-
Recently Browsing 0 members
- No registered users viewing this page.
-
-
Thread of the Week
-
Topics
-
Posts
-
Wentz trade had a higher risk factor because of the 1st rounder given up compared to Matt Ryan, IMO.
-
By Restinpeacesweetchloe · Posted
I still can’t shake the feeling something else was going on in the locker room. I don’t think it’s far fetched it had something to do with Covid vaccines ect. Then when Covid hit the team crap hit the fan.There seemed to he something that divided the locker room from that raiders game and it carried into this year. Covid vaccines wrecked a lot of relationships. -
Trading a first for an established player and giving him a new contract absolutely qualifies as an aggressive move. We're praising Howie Roseman for doing this with AJ Brown, but diminishing it when the Colts did it for Buckner? It's not the same level of aggressiveness as moving up for a QB, nor is it as risky. It's still aggressive, and risky. Same is true for signing Rivers, and trading for Wentz.
-
Agreed. Reich wasn't treated poorly by the Colts, his firing was absolutely warranted. I don't agree with bringing in Saturday as interim, but that's a different issue.
-
It’s true. Buckner was already a pro bowl caliber player when we traded for him. Aggressive would have been saving that pick and using it and other draft capital to go and get one of the QBs in the 2020 draft. Trading for Wentz (a conditional 2nd and a 3rd) isn’t as aggressive as trading up to go get Fields would have been. We traded a 3rd round pick for Ryan who was past his prime. That’s not aggressive at all. That’s maintaining status quo. Moving up for Taylor? Sure that was aggressive but let’s not act like teams don’t trade up in the 2nd round all the time. The truth is that very few of his moves have had any significant risk factor.
-
-
Members
Recommended Posts