BillsFanForever19

It's not "apprehension". It's a matter of it could be any of a number of 4 different WR's. All of them have the potential to be the #1 WR for this team. Did anyone have on their bingo card that down the stretch and in the playoffs that the passing game would run through Khalil Shakir and Dalton Kincaid? And to use the example of the LA Rams - did anyone have Puka Nacua, a 5th Round Rookie, putting up 1500 yards? You discount Keon Coleman and his potential. You obviously weren't a fan of him in the Draft process. But that doesn't mean he can't be good. Beane thinks he can be and that he is. You called him WR8 of the Draft. Sure, that's where he was selected. But if Beane viewed him as any worse than WR5, he wouldn't have traded down with KC and again with Carolina. He did that because he felt that after Thomas was taken by Jacksonville, the next group of 3-4 WR's were all on the same level. It's been alluded to that he would have selected Coleman at 28 as WR5 if he hadn't moved down. It's been outright said he was going to take him at 32 before Carolina called him and he knew it was for Legette. Coleman reminds me an awful lot of the Josh pick around here. He wasn't the guy for posters. But we were wrong. Much like Allen, there is cons to Coleman as a prospect. But that doesn't mean there aren't pros. Coleman could be the Top 10 WR you're thirsting for. We won't know until he is given the opportunity to show it. But it seems you don't want to even give that a chance in Year 1. We drafted Dalton Kincaid in Round 1 last year. And as a Rookie, he exceeded expectations down the stretch. So the team wants to give him more opportunities and hopes growth continues in Year 2, as it's pretty much expected that he will. He IS a WR first and foremost. He barely lines up as a TE, regardless of his title. He's a Travis Kelce clone. I'm not saying he is Travis Kelce or that he will become that. But i'm also not saying he doesn't have the talent level and potential to at least be close to that level either. He was a prime investment for us. If you take a WR in Round 1, you showcase him. To see him grow and evaluate what he is/what he can become - he needs to be giving a prime role in this offense, the same as Coleman. This room provides him with that. The addition of the kind of guy you're (somehow) expecting, would limit that kind of role. The same goes for Khalil Shakir. He's a guy that burst onto the scene in Year 2. No one expected the kind of player he was for us at the end of the year. I've listened to analysts say all offseason "I LOVE Khali Shakir" and he's been pegged as a potential future superstar, maybe as early as this year. Much like I discussed with Kincaid before him, how could you not increase his role and opportunities following his 2nd year? It'd be borderline malpractice to do that with either of them as they are continuing to develop. Either one of them could be the Superstar #1 you say we don't have. Then there's Curtis Samuel. A guy who has produced at a high level for a number of years, playing with QB's nowhere near on the level of Josh Allen. He was signed to a 3 year, 24 million dollar contract - with 15m in guaranteed money. This kind of investment denotes a decent role in this offense. Again, to add another WR of this level would be to push one of these 4 to 5th in targets on the team and a minimal role. There's only so many balls to go around. For example, 5th in targets for this team last year was a total of 45 targets all year. One of these guys would be denoted to an average of 2 and a half targets total per game. None of these players should be or will be relegated to such a role. You have an obsession with how things look "on paper". But the Super Bowl Champion "on paper" before the year is WAY more often than not the real Super Bowl Champion. Yes, KC had a top 10 player in Travis Kelce. But what was their core beyond him? MVS, Mecole Hardman, Rashee Rice, and Skyy Moore. While not having the established, sure fire Top 10 WR they had - as a core beyond it, i'd take the guys we have (including MVS) over that. And I do believe that odds are more likely than not that 1 out of the field of 4 of Keon Coleman, Dalton Kincaid, Khalil Shakir, or Curtis Samuel will be able to fill the #1 role at a decent to high level. They all carry the potential to do so. You seem to look at things as though if you're not eating at an established 5-star Michelin restaurant, you're eating garbage. Would I have preferred we had a more sure fire thing going into this year? Yes, I would have. But he's built this room in his vision of spreading the ball around, not having a Diggs like player that Allen feels he needs to target X number of times to keep him happy, and evaluating the growth of his investments. This room is not the garbage you portray it to be. There is talent there. But we need to see it grow. And that means giving them the opportunities to do so. He's betting on potential and development over established stars. You obviously disagree with this course of action, but that is *clearly* the course. Like it or not, and it's fair to not, the WR Room is set. We only kept 5 WR's last season (in large part because Kincaid is a WR) and we have 5 WR's that are locks. The likelihood of what you not only hope for, but expect/say will happen, is as likely as it was for us to move up in the Top 10 of the Draft. It's just like last season. It's fair to say you feel he hasn't done enough. But what he has done (just like Harty and Sherfield last year) IS done. And those guys aren't going anywhere.

