Jump to content

The WR battle of 2019


gopherwrestler

Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, RpMc said:

If the Dolphins move on from Kenny Stills, as has been suggested, he's someone I'd take a look at to give us something different from the WR 3 spot. Probably would be too expensive on the open market, and maybe Jeff Badet could potentially be the field stretching type for cheaper.

If he's willing to take the veteran minimum, I'd certainly be interested, because he's a good character guy and a solid, even if not spectacular, receiver.  But, he'd likely get a bigger paycheck elsewhere.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, swede700 said:

If he's willing to take the veteran minimum, I'd certainly be interested, because he's a good character guy and a solid, even if not spectacular, receiver.  But, he'd likely get a bigger paycheck elsewhere.  

Not sure Zimmer would be on board, he is a no nonsense guy. Can't see Zimmer putting up with Still's "activism" on game day.

Seems like it would be one of those things that the entire lockerroom would have to be on board with, that's a lot of effort for a #3 WR. Theres a great lockerroom culture in MN, so you can certainly make the case either way.

Edited by vikingsrule
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, vikingsrule said:

Not sure Zimmer would be on board, he is a no nonsense guy. Can't see Zimmer putting up with Still's "activism" on game day.

Seems like it would be one of those things that the entire lockerroom would have to be on board with, that's a lot of effort for a #3 WR. Theres a great lockerroom culture in MN, so you can certainly make the case either way.

Stills is automatically One of Us since he was born in Eden Prairie (even though he didn't grow up there).    And I'm sure Zimmer would address the issue with him, Stills is clearly a character guy and does a lot of charity work, so there would be some common ground found.  I really don't think it'd be that big of an issue.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Kenny Stills is released, I would think it’s a no brainer for the Vikings look into his cost. But, realistically, it doesn’t make sense financially (especially if you’re talking trade), or personnel wise. Given how often the team seems set to play with 12 or 21 personnel, the WR3 position is just not that important. You don’t sign, or trade for, a guy like Stills to only play 30% of the snaps.

Edited by SemperFeist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, swede700 said:

Stills is automatically One of Us since he was born in Eden Prairie (even though he didn't grow up there).    And I'm sure Zimmer would address the issue with him, Stills is clearly a character guy and does a lot of charity work, so there would be some common ground found.  I really don't think it'd be that big of an issue.

Won't argue about that, seems like he'd fit from a character standpoint. Still not convinced that Zimmer would be thrilled about it though, having to address the team and everything over a backup. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, vikingsrule said:

Won't argue about that, seems like he'd fit from a character standpoint. Still not convinced that Zimmer would be thrilled about it though, having to address the team and everything over a backup. 

I think you're overthinking - Zimmer wouldn't have to address to team over Stills' comments about the Dolphins' owner.  That would just be a conversation with the player before any potential signing.

Again, I was just throwing it out there because Stills would bring a different dimension to the receiver group.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, RpMc said:

I think you're overthinking - Zimmer wouldn't have to address to team over Stills' comments about the Dolphins' owner.  That would just be a conversation with the player before any potential signing.

Again, I was just throwing it out there because Stills would bring a different dimension to the receiver group.

Not just his comments about his owner. There's been a number of issues that Flores has had to come to his defense over. Not saying that Stills is right or wrong, that's irrelevant. It's the amount of effort that Zimmer will have to put forward, like Flores, to mitigate any potential animosity amongst owners, teammates and fans. I just don't see the fit with Zimmer, I suspect that he wants to manage a team, not individual activists.

I'd be surprised if there was any interest.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, vikingsrule said:

Not just his comments about his owner. There's been a number of issues that Flores has had to come to his defense over. Not saying that Stills is right or wrong, that's irrelevant. It's the amount of effort that Zimmer will have to put forward, like Flores, to mitigate any potential animosity amongst owners, teammates and fans. I just don't see the fit with Zimmer, I suspect that he wants to manage a team, not individual activists.

I'd be surprised if there was any interest.

I don't know...the Wilf's seem to have a heart for justice issues...maybe I'm wrong.  I think they might try to focus any players activism, rather than stifle it.  Again, maybe I'm reading the franchise ownership wrong.

I think Zimmer would be ok with Stills.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, RpMc said:

If the Dolphins move on from Kenny Stills, as has been suggested, he's someone I'd take a look at to give us something different from the WR 3 spot. Probably would be too expensive on the open market, and maybe Jeff Badet could potentially be the field stretching type for cheaper.

He may hit the open market if they trade for Clowney and give him a massive contract.

Could we afford Stills for one year?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, SemperFeist said:

No team that acquires Clowney can sign him to a new contract until next offseason. 

Yes, they can.  The deadline of July 15 to sign long-term only applies to the team that applied the franchise tag, in this case, the Texans.  If they trade him away, that deadline no longer applies to the new team...they can extend him at any time.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, swede700 said:

Yes, they can.  The deadline of July 15 to sign long-term only applies to the team that applied the franchise tag, in this case, the Texans.  If they trade him away, that deadline no longer applies to the new team...they can extend him at any time.  

Pat Kirwan was saying differently on Tuesday. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, SemperFeist said:

Pat Kirwan was saying differently on Tuesday. 

Here's where I got the information:

Quote

Although Wednesday is the deadline for franchise players to get long-term deals, Cassel technically doesn't apply because he was traded and the team that franchised him no longer holds his rights. Still, the deadline and the start of training camp in two weeks provided both sides with incentive to lock up a long-term relationship.

https://www.espn.com/nfl/news/story?id=4327067

So, unless they changed it in the new CBA that was agreed to in 2011 (which they certainly might have, but I don't recall that they did), I think the acquiring team could do whatever they want and don't have to wait.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, swede700 said:

Here's where I got the information:

https://www.espn.com/nfl/news/story?id=4327067

So, unless they changed it in the new CBA that was agreed to in 2011 (which they certainly might have, but I don't recall that they did), I think the acquiring team could do whatever they want and don't have to wait.

Things have changed since 2009. I am going to trust the current CBA over anything that happened back then. Nothing in the current CBA implies a trade would allow for an unsigned franchise player to sign a longer contract with a team he is traded to after signing his one year deal post July 15. Other teams can no longer sign franchise players to offer sheets after July 15th as they could back in 2009 either.

Here is the relevant information from the current CBA:

https://www.thefootballeducator.com/nfl-cba-article-10-franchise-transition-players/

Here is the text of section 2(k):

Quote

Any Club designating a Franchise Player shall have until 4:00 p.m., New York time, on July 15 of the League Year (or, if July 15 falls on a Saturday or Sunday, the first Monday thereafter) for which the designation takes effect to sign the player to a multiyear contract or extension. After that date, the player may sign only a one-year Player Contract with his Prior Club for that season, and such Player Contract may not be extended until after the Club’s last regular season game of that League Year.

That means that a team that trades for Clowney would not be able to sign Clowney to a long term contract until after the season.

Edited by Cearbhall
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...