Batman1876

What spin? I’m drawing my own conclusions based on the facts at hand. 2 rookies and a second year man is plenty of youth at the position if the decide they want more then a simple roster move can solve the problem.

Not buying any spin. This is a year to turn over the roster and evaluate young talent. So I’m not going to panic when they cut an easily replaceable player who was a 1 year rental in the first place.

Because they like the young WR they have now more. To to see if he could be a serviceable backup and to give Allen extra time to acclimate. Because of a a handful of aging vets who will be replaced next years. Teams regularly move from top 10 oldest to top 10 youngest. There is no shortage of young developing players in our team.

I’d rather they set up for success long term rather than win a few games this year. I also think a lot of the over reaction to every move made is silly.

These e-mails are so bad they result in defending Rob Johnson. Space is warped and time is bendable. rob was the most likely to get a concussion, most likely to have never learned to read but not the worst.

Move aside Jeff Tuel we’ve got a new symbol of QB failure.

Pegula had to have known that when he signed off on 54 mil in dead cap that the team would struggle. I also think that 3 two and outs in a row would be hard to overcome, bad look for an owner.

So they signed backups and they played like backups. Star played well, especially considering he is the 40th highest paid D lineman in the league. Pretty good value there.

Who do you think they should have kept? Who shouldn’t they have signed.

And the number 1 reason to sign Tim Tebow is... you want to sign Jared Lorenzen but you lost his number.

Peterman’s raw deal sounds. .. creepy.

Based on ESPN's QBR hes the worst QB ever. His 2 non injury starts rank as a .7 and .9. Those are both bottom 10 performances all time. Lets put that into perspective QBR covers 13 years so 13 years by 16 games by 32 teams equals 6656 QB performances, and thats not even accounting for games when 2 or more QBs played due to injury or blow out. So of 6656 QB performances 2 of the bottom 10 are Peterman. You can say without a doubt that he is the worst ever by that metric.

https://www.si.com/2013/10/11/readers-hall-of-fame-nominations

The thing to watch for the first season is growth not success. You want to see that they can improve their game. Success can be deceptive RG3 may be the best example.

What are the percentages? Either way we picked a DB so we dropped from a 24% to a 17% so a 7% difference. Seems small to me. Especially since Edmunds was a top 10 talent. Curious us where your stats i from, I don’t doubt them I just want to look at them more.

We got a fifth back in that trade, do you think that dropping from the 3rd to a 5th is such a huge give up? Especially given that they were able to get one of the top defenders on their board.

I think what’s not smart is building a team but not taking the best shot possible to get the best QBs possible. Otherwise you end up resorting to lesser draft prospects, other teams backups, washed up veterans and reclamation projects.

When we traded up for Edmunds we traded our first and a third for their first and a fifth. So we still ended up with 2 players. I also think that the benefit of getting a guy you have as a top10 guy rather than a guy you think is a late first guy is greater than giving a 3rd for a fifth. In other words top 10+5th > late 1st + 3. As for trading up for a top Quarterback prospect, it’s the only way to get a top prospect in today’s NFL, everyone wants to build around a rookie contract QB. The fact that a top prospect lasted until 7th was an anomaly. If you want a top prospect you either need to be picking at 1 or 2 or be ready to trade up.

https://www.si.com/2013/10/11/readers-hall-of-fame-nominations

https://giphy.com/gifs/season-9-the-simpsons-9x6-l2JdZzJXNpkdHw15S

*well acctualy* that’s called eidetic memory not being a savant. Now if you’ll excuse me I have a neck beard to trim.

The proudest moment of my sports fandom was when peter king published my essay about why Tasker should be in the HOF.

Sending him out on one leg to get further injured also hurt his career.

It’s a question that comes up all the time can playing a QB too soon or in adverse conditions ruin them? Yes- they learn bad habits, lose confidence, get gun shy, hold the ball too long and expose themselves to injury, lose the faith of the team. No- the NFL is a tough league if you don’t survive early struggles then you were doomed from the start.

They decided that paying Sammy and Gilmore would not have created a core to build around, at a cost of 30 mil I agree. They absolutely created a talent void, I don’t think anyone is arguing that . What people are saying is that it was better in the long run for them to do so. I agree with them. I am not a fan of the patching holes approach, I believe in the build around central players approach. Look ok at the talent that people are complaining we lost. Sammy, paid 16 mil and still not that good. Woods great 2nd or 3rd receiver. Darius lazy, overpaid, distraction. Tyrod, the epitome of meh. Gilmore overpaid and inconsistent. The list goes on. These guys would be improvements over the role players and back ups we have but they are not the core that you build a Super Bowl team around so I’m all for gaining assets to start over with. complaining about not keeping talent also ignores the salary cap. Teams get in situations where they have to cut talent to get under the cap. The Seahawks did this just this year. You hope it comes after some success but if your plan flops you hit the same wall. When we brought in Rex the hope was to take out top 5 defense add in shady to make a top running attack and put a game manager in place at QB. We acquired players to make that work adding in pieces that the plan required. But Rex flopped, the game manager and running attack were fine but the Defense didn’t do its job. The next year with Rex was the same and so him and the man that built the team with that plan were let go. The new GM came in he saw a plan that had not worked but the bills were still coming due, the players brought in to make it work cost more and more every year. Like a bussinuss he had two choices declare bankruptcy and start with a new plan from scratch or limp along with reorganization and hope you eventually get a plan that works. No no matter what you wanted to see those bills were going to come due, players would be lost.