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!

     

Houston will let Watson rot

Ja Rhule

By Ja Rhule,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

NanuqoftheNorth Grand Master

NanuqoftheNorth

Posted
Posted

Anything is possible at this point, but it is clear the owner of the Texan's is going to do whatever he choses to do regardless of Watson's opinion or the team's best interests. 

I'm old enough to remember when Al Davis kept Marcus Allen (one of the greatest talents of his day) on the bench for an entire season.  Owners/Billionaires can be rather obstinate when they choose to be.

  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NanuqoftheNorth Grand Master

NanuqoftheNorth

Posted
Posted (edited)

Another aspect of this situation to keep in mind is that all the owners have a vested interest in the outcome of this standoff.  As it is, owners still call the tune players dance to when it comes to contracts.  The owner/player dynamic might significantly change if Watson comes out of this smelling like a rose.

Edited by NanuqoftheNorth
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rippadonn Grand Master

rippadonn

Posted
Posted

The no trade clause is a precursor to players forcing a trade to...  because any type of mismanagement or mutual departing of ways. Houston signed THAT and knows exactly what it means.

If you haven't heard Deshauns side of the story I wouldn't be so pro team pro NFL establishment hierarchy. A lot lead to his present position. To him it's now or never. He gave them some great years and performances.

Houstons stance only makes his case more clear, unless its a smokescreen to really talk to a particular team in waiting. Houston should focus on FUTURE player relaionships.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SizzleBuzz Grand Master

SizzleBuzz

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Verge said:
1 hour ago, The Lobo said:

You think that will change?

I can't imagine them being that petty. 

It's simply business, nothing petty about it.

The player is one of the 2 best franchise QB's in the NFL when viewed through a 10yr lens, a team cannot afford to let that sort of talent go to another team...

...not to mention doing so would be a disservice to the entire NFL in terms of setting precedent --- this is the time to draw a line in the sand.

 

 

Edited by SizzleBuzz
  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mav1234 Grand Master

mav1234

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, SizzleBuzz said:

It's simply business, nothing petty about it.

The player is one of the 2 best franchise QB's in the NFL when viewed through a 10yr lens, a team cannot afford to let that sort of talent go to another team...

...not to mention doing so would be a disservice to the entire NFL in terms of setting precedent --- this is the time to draw a line in the sand.

there's no disservice here and this isn't a precedent.  players have asked for trades and gotten them before.  hell this isn't even the first player THIS YEAR to say he doesn't want to play for the Texans anymore.

there's no reason for Houston to torpedo its new GM and new HC just to try to force a millionaire to play when he refuses to, not when they could gain huge capital from any of a number of teams for shipping him off.

its just funny given how Watt was treated... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mav1234 Grand Master

mav1234

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, rippadonn said:

The no trade clause is a precursor to players forcing a trade to...  because any type of mismanagement or mutual departing of ways. Houston signed THAT and knows exactly what it means.

If you haven't heard Deshauns side of the story I wouldn't be so pro team pro NFL establishment hierarchy. A lot lead to his present position. To him it's now or never. He gave them some great years and performances.

Houstons stance only makes his case more clear, unless its a smokescreen to really talk to a particular team in waiting. Houston should focus on FUTURE player relaionships.

yeah, this isn't just a player waking up one morning and deciding he regrets his contract and wants to go elsewhere.  there is a lot more to this situation than that.

imo this isn't really a precedent-setting situation unless Houston's owner makes it so.  Trying to force a superstar to play for a team he refuses to will create a much bigger situation than if they just trade a huge fuging bounty for him and come out with a whole new set of options to build their team for the future.  We're talking about a team that is entering a full rebuild with a new coach and new GM... it isn't surprising that the franchise players want a chance to chase their dreams elsewhere.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TrevorLaurenceTime22 Grand Master

TrevorLaurenceTime22

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, mav1234 said:

yeah, this isn't just a player waking up one morning and deciding he regrets his contract and wants to go elsewhere.  there is a lot more to this situation than that.

imo this isn't really a precedent-setting situation unless Houston's owner makes it so.  Trying to force a superstar to play for a team he refuses to will create a much bigger situation than if they just trade a huge fuging bounty for him and come out with a whole new set of options to build their team for the future.  We're talking about a team that is entering a full rebuild with a new coach and new GM... it isn't surprising that the franchise players want a chance to chase their dreams elsewhere.

No one forced him to sign a four year extension with 111M guarenteed...  

  • Beer 1
  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
PootieNunu Grand Master

PootieNunu

Posted
Posted (edited)
28 minutes ago, mav1234 said:

there's no disservice here and this isn't a precedent.  players have asked for trades and gotten them before.  hell this isn't even the first player THIS YEAR to say he doesn't want to play for the Texans anymore.

there's no reason for Houston to torpedo its new GM and new HC just to try to force a millionaire to play when he refuses to, not when they could gain huge capital from any of a number of teams for shipping him off.

its just funny given how Watt was treated... 

Watt and Watson are two different situations.

JJ was probably getting released whether he asked for it or not. He got out in front of it to save face. 

Edited by PootieNunu
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mav1234 Grand Master

mav1234

Posted
Posted
23 minutes ago, TrevorLaurenceTime22 said:

No one forced him to sign a four year extension with 111M guarenteed...  

And no one is forcing the Texans to keep him, either.  Contracts don't mean poo in sports.  Teams drop players all the time. Trade players. Cut them. Etc...  I don't really care that he has a contract; he doesn't want to be there, and it is to their benefit to find a way to handle that.

Plus the situation has changed in strange directions since then.

  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • strato
      If you wanted Danny Dimes here’s the chance

      By strato · Posted

      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.
    • strato
      If you wanted Danny Dimes here’s the chance

      By strato · Posted

      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.
    • LinvilleGorge
      2024 College Football Thread

      By LinvilleGorge · Posted

      Well, we got our answer on Army today.
×
×
  • Create New...