Uffdaswede Posted August 24, 2018 Share Posted August 24, 2018 2 minutes ago, Malfatron said: our first. not the extra first Indeed, this may be the holdup. Our first is like the first pick of the second round. Reggie wants NO’s pick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norm Posted August 24, 2018 Share Posted August 24, 2018 1 hour ago, Siman08/OH said: I just don’t understand how if the front office can make this happen the fans wouldn’t want it? Weve had bad defenses and wanting big changes since 2011. 8 seasons guys...almost a decade. If we can acquire Mack with our new changes we should AT LEAST be top 10. Aaron Rodgers and a top 10 defense? Come on...that’s easily Super Bowl worthy. Why so much hate? I want it..I just don't think they're trading him for those worthless picks that have a 5% chance of being good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siman08/OH Posted August 24, 2018 Share Posted August 24, 2018 Just now, Beast said: That's nonsense, first that he would magically end his holdout without a contract, and that some team would trade a ton to get him without a new contract in place/agreement. He's holding out for a contract, not to stick it to the Raiders. You guys really honestly think he will skip the season? Watch football at home? Not make a dime? Its a bluff. He’s going to play, either in Oakland or elsewhere. He doesn’t want to do training camp just like LeVeon Bell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malfatron Posted August 24, 2018 Share Posted August 24, 2018 1 minute ago, Beast said: That's nonsense, first that he would magically end his holdout without a contract, and that some team would trade a ton to get him without a new contract in place/agreement. He's holding out for a contract, not to stick it to the Raiders. give him 21 million per year for 3 years. then, he can get another bigger contract after that. trade a 1(ours) and 2. lets do this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beast Posted August 24, 2018 Share Posted August 24, 2018 Just now, Siman08/OH said: You guys really honestly think he will skip the season? Watch football at home? Not make a dime? Its a bluff. He’s going to play, either in Oakland or elsewhere. He doesn’t want to do training camp just like LeVeon Bell. No one has ever said that, yet you're trying to set up a straw man fallacy to put us in a fake corner. He (and Bell) want a huge new contracts, that's what this is clearly about. This is clearly about money, not missing time or sticking it to anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siman08/OH Posted August 24, 2018 Share Posted August 24, 2018 2 minutes ago, Beast said: No one has ever said that, yet you're trying to set up a straw man fallacy to put us in a fake corner. He (and Bell) want a huge new contracts, that's what this is clearly about. This is clearly about money, not missing time or sticking it to anyone. Que the Queen music.... Just because they want it doesn’t mean they will get it. Mack will be playing this year, and it could be with us. And we won’t have to trade the farm to get him. Just watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norm Posted August 24, 2018 Share Posted August 24, 2018 5 minutes ago, Beast said: No one has ever said that, yet you're trying to set up a straw man fallacy to put us in a fake corner. He (and Bell) want a huge new contracts, that's what this is clearly about. This is clearly about money, not missing time or sticking it to anyone. I definitely think they like to miss camp though lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beast Posted August 24, 2018 Share Posted August 24, 2018 3 minutes ago, Siman08/OH said: Just because they want it doesn’t mean they will get it. Mack will be playing this year, and it could be with us. And we won’t have to trade the farm to get him. Just watch. Clearly you don't have a clue how the NFL works... if there is a trade, then he'll get a new large contract. You can't just magically make every aspect turn to your favor in reality. A team isn't going to give enough value to the Raiders to get him, just to let him play out his one year left on his contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beast Posted August 24, 2018 Share Posted August 24, 2018 4 minutes ago, Norm said: I definitely think they like to miss camp though lol I'm not sure if camp is really that bad since the new CBA agreement... I haven't heard any complaints other than the 4 preseason games being over kill number of preseason games. I mean, I'm sure people would love to spend more time with family or vaca somewhere, but I don't think camp is horrible as those ol two a days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siman08/OH Posted August 24, 2018 Share Posted August 24, 2018 3 minutes ago, Beast said: Clearly you don't have a clue how the NFL works... if there is a trade, then he'll get a new large contract. You can't just magically make every aspect turn to your favor in reality. A team isn't going to give enough value to the Raiders to get him, just to let him play out his one year left on his contract. But value is to be determined via the GMs, not the player. Of course Mack wants QB money but if no GM will give it to him then guess what...HE DOESNT GET IT. And once he realizes that I’m sure he would rather be dealt to someone who wants him and is more willing to pay to keep him than the Raiders who obviously don’t value him that much or he would be signed already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted August 24, 2018 Share Posted August 24, 2018 47 minutes ago, packfanfb said: Sure, but Green Bay also can't get players like Mack or impact players of his caliber unless you pay for them because we aren't drafting in the top 1-5 any time soon, not while Rodgers is here anyways. At some point, you take the risk.. It's short term gain vs. long term gain. People who want Mack understand the possible repercussions it will/could have in years 4-6. We are simply willing to accept those repercussions for the fruit we get in years 1-3 when Rodgers is 35-37 years old. Years 3, 4, and 5 when those guys are ready to play (maybe year 2) when those picks are ready to play for peanuts is where you're losing that value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norm Posted August 24, 2018 Share Posted August 24, 2018 14 minutes ago, Siman08/OH said: Que the Queen music.... Just because they want it doesn’t mean they will get it. Mack will be playing this year, and it could be with us. And we won’t have to trade the farm to get him. Just watch. I hope you're right. I don't see it. If situation was reversed we'd laugh at this compensation though. Am I terrifically wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norm Posted August 24, 2018 Share Posted August 24, 2018 9 minutes ago, Beast said: I'm not sure if camp is really that bad since the new CBA agreement... I haven't heard any complaints other than the 4 preseason games being over kill number of preseason games. I mean, I'm sure people would love to spend more time with family or vaca somewhere, but I don't think camp is horrible as those ol two a days. It's probably just a bonus of sorts. I agree it's not as bad but I bet tons of vets would like to skip it, or some at least? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beast Posted August 24, 2018 Share Posted August 24, 2018 1 minute ago, Siman08/OH said: But value is to be determined via the GMs, not the player. Of course Mack wants QB money but if no GM will give it to him then guess what...HE DOESNT GET IT. And once he realizes that I’m sure he would rather be dealt to someone who wants him and is more willing to pay to keep him than the Raiders who obviously don’t value him that much or he would be signed already. You're talking out of both sides of your mouth. First you suggest no GM is willing to pay it, then be traded to a GM that will pay it. Also you have suggested that players don't get what they want and then if some team values them, then they automatically do? That's horrible logic... Using that same (horrible) logic, then the Packers don't value Aaron Rodgers because if they did he would of be resigned already, with everyone agreeing he deserves a new contract and moving so dang slowly towards it. Like the Packers and Rodgers, the Raiders know Mack has a ton of value, they're just trying to get the player closer to the number they would prefer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norm Posted August 24, 2018 Share Posted August 24, 2018 14 minutes ago, Beast said: You're talking out of both sides of your mouth. First you suggest no GM is willing to pay it, then be traded to a GM that will pay it. Also you have suggested that players don't get what they want and then if some team values them, then they automatically do? That's horrible logic... Using that same (horrible) logic, then the Packers don't value Aaron Rodgers because if they did he would of be resigned already, with everyone agreeing he deserves a new contract and moving so dang slowly towards it. Like the Packers and Rodgers, the Raiders know Mack has a ton of value, they're just trying to get the player closer to the number they would prefer. If Rodgers held out they would take peanuts for him and be happy about it I bet... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.