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!

     

Marty Hurney discusses the Kelvin Benjamin trade...


Jeremy Igo

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, SpeedOFLight said:

I cried when I walked into my closet and seen my KB Jersey...I will just get a personalized jersey from this point on.... I don’t get the moves we make at times. I’m still trying to wrap my mind about this one. 

Felt that way about my Jon Beason/Julius Peppers Jersey.  However turned the beason into an ICE up son jersey.   And the Peppers jersey back in rotation.   Just keep the faith my friend. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, GoobyPls said:

It’s both their issue. Gettleman is an idiot and Hurney is a moron

 

Their is no debate, he was our best receiver 

If you say so. 

I think he was slow.  That he only got separation on busted coverage.  He had a low football I.Q.  and kept into every offseason out of shape and had to work himself back into shape.  He even did so on a contract (essentially) year. He was tied for worst in the entire league in separation so that meant Cam had to basically throw into coverage on most of his completions.  So if you can get and shape and be ready in a contract year......  

He could box out and had good hands but could easily be taken out of a game.  Teams did not roll coverage to his side.  Did not double team except lately on 3rd downs they have.  Dre Bly was talking about how the Saints and other teams did not fear him at all.   He basically did nothing that would force teams to change their defensive game plan in anyway.  But he is our "best" WR. 

Greg Olsen is by far  our best receiver in my opinion, followed by CMC, but if he is the best they we were fu$%$% anyway. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, NAS said:

I hate JR for letting Beane go to the Bills.  No we have to deal with this nonsense.

Beane wasn't staying here regardless. He knew he would have very limited control being JR's "yes" man. He knows this franchise is dysfunctional.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My issues: 

1. Whoever said we had to ALWAYS play KB & Funch together on the outside? Shouldn't Off Coordinator have different groupings and pairings? Why did we have to trade away our best WR so that we could utilize different WRs? 

2. I hate that ppl get sucked into the whole "Marty talked to us I feel better. DG never talked to us." Marty talking to us doesn't take away from the fact he has historically made bad moves. 

3. Chemistry is huge and we have had a ton of distractions. All of them are self inflicted like this one. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Pimpdaddy said:

say what you will about Marty, and I despise him, he is accountable and will face the fans....Gman always waited till the end of the season for his state of the union address.

He is not accountable.  I don't really care about radio shows, interviews, facing the crowd, or having things explained to me.  Success on the field is the only thing that matters.  Him coming on a radio show and explaining doesn't mean squat if we don't have that success.  Lack of success should get him fired (well actually it should have never gotten him rehired), but it wont.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Castavar said:

Beane wasn't staying here regardless. He knew he would have very limited control being JR's "yes" man. He knows this franchise is dysfunctional.

I'm beginning to think that this is the case.  With the front office in shambles the way it is leads me to believe that JR is the main problem.   Remove him and maybe the new owner will hire a competent staff for a change.  Until then this is what you will see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Snake said:

Sounds to me like Hurney is taking a page out of Dave's book. Only way to get the coaching staff to play younger or new players is to get rid of the old ones. With that said Im not saying it was good timing or the right move. 

Which would suggest that the coaching staff is so incompetent that the GM has to force roster decisions and that the owner is protecting the coaches from dismissal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, dpm0409 said:

This is the most logical thing I have read on the Huddle in the last 18 hours or so.....not saying this will be a situation like 2015, but it is the perfect example of how 95% of people thought we were completely screwed and it turned out the exact opposite.  The point is you never really know what to expect in today's NFL.  It's definitely weird timing and everything, but I'm not gonna freak out and will also withhold final judgment for a while.

I'm not even sure that the timing is all that weird. We're still in contention for the playoffs, thanks to our defense, but the offense can't get out of it's own way. Something big was needed to shake things up. While most of us would have preferred Shula being shown the door, this move definitely qualifies as something big. Plus, if we can survive the next 2 games, we have Olsen back as big, reliable receiver. Maybe, with Dickson's larger role, we really are looking at a possible 2 TE plan (take a cold shower Sanjay :)). 

I do think that Marty got fleeced in the deal.  He basically traded a # 28 pick for a upper 80's pick next year. Part of me wonders if this is a "fug you Gettleman" move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Strange, every news article and tweet I just searched all mentioned waivers. It is definitely his sixth year of at least 6 games. All I was trying to think of earlier was at the vet min could he beat out Bryce in camp next year lol. He's kinda got the old Darnold issue where he can obviously launch deep balls and qb run at a level Bryce will never achieve, but it sounds like he would be content being like a Josh Allen backup who doesn't throw the whole game plan out the window if he has to come in for a series or two. If we had him and for some reason still wanted to start Bryce he would kinda do what Justin Fields was doing the other night with Dangeruss, coming in for designed runs and maybe some play action/triple option rpo things to go deep. That would be so obvious and sad though. At least Russ can still sling it 40 yards in the air with a flick of the wrist
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...