Crimsoncrew
Well-Known Member
- 10,323
- 56
- 48
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2011
- Hoopla Cash
- $ 1,000.00
I'm not sure where you got that info that he would be a WR or anything other than a QB.
I was joking.
I'm not sure where you got that info that he would be a WR or anything other than a QB.
Nobody ever really knows....ST ? WR ? TE ? QB? Oh wait....that's the Pats deciding where Tebow might fit in !I was joking.
Nobody ever really knows....ST ? WR ? TE ? QB? Oh wait....that's the Pats deciding where Tebow might fit in !
Yeah, I realized after the fact that it wasn't clear that I wasn't being serious.
Obvious to some.
not necessarily, we can cut Wallace can't we?
if you think about all the things he needs to learn......in one week.....then perform next week.....
then he not playing last season (why would he be working out all this time?), and next his age......
Cannot come up with any reason that the 49ers would have made this move; then again I can't think of any reason they would have signed Colt McCoy either but they did. Pickins' must be real slim. Can you imagine either of those guys trying to work with this wide receiver corps we have? That would be a disaster.
Cannot come up with any reason that the 49ers would have made this move; then again I can't think of any reason they would have signed Colt McCoy either but they did. Pickins' must be real slim. Can you imagine either of those guys trying to work with this wide receiver corps we have? That would be a disaster.
Most likely. But how many teams would do well if they lost their star QB for a significant period?
The 49ers did not sign Colt McCoy
He's playing for free? Wow!
We traded for him...
Yep, and then signed him. I assume his previous contract was with the Browns and now would have to move to the 49ers. Did you think documents did not need to be re-signed after a trade by the player and the new team?
Actually, the contracts probably have an assignability clause which would preclude the need to have it re-signed.
I doubt it. Too many team specific details in contracts these days. For instance, no way the 49ers pay an 8 wins bonus that he may have got as a starter in Cleveland when he is a backup on a team much more likely to win 8 games.
I doubt it. Too many team specific details in contracts these days. For instance, no way the 49ers pay an 8 wins bonus that he may have got as a starter in Cleveland when he is a backup on a team much more likely to win 8 games.
I disagree. Contracts are transferred verbatim. Any change with the new club is noted in the media.
Don't you think that bonus would be contingent on being a starter? Too many issues would open up by trying to negotiate a new contract, these guys get traded and are working with the new team the next day, sometimes.
I can't say I know enough about the subject to argue about it.
Signed vs trade...splitting hairs here but it is fun to watch you guys argue about it.
I feel McCoy will be gone as early as Sunday...just my opinion.