What happened to the "Coleman will have a hard time starting the year" quote is that he said it only one time during his intro press conference. And to that, I think @HappyDays put it best in another thread when it comes to that quote: Since making that statement, he's confirmed Happy's sentiment by calling Coleman on at least 3 separate occasions "The X". That's his role on the team and that was Diggs' role on the team. Will being this team's X make him the #1 WR? It really depends on your definition. If your definition is the go to option or the WR with the most yardage - time will tell on that. But if your definition of WR1 is the starting X WR - then, yeah, Keon Coleman is WR1. As for the question of who I think the #1 WR will end up being, in terms of yardage and production, I don't have a Crystal Ball. But I imagine it will be one of Keon Coleman, Dalton Kincaid (a Big Slot WR in reality and a TE in name only - like Von Miller is a "LB"), Khalil Shakir, or Curtis Samuel. That uncertainty is something else that Beane has also spoke of multiple times since the Draft. He's said on a number of occasions that he wanted to create a room where week to week, that #1 option could change. Where the ball is spread around and there isn't just one Diggs like player that the Defense keys in on. And that comes to another problem with your theory. If they were to trade for a WR (unlikely at this stage IMO for a number of other reasons, as I've discussed) - that would mean that one of Coleman, Shakir, Kincaid, or Samuel would likely be no better than option 5 when it comes to targets and reps. And with what they've invested in that group, how they want to develop and evaluate the younger players, and the skill/production some of them have shown already - I absolutely do not see that happening. Again, you're calling out people for thinking they know how Beane operates (mockingly calling them "resident Beaneologists").... then claim to know how Beane is going to operate. It's pot and kettle.

Beane has said on multiple occasions that Keon Coleman IS the X on this team. That was Diggs' role. Like it or not, that's what he is this year. Like a Rookie starting QB, I'm sure there will be some growing pains. But he has said that's what he is already and what he's been brought here to be. Even if there is some growing pains, down the stretch, the passing game ran through Dalton Kincaid and Khalil Shakir - with Diggs (who Coleman is replacing) and Davis providing little to nothing. They're still here and they have good reason to believe they'll be even better in Year 2 and Year 3. Then they also brought in Curtis Samuel, to compliment Kincaid, Shakir, and Coleman. All of these players are expected to play big roles. To add another would be to have one of those 4 players play a minimal role with minimal snaps. I don't see that happening.

This is factually incorrect. You can't restructure or do a new deal until the player is in house. Until the trade goes through, that's not our contract to touch. For the trade to be approved, the contract has to fit under your salary cap *as is* first. If you can't take on his current deal without going over the cap, the trade will not go through. In another post, you suggested working out a restructure was the reasoning for talking to other teams when seeking a trade. This is also incorrect. They talk to other teams regarding a NEW contract. But, again, that can't be done until AFTER they've acquired their current contract. Now, is it *technically* possible for the player to restructure his deal with his current team before he's traded to make it fit better for us? Yes. But that doesn't happen because if we back out at the 11th hour (as such a restructure would have to be done before the trade is submitted to the league), the team is stuck with him on a contract done in our terms to best fit our books, rather than their own. You can't say to the league "this is going to put us over, but once he's here we'll make it work". You either have it on hand and it goes through or you don't and it doesn't. Just like any acquisition during the offseason.

