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!

     

Kurt Coleman has been awful this year.


Eazy-E

Recommended Posts

I am not sure if he just hasn't recovered from his injury but he is just flat out bad this year. I mean to the point where we would almost have been better off with Tre Boston at free safety. His closing speed isn't there and neither are the int's. He has been out of position more times than I can count and is whiffing tackles left and right. I know the entire secondary has looked pretty bad but he and Worley have been the two most glaring weaknesses imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, WarHeel said:

Tre is quietly having himself a good year in LA. Y’all can hate him all you want but it was a mistake letting him go, for depth if anything.

wasn't a mistake. would cost too much for depth.

 

Besides this game, Coleman has been playing fine?  you guys turn on players so fast, holy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, WarHeel said:

Tre is quietly having himself a good year in LA. Y’all can hate him all you want but it was a mistake letting him go, for depth if anything.

Nah...sometimes people need a boot in the ass to get things going in the right direction (Peppers was another example...remember “taking plays off” narrative).

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...