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!

     

Other NFL Games Thread

kungfoodude

By kungfoodude,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

CarolinaLivin Veteran

CarolinaLivin

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

I am not sure I would put the Steelers in the "highly unlikely" category. The Broncos are unlikely but it is possible that they make a tectonic shift in direction if they jettison Hackett, as well.

At most they scapegoat hackett and run russ again with new staff in hope that something changes and they don’t look dumb for the money they spent. 
 

(Opinion) i think steelers stick with pickett.

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

PNW_PantherMan

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, CarolinaLivin said:

At most they scapegoat hackett and run russ again with new staff in hope that something changes and they don’t look dumb for the money they spent. 
 

(Opinion) i think steelers stick with pickett.

It's not just the money but the draft capital they gave up as well.  They are basically stuck with Wilson in the short term.  I would be shocked to see them move on from Russ this offseason barring him retiring.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sgt Schultz Grand Master

Sgt Schultz

Posted
Posted

Let's not forget that just because a team is not looking to draft a QB, they often trade with those who are for a haul. 

As of this morning, the teams ahead of us that are likely sniffing at QBs are Houston, Detroit (Rams pick), and Seattle (Broncos pick).  That leaves Chicago who does not have another pick until late int he second round (Steelers own their 2nd round pick, they own the Ravens 2nd rounder).  Da Bears have a lot of needs outside of QB. 

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LinvilleGorge Grand Master

LinvilleGorge

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, PNW_PantherMan said:

It's not just the money but the draft capital they gave up as well.  They are basically stuck with Wilson in the short term.  I would be shocked to see them move on from Russ this offseason barring him retiring.

The Broncos are completely fuged for the next several years if they can't get Wilson fixed.

  • Pie 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sgt Schultz Grand Master

Sgt Schultz

Posted
Posted

The irony of Seattle needing to look at QBs and owning Denver's first round pick, while Denver still needs to look at QBs despite trading a small farm to the Seahawks and committing three Brink's trucks to Wilson is a lesson in "don't let this happen to you."

Wilson's dead cap looks like the national debt through 2024 and is still pretty steep in 2025.  His contract is in that no-man's-land where he costs a fortune to keep and almost as much or more through then.   They are locked into him for a while.

  • Pie 3
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jackie Lee Grand Master

Jackie Lee

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, PNW_PantherMan said:

It's not just the money but the draft capital they gave up as well.  They are basically stuck with Wilson in the short term.  I would be shocked to see them move on from Russ this offseason barring him retiring.

They really don't have a reasonable way out til 2025 and that would still be over $30M in dead cap that year 

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

PNW_PantherMan

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Sgt Schultz said:

The irony of Seattle needing to look at QBs and owning Denver's first round pick, while Denver still needs to look at QBs despite trading a small farm to the Seahawks and committing three Brink's trucks to Wilson is a lesson in "don't let this happen to you."

Wilson's dead cap looks like the national debt through 2024 and is still pretty steep in 2025.  His contract is in that no-man's-land where he costs a fortune to keep and almost as much or more through then.   They are locked into him for a while.

That's why I don't want us to trade a haul for any QB and guarantee them a big contract.  If anything goes wrong with that player, your team is completely screwed for years.  We could be saying the same thing about the Browns in a couple months.

Edited by PNW_PantherMan
  • Pie 2
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sgt Schultz Grand Master

Sgt Schultz

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, PNW_PantherMan said:

That's why I don't want us to trade a haul for any QB and guarantee them a big contract.  If anything goes wrong with that player, your team is completely screwed for years.  We could be saying the same thing about the Browns in a couple months.

It is quite possible.  While Denver's options with Wilson look awful, it looks like a picture of "fiscal responsibility" compared to the Browns if Watson does not take them to the promised land.  Denver has the added concern of Wilson's age and the possibility that he may just not have it anymore, but that aside, if Watson is not the second coming, the Browns are up against it for several years.  His dead cap could just about exceed the salary cap.

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...