I don't think you're going to see all that much, honestly. We don't have enough money to sign our Draft Picks right now. So that will take out a couple million. You need 2-3 to pay for the Practice Squad for the year. And we'll need to keep 2-3 for in season spending. That cuts into most of it. I think we'll sign a Cornerback. And there's a lot of good ones still left. Douglas was brought in last year to replace Tre. Daequan Hardy was brought in to replace Siran Neal. But we didn't add anyone to replace Dane Jackson yet. And with how often Benford is injured and Elam still being a question mark, I don't see them relying on UDFA's and PS players to replace Jackson - which is where we're currently at. Everyone says DE and WR. But Beane has already made more moves at those positions than players we need to replace. At WR, we lost Stefon Diggs (replaced by Keon Coleman), Gabe Davis (replaced by MVS), Deonte Harty (replaced by Curtis Samuel), and Trent Sherfield (replaced by Mack Hollins). We also added Chase Claypool, K.J. Hamler, and have Justin Shorter debuting off his Redshirt year, after being Drafted in Round 5. We're only keeping 6 max and he's not going to release *all* of the latter list. Or all of the latter list plus one of MVS or Hollins, if we keep only 5 like last season. Which is what adding another WR would take. At Defensive End, we lost Leonard Floyd and Shaq Lawson. We signed Dawuane Smoot (to some guaranteed money), Casey Toohill, and Drafted Javon Solomon. More than that, they re-signed Epenesa to a long term deal with a big pay raise. They wouldn't have brought him back and at the amount they did if they felt he was anything less than DE3 as the floor. They kept Miller, who they have faith will show improvement with an offseason of training and a full year removed from his ACL. Between Epenesa and Miller, one of them is going to start opposite Groot and the other will be DE3. And I don't see them cutting Smoot or Solomon. There's your 5. As it is, guys like Casey Toohill and Kingsley Jonathan are unlikely to make the roster. It's fine to question whether he should have signed or Drafted someone more prestigious than he did at either position group. But he's made these moves, most of which with roles in mind. He's not going to cut a bunch of players he *just* signed because you think he should have done more than them. Moves like MVS and Smoot wouldn't have been made if he planned on something more. It's just like the Harty and Sherfield situation last year. Many argued he should have done more (and they ended up being right) - but the moves were already made and they weren't going anywhere. Just like most of the 9 moves he decided to make at WR and DE this offseason to replace 7 roster spots.

Reggie Gilliam can be an H-Back, if that's what they want for their offense. That's actually exactly what his role was before they moved him to Fullback. That kind of versatility, combined with him being a core Special Teams player is what makes him a commodity for the team and why he's 100% safe - regardless of how many posters want to boot him from the team because he doesn't show up on the stats sheet. He's inexpensive, can be a Fullback, can be a Tight End/H-Back (which allows us to carry only 3 TE's when we always carried 4 before him), is essentially an extra lineman providing blocking on the field, and is an important Teams player. The latter part makes him safer than ever this season, as we've moved on from multiple long time Special Teams players already, including Tyler Matakevitch and Siran Neal. They're not going to want to completely rebuild that unit. He's also absolutely beloved by the coaching staff and the players. Gilliam is going nowhere. There's a chance Frank Gore makes it by beating out Ty or if they decide to keep 4 Tailbacks and 1 FB (which isn't completely unheard of, we've done it in the past). But they aren't going to replace Gilliam with Gore. Gore can't do the things GIlliam can that has made Gilliam a long term veteran for this team. They aren't going to remove Gilliam's role off of the team to carry a 4th Tailback that wouldn't dress on Game Day, unless there was an injury.

He's convinced Beane is going to make a 6th rosterable WR addition this offseason, in a big trade. So he needs 8 of our current 13 WR's to end up cut if we keep 6, or 9 of the current 13 eventually cut if we only keep 5, like last season - to keep that dream alive. That's his motivation for rooting against Claypool, creating scenarios where he's a "carcinogen" to the locker room, and wanting him cut quickly. But I don't see a scenario where Beane gives all of Shorter, Claypool, Hamler, Isabella, Shavers and the rest of the UDFA/PS field a 0% chance of making the roster, if we were to keep 6. Or all of the previous list, plus 1 of MVS or Hollins also being cut, if we were to keep 5 again. This is true. I'd go so far as to say posters around here would be *more* positive of Claypool's ability to rejuvenate his career if KC had signed him than they are of him doing it here.

