Rockice_8 Posted August 29, 2019 Share Posted August 29, 2019 17 hours ago, FinSting said: Crap. Could only see the first part of the headline without clicking, wanted to see "traded to Dolphins" at the end but was not to be. I don't get it at all from a MIA perspective. Why do you even want him when you just put your entire roster on the trade block? I rebuilding team who is trying to repair their cap and will not be good for at least 2 seasons (and that is if all goes well) should want nothing to do with trading for Clowney. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger Posted August 29, 2019 Share Posted August 29, 2019 55 minutes ago, Blackstar12 said: Clowney is a good pass rusher but he sometimes gets overrated. He has a low motor and his work ethic isn’t that good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oregon Ducks Posted August 29, 2019 Share Posted August 29, 2019 17 hours ago, Steelersfan43 said: The teams can't extend him before the season ends because he is on the franchise TAG. Why would the NFLPA agree to this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuskieTitan Posted August 29, 2019 Share Posted August 29, 2019 I support his stance on sitting out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FinSting Posted August 29, 2019 Share Posted August 29, 2019 32 minutes ago, Rockice_8 said: I don't get it at all from a MIA perspective. Why do you even want him when you just put your entire roster on the trade block? I rebuilding team who is trying to repair their cap and will not be good for at least 2 seasons (and that is if all goes well) should want nothing to do with trading for Clowney. Kidding, I agree with you. A rebuilding team should not be getting a guy like him with contract issues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiltman Posted August 29, 2019 Share Posted August 29, 2019 1 hour ago, Blackstar12 said: Clowney is a good pass rusher but he sometimes gets overrated. He has a low motor and his work ethic isn’t that good. eh, thats a narrative that's kinda fizzled out Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiltman Posted August 29, 2019 Share Posted August 29, 2019 20 minutes ago, Oregon Ducks said: Why would the NFLPA agree to this? it likely will get changed a bit next CBA I dont get it besides a strong arm tactic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackstar12 Posted August 29, 2019 Share Posted August 29, 2019 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Kiltman said: eh, thats a narrative that's kinda fizzled out It’s true and you’ll see it more clearly in the next few seasons. Edited August 29, 2019 by Blackstar12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiltman Posted August 29, 2019 Share Posted August 29, 2019 1 minute ago, Blackstar12 said: It’s true and you’ll see in the next few seasons. I think if he had a low motor, Eagles are perfect because of the rotation we do. 2+ rotations of DEs and DTs to keep them fresh. I'll gladly take this...especially when he's lining up with Fletcher Cox. With Malik and the others being pretty good themselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forge Posted August 29, 2019 Share Posted August 29, 2019 11 minutes ago, Kiltman said: it likely will get changed a bit next CBA I dont get it besides a strong arm tactic I hope they do as well. I think it's a ridiculously silly rule. I'd also like to cap franchise tag possibilities, but that's going to be something that players will really have to give up a lot for (I'd prefer one time franchise tag, option to negotiate and sign all year long but after a certain point, they have to play on the tag, so the extension doesn't kick into the following year. As part of the compromise for a one time max tag, I think you create a right of first refusal tag or something like that which you have for RFAs where the team can choose to match any contract) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackstar12 Posted August 29, 2019 Share Posted August 29, 2019 1 minute ago, Kiltman said: I think if he had a low motor, Eagles are perfect because of the rotation we do. 2+ rotations of DEs and DTs to keep them fresh. I'll gladly take this...especially when he's lining up with Fletcher Cox. With Malik and the others being pretty good themselves. Yeah he’s a good fit for a team like the Eagles that are deep on the DL. If he goes to a team that isn’t deep at DL you’ll see great plays mixed with low effort plays. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shanedorf Posted August 29, 2019 Share Posted August 29, 2019 Just now, Forge said: I think it's a ridiculously silly rule. There's likely a couple of reasons for it. If you look back to why the Franchise Tags were originally enacted, it was to allow teams to keep their star players and not have them be poached by the wealthy teams. The league put a deadline on signing these deals because deadlines spur actions. The goal was to get it done and keep the stars on their original teams By not allowing other teams to sign that franchise player to a new deal/ extension after the deadline, it gives the incumbent the advantage in retaining the player. The NFLPA agreed to it for some unknown quid pro quo, but it only impacts a few players in their vast membership - so it was probably an easy give. The needs of the 5-10 tagged guys are outweighed by the needs of the 2000 other players in the league. Tagged players are also the highest compensated, so they are hardly aggrieved. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forge Posted August 29, 2019 Share Posted August 29, 2019 3 minutes ago, Shanedorf said: There's likely a couple of reasons for it. If you look back to why the Franchise Tags were originally enacted, it was to allow teams to keep their star players and not have them be poached by the wealthy teams. The league put a deadline on signing these deals because deadlines spur actions. The goal was to get it done and keep the stars on their original teams By not allowing other teams to sign that franchise player to a new deal/ extension after the deadline, it gives the incumbent the advantage in retaining the player. The NFLPA agreed to it for some unknown quid pro quo, but it only impacts a few players in their vast membership - so it was probably an easy give. The needs of the 5-10 tagged guys are outweighed by the needs of the 2000 other players in the league. Tagged players are also the highest compensated, so they are hardly aggrieved. The bolded is certainly true, so I will agree that there is a logic to that for sure. The second could be remedied by allowing the team that retains his rights to continue to negotiate but not allow other teams to try and swoop in there. Probably unfair to say the rule is silly...but I think it could certainly be tweaked for betterment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger Posted August 29, 2019 Share Posted August 29, 2019 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiltman Posted August 29, 2019 Share Posted August 29, 2019 27 minutes ago, Forge said: I hope they do as well. I think it's a ridiculously silly rule. I'd also like to cap franchise tag possibilities, but that's going to be something that players will really have to give up a lot for (I'd prefer one time franchise tag, option to negotiate and sign all year long but after a certain point, they have to play on the tag, so the extension doesn't kick into the following year. As part of the compromise for a one time max tag, I think you create a right of first refusal tag or something like that which you have for RFAs where the team can choose to match any contract) Yeah there is a compromise there, I think there's a good deal of things the players can get if the league really is going for 18 games finally Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.