Jump to content

Update: Alex Leatherwood waived


RaidersAreOne

What would you do?  

16 members have voted

  1. 1. What would you do?

    • Try to find a trade partner, if nothing works then release him. Time to cut our loses.
      5
    • Keep him and start him, and just hope he improves with playing time.
      1
    • Keep him but purely as a backup. He hasn't earned a starting spot yet.
      11


Recommended Posts

55 minutes ago, big_palooka said:

The "move him to G" and "he's better on the left side" arguments bother me. 

This staff seems highly intelligent and in tune with their players. If they are not seeing value at G, left side, etc. then I trust their eyes. 

 

Of course.

But here's the thing:
The new regime obviously is trying to find a trade partner for him. But what if they don't find anyone?
I don't think they cut him - so what's the next option?
To find a position that's suits him better for the upcoming season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Styrian Raider said:

Of course.

But here's the thing:
The new regime obviously is trying to find a trade partner for him. But what if they don't find anyone?
I don't think they cut him - so what's the next option?
To find a position that's suits him better for the upcoming season.

Leave him parked on the sidelines while he considers that he practically hit the lottery thanks to Grudock's incompetence. 

He's a liability on the field. His trade value is shot. And the only reason he has any hope of making the team is because of his contract and cap. List him as a FS for all I care, he doesn't need to see the field over more deserving guys. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ronjon1990 said:

Leave him parked on the sidelines while he considers that he practically hit the lottery thanks to Grudock's incompetence. 

He's a liability on the field. His trade value is shot. And the only reason he has any hope of making the team is because of his contract and cap. List him as a FS for all I care, he doesn't need to see the field over more deserving guys. 

Well, that we move him to LG or G in general, doesn't mean that he will start in that position.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Styrian Raider said:

Of course.

But here's the thing:
The new regime obviously is trying to find a trade partner for him. But what if they don't find anyone?
I don't think they cut him - so what's the next option?
To find a position that's suits him better for the upcoming season.

Keep him at OT and see if it eventually clicks for him I guess. 

Really discouraging as he was said to have a good offseason. Then completely fell apart in training camp. His confidence is shot at this point. I just don't see the value in keeping someone like that around. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, big_palooka said:

Keep him at OT and see if it eventually clicks for him I guess. 

Really discouraging as he was said to have a good offseason. Then completely fell apart in training camp. His confidence is shot at this point. I just don't see the value in keeping someone like that around. 

 

He supposed iirc tagged along training with wills the lt from Cleveland browns also but I guess he didn’t learn a mf thing. He seems like the type that would walk away from football early to do something artsy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Styrian Raider said:

Well, that we move him to LG or G in general, doesn't mean that he will start in that position.
 

No, I get that. I just mean it doesn't really matter what position he's listed at, he doesn't need to play. 

It's painfully obvious he would have been cut were it not for the cap hit. No need to put him on the field just for charity's sake. If we want to list him at G for record's sake, ok. But he's still a sub-replacement level player that we need to just keep inactive and be done with ASAP. There's no real value in moving his position designation unless he were to play, and that doesn't need to happen. Him being on the field threatens to hurt the offense more than help it. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, big_palooka said:

The "move him to G" and "he's better on the left side" arguments bother me. 

This staff seems highly intelligent and in tune with their players. If they are not seeing value at G, left side, etc. then I trust their eyes. 

 

Did you see him on the left side at any point in the preseason?  Did you hear from anyone that they had him on the left at practice?  No and no.  So them seeing him fail on the right and making the judgment that because of that he could not make it on the left when that is where he played most of his career is just as stupid as Cable thinking he can just switch a guy from the left to the right without him having playing time there and it will turn out great.  Who here does not watch Leatherwood play on the left at Alabama and think to themselves I would draft him in the 2nd or 3rd?  But one year playing where he should not have been and he is a garbage player that can not be the last O-linemen when his pay is guaranteed?  I am not into scholarship players but this is a bit on the other extreme.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

FO decided it was worth 8 mil not to have this bum on the team.

I like the precedent. Doesn't matter how you got here, what you're paid... if you can't compete, you're gone. 

31 other teams said no to a trade. Was an obvious terrible draft pick and here we are before year 2. Amazing. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, big_palooka said:

FO decided it was worth 8 mil not to have this bum on the team.

I like the precedent. Doesn't matter how you got here, what you're paid... if you can't compete, you're gone. 

31 other teams said no to a trade. Was an obvious terrible draft pick and here we are before year 2. Amazing. 

If we keep 9-10 o-linemen and we have 9-10 o-linemen that are better then him I get your point but you can not gauge his ability by only having him play out of position.  My point is he was not given a chance to compete if he was never allowed to lineup on the other side.

31 other teams all said no because of the money he was owed which we already guaranteed.  If he does not make another teams roster then I will say you are correct.

Edited by drfrey13
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, drfrey13 said:

Did you see him on the left side at any point in the preseason?  Did you hear from anyone that they had him on the left at practice?  No and no.  So them seeing him fail on the right and making the judgment that because of that he could not make it on the left when that is where he played most of his career is just as stupid as Cable thinking he can just switch a guy from the left to the right without him having playing time there and it will turn out great.  Who here does not watch Leatherwood play on the left at Alabama and think to themselves I would draft him in the 2nd or 3rd?  But one year playing where he should not have been and he is a garbage player that can not be the last O-linemen when his pay is guaranteed?  I am not into scholarship players but this is a bit on the other extreme.

This better work cause if the light comes on some team is getting a free player on our tab

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, NCOUGHMAN said:

This better work cause if the light comes on some team is getting a free player on our tab

Meh, even if it comes on, I strongly doubt it would have much to do with us. He simply wasn't good and made too many errors on the field. 

If someone else gets a good player out of him, they're either a wizard or just incredibly lucky. Either way, I don't see how he would've ever been successful here for many reasons, some under hso control, others not. 

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...