quote:

ORIGINAL: TJSweens

If it's a contest between the statistics that measure performance and a Brad H. eye test, I will go with the stats every time.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

I liked Culpepper a lot and thought he gave his all every game, but the board had the same points about Culpepper as it does with Cousins: he can't possibly fulfill his potential and lead us to the SB unless EVERY component of the team is top notch. Right guard injured a couple of games? Sorry, but that affected Daunte and no way should we expect him to rise above that. It has been shown that the OL does give time for Cousins to throw. Problem is he is a statue, he holds the ball too long, and has the worst combination of pocket presence and happy feet a QB could have. But yeah, go enjoy those stats.

Cousins is the Adrian Peterson of QBs. He piles up the yards but is damn well useless in other phases of the game. And he sucks up the cap space like there is no tomorrow.

The stats show that in drop back situations for 2018 and 2019 Cousins was league average. I don't know if he is holding onto the ball long, not moving through his reads fast enough because I don't know the play design and what the primary, secondary reads are. I also don't know if he's deteriorated in those areas since becoming a Viking. When McVay and Shanahan coached him, as I've posted before, they thought highly of him because they considered those strengths for him. And when your interior line is the worst in history it does impact QB play, that's not an excuse, just a fact.

No doubt the extension was a terrible decision, and his cap hits are debilitating the next two years. And upgrading the position is something we should absolutely pursue. I don't enjoy his stats? But I guess any defense of him makes me pro-cousins.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

quote:

ORIGINAL: marty

So Brady capitalized on the turnovers, and didn't make mistakes in the 1st half to put his team in the hole, and did this on the road against quality opposition, and he did the same thing in the SB, against a team that just won the SB the previous year.

There is NO guarantee Cousins would do that.

Only a fool would say any QB could do that. As none of Brady's throws looked terribly difficult, there are probably some that speculate Trubisky, Carr or Cousins could all havemade those throws, but just watching someone play in the clutch, doesn't make another player suddenly clutch.

Make up your mind on which argument you are trying to push. Or better yet, do some research AND then make a claim. Like Brady made the oline better. Prove it. I can post some stats that back up my argument for the SB. Brady was pressured only 3 times (10%) on plays 2.5 or less while Mahomes was pressure 43% in the same situations. Bucs oline had 33 carries, 145 yards, 4.4 average, 1 TD.

Who guaranteed Cousins could do that?

Who said any QB could do that? You need to work on your reading comprehension.

My original points: 1) I'm all for improving the Vikings QB situation. 2) Cousins, inaccurately imo, is getting all the blame for slow starts when it's multiple things.
3) Bucs had a vastly superior team to the Vikings last year in all phases except 1, the run game which was mitigated or caused by scheme (and as you can see the in the SB, ran it pretty effectively). And that the Bucs lifted Brady not the other way around.

1) Ofcourse, nobody should dispute that.

2) Pretty much true.

3) Certainly, the Bucs were a superior team to the Vikings ... vastly on defense, OL and TE. And coaching.

To say that the Bucs would have won big game after big game, from getting the #5 seed in-season as an 11-5 above-average-but-not-really-good-team through winning the SB ... without a Big Game QB, is a feeble argument. That's not what happened in 2020.

Sure, the rest of the team absolutely rose to the occasion, and the Chiefs were not the same team that beat the Bucs during the season.

But 2020 ended with a proven big game player making reads, decisions, throws one necessary play after another, one big game after another.

Cousins is a good QB with a great arm. He has yet to prove he is a big game player in any sense of the term.

Calling the Bucs an above average but not really good team, is a feeble argument. And no Brady did not make one necessary play after another. NFCCG is absolutely proof of that. Brady choked. 3 second half pics - in a row. One of them Brady chucked it up - floater not even close to his target in a critical spot. Bucs defense and GB bailed Brady out.

As Brad pointed out, they held Mahomes and the Chiefs to 3 field goals.

I apologize for the long-ass answer.

Going into the playoffs, anybody not involved in this debate would say the Chiefs, Packers, Saints and Bills were better teams ... easily. The next rung being the Bucs and 5 or 6 other 11-5 teams (Titans, Ravens, Browns, Colts, Seahawks ...) with the struggling Steelers, Rams?, WASH and Bears on the lowest playoff rung.

We can quibble over above average / good / very good ... IMO the Bucs were somewhere in the middle of the pack ...

Yes – you are right ... Brady did not play well in the NFCCG (although he threw 2 TDs which helped). The Bucs defense completely bailed out Brady and won that game ... the Bucs run game was actually the second biggest contributor with some huge gaffes by the packers as probably the third.

When I say 'play after play', it's a mis-statement because it implies 'every necessary play' which is impossible. Maybe 'do enough to win', I dunno, obviously I'm not talking about every game or making the necessary play in every situation – no player has ever done that.

