Jump to content

BDL Discussion Thread *OWNERS MEETING STARTS 1/31/18*


Jlash

Recommended Posts

SirA, if you think I am trading Russell Wilson for cap reasons, you don't understand how 3 Downs work. You don't move from elite QBs because you want 9K in cap. That's all I'll say on that. Would like to hear from other members of the committee here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, SkunkApes said:

SirA, if you think I am trading Russell Wilson for cap reasons, you don't understand how 3 Downs work. You don't move from elite QBs because you want 9K in cap. That's all I'll say on that. Would like to hear from other members of the committee here.

I find it hilarious that for once the one time the committee doesn't let you do a trade rape it's against yourself. But I suppose that was the deal with Hockey you keep your team but give up your QB for pennies on the dollar.

Work out a trade that actually benefits both of you instead of paying off a debt you owe hockey. 

Edit: also no to all the topics I haven't read/missed.

Edited by DingoLadd
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, SkunkApes said:

SirA, if you think I am trading Russell Wilson for cap reasons, you don't understand how 3 Downs work. You don't move from elite QBs because you want 9K in cap. That's all I'll say on that. Would like to hear from other members of the committee here.

I've rejected it in current form, I would like to hear your reasons for trading him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, pheltzbahr said:

I've rejected it in current form, I would like to hear your reasons for trading him.

Same, since you feel it's not for cap reasons Footy. 

Pheltz and I, maybe others also, said we wouldn't allow a trade of Russell "on the cheap" to Hockey just so you could keep your team. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, SirA1 said:

Topic #4A - Better Record Vs. Higher seed for Home Field in playoffs.

A. Higher Seed - 8 - SirA, Jlash, Skapes, Hockey, Whicker, Lukic, Pheltz, MD4L

B. Better Record - 3 - BCB, Rags, Xmad

Paging

Edited by SirA1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Jlash said:

Same, since you feel it's not for cap reasons Footy. 

Pheltz and I, maybe others also, said we wouldn't allow a trade of Russell "on the cheap" to Hockey just so you could keep your team. 

Thanks for the feedback Pheltz and JLash.

The "give Hockey a QB" aspect is admittedly what pushed me in this direction to start, but from a roster standpoint it felt cheap to be gifted a franchise QB on the free agent market like contraction allowed for. I want to win the real way, not with a shortcut at QB. I know SirA has weighed on the compensation needed to get this done, but would you guys need it be something similar to get this approved?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, SkunkApes said:

Thanks for the feedback Pheltz and JLash.

The "give Hockey a QB" aspect is admittedly what pushed me in this direction to start, but from a roster standpoint it felt cheap to be gifted a franchise QB on the free agent market like contraction allowed for. I want to win the real way, not with a shortcut at QB. I know SirA has weighed on the compensation needed to get this done, but would you guys need it be something similar to get this approved?

I would say a deal that isn't lopsided and at least close to market value is the route to go.  SirA's market evaluation is closer to accurate than the deal proposed.  Collusion with "noble" intent is still collusion, we can't have the precedent set here as its not fair to ALL participants.

Edited by pheltzbahr
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SkunkApes said:

Thanks for the feedback Pheltz and JLash.

The "give Hockey a QB" aspect is admittedly what pushed me in this direction to start, but from a roster standpoint it felt cheap to be gifted a franchise QB on the free agent market like contraction allowed for. I want to win the real way, not with a shortcut at QB. I know SirA has weighed on the compensation needed to get this done, but would you guys need it be something similar to get this approved?

giphy.gif

You feel some sort of guilt because you feel like contraction 'gifted' you a QB and now want to have a do-over, so to fix that you're just going to do the same thing and give away a franchise QB?

You see how this doesn't make sense right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...