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!

     

Outlining potential cap savings


Mr. Scot

Recommended Posts

At this point I think people are so eager to get rid of Armanti that Joe is playing to the crowd a little. But we could save a couple hundred thousand by cutting him, maybe. I agree Ron Edwards, Gamble, and Nakamura are obvious moves. I think you restructure or cut Jordan Gross after the draft if you can get an Eric Fisher or Luke Joeckel(unlikely). Maybe you cut Deangelo as a June 1st but he played well. I'm not huge on cutting productive players.

We are going to lose some guys that can still play. We will downgrade at some positions. This is our reality for overpaying talented but not elite players. We just have to believe that Gettleman can find cheaper guys that will produce at a similar or higher level. Gamble didn't produce at his contract last year, neither did Beason, nor our Running Backs, nor Gross. We need some overachievers like Hardy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you want corn in the fall, you gotta plant corn in the spring.

There has to be a lot of blood letting now so that Hardy, then Cam, then Luke can get what they need to stay on this team.

This is about now AND the future. Let's hope Gettleman is the man for the job.

The next 4 to 5 years should be really interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd rather keep Garry Williams. Yeah you save $1 million but then after you pay the guy to replace his roster spot it's really not that much. He played well as a backup, I'd rather have the depth than the $300-$400K in cap savings.

James Anderson, Nakamura, Dwill, Ron Edwards, AE, I'd be OK with cutting all of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Beason is the tough one.Restructure sounds great to the fan base, but not to him.

He is a big time Leader in the Locker room, but will now play out of his best position.

This one could hurt the most. Tough to trade him with his cap hit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

letting Gamble, Edwards and Nakamura go will help us tremendously.

still won't have much for FA's, but we'll be ok with the cap.

The hard part is finding the right replacements, while trying to fill the obvious holes we have.

We have to address DT and CB immediately.

We really need OL and WR help for the long term.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Um, no, just no. Bills, Chiefs, Chargers, Ravens, Bengals, Texans, Eagles, Commanders are 8 teams that it's not even a debate, they aren't trading their QB for Purdy. Patriots, Broncos, Titans, Giants, Bears, Vikings, Falcons are 7 more teams with QBs drafted in the last 2 years that also would rather stick with them than trade for Purdy as they all have more upside than he does. Lions, Packers, Cowboys, Bucs are 4 more that would likely keep their QB's as well, age aside for Goff, Dak, and Baker. Panthers and Colts are two teams in the same situation, QB's who have both struggled and shown flashes to where the teams probably stick with them because they drafted them, but in a re-draft of all QB's, they probably take Purdy over the guy they currently have. Jags, Cardinals, Dolphins, are 3 more with QB's who probably have a higher upside than Purdy but come with their own question marks, so debatable if they'd take Purdy over who they already have. That leaves Jets, Raiders, Steelers, Browns, Saints, Seahawks, and Rams. Rams would take him over Stafford for the future of course, but not for 2025, and I'd think the Seahawks would take him over Darnold, but honestly not sure if they would take him over Milroe at this moment as they really like his potential and have him for 4 years really cheap. That leaves 5 teams that I see who would absolutely take him over their current situation right now, and a handful of others who MIGHT take him over their current guy, a far cry from your 20.  
    • Agreed. Also as soon as they received the top pick in the next draft it was over. Bears won that trade. Gave up a top overall pick got one the next year plus pick 9, a couple 2nds, and DJ Moore a proven young WR. Had their 2024 pick from us be in the late teens or later it would be more debatable IMO. 
    • Option A:  Pay your starting QB starting QB money. Option B:  Look for a starting QB for 4-10 years (or longer) while wasting the talent at every other position.    How many of the top 20 QB's do you think are worth what they are being paid?   When you factor in the last year of his present deal his contract is really an average of 45 million per year which in today's QB market is a very, very good deal. I wish we'd had found a Brock Purdy to pay 50+ million a year right after we parted ways with Cam.  Ya'll go ahead and live in fairy tale land where good to great (much less elite) QB's are available to pay. Just the fact that they had the chance to pay Brock after the disaster of trading up for Lance is a testament that when you find a quarter back you can win with, complete in the playoffs and superbowls with, you pay him.  
×
×
  • Create New...