Fresh Prince Posted August 17, 2019 Share Posted August 17, 2019 (edited) Simple question. Was signed by Cle and don’t see anyone complaining about that. Hunt was a top 5 back on a rookie deal. Edited August 17, 2019 by Fresh Prince Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilpimp972 Posted August 17, 2019 Share Posted August 17, 2019 I believe they could have won it all with him, he owned the Pats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeotheLion Posted August 17, 2019 Share Posted August 17, 2019 11 minutes ago, evilpimp972 said: I believe they could have won it all with him, he owned the Pats. That's probably a moot point because I couldn't imagine he'd not have been either suspended or removed from the exempt list in time. I think they probably did but it seemed like it was the type of thing Hunt needed to get the wakeup call necessary to change. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingseanjohn Posted August 17, 2019 Share Posted August 17, 2019 (edited) Having a biased opinion, I'll say no. But it should have come with all kinds of stipulations for behavior, therapy, etc. The suspension would happen no matter what team he was on. By being cut he got to go to a new team and get paid even more money than he would have earned from KC. So other than being the publicity of being cut, how did this badly affect Hunt? If anything it helped him reach free agency faster. Although he did lie to team officials. So without knowing what exactly his lies were, I can't 100% say it was the right/wrong move. Edited August 17, 2019 by kingseanjohn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger Posted August 17, 2019 Share Posted August 17, 2019 Absolutely. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apparition Posted August 17, 2019 Share Posted August 17, 2019 Yes. But I also believe that, applying the same standard, they should've let Tyreek Hill go. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatriotsWin! Posted August 17, 2019 Share Posted August 17, 2019 Should have kept him, considering they kept Hill who did 1000x worse. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DigInBoys Posted August 17, 2019 Share Posted August 17, 2019 1 hour ago, Fresh Prince said: Simple question. Was signed by Cle and don’t see anyone complaining about that. Hunt was a top 5 back on a rookie deal. Curious which one of these you take Hunt over: Gurley Barkley Elliott Bell Kamara Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soko Posted August 17, 2019 Share Posted August 17, 2019 No. Lots of overreacting IMO and the NFL wanted to run with it because of the climate. I hear KC was peeved because he lied to them, which is understandable if you’re an organization that asks for character from it’s team. Think it was a bad move for the team. Not that it’ll sink them, but they’d be better with him there and I don’t think the narrative or his actions are crazy enough to let him go. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apparition Posted August 17, 2019 Share Posted August 17, 2019 33 minutes ago, DigInBoys said: Curious which one of these you take Hunt over: Gurley Barkley Elliott Bell Kamara Gurley because of his knee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daineraider Posted August 17, 2019 Share Posted August 17, 2019 No, Hunt was an idiot and acted as such, but it wasn’t that bad. Maybe a suspension or something, but Hills issues have been much worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nightime Posted August 17, 2019 Share Posted August 17, 2019 (edited) If he didn’t lie, he could’ve been given a short suspension early in the year and been ready for the rest of the games. As of today, nobody cares about what Hunt did. I think KC saw understood that and made sure to hold onto Tyreek Hill. Makes no sense to cut players who didn’t commit crimes. Edited August 17, 2019 by Nightime Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkippyX Posted August 17, 2019 Share Posted August 17, 2019 He was an idiot. She was an idiot. He crossed the line and should have been suspended. (and was) There was no reason to cut him so he could have gone to Cleveland to play against them. Cutting Tyreek would have done something similar. I don't know that much about what he told KC and what he lied about, but if that was enough for them to make a stand and get worse as a team then I am fine with their decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ninjapirate Posted August 18, 2019 Share Posted August 18, 2019 3 hours ago, Fresh Prince said: Simple question. Was signed by Cle and don’t see anyone complaining about that. Hunt was a top 5 back on a rookie deal. I think Hunt was mostly let go because he lied to the Chiefs. You can't keep someone around that you can't trust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdrawkcab321 Posted August 18, 2019 Share Posted August 18, 2019 I think it was a great decision Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts