Jump to content

The Vegas "Our Front Office can certainly screw the pooch on this one." thread


vegas492

Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, Old Guy said:

Where is this information coming from regarding the Raiders agreeing to compensation for Carr? I've not seen it reported anywhere. 

This would be huge news if true. The Raiders would be fully stocked to outbid any team for Rodgers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, vegas492 said:

I started with Amari Rodgers.  Then it went to Christian Watson.  Then to Kenny Clark.  Along the way there was a dig at Nixon.  Wyatt ended up in there when the season was done.

But we don't count Amari Rodgers. That was before your powers came to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Sandy said:
5 hours ago, Old Guy said:

Where is this information coming from regarding the Raiders agreeing to compensation for Carr? I've not seen it reported anywhere. 

This would be huge news if true. The Raiders would be fully stocked to outbid any team for Rodgers. 

why would Carr agree to a trade to a team that is willing to pay him on his current contract AND have to give up assets when the alternative is Carr gets cut and can sign with that same team for the same contract value and the new team gets to keep the assets?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, squire12 said:

why would Carr agree to a trade to a team that is willing to pay him on his current contract AND have to give up assets when the alternative is Carr gets cut and can sign with that same team for the same contract value and the new team gets to keep the assets?

That has been my point all along. I don't have an answer for you. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Old Guy said:

Where is this information coming from regarding the Raiders agreeing to compensation for Carr? I've not seen it reported anywhere. 

 

Quote

 

Derek Carr has said he will not extend the Feb. 15 deadline for the $40.4 million injury guarantee clause in his contract. 

In other words, the Raiders have to trade Carr before Feb. 15. Carr has a no-trade clause, so in other other words, he will not be getting traded, instead forcing his release. “I don’t think that would be best for me,” Carr said matter-of-factly. He is correct. Carr has zero reason to play ball with the Raiders, and though the remaining money on his deal is lucrative, he will make even more as a free agent in this quarterback-starved league. The Raiders threw Carr under the bus on the way out the door. He is reclaiming some dignity now. 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, squire12 said:

why would Carr agree to a trade to a team that is willing to pay him on his current contract AND have to give up assets when the alternative is Carr gets cut and can sign with that same team for the same contract value and the new team gets to keep the assets?

I think the issue is the contract.  Pat Kirwan went over it once.  And that was debated on here (Cwood) as to whether or not Kirwan was correct.

I think that Kirwan's point was that he isn't getting a deal as a free agent like he has now.  Total comp.  So it would be best for him to help facilitate a trade.

And I think what works well for him via trade is that he gets that money, but Vegas has to eat the guaranteed dollars so the cap hit is less for the acquiring team?  But that is pure speculation on my part.

Now...I'm saying this, and I really don't understand his contract.  Simply parroting what Pat Kirwan said once while I was listening to him on the radio.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, vegas492 said:

I think the issue is the contract.  Pat Kirwan went over it once.  And that was debated on here (Cwood) as to whether or not Kirwan was correct.

I think that Kirwan's point was that he isn't getting a deal as a free agent like he has now.  Total comp.  So it would be best for him to help facilitate a trade.

And I think what works well for him via trade is that he gets that money, but Vegas has to eat the guaranteed dollars so the cap hit is less for the acquiring team?  But that is pure speculation on my part.

Now...I'm saying this, and I really don't understand his contract.  Simply parroting what Pat Kirwan said once while I was listening to him on the radio.

If a team is willing to trade for Carr, they are willing to pay him the current contract he has AND give up assets to acquire him.  So why not have Carr get cut and sign Carr to a similar contract and save the assets.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, squire12 said:

If a team is willing to trade for Carr, they are willing to pay him the current contract he has AND give up assets to acquire him.  So why not have Carr get cut and sign Carr to a similar contract and save the assets.  

Because if you trade for Carr, he's yours. If Carr is cut, you have to recruit him and he can go wherever he wants. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

Because if you trade for Carr, he's yours. If Carr is cut, you have to recruit him and he can go wherever he wants. 

and he will go where the money is highest.  so why again would Carr agree to a trade and restrict his potential to hit FA and get a big contract?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

Because if you trade for Carr, he's yours. If Carr is cut, you have to recruit him and he can go wherever he wants. 

In theory yes, but unfortunately in this scenario Carr has a no trade clause. He holds all the cards, not the Raiders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, {Family Ghost} said:

  I don't know what the Packers will do if he says he wants to stay in GB.  They probably cave and bring him back.

I think that's what's going to happen.  I'd trade him, but I think they'll rework a deal to bring him back.  There's nothing that would appeal to me playing in the AFC having to go through that gauntlet of QBs to win anything.

Edited by NFLGURU
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...