Then you cut him. Simple as that. This idea that a guy who's on his last opportunity and is playing for the last spot in the WR room could be a "cancer" is a laughable take. He literally can't be and he knows it. He won't have an important enough role on the team behind Coleman, Samuel, Shakir, Kincaid, and (most likely) MVS to be able to make any sort of waves or problems. If he starts showing any signs of being a problem, he's out of here and we elevate Shorter or Hamler from the Practice Squad to take the minimal role he'd have on the team.

Any more additions went out the window with the signing of MVS, in my opinion. If they were going to go with something more, they wouldn't have signed him, after Drafting Coleman and (to a lesser extent) signing Claypool. We lost 4 WR's. We brought in 5 between FA and the Draft. And that doesn't take into account Futures/PS players like Hamler, last year's 5th Round Pick in Shorter coming off redshirt, and UDFA's. Keon Coleman replaces Diggs as the 'X', MVS replaces Davis, Curtis Samuel (greatly) replaces Harty, and Mack Hollins replaces Sherfield. Leaving Claypool, Shorter, Hamler, Isabella, and the rest of the field battling for one spot - the rest being cut.

He was worth the risk because he either carries himself how he should, or he'd be cut as quickly as Quintez Cephus was. He can't afford to have an ego or be a problem. He's on an incredibly short leash and has to earn a roster spot and prove he's changed. Even if he makes it, I see it being a tight race. So if this is a mask he's wearing now and he let's it slip in season, we're going to have guys like KJ Hamler, Andy Isabella, and/or Justin Shorter in the Practice Squad that will replace him just as quickly.

Great find @HappyDays! And I'm thrilled to hear the famous quote of "Coleman will have a hard time starting at the beginning of the year" was just a lip service one liner. MVS, Hollins, Claypool, and Shorter battling over 1 starting spot on the Outside makes me feel a LOT better than starting two from that pool to start the year.

I don't really consider Smoot or Johnson reclamation projects.

I, admittedly, bit on them too. Perhaps out of necessity because he didn't bring in similar type players as competition for them and in doing so (or not doing so) had me feeling like he knew they were going to work. He was wrong and so was I. I'm glad that this year he's not doing the same thing in just handing unheralded players spots on the 53. MVS, Hollins, Shorter (his Draft investment from last year), Claypool, and Hamler all battle for 3 slots - with 2 being cut. It's a better approach. Claypool will be handed nothing and will have to earn it, unlike Harty and Sherfield before him.

It was insane to me that he was available at the end of Round 2. He was a 1st Round talent, one that was discussed at length as possibly being our 1st selection. I know Guard is a slightly devalued position, but his floor was as a pick at the top of Round 2. Absolute steal.

Exactly. So they're going to give him the best tools to succeed to evaluate him. Thus, replacing Burks with Ridley in the Starting Lineup Outside and adding Tyler Boyd in the Slot. Mid season? Yes, that's a completely different story. Anything's possible. The Titans could go 0-7, Will Levis could fall on his face or get injured, a light could go on for Burks and he starts looking like the guy they thought they Drafted. But I'm just talking about right now. Hopkins isn't going anywhere.

McDermott is impressed. He's working hard, saying all the right things, and approaching this with the right mindset. I see us keeping 6. Coleman, Samuel, Shakir (those 3, obviously), MVS, and Hollins are locked in. In my mind, it was Shorter and Claypool in a battle for WR6 - with Shorter having a leg up all things equal being a 5th Round investment. But if Claypool's work ethic and mindset are top tier, it's probably going to be an uphill battle for Shorter.

Hopkins is a wear his thoughts on his sleeve type of guy. He's uncharacteristically honest. Marches to the beat of his own drum. He didn't say anything everyone else hasn't already thought or is thinking after watching Burks the past couple seasons. Just wild to hear him say it. Maybe he's trying to light a fire under the kid? Either way, this is the exact reason I see close to a zero chance Hopkins is moved. They Drafted Burks to be AJ Brown's replacement. Year 1, he puts up 444 yards and 1 TD as a starter. They realized he wasn't ready, so they went out and got Hopkins - hoping he'd grow with someone else taking coverage away. And Year 2 for Burks with Hopkins? He puts up 221 yards and 0 TD's. Yikes! Realizing they're absolutely nowhere with him and he absolutely cannot be a Starter again this year, they sign Calvin Ridley to a big contract to replace him. They sign Tyler Boyd to be their Slot. Now they have a Top 5-10 WR core in the league for Levis with Hopkins and Ridley Outside and Boyd Inside. Burks is busting harder than any WR in recent memory to the point that he's being publicly called out by teammates. And people think they're going to trade away Hopkins and put him back in the Starting Lineup? No way. Either they keep Burks and hope he develops as a late bloomer in a reserve role or they get rid of him. Hopkins isn't going anywhere.

This is the disconnect for me. It's one thing to say "I think he should make a trade". Or have hope that he does. It's the definitive expectation that he will and claiming that a trade is "Beane's plan all along", that I disagree. You condemn other posters for thinking they know how Beane operates (based on historical evidence, no less)... and then claim to know how Beane is going to operate. I think the plan was to specifically NOT have a high priced, big star WR with a "just give me the damn ball" attitide that Josh feels he needs to force it to or they're going to get upset. To not have 1 WR specifically that the Defense wants to take away. He spoke of wanting to create a room where week to week, the #1 could be interchangable. These are things, some of which, he said directly on the Chris Long Podcast: I believe this year, he looks at the guys that the Offense was run through down stretch (Dalton Kincaid, Khalil Shakir, James Cook) as potentially still the top guys. It's about evaluating their progressions in Years 2 and 3 and seeing if they take a step forwards. He wants to see what Keon Coleman looks like as a Rookie and what Curtis Samuel brings - both long term investments. If any of those guys (Kincaid, Coleman, Shakir, Samuel) step up to be a #1 Guy, than there's no need for a big name guy next year and wouldn't have been a need for one this year. So I don't see them investing in one before then, the earliest being mid season if it isn't working out or there's injuries. To do so now would be to limit reps on guys that he's evaluating as possibly being "the guy". And ultimately, it boils down to what we lost and what he's done already. We lost 4 guys this offseason. We brought in 5 guys this offseason. And that doesn't even count 2023 Draft Pick Justin Shorter coming off his redshirt Rookie year, Futures, and UDFA additions. We lost Deonte Harty. He was replaced (greatly) by Curtis Samuel. We lost Trent Sherfield. He was replaced by Mack Hollins. Going into the Draft, we needed replacements for Stefon Diggs and Gabe Davis. They spent their first pick on Keon Coleman to replace one. Post Draft, the question I had was "does Keon Coleman replace Stef or Gabe?". If he replaces Gabe, we'd probably do something bigger. If he replaces Stefon, we'll probably sign a FA like MVS or Michael Thomas. Then we signed MVS and Beane called Coleman "The X" on the Podcast. Question answered, WR core finalized. To bring in a 6th roster worthy WR this offseason just seems unrealistic. There's 5 guys who are locked in already and we only carried 5 last season. As it is, guys like Claypool and Shorter are on the outside looking in. He's not Would I be opposed? No. But to say you expect it and it's "the plan"? I think you're definitely setting yourself up for disappointment.

If they weren't going to give him another legitimate shot or had visions of him starting the year lower than DE3 - they would have a.) just outright cut him with a Post 6/1 designation and b.) Would have gotten a bigger chess piece at DE in Free Agency or the Draft by now. Beane believes that like Tre White before him - he needs a full year removed from the injury and a full offseason of Training Camp and Pre-Season and we'll see some improvement. He also spoke of thinking he may have rushed him back too soon. Will Von return to pre-injury form? That's a big if. But can he be at least a decent DE3? They're banking on it, both figuratively and literally.

