Malfatron Posted September 6, 2018 Share Posted September 6, 2018 On 9/3/2018 at 2:18 PM, Broncofan said: I just think Matthews has lost a step. I disagree. I believe he he gained a step. Gained many steps actually, which usually take him well past the qb during his sack attempts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CKSteeler Posted September 6, 2018 Share Posted September 6, 2018 I find the Rams coming and saying that they tried to trade for Mack to be pretty bogus. From the how the hell were you going to pay him front to the whole the Raiders rejected it because we don't think you'll be picking low enough. I just don't buy it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broncofan Posted September 6, 2018 Share Posted September 6, 2018 8 hours ago, CKSteeler said: I find the Rams coming and saying that they tried to trade for Mack to be pretty bogus. From the how the hell were you going to pay him front to the whole the Raiders rejected it because we don't think you'll be picking low enough. I just don't buy it. Well, the Rams have 35M in cap space next year, and Mack's CHI contract takes up a 35M cap hit this year and next. And that's before they do things like cut a couple of guys who Mack would have made redundant. Mack's 13M hit this year (22 next) would have been tricky, but LAR has 4.7M of 2018 salary for Mark Barron that they could have pushed to 2019-20 , 3M with Cooks for 2019-21, 2.5M with Brockers for 2019, and 5.5M from Talib for 2019. So that's 15.7M of space created for 2018, and any rollover goes back to 2019, to fit 2019's #'s for Mack. Once 2020 hits - the Rams have 90M in cap space left. This times well, because that's when Goff needs an extension - but Goff/Mack could have actually worked by then. The tricky part is that by 2020, Whitworth's contract would be up - but by then, well that's 2020 to worry about. It seems crazy, but LAR's cap management has all fit well enough it would have been a tight squeeze, but it was actually do-able. And come 2020, their cap space becomes manageable again. The bigger obstacle was the fact 2 1sts from LAR would have been in the 20's and maybe even 30's - that's probably what killed the deal. Getting the $ wasn't likely the obstacle. I have no doubt LAR would have made an offer, just couldn't match the draft capital given their late picking position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leoric Posted September 6, 2018 Share Posted September 6, 2018 17 hours ago, CKSteeler said: I find the Rams coming and saying that they tried to trade for Mack to be pretty bogus. From the how the hell were you going to pay him front to the whole the Raiders rejected it because we don't think you'll be picking low enough. I just don't buy it. I don’t know how realistic I find it either. It is fun to envision though. That defensive line would have been must see television every week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nabbs4u Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 The Rams are already Dream Team 2.0. What were they trying to be 3.0 before ever playing a season? This isn't Madden! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr LBC Posted September 10, 2018 Share Posted September 10, 2018 Whether wise or not, I've got to respect the set of stones that Les Snead has: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RaidersAreOne Posted September 11, 2018 Share Posted September 11, 2018 A low 1st and 3rd? Thank god we passed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forge Posted September 11, 2018 Share Posted September 11, 2018 37 minutes ago, RaidersAreOne said: A low 1st and 3rd? Thank god we passed. I really wish we could learn what all everyone offered. I know the 49ers supposedly had a formal offer to the Raiders as well, and I'd be really curious to know what our max offer was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BayRaider Posted September 11, 2018 Share Posted September 11, 2018 4 minutes ago, Forge said: I really wish we could learn what all everyone offered. I know the 49ers supposedly had a formal offer to the Raiders as well, and I'd be really curious to know what our max offer was. Probably similar to the Rams. It was stated nearly 20 teams made a formal offer although the Raiders only considered offers of the Bears, Packers, Rams, 49ers as "aggressive". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Buck Posted September 11, 2018 Share Posted September 11, 2018 If he had to end up in the NFC North, I sure wish it would have been with the Vikings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ketchup Posted September 11, 2018 Share Posted September 11, 2018 21 hours ago, BayRaider said: Probably similar to the Rams. It was stated nearly 20 teams made a formal offer although the Raiders only considered offers of the Bears, Packers, Rams, 49ers as "aggressive". You can just about guarantee GB offered their two 1st rounders this year. However, before the season started, both those picks were very likely to be 20 or later. I'm glad we didn;t go any higher then that with the pick offer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted September 12, 2018 Share Posted September 12, 2018 2 hours ago, Ketchup said: You can just about guarantee GB offered their two 1st rounders this year. However, before the season started, both those picks were very likely to be 20 or later. I'm glad we didn;t go any higher then that with the pick offer. I'm not so sure they offered both firsts. I'd think it'd be more likely their '18 1st and '19 2nd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N4L Posted September 12, 2018 Share Posted September 12, 2018 2 minutes ago, CWood21 said: I'm not so sure they offered both firsts. I'd think it'd be more likely their '18 1st and '19 2nd. Yeah, considering that they took less than two firsts from the bears, with picks spread over multiple years, I would say its pretty safe to assume the raiders would have jumped on two firsts next year. Im still miffed we didn't trade for marcus peters, talib (although talib apparently didn't want to come here), or mack. Could have had all three guys Also I think Sunday night settled the 30 page debate in this thread: Aaron Rodgers + Green Bay's roster >>> Chicago Bears Green Bay's roster minus Aaron Rodgers <<<<< Chicago Bears Isnt it nice when debates get settled so quickly? week one and we already have the definitive answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BayRaider Posted September 12, 2018 Share Posted September 12, 2018 The Packers and Saints picks will be like 29 and 32. Bears 1st Rounders can be anywhere from 3-18. Probably 8-15 range. Accepting the Packers is like two early second rounders. Would of been dumb to accept. Even throwing in a 2nd, we got better value than we would of got on a Green Bay trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikesfan89 Posted September 12, 2018 Share Posted September 12, 2018 1 hour ago, BayRaider said: The Packers and Saints picks will be like 29 and 32. Bears 1st Rounders can be anywhere from 3-18. Probably 8-15 range. Accepting the Packers is like two early second rounders. Would of been dumb to accept. Even throwing in a 2nd, we got better value than we would of got on a Green Bay trade. Not sure if serious Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.