Players who need to go this offseason

[chf]

contracts mean NOTHING in the NFL outside of guaranteed money.

seriously, are you new to the NFL or something?

I've been watching before your Mom met your Dad.

Does a % of cut guys contracts get counted against the cap? Yes or no?

Simple answer. Yes or no.

 

[blstoker]

1. huge underperformers

2. massive salary cap savings

how is that unreasonable?

Inaccurate and incomplete. Which players are salary dumps? Which one under performed?

 

[droider]

I'll dumb it down for you.

If you cut a guy, a certain % of his salary STILL COUNTS AGAINST THE CAP.

Now think about that, and get back to me.

not for players who don't have ANY remaining GUARANTEED dollars it doesn't. again, you're literally clueless.

 

[chf]

not for players who don't have ANY remaining GUARANTEED dollars it doesn't. again, you're literally clueless.

And that's the status of all the guys on your list?

 

[HaroldSeattle]

And let me guess, you have a plan with what to do with the savings that will make them a better team?

 

[chf]

See here's the thing Droider, the Hawks ALREADY have the rep of cutting guys who underperform their contract, and will eat the money. (see: Williams, Carey)

But they ALSO have the reputation of taking care of their veterans who deserve it.

It's part of why Seattle is seen as a blue-chip destination for FA's.

Again, this isn't a video game.

You really shouldn't throw around 'clueless' blasts.

The next time you wow me with your intellect will be the first.

 

[SonnyCID]

And let me guess, you have a plan with what to do with the savings that will make them a better team?

Waiting on an answer here @droider..... Is your strategy just to clear up cal space and thats it?

 

[droider]

And let me guess, you have a plan with what to do with the savings that will make them a better team?

of course. redistribute the allocation of new monies to currently underperforming or neglected areas of weakness - OL, RB, WR, LB.

how in the world is this approach unreasonable at all?

 

[AceKeptic]

Anybody besides me want this thread locked? Speak up.

I was fine putting in a little humor, reflecting on today's game. If only I had found the video clip ahead of time; had trouble trying to edit it.

But if you think it's best...

 

[HaroldSeattle]

I was fine putting in a little humor, reflecting on today's game. If only I had found the video clip ahead of time; had trouble trying to edit it.

But if you think it's best...

My remark had nothing to do with you. Rather it was about a thread I found ridulous.

 

[blstoker]

of course. redistribute the allocation of new monies to currently underperforming or neglected areas of weakness - OL, RB, WR, LB.

how in the world is this approach unreasonable at all?

Because you're advocating getting rid of established players without any input on who would be taking their place. What free agents? Which rookies to target? Which players would be a better fit and perform better?

Oh, yes, and you haven't even come out with WHY those players need to be gone.

 

[SonnyCID]

of course. redistribute the allocation of new monies to currently underperforming or neglected areas of weakness - OL, RB, WR, LB.

how in the world is this approach unreasonable at all?

How much money would you save on releasing those players vs dead money? Which ones are rfas or ufas? When you say "reallocate", are you also replacing the outgoing player with a comparable one at his position?

 

[AceKeptic]

My remark had nothing to do with you. Rather it was about a thread I found ridulous.

Understood. The back-and-forth going on really is the point.

But on the plus, it may teach all of us a little more about the business side of the game.

 

[cezero]

it doesn't matter who you get rid of

it'll be years before the team can afford to buy what they need to contend

that's just what happens

 

[AceKeptic]

it doesn't matter who you get rid of

it'll be years before the team can afford to buy what they need to contend

that's just what happens

Hey, cezero, long time no see!

 

[HaroldSeattle]

it doesn't matter who you get rid of

it'll be years before the team can afford to buy what they need to contend

that's just what happens

Buy? That's not the answer, best stick to baseball.

 

[droider]

it doesn't matter who you get rid of

it'll be years before the team can afford to buy what they need to contend

that's just what happens

what do you mean?

 

[Tech_God]

I am surprised that Carrol & Schneider are not on Droider's list. Fuck, let's get a new owner while we are at it.

 

[droider]

I am surprised that Carrol & Schneider are not on Droider's list. Fuck, let's get a new owner while we are at it.

yet i'm still waiting for you to tell me a single player on that list who doesn't belong on it. your posts are irrelevant until you can do so.

 

[Tech_God]

yet i'm still waiting for you to tell me a single player on that list who doesn't belong on it. your posts are irrelevant until you can do so.

And I'm waiting for you to give a reason to your knee jerky reaction! You started this STUPID thread so please give us an itemized list on why each player should be kicked off the team. When you do that, some of us might bring their counter arguements.

 

[droider]

And I'm waiting for you to give a reason to your knee jerky reaction! You started this STUPID thread so please give us an itemized list on why each player should be kicked off the team. When you do that, some of us might bring their counter arguements.

i've already done so, learn to read.