that situation, we might be able to contend for a wildcard spot with Bryce at QB 

lol I agree. It’s not like the team spent a ton resources this off season on offense anyway. 

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 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.
    • adamantium? adam? adam thielen super bowl game winning catch ?
×
×
  • Create New...