Yeah, more over-the-top nonsensical rhetorical hyperbole.
Originally Posted by: DoddPower
More labeling and deflecting...if Adams and 88 cent are stars... Cobb and Nelson aren't going anywhere.
Hawk never left because there was too much dead money. It wasn't about performance with Hawk, it was about his contract that's why he stuck and played. He was horrible but his contract made him almost uncuttable. Same kinda deal with Cutler in Chicago. No Bears fan wants him as their starter but he ain't going anywhere because he's paid too much.
I asked a simple question because I think it's relevant and entirely possible. I wanted to hear the thoughts of the members here but somehow I'm a baiting troll and full of hyperbole for bringing up something that very well could happen or should at least be a consideration for this org.
Should never be baffled by any of your replies but I'm human and make the mistake of being so.
EDIT: Go back and look at my old posts...I KNEW we weren't getting rid of Hawk due to money. I knew this was the year we could FINALLY move on and waited for it with baited breath. Same with Tramon... was hoping we might do it last year but we weren't quite there yet. I was certain we would move on this year and we did even though we almost brought him back for peanuts in comparison.
James may go. Don't be surprised if he departs. Can't wait to see Neal hopefully get a shot with the 1's. I like Starks, always have, but I like Neal, too. Neal offers an element James doesn't in pass game. Not sure Neal isn't a better option even at same money. Saving a mil and keeping maybe better player? No brainer. The "he was our RB when we won the SB" stuff has to be let go of.
Ted Thompson sits on his hands per former GM: "because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback."