Vikes_Bolts1228 Posted March 5, 2019 Share Posted March 5, 2019 You guys think Rick can swoon the 9ers GM and get him to do Kittle for Griffen straight up? Maybe turn down the "trade logic" like you can in Madden? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
byuvike88 Posted March 5, 2019 Share Posted March 5, 2019 47 minutes ago, vikestyle said: I mean obviously you'd rather get guys to stay for cheaper, but Wolfson has said both Griffen and Rudolph are not interested in restructuring. If that's the case, he's essentially forcing us to either trade him or cut him. He never said Griffen wasn't, he said that Rudolph wasn't Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VikeManDan Posted March 5, 2019 Share Posted March 5, 2019 2 minutes ago, Vikes_Bolts1228 said: You guys think Rick can swoon the 9ers GM and get him to do Kittle for Griffen straight up? Maybe turn down the "trade logic" like you can in Madden? We'll give them Rudy as well! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
byuvike88 Posted March 5, 2019 Share Posted March 5, 2019 1 hour ago, swede700 said: Is Linval really hungry? Well...maybe a little Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikestyle Posted March 5, 2019 Share Posted March 5, 2019 6 minutes ago, byuvike88 said: He never said Griffen wasn't, he said that Rudolph wasn't https://twitter.com/DWolfsonKSTP/status/1102959166556172288?s=19 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
byuvike88 Posted March 5, 2019 Share Posted March 5, 2019 1 minute ago, vikestyle said: https://twitter.com/DWolfsonKSTP/status/1102959166556172288?s=19 Oh my bad. I hadn't seen that tweet. I had just listened to a couple podcasts where he talked about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikestyle Posted March 5, 2019 Share Posted March 5, 2019 11 minutes ago, byuvike88 said: Oh my bad. I hadn't seen that tweet. I had just listened to a couple podcasts where he talked about it. Yup it was pretty new. And that's a bummer especially when you see the Eagles restructuring every contract they've ever signed, but I'm an advocate for the players. We signed them to contracts and they shouldn't have to give up money if they don't want to. It'd be great if they did, but they shouldn't be expected to. That said, we either need to trade them or release them so they can go get another contract. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VikeManDan Posted March 5, 2019 Share Posted March 5, 2019 Players aren't giving money up in a restructure, players only give up money when taking a pay cut is my understanding. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikestyle Posted March 5, 2019 Share Posted March 5, 2019 7 minutes ago, VikeManDan said: Players aren't giving money up in a restructure, players only give up money when taking a pay cut is my understanding. Yeah I'll let someone smarter than me get into all that. My rudimentary understanding is that a normal restructure can add years and guaranteed money to the back end of a contract which would be what you're talking about. However, I think that's usually what happens for younger players on their second contracts as opposed to aging vets on the downside of their careers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VikeManDan Posted March 5, 2019 Share Posted March 5, 2019 A restructure is a restructure, I don't think it matters for aging vet vs. 2nd contract player. The restructure adds time but gives the player money up front by converting their base salary into a signing bonus. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingsrule Posted March 5, 2019 Share Posted March 5, 2019 16 minutes ago, vikestyle said: Yup it was pretty new. And that's a bummer especially when you see the Eagles restructuring every contract they've ever signed, but I'm an advocate for the players. We signed them to contracts and they shouldn't have to give up money if they don't want to. It'd be great if they did, but they shouldn't be expected to. That said, we either need to trade them or release them so they can go get another contract. Easier to do that when you win a super bowl. The Vikes didn't make the playoffs, as a veteran, I can see not wanting to give money back. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingsrule Posted March 5, 2019 Share Posted March 5, 2019 Any interest in John Sullivan? The Rams declined his option. He hasn't missed a start in two years and can play in a ZBS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikestyle Posted March 5, 2019 Share Posted March 5, 2019 27 minutes ago, VikeManDan said: A restructure is a restructure, I don't think it matters for aging vet vs. 2nd contract player. The restructure adds time but gives the player money up front by converting their base salary into a signing bonus. Gotcha. Appreciate the clarification! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VikeManDan Posted March 5, 2019 Share Posted March 5, 2019 1 minute ago, vikestyle said: Gotcha. Appreciate the clarification! I'm certainly not an expert and could in fact be getting some things mixed up with extending a player. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikestyle Posted March 5, 2019 Share Posted March 5, 2019 Mark Barron was released. Don't know if he's any good. Is this someone that interests you as a potential Barr replacement? Upside would be they'd just have to stitch an "on" onto the back of Barr's old jersey 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.