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!

     

Don’t Give Up on Keyarris Garrett Just Yet


Ron Burgandy

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, ShutDwn said:

swear to god if another person cries about him not making it through waiver wires...

I volunteer! Boo Hoo! Have at it.

9 minutes ago, KSpan said:

No chance he makes the 53 at this point - Byrd, Bersin, and Norwood have looked too good. Fair shot at the PS with the ability to improve those odds, but the 53 is out of reach.

Hill is really the only guy who has disappointed, and if his leg had been 100% coming into camp, he might have been pushing hard for a roster spot too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Daddy_Uncle said:

He will be on practice squad and hopefully develops into something in a few years

I don't really see why it would take "a few years." If Garrett's progress is similar to Fun's now, then in a year we should see some marked progression, maybe even starter's worth.  It's not like he is a rock head, and he has the physical skills to play the part. But we will see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been following training camps since the first one. I don't think it's so much about him being so bad early as the fact that we didn't judge players so early until recently. This right now is what camp is for. It's to get these players ready. He may or may not make the team but we are taking first impressions too seriously. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, csx said:

I've been following training camps since the first one. I don't think it's so much about him being so bad early as the fact that we didn't judge players so early until recently. This right now is what camp is for. It's to get these players ready. He may or may not make the team but we are taking first impressions too seriously. 

We didn't judge players so early? People had this guy making the roster before he even went through OTAs because they thought him being a priority UDFA somehow meant he wasn't skipped for 33 other WRs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, ShutDwn said:

We didn't judge players so early? People had this guy making the roster before he even went through OTAs because they thought him being a priority UDFA somehow meant he wasn't skipped for 33 other WRs.

I am saying that judging either way before now is futile. We have opinions etched in stone before camp starts based on hope and offseason activities. Right now is the time that things start to be real.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Too late to edit above but the quote is from this Diane Russini article in the Athletic: https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5941684/2024/11/23/russinis-what-im-hearing-the-day-the-jets-fell-apart-and-the-broncos-rallied-belichick-best-fits/ Okay.. there you have sorry I left that out the first post.  Also waivers keep the contract intact. That is the major difference in released and waived. It's all in that link from the other post.
    • Okay so I am reading something in The Athletic and it says that Jones had to pass through waivers. So I don't know. I looked this stuff up when we were number one there all offseason and I thought it said 4 years in the league got you vested, as they call it.  Vested gets you out of waivers as I understood it. I probably got something wrong, but when I think about the slack quality of journalism these days I wonder about that. So I went and looked, again. Well, well.  For everyone: "When a player has accrued at least four seasons in the NFL, they are considered a vested veteran. When these vested veterans get cut, they are released and their contract is terminated. When a vested veteran is released, they are an unrestricted free agent that can sign with any NFL team, and the team that released them doesn’t need to provide any additional compensation." It runs it all down here, where the quotes came from: https://www.profootballnetwork.com/waived-vs-released-nfl/ As far as Jones, the team turned down his 5th year option so I knew that meant he had 4 years in, because they re-signed him anyway, after turning down the much cheaper extra year.  The Athletic is owned by the New York Times so I shouldn't be surprised. That paper was an institution once upon a time but they let their standards go.
    • Well, we got our answer on Army today.
×
×
  • Create New...