Dessie Posted February 12, 2023 Share Posted February 12, 2023 Just now, drfrey13 said: Depends on what happened to the Saints offer. If he got a good offer from the Saints and he said screw this just to hurt us then screw him. If the Saints said we need you to takes a paycut and it did not benefit him in anyway then I understand. It all comes down to the details. From how David has been acting I would say this was personal and he just wanted to hurt us. So I would go all in and see if he blinks. He would still be on the team on 2/15. It’s being said that the Saints asked him to take a pay cut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darbsk Posted February 12, 2023 Share Posted February 12, 2023 Just now, Dessie said: Yeah I’m torn on that, I can see the reasoning to win now, just worry about Rodger’s/McDaniel dynamic tbh. Think I would rather build the roster. It’s a tricky one. Rodgers has been fantastic of course but I just wonder if the timing is right, maybe a year too early for us as a team as we wont have the D in place, not really contenders and possibly a year too late for Rodgers if he’s on the down hill slope at all which he seemed to be a little - though maybe that was just his concentration playing in the situation he was last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drfrey13 Posted February 12, 2023 Share Posted February 12, 2023 22 minutes ago, Dessie said: Absolute stupidity that would be, pay DC $35m to not play and scupper our own FA moves. We would only be screwing ourselves. Until teams realize if they want him they have to trade for him or wait another year for a QB. Carr would also have to realize if he wants to play he will have to waive the no trade clause. It is not without risk but teams have held their ground in the past and it has paid off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dessie Posted February 13, 2023 Share Posted February 13, 2023 1 minute ago, drfrey13 said: Until teams realize if they want him they have to trade for him or wait another year for a QB. Carr would also have to realize if he wants to play he will have to waive the no trade clause. It is not without risk but teams have held their ground in the past and it has paid off. How would that help us in FA, it’s not only risky it’s nonsensical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drfrey13 Posted February 13, 2023 Share Posted February 13, 2023 2 minutes ago, Dessie said: It’s being said that the Saints asked him to take a pay cut. Yes but how. If they wanted a pay cut but gave him more guaranteed it is still a win possibly. All depends on how big the cut is and what they were willing to give him in return. I know he was asked to take a pay cut but generally they give something back in return. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darbsk Posted February 13, 2023 Share Posted February 13, 2023 3 minutes ago, drfrey13 said: Until teams realize if they want him they have to trade for him or wait another year for a QB. Carr would also have to realize if he wants to play he will have to waive the no trade clause. It is not without risk but teams have held their ground in the past and it has paid off. But wouldn’t we still be on the hook for all the guaranteed money. It’s like paying 40 mil for a first round pick isn’t it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drfrey13 Posted February 13, 2023 Share Posted February 13, 2023 Just now, Dessie said: How would that help us in FA, it’s not only risky it’s nonsensical. We do not need to do much in FA. We are not doing anything next year unless everything plays out perfectly. Carr would end up getting traded but we would have to wait to get the cap space later when you get budget FAs. It makes sense if you are willing to take a risk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drfrey13 Posted February 13, 2023 Share Posted February 13, 2023 1 minute ago, Darbsk said: But wouldn’t we still be on the hook for all the guaranteed money. It’s like paying 40 mil for a first round pick isn’t it? No. All the guarantees are to be paid by the team he plays for. The money just becomes guaranteed but it is not like a signing bonus where we pay it up front. If he gets traded then that team owes him the guaranteed money unless he restructures. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dessie Posted February 13, 2023 Share Posted February 13, 2023 3 minutes ago, drfrey13 said: We do not need to do much in FA. We are not doing anything next year unless everything plays out perfectly. Carr would end up getting traded but we would have to wait to get the cap space later when you get budget FAs. It makes sense if you are willing to take a risk. Tell that to the FO. They aren’t going to want to have all the FA money tied up in a player they no longer want. Nonsensical which is why we are looking at releasing him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy408 Posted February 13, 2023 Share Posted February 13, 2023 1 hour ago, Darbsk said: There really is something malfunctioning here isn’t there? I mean for cripes sake Carson Wentz garnered a first round pick, how did we botch this up so badly? I’m all for giving a coaching and GM team patience but the FO should really be put on notice that that is a big, big error in judgement one way or another. The most valuable position and there’s several teams with obvious needs and we don’t even get a draft pick for Carr is gross incompetence IMO. I said that the trading Yannick ngakwoue for the older cheaper option was questionable. And that the FO should’ve been put on notice back then. And then I thought it was questionable to keep five running backs not including the one that you had to pay most Kenyan Drake even though you had to pay him anyway . Guess I was too early. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimkelly02 Posted February 13, 2023 Share Posted February 13, 2023 1 hour ago, MrOaktown_56 said: Remember when I said they tanked his trade value by not playing him for the last 2 games? I stand by it. It was idiotic. That and the super bowl guarantee + no trade clause. Your absolutely right! If we didn’t bench him the whole process of trading Carr and his value changes drastically. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drfrey13 Posted February 13, 2023 Share Posted February 13, 2023 1 hour ago, Dessie said: Tell that to the FO. They aren’t going to want to have all the FA money tied up in a player they no longer want. Nonsensical which is why we are looking at releasing him. Tell them what. Finally make a good decision. You want them to spend $40-50 million again. I do not. Would you rather them take a chance on a Carr trade or giving aging players huge contracts. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimkelly02 Posted February 13, 2023 Share Posted February 13, 2023 1 hour ago, MrOaktown_56 said: To everyone who is salty/hoping for him to get hurt, just know the front office are the ones who put in the idiotic no trade clause and this other bull****. No idea why you're mad at a player for looking after themselves. It's what anyone would do in that situation. He's going to get way more $ as a free agent. That's just the reality. Your spot on. If any of us were in the same situation we’d do what’s best for us, that’s all Carr’s doing. Ziegler and Co. set the rules, they’re the only ones to blame. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dessie Posted February 13, 2023 Share Posted February 13, 2023 2 minutes ago, drfrey13 said: Tell them what. Finally make a good decision. You want them to spend $40-50 million again. I do not. Would you rather them take a chance on a Carr trade or giving aging players huge contracts. A good decision does not involve guaranteeing a $40m contract for a player everyone knows you don’t want. Embarrassing you don’t recognise that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drfrey13 Posted February 13, 2023 Share Posted February 13, 2023 1 minute ago, jimkelly02 said: Your spot on. If any of us were in the same situation we’d do what’s best for us, that’s all Carr’s doing. Ziegler and Co. set the rules, they’re the only ones to blame. I will be surprised if he gets more than his current contract. He might get more guaranteed because he did not have a lot left but overall value should be less. The worst part is none of this happens if they just did what I said and not extend Carr. Give him the season to see how well he can produce in the system without the extension. We could have just tagged him if we wanted to trade him or keep him. No need to tell him to leave the facilities for the last 2 games also. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts