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!

     

2009 Draft Thread


Kurb

Recommended Posts

Its a good choice. I still think we should have went for a DT or an OG. I feel we need more depth and talent despite adding Brown. I just don't feel comfortable with Lewis starting. But the FO knows the team better than we all do. We could still try and make a move I guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brown is a great college player, let's hope he's good in the NFL. I worry about his size. But if he's as good as he was at FSU...awesome.

I don't, however, like trading next year's first. Are we going to do this every year now? Not only that, it REEKS of desperation!! We knew we needed D-line help, we worried Brown might go before our regular pick...so we trade away a first round pick for a second. Are you kidding me? Should have done that earlier to get in the first.

Don't know much about the CB, but at least we have someone in place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brown is a great college player, let's hope he's good in the NFL. I worry about his size. But if he's as good as he was at FSU...awesome.

I don't, however, like trading next year's first. Are we going to do this every year now? Not only that, it REEKS of desperation!! We knew we needed D-line help, we worried Brown might go before our regular pick...so we trade away a first round pick for a second. Are you kidding me? Should have done that earlier to get in the first.

Don't know much about the CB, but at least we have someone in place.

2010 seems to be an uncapped year so far, with no rookie cap in place, it seems pretty smart to trade away something that will probably cost more than anything we get this year.

That, and we can still trade Julius for picks next year......once his signs his Tender.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Guest
This topic is now 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...