Question for the Burns pocket watchers...

[tukafan21]

Just now, CamWhoaaCam said:

You don't get it Burns is our best player!

 

You need good players to win games!

 

How is trading Burns helping the team?

 

We got picks for CMC and Moore. We got the worst record in football. Make it make sense!

Burns being our best player actually probably hurts us right now more than it helps us.

Teams are able to formulate their entire offensive gameplan around Burns and taking him out of the game because they aren't afraid of the rest of our defense in the slightest.

No matter how elite a pass rusher is, unless you have other quality pass rushers to make the blocking scheme account for them and/or quality DB's to make the QB hold onto the ball longer, they are going to be minimized when they send double and triple teams at that pass rusher on every pass play.

In a vacuum I'd love to keep Burns long term, but when you factor in the contract situation and the state of the rest of the team, keeping him isn't the smart play for the long term success of the franchise, no other way around it at this point unfortunately. 

[SmokinwithWilly]

1 minute ago, tukafan21 said:

Burns being our best player actually probably hurts us right now more than it helps us.

Teams are able to formulate their entire offensive gameplan around Burns and taking him out of the game because they aren't afraid of the rest of our defense in the slightest.

No matter how elite a pass rusher is, unless you have other quality pass rushers to make the blocking scheme account for them and/or quality DB's to make the QB hold onto the ball longer, they are going to be minimized when they send double and triple teams at that pass rusher on every pass play.

In a vacuum I'd love to keep Burns long term, but when you factor in the contract situation and the state of the rest of the team, keeping him isn't the smart play for the long term success of the franchise, no other way around it at this point unfortunately. 

Sadly, this is where we are now. Fitts is not the right GM to do a rebuild properly and Tepper is too impatient an owner to do one at all. Sometimes you have to accept the pain and do what's necessary to have long term success. Right now, we're doing none of those things. 

[CamWhoaaCam]

13 minutes ago, tukafan21 said:

C'mon guy, it's been explained so many times, there is only a small portion of the fan base who doesn't want to pay him.

It's just become clear that he wants much more than the team is willing to pay him or else they'd have been able to get a deal done before the season started.  At this point it's not about "not paying him" as much as it is moving getting much needed assets while avoiding a messy situation.

If we have to franchise tag him in the offseason, I don't think he'll ever play another down for us again, as I don't see him playing on the tag and if we still can't get a deal done by that point, we just won't be.

That means if we tag him, we then have to keep about at least $20 Million of the cap open instead of being able to use it to sign other top free agents once FA begins.  All for a player that we'll end up having to trade in the end anyways.

Much better to trade him now, get those picks, and then be able to use that cap space on day 1 of free agency.

Again man, as I've said to you before, you only look at the surface of things, do we want this player or that player, not at the functional dynamics about how the real life NFL operates.  If you want your opinions to be taken seriously, you need to start factoring in things such as that, as it's critically important in a scenario such as this.

Particularly because if we have to tag Burns and he somehow does sign it and play, that will almost assuredly carry a larger cap hit for 2024 than if we were to sign him to a long term deal with how cap hits get worked out in contract details.  So if we tag him, then we actually need to allocate more cap room for him in 2024 than we would if we just had him under long term contract.

Sure, if we then got a deal done for him, it would lower his cap hit for the season, but that wouldn't do us any good on day 1 of free agency, as we'd lose out on guys we could have signed with the cap space.

Cmon guy I know he wants big money. My point is pay him just don't give him away for a useless pick which is what it will be when Fitt makes that pick.

 

Im okay giving Burns 30 mi. At least we know what he brings and at worst he's still the best or 2nd best player on the defense.

 

What is wrong with paying Burns 30 mil a year?

[tukafan21]

Oh, and another problem with Burns being our best player is that we're constantly playing from behind which allows teams to run the ball more.

Some of the best pass rushers tend to play on good teams, who play with leads, and thus it allows those elite pass rushers to pin their ears back and just go.  That's not something Burns can do on this defense right now, they have to be ready for the run on the overwhelming majority of plays pre-snap.

That's not insignificant at all

[SmokinwithWilly]

Just now, CamWhoaaCam said:

Cmon guy I know he wants big money. My point is pay him just don't give him away for a useless pick which is what it will be when Fitt makes that pick.

 

Im okay giving Burns 30 mi. At least we know what he brings and at worst he's still the best or 2nd best player on the defense.

 

What is wrong with paying Burns 30 mil a year?

Nothing is wrong depending on the contract provided you can still put together a decent team. Not trading him for picks because Fitts will likely make a bad one is a sign of a bigger problem with Fitterer being GM. This isn't just a Burns issue. It's a team building issue. 

[Johnstonny]

1 hour ago, mickeye76 said:

My strategy is addition by subtraction. We add two new FA edge rusher types to replace Burns and give Barno and yep DJ Johnson some reps and hope they develop.  Use the extra monies to add a guard, sign our other FA's and be a player in the Tee Higgins sweepstakes. 

sounds like a fitt move

[onmyown]

It's really simple

whether they pay burns or not, the team is years away from competing and what he does during his contract won’t even matter 

future picks however may, so long as Fit and Reich are gone

this is the collateral damage of all of Tepper dumbassery, you can’t do unbelievably stupid poo like he has done and turn it around in a matter of games or a season 

he’s dug a hole with his path making, smarter than everyone cheat codes and rebuilding properly like he should’ve done in the first place takes time and is the only way to get out

[CamWhoaaCam]

14 minutes ago, tukafan21 said:

For someone who has been screaming about opening up the piggy bank to sign Higgins in the offseaosn (assuming he doesn't get tagged and traded, which is most likely anyways)...

You sure seem to not grasp that tagging Burns instead of having that cap space available will likely take us out of the Higgins running from the jump.

 

You rather have a unknown rookie drafted by Fitt tells me all I need to know. Give me the slightly overpaid pro bowl DE Burns just entering his prime.

 

Not surprised because you and I are like water and oil we just don't mix. Continue the Tepper way though it has worked wonders for us.

 

 

[tukafan21]

1 minute ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

Cmon guy I know he wants big money. My point is pay him just don't give him away for a useless pick which is what it will be when Fitt makes that pick.

 

Im okay giving Burns 30 mi. At least we know what he brings and at worst he's still the best or 2nd best player on the defense.

 

What is wrong with paying Burns 30 mil a year?

What's wrong with it?

You mean, other than the fact that Burns wants more money than that?

Nothing at all

But seeing as he wants more than that, and yes, it's pretty clear he does, as if he'd have taken 30, a deal would have been done before week 1, then yea, there is a big problem in paying him that since he won't sign that contract.

Again, you keep arguing about just paying him the money... if you can't see that he clearly doesn't want to be here long term at this point, at least unless he's paid as a Top 3 pass rusher, then I don't know what else to tell you.

He's not worth Top 3 money, not when this team has as many holes as it has, you pay top 3 pass rusher money when you're a SB contending team.

And saying we're just going to screw up the draft picks is just a lazy and pathetic reason to want to overpay him, by that thinking, we might as well just fold the franchise and have 31 teams in the league.  Sure, we might screw it up, but not making the smart move because you're afraid we won't then make the subsequent correct moves is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard of.

By your logic, I'd then argue that overpaying him will be an even worse decision as then we have $30+ million tied up in one player and then we're not going to be able to make smart mid round draft picks to fill out the roster on cap friendly contracts, like we'd need to do if we give him that contract.

Again.... LOOK AT THE WHOLE PICTURE INSTEAD OF JUST ONE THING, it's your biggest flaw in critiquing this team and it's decisions, you do not understand how the NFL operates, it's so painfully clear.

[mickeye76]

48 minutes ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

My question to you is what has addition by subtraction gotten us?

 

We loss CMC and Moore and what have we got to show for it besides the worst record in football.

 

Putting your trust in Tepper and Fitt for a draft pick is just crazy to me. At least we know Burns is a good player and he's our good player. Just pay the man.

Moore trade got us Young. Yeah, some have reservations bout that but I don't. I think Young can become the franchise guy if we support him with a better oline and another trusted weapon in the offense. CMC situation actually is very similar to Burns.  His salary is crazy for a RB.  

RB and WR are positions we can hit on in the draft in later rounds. Building a RB Corp is not beyond our reach.  If the trade off is signing Burns or being big players in FA I know what I want. We need more than just Burns.  We need 3 to 4 players to fill spots and to resign guys like Hill, Luvu and Brown. 

[CamWhoaaCam]

14 minutes ago, ThrillzforthePils said:

After seeing the packers ink their guy today.  I am on board with giving him that 30 mil per year.  Maybe fitt can do something with the contract where it works out for us.  

It's a shame the new accounts are talking sense. Post more often my guy we need more like you.

Im tired of playing Madden trading all our stars for picks only for Fitt to screw it up.

[Mr Mojo Risin]

I'd rather use that money on the offensive side of the ball. Even with Burns we aren't a top defense. It's time to have a top offense and not let history repeat itself by thinking you can spend money and have both. You can't. Use that money to protect young and surround him with playmakers while getting high energy guys who are hungry to fill out the defense. Burns is a solid player but he disappears far too often to command that sizeable % of our cap.

Edited October 30, 2023 by Mr Mojo Risin

[tukafan21]

1 minute ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

You rather have a unknown rookie drafted by Fitt tells me all I need to know. Give me the slightly overpaid pro bowl DE Burns just entering his prime.

 

Not surprised because you and I are like water and oil we just don't mix. Continue the Tepper way though it has worked wonders for us.

 

 

You're against trading him for a 1st rounder because you think we'll screw up the pick.

But if we give him the contract, we then need to hit on our 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and maybe even 5th round draft picks for a few years to get starters and key rotational players on cheap contracts to make it all work.

The logic in that so so inherently flawed that it's hard to comprehend.

It's much easier to hit on 1st round picks than those mid round picks, you don't want to make the move because you don't think we'll hit on the 1st rounder, but somehow ignore that we're even less likely to hit on the mid round picks?

You kill me man, you are the worst type of fan, one who looks at individual players instead of the full team.

[CamWhoaaCam]

15 minutes ago, SmokinwithWilly said:

I don't pay to watch a player. I pay to watch a team win. If overpaying Burns hurts the team overall, that's not something I want the team to do. I want the best team possible. 

What are you watching now?

 

A team full of bad players and only a few of good players. 2 players can't make a team. But if you continue to add talent around those few players then you can build something. Trading our last few good players is what you have now a team full of bad players. Burns is the last one standing.

 

Remember that. So much for loyalty. Burns never caused trouble here. Been a great leader even played injured. But no fug him he wants too much money.