Lawson's been replaced with Dawuane Smoot, who through production and experience is an upgrade from him. As such, he cost us more. We gave Shaq about a million. Smoot is being paid 2.5 with just about 2 guaranteed. He's someone I see etched in pen as the 4th or 5th DE. He's also who I expect Beane to have decided is the DE addition everyone expected. I think he evaluated what's left and decided that was his guy from that (gross) group, for what he was looking for and what he was looking to pay. As I said, we're going to keep 5. Groot, Von, and AJ are clearly the top 3 guys. He's not paying Von or AJ what he's paying them for either to be the 4th DE in the rotation. If he didn't feel AJ could step up and be the guy to replace Von in the event he can't go - he wouldn't have brought him back and paid him what he paid him. Solomon was a steal in the 5th. We don't outright cut players we Drafted before Round 6. He'll be here. And that's your 5 guys right there - Groot, Von, Epenesa, Smoot, Solomon. If he wanted someone from your list, he wouldn't have signed Smoot or given him anything guaranteed. As it is, we'll be cutting Toohill and Jonathan. I don't see a 5th DE move this offseason that would see him moving on from 2 of the 5 guys he'd have acquired - especially when one has some guaranteed money (we've moved on from a guaranteed money FA only once in OJ Howard), the other is a Draft Pick above Round 6 or 7, and the list of guys left aren't much of an upgrade, if any at all, beside having a more known name.

When it comes to Defensive End, it feels a lot like WR for me. People don't like the choices he made and want more, but that doesn't change the fact that he made the moves he made and those guys aren't going anywhere. They aren't paying what they're paying Von and AJ what they are for either to be anything less than DE3. If they felt AJ couldn't be DE3 or possibly start in the event Von doesn't bounce back, they wouldn't have brought him back and at the number they did. They'd have picked someone else. They've re-signed Epenesa, signed Dawuane Smoot (to a couple mil guaranteed) and Casey Toohill, and Drafted Javon Solomon. Groot, Von, and Epenesa are obviously safe and I don't see Javon Solomon (being a 5th Round Pick and a steal there, honestly) and Dawuane Smoot going anywhere either. We'll only keep 5 and there's 5 right there. As it is, Casey Toohill and Kingsley Jonathan are going to be cut. I don't see us making a 5th Defensive End move this offseason, post 6/1, and honestly - the market is pretty much bare at this point anyways. Emmanuel Ogbah, Yannick Ngakoue, or Carl Lawson? Pass.

I've said it a couple times, but the only move I'm expecting is another perimeter Cornerback. We lost Tre White, Dane Jackson, and Siran Neal. We replaced White with Douglas last year. We replaced Neal with Daequan Hardy. But we never replaced Dane Jackson. And with how often Christian Benford is hurt and Elam still being a relative unknown to count on - I don't see us rolling with Ja'Marcus Ingram or a UDFA to replace Jackson on the 53. There is still a pretty deep pool of FA CB's left. I wouldn't expect a Xavien Howard, J.C. Jackson, Adoree Jackson, or Stephon Gilmore type would sign on for that role on the team - nor would I expect we'd tell Douglas or Benford to take a seat for one of them. But something like a Steven Nelson is something I could see.

His track record of moves and the fact that he's never done that (restructuring someone more than once in the same off season) in the 8 years and countless deals he's done as GM isn't "just because". It goes to how he operates and this isn't his normal operating procedure. As for the Metcalf contract, here's an in depth look. The cap room we would need to make it happen Post 6/1 is 13m. We would not have enough after doing the two moves left we could theoretically do (Oliver and Milano restructures), factoring in our other expenses: https://steelersdepot.com/2024/05/evaluating-dk-metcalfs-contract-situation-with-seahawks/ Overtures on Draft Day were rebuffed. I don't believe he's available. It'd be great to have him. But why would they move him at this point? They aren't tanking. Why would they now, Post Draft, and Post the WR FA market being picked through - choose to trade away one of their best players with no way of replacing him? I fall in with the poster above me. Would it be great? Yes. But the stance of expecting it like you seem to or even thinking it's even so much as a 50/50 shot - I just don't see it.

Diggs' cap hit is a case in point to you saying "we don't take on cap in a trade". And it's just the Base salary. If that's the case, why would Diggs have a cap hit for the Texans at all? And yes, they were able to get it down to 6m - after a massive restructure. But they had to take it as is first BEFORE they could get it down to 6m. Initially, when they did the trade, even after everything we took on - the hit for the Texans was still 19m at the time of the trade. https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/houston-texans/news/texans-salary-cap-stefon-diggs-trade/27b6c055d87953adfa5c01cb And therein lies the problem. We have to be able to take on one of these WR's cap hit and the full terms of their current contract from the team we're trading with AS IS for the trade to be approved by the league. We can't say "well, we don't have it now but once the deal goes through, we'll make it work". We either have the money to take on the cap hit as is and the trade goes through or we don't and the trade doesn't go through. Before the Offseason started, there was a long list of measures we could do as far as releases, extensions, and restructures to get out from under the massive hole we were in. Since then, we have done every single one on the list, save for two - a restructure of Oliver and a restructure of Milano. So let's do some accounting.... After the signings of MVS and Dee Delaney and the release of Quintez Cephus, we're at about, we'll say, 1.75m under. Add in the 10.25 from Tre - that brings us to roughly 12. A restructure of Oliver can save us 3.9m and a restructure of Milano can bring us another 2.4m. That gives us around 18.3. That's the highest amount I see us possibly reaching. BUT! Even if we do those two moves and don't spend a dime on anyone else - which I don't see happening as we never replaced Dane Jackson and we're currently going into the season with just Elam (still a massive question mark) and UDFA/PS players underneath the oft-injured Benford and Douglas - there's still a number of things we have no choice but to account for.... We haven't signed our Draft Picks. We have to be able to pay for the Practice Squad. And we need some money for the In Season Spending Pool. So from that possible 18.3 or so, you need to subtract around 8. And this is something that there's no way around. That leaves us with roughly around 10-10.5, give or take - if we were to restructure Milano and Oliver and sign no one else. Now - let's look at the cap hits for the guys : Deebo Samuel - 28.83m DK Metcalf - 24.5m Davante Adams - 24.35m Tee Higgins - 21.816m Brandon Aiyuk - 14.124m You see the problem here, right? Even if the cap number comes down a little bit on most of these guys through a trade - it's not coming down to 10. The money simply isn't there and the means to come up with it has all been done already. It would take radical moves like re-structuring Josh again - which I don't see happening, he's never restructured someone twice in the same offseason and if he felt comfortable taking more from Josh, he would have done it then. He'd also have to restructure moves he just did, which he's also never done, and I just don't see him doing. *Maybe* Aiyuk could be done. Maybe there's a way that through the trade, his cap number would come down to around the 10 number we'd have. But, again, it would take re-structuring both Oliver and Milano - which he chose not to do when he was doing ALL the things he could to scrape up money and not signing anyone else at other positions. There is never a literally 0% chance of anything. But it not being a 0% chance doesn't make it likely or logically feasible. And people pointing out the flaws in the likelihood of it happening doesn't mean these same people think we're in amazing shape or that these WR's you're mentioning wouldn't help or wouldn't be great to have. I would be thrilled to land one of these guys. I wish we were in a scenario where I could say "yeah, I see that happening". It's just when you really look at the scenarios of what it would take, what we could feasibly/realistically do, and what we've done already - it adds up to an *incredibly* unlikely scenario at this point. And that's where the disconnect is between you and the majority of posters on this thread. After Drafting Keon Coleman and signing Curtis Samuel, MVS, Mack Hollins, and Chase Claypool already - it seems even more unlikely that they'd add yet *another* WR, at this point. This one the most expensive of them all, after everything he's done already. Had we not acquired one or two of these WR's and not signed some of the people we had before, it'd be a more manageable situation right now. But those deals are done and they aren't just going to be ignored or thrown away. We only kept 5 WR's total last season. And we've got 5 guys already that aren't going anywhere. There's a reason they signed MVS, after Drafting Coleman and signing Samuel and Hollins. And to me, it's because he recognizes he just can't feasibly or responsibly pull something like what you're suggesting off - comfortable enough to his management of the team.