NorthHawk wrote:Still does not say who he drafted or what he did. You are just taking a period in time, ignoring that we did not build this team solely through the draft, and assuming McGloughan is somehow the reason.
I'm not going to keep posting how this team was built given any Seattle fan should know.
McGloughan did not build the Super Bowl team. That is just BS.
In your mind somehow McGloughan found everyone of our good players in the draft, convinced Carroll and Schneider to draft them, and built the team while Pete and John buffooned around going, "McGloughan, what would do with out you?" That just such a ridiculous idea I see getting posted over and over again. The idea that one guy in the organization has that much power to get players drafted and scouts them all and just knows better than everyone else like that's how NFL scouting and drafting works.
Just look at the results. Some people just have a good eye for talent that fits and can have a huge influence on who to select. That's the reality of the draft and how it works.
When McGloughan was here as Senior Personnel Executive we selected 8 players that were named to the Pro Bowl or All Pro.
Since he left we've selected 4 players to do that of which 1 is a punter. Brooks and Taylor might add to that list, but still
8 in 2 years vs 4 in 7 drafts.
c_hawkbob wrote:His actual first year salary is only $1.4M to minimize the effect of any league sanctions against him for his sexual assault cases. Cleveland really sold their souls for this one. Hope it bites 'em in the arse hard.
NorthHawk wrote:It was described by someone in the media as the first Basketball contract in the NFL - and that sounds about right.
A few years ago we discussed QB salaries and the impact on the Cap, and if the Cap doesn't expand equally with
the increase in QB compensation, how are teams going to manage? Now that we see the Watson and Rodgers
contracts and expect others to follow, will it be addressed sooner than later? Something like a QB exemption or
partial exemption for Cap purposes or maybe make them Cap exempt? The issues will be coming to the front
pretty soon with Murray already wanting to get a new contract and I'm sure others are looking that way, too.
NorthHawk wrote:We might end up like in Baseball where an owner would "buy" a championship, and that's probably not good for the league and the for the most part parity it has achieved.
By allowing some type of relief for one player (it might not have to be a QB come to think of it) all teams could be on the same footing or at least a similar one.
NorthHawk wrote:like I said it doesn’t have to be a QB, so if a team found the 2nd coming of a Reggie White and had to keep
him they could use it to stock the rest of the team. Then when his contract is more manageable use it on
another player. It could help teams become more competitive.
Just a thought.
RiverDog wrote:I would be vehemently opposed to some type of QB exemption in the salary cap. Damn QB's are pampered enough as it is, and you'd essentially be trying to save the owners/GM's from themselves. Let teams like the Packers and Browns stew in their own broth if they make a bad deal. No one's forcing them to make those ridiculous offers. Leave things alone and the problem will self correct.
Hawktawk wrote:I felt Russ was in the same situation as a first basketball type deal . Quasi forcing his way out while in his prime and picking his landing spot .
A few interesting comments from PC . He said on Mike Salk yesterday morning that he was never in favor of trading Russ , never thought it would happen and when it did he chose to see the opportunity for the team or words to that effect . So was he not on board ? If so it’s another sign of the power shift .
Also Carroll reinterated a desire to resign Geno “ had a great command of the offense “ ahead of the others in the competition from that standpoint “. So if that doesn’t happen it’s another sign PC is a paper Tiger .
Hawktawk wrote:I believe Carroll said he wasn’t in favor of trading him even if he wanted out . Kind of like Wags . PC said he was hoping to bring him back and had a different opinion than John in explaining the mix up in notification. Sure looks like things are changing which I see as a good thing .
c_hawkbob wrote:His actual first year salary is only $1.4M to minimize the effect of any league sanctions against him for his sexual assault cases. Cleveland really sold their souls for this one. Hope it bites 'em in the arse hard.
As you've heard, with a new allegation and a potentially a new grand jury investigation, I wonder if the Browns had something written in the contract to offset the risk. They had to pay him $44.9MM on signing....I would hope its laying in escrow waiting to see how this plays out. I presume they couldn't get their 3 #1's back.
Hawktawk wrote:Watson is nauseating . The whole thing is sordid , set the league back decades . Hill is no different . My guess he was getting spun out and KC dealt him . I’ve heard Pete and John are getting bombed with offers for DK and Lockette. If they pull the trigger on that it’s a wrap on the era , total rebuild unless they have a 2012 draft in front of them .
Hawktawk wrote:Watson is nauseating . The whole thing is sordid , set the league back decades . Hill is no different . My guess he was getting spun out and KC dealt him . I’ve heard Pete and John are getting bombed with offers for DK and Lockette. If they pull the trigger on that it’s a wrap on the era , total rebuild unless they have a 2012 draft in front of them .
NorthHawk wrote:The NFLPA is (according to PFT) going to take the position of an equitable punishment as Kraft, Snyder, and Jones got. Which was really nothing. And since the owners are supposed to be held to a higher standard, they may have a point.
NorthHawk wrote:Roethlisberger was before the Kraft/Jones/Snyder incidents. They now have a benchmark from which to compare punishments of players and owners.
Aseahawkfan wrote:I am so glad we did not trade for Watson. I don't care how good he is. I would not have felt good with that guy at QB.
I don't care if the millionaire athletes demand the same punishments as the billionaire owners. Not like the players and owners haven't both engaged in plenty of scumbag behavior they overlook to win or just have a good player.
RiverDog wrote:I agree. Kraft, Snyder, Jones, et al should have been punished, but two wrongs don't make a right. It's not an acceptable excuse not to punish Watson for what was obviously a blatant violation of the personal conduct policy. Watson's 'crimes' of sexual assault, although unproven, are leaps and bounds above what Robert Kraft did, ie soliciting prostitution.
RiverDog wrote:I agree. Kraft, Snyder, Jones, et al should have been punished, but two wrongs don't make a right. It's not an acceptable excuse not to punish Watson for what was obviously a blatant violation of the personal conduct policy. Watson's 'crimes' of sexual assault, although unproven, are leaps and bounds above what Robert Kraft did, ie soliciting prostitution.
Aseahawkfan wrote:I don't even know for sure what Watson did. I just know it was weird. Probably uncomfortable for the women. I figure he was probably requesting Happy Endings from masseuses that didn't normally give them. Sure, there are lots of massage parlors of ill repute, but not all of them. Many are likely legitimate massage parlors with women that do it for a living as giving even regular massages is good money. If he was trying to get Happy Endings from legitimate massage therapists by showing himself off while offering cash or the like, then I guess I have an idea of what he was doing. It obviously wasn't full on rape or he would be in jail. Either way, that's just weird.
And I doubt that was the first time Robert Kraft did what he did and Snyder has tons of stuff built up on him. I can see the union having a legal precedent for fighting back given the weak punishments given to owners and possible discrimination being shown. Even if Watson doesn't get suspended, he may be able to sue for compensation. I imagine we will see how invested the union is in fighting on behalf Watson.
Hawktawk wrote:Dude was playing small towel with them bringing a miniature towel , humping the massage table and leaving ummmm....evidence. FYI the attorney handling the remaining lawsuits has added the Texans organization to it based on their facilitating of his activities furnishing a hotel suite under the name of a team official and providing NDAs AFTER he reported receiving complaints and threats from masseuses. It s as big a scandal as the league has had. Hes facing an indefinite suspension and Ive read reports the Browns may sign Garroppolo now. And you think Seattle's QB room is a mess![]()
NorthHawk wrote:I had read somewhere that if Watson was suspended this year the Browns would still be on the hook for Watson's last year of his original contract
as the new one is an extension. Therefore, the QB cost would be Jimmy G's contract plus the last year of Watsons contract.
Probably still less than what the Browns will have to pay next year, but still a lot of money.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 51 guests