Jump to content

Jaguars to decline DT Marcell Dareus' option


HOUSE

Recommended Posts

On 2/24/2020 at 5:27 PM, HOUSE said:
Image result for Marcell Dareus
 
  facebook_icon.svg  
  twitter_icon.svg  
  email_icon.svg  
 
  • By Jelani Scott NFL.com
  • Published: Feb. 24, 2020 at 12:06 p.m.
  • Updated: Feb. 24, 2020 at 02:50 p.m.

 

Marcell Dareus' time with the Jacksonville Jaguars has presumably come to an end.

NFL Network Insider Ian Rapoport reported Monday that the Jags intend to decline the defensive tackle's $19.5 million option. Jacksonville had until Feb. 25 to make the decision.

 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000001102813/article/roundup-jaguars-to-decline-dt-marcell-dareus-option

 

Can't be.  He was solely responsible for like the greatest run defense Jacksonville has ever known.  I'm sure I read that here.  

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/24/2020 at 5:34 PM, BuffaloBills1998 said:

Also his play has regressed the last two years in Jacksonville, he’s not playing at a high level anymore. That defense had a shot to go to the super bowl in 17 and they got killed by bad QB play from Bortles 

They had a Super Bowl bound team in 2017. It was derailed by an officials whistle that took away what would have been a game sealing fumble return for TD vs Pats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, ScottLaw said:

I think more people complained that it was a strange trade to make in the middle of the season when the team was playing well. They went in a tail spin after that trade and their run defense got exposed in the process. 
 

I wouldn’t say it’s a win or loss. 


Meh. Bills made the playoffs that season. They still have two draft picks to use that ultimately resulted from that trade.

Dareus, meanwhile, made about a half a season of impact for the Jaguars, did nothing the next two seasons, and is now being cut. 

I still say the people that freaked out about it when it happened were -- predictably -- overreacting and have been proven wrong. Just my opinion.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Logic said:


Meh. Bills made the playoffs that season. They still have two draft picks to use that ultimately resulted from that trade.

Dareus, meanwhile, made about a half a season of impact for the Jaguars, did nothing the next two seasons, and is now being cut. 

I still say the people that freaked out about it when it happened were -- predictably -- overreacting and have been proven wrong. Just my opinion.

you realize who you're quoting...right?

  • Haha (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, ScottLaw said:

I think more people complained that it was a strange trade to make in the middle of the season when the team was playing well. They went in a tail spin after that trade and their run defense got exposed in the process. 
 

I wouldn’t say it’s a win or loss. 

 

It is most certainly not a "loss."  If you really think the Bills -- both then and now -- would have been better off keeping Dareus, I don't know what to tell you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, ScottLaw said:

I think more people complained that it was a strange trade to make in the middle of the season when the team was playing well. They went in a tail spin after that trade and their run defense got exposed in the process. 
 

I wouldn’t say it’s a win or loss. 


I would say it’s a win only because it allowed them to get out from under a terrible contract.  Trading Marcel was more about getting a horrible (Thanks Whaley) contract off the books and getting a player who didn’t seem to be buying into the system.  
 

They were realistic with what the 2017 team was and were looking toward the future and getting the team in a better cap situation.  
 

Would he have been better at DT than Adolphus Washington (Thanks Whaley).  Yeah probably but I don’t think Marcel makes much of a difference in the W-L column.  
 

They bit the bullet and got rid of an underperforming, overpaid player who didn’t want to be in Buffalo.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Logic said:


Meh. Bills made the playoffs that season. They still have two draft picks to use that ultimately resulted from that trade.

Dareus, meanwhile, made about a half a season of impact for the Jaguars, did nothing the next two seasons, and is now being cut. 

I still say the people that freaked out about it when it happened were -- predictably -- overreacting and have been proven wrong. Just my opinion.

Somehow, the Jags have still won more playoff games than the Bills have since the Dareus trade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Logic said:

 

Definitely because of Dareus.

Well, he was on their roster for those two wins....

3 hours ago, eball said:

 

It is most certainly not a "loss."  If you really think the Bills -- both then and now -- would have been better off keeping Dareus, I don't know what to tell you.

I don’t know if the only two options were trading Dareus mid season for a maximum cap penalty or keeping him for 3 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:


You did.

I don't remember that. I do remember saying the Jags have won more playoff games than the Bills have since that trade. It's a nice little fact the "LOL Jags" crowd needed reminding. Especially when they were trying to paint the Jags trading for Dareus as a bad move, when they got a talented D-lineman for a sixth rounder to add to a team only a few minutes away from playing in the Super Bowl, which is much closer than the Bills have sniffed since 1993.

 

Perspective is nice sometimes.

Edited by BringBackOrton
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...