I am not really a Brady fan, never have been. I do grudgingly admit that he somehow consistently finds ways to win in spite of his physical limitations. I used to hate that with the Pats ... for some reason, it entertained me this past season.

As far as the SB – you cannot have it both ways and argue that our stupid OL is holding Cousins back from 'winner' status but that the Bucs Def were great by stuffing Mahomes regardless of his lousy OL (Not to mention playing through injury). The Bucs defense is good but not near the SB's Ravens or Bears level – Brady was a critical factor and, yes, came through in some clutch moments. (not play after play which was a silly exaggeration).

To get back to the original point, Cousins has not done enough in his career with what he has – to be considered a QB that rises to the occasion / plays well in big moments / comes through under pressure (however you want to word it). That's not comparing him to Brady or anyone else ... that is just his trajectory as a QB so far. I honestly hope he gets past that and proves otherwise.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

quote:

ORIGINAL: marty

So Brady capitalized on the turnovers, and didn't make mistakes in the 1st half to put his team in the hole, and did this on the road against quality opposition, and he did the same thing in the SB, against a team that just won the SB the previous year.

There is NO guarantee Cousins would do that.

Only a fool would say any QB could do that. As none of Brady's throws looked terribly difficult, there are probably some that speculate Trubisky, Carr or Cousins could all havemade those throws, but just watching someone play in the clutch, doesn't make another player suddenly clutch.

Make up your mind on which argument you are trying to push. Or better yet, do some research AND then make a claim. Like Brady made the oline better. Prove it. I can post some stats that back up my argument for the SB. Brady was pressured only 3 times (10%) on plays 2.5 or less while Mahomes was pressure 43% in the same situations. Bucs oline had 33 carries, 145 yards, 4.4 average, 1 TD.

Who guaranteed Cousins could do that?

Who said any QB could do that? You need to work on your reading comprehension.

My original points: 1) I'm all for improving the Vikings QB situation. 2) Cousins, inaccurately imo, is getting all the blame for slow starts when it's multiple things.
3) Bucs had a vastly superior team to the Vikings last year in all phases except 1, the run game which was mitigated or caused by scheme (and as you can see the in the SB, ran it pretty effectively). And that the Bucs lifted Brady not the other way around.

1) Ofcourse, nobody should dispute that.

2) Pretty much true.

3) Certainly, the Bucs were a superior team to the Vikings ... vastly on defense, OL and TE. And coaching.

To say that the Bucs would have won big game after big game, from getting the #5 seed in-season as an 11-5 above-average-but-not-really-good-team through winning the SB ... without a Big Game QB, is a feeble argument. That's not what happened in 2020.

Sure, the rest of the team absolutely rose to the occasion, and the Chiefs were not the same team that beat the Bucs during the season.

But 2020 ended with a proven big game player making reads, decisions, throws one necessary play after another, one big game after another.

Cousins is a good QB with a great arm. He has yet to prove he is a big game player in any sense of the term.

Calling the Bucs an above average but not really good team, is a feeble argument. And no Brady did not make one necessary play after another. NFCCG is absolutely proof of that. Brady choked. 3 second half pics - in a row. One of them Brady chucked it up - floater not even close to his target in a critical spot. Bucs defense and GB bailed Brady out.

As Brad pointed out, they held Mahomes and the Chiefs to 3 field goals.

I apologize for the long-ass answer.

Going into the playoffs, anybody not involved in this debate would say the Chiefs, Packers, Saints and Bills were better teams ... easily. The next rung being the Bucs and 5 or 6 other 11-5 teams (Titans, Ravens, Browns, Colts, Seahawks ...) with the struggling Steelers, Rams?, WASH and Bears on the lowest playoff rung.

We can quibble over above average / good / very good ... IMO the Bucs were somewhere in the middle of the pack ...

Yes – you are right ... Brady did not play well in the NFCCG (although he threw 2 TDs which helped). The Bucs defense completely bailed out Brady and won that game ... the Bucs run game was actually the second biggest contributor with some huge gaffes by the packers as probably the third.

When I say 'play after play', it's a mis-statement because it implies 'every necessary play' which is impossible. Maybe 'do enough to win', I dunno, obviously I'm not talking about every game or making the necessary play in every situation – no player has ever done that.

I am not really a Brady fan, never have been. I do grudgingly admit that he somehow consistently finds ways to win in spite of his physical limitations. I used to hate that with the Pats ... for some reason, it entertained me this past season.

As far as the SB – you cannot have it both ways and argue that our stupid OL is holding Cousins back from 'winner' status but that the Bucs Def were great by stuffing Mahomes regardless of his lousy OL (Not to mention playing through injury). The Bucs defense is good but not near the SB's Ravens or Bears level – Brady was a critical factor and, yes, came through in some clutch moments. (not play after play which was a silly exaggeration).

To get back to the original point, Cousins has