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!

     

Gettleman: "If the ink is dry and you aren't happy, you did something wrong"

Zod

By Zod,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

Mage Grand Master

Mage

Posted
Posted

Are we talking what were actually bad deals or what turned out to be a bad deal, if that makes sense?

I don't think paying Beason what we did was bad but obviously it has not worked out for us and Beason is probably out of his starting spot in the middle. Delhomme's deal was probably the worst - the most inexcusable deal ever and made no sense logically, even if Delhomme played remotely well in the playoffs game (he had been wildly inconsistent that year though to his credit always delivered in the clutch, mainly just lobbing up balls to Smitty though).

The DeAngelo Williams deal was dumb only to be compounded by the Jonathan Stewart deal. Love Stewart but just thinking it over, no reason to give 2 running backs big bucks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
natty Newbie

natty

Posted
Posted

Virtually every single deal signed Delhomme is uncomfortable besides FA pickups. Lots were players that I thought deserved to get re-signed did but all the numbers seemed at very least a bit high. Overspend a bit here and a bit there and all of a sudden you got nothing left.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CRA Grand Master

CRA

Posted
Posted

hind sight is 20/20. pretty dumb statement in my opinion.

I don't think he is talking about those rare ones where hindsight really comes into play.

Delhomme's deal wasn't bad in hindsight. It was bad when we offered it to him.

DeAngelo and Stewart both being signed isn't bad in hindsight....no team in NFL history has done such a thing (and all those other team in the history of the league didn't have a mobile QB and a FB who is a really a RB on board). Comes down to touches simply not being there regardless of OC.

Anderson/Godfrey/etc are just overpaid....hindsight doesn't make that so.

Most of the obvious bad deals are "justified" here using fan logic. We like them....therefore try to rationalize why we blantenty overpay or focus on one spot

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cbully Enthusiast

cbully

Posted
Posted

I don't think he is talking about those rare ones where hindsight really comes into play.

Delhomme's deal wasn't bad in hindsight. It was bad when we offered it to him.

DeAngelo and Stewart both being signed isn't bad in hindsight....no team in NFL history has done such a thing (and all those other team in the history of the league didn't have a mobile QB and a FB who is a really a RB on board). Comes down to touches simply not being there regardless of OC.

Anderson/Godfrey/etc are just overpaid....hindsight doesn't make that so.

Most of the obvious bad deals are "justified" here using fan logic. We like them....therefore try to rationalize why we blantenty overpay or focus on one spot

Delhomme mos def didn't deserve his contract and the RB contracts were a bit too much too. The reality is that year we could pass the ball was the birth of our RB duel so yes they should have ran 1000+ yards sadly because we couldn't pass the ball. Thus our backs don't suck but that year certainly made them overrated and now overpaid! I love them, Stew more so based on power and will, but those contracts suck.

Lets' not even go to our defensive contracts! smh... yes we have great players but we could have offered less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
Posted

My favorite Gettleman quote: "I don't believe in communism"

Thank god for that

He wasn't discussing economic theory.

In context, he was talking about people being included on decisions rather than one guy issuing orders and everyone else being in the dark until he speaks (i,e, the way the old Soviet Union used to operate).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
davos Grand Master

davos

Posted
Posted

He wasn't discussing economic theory.

In context, he was talking about people being included on decisions rather than one guy issuing orders and everyone else being in the dark until he speaks (i,e, the way the old Soviet Union used to operate).

yeah haha I know

Twas a joke mate!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CRA Grand Master

CRA

Posted
Posted

On the topic, it tells me he's gonna be really careful about signing contracts rather than just throwing money at whomever has an above average season.

Also, if you look at Bradshaw, Jacobs, Ward, etc from his era in NY ( I think they where Earth, Wind, and Fire about the same time Double Trouvle emerged)....he will let certain positions simply walk or take reasonable money to stay. NYG ain't about paychecks to RBs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • PootieNunu
      Dan Morgan on the Rich Eisen show

      By PootieNunu · Posted

      We have seen Bryce get outplayed by all manner of QBs, from UDFAs to second round picks.  If we actually scouted any QBs it would not be a difficult task to upgrade from Bryce, you guys act like he is even decent. He is one of the worst starters league wide stop making excuses.   
    • bandu
      Dan Morgan on the Rich Eisen show

      By bandu · Posted

      if  ANYONE actually goes & looks at the FACTS on rookie Qb's after 2 full seasons as a starter in the NFL & they are still well below average do they rarely ever actually become top tier Qb's & instead most likely either do not recieve a second contract & or become life long backups...just saying 
    • SmokinwithWilly
      Dan Morgan on the Rich Eisen show

      By SmokinwithWilly · Posted

      So he became GM and decided not to address the weakness in the QB room following one of the worst rookie QB performances in NFL history?  There were options last season other than signing Dalton to a 2 year deal. Brissett and Jones by a wide margin, both of whom outplayed Bryce, Wilson, Winston, hell even Rivers off the couch was more exciting at the QB position. The time to address the failure in the QB room was last year but instead people on the Huddle cheered when we brought Dalton back then cheered when we were able to get anything for him after they finally realized he was washed up like a few of had been saying all along and got poo'd for even mentioning.  This year, the options were more limited obviously, especially since we lost Icky. It changed the dynamic of our draft. I think we were stuck this year keeping Bryce, but i still think giving him a 5th year option for what has amounted to replacement worthy performance was the wrong move. Why guarantee 25m if you're planning to replace him? You think he's going to want to be a bridge QB? Hell no. He's going to want out and we'll end up cutting him if he has another lackluster season because no one is trading for him with that price tag.  Were there better options as far as production available. A couple. Were there guys available with more physical tools than Bryce, Pickett or Grier, you damn well better believe there were. I've been saying all along, you always keep looking for your 1b. Bryce has yet to prove he can be a starter. Keep looking for someone who may. Put competition in camp. Let the best QB lead the team. Stop settling for less than mediocre. 
×
×
  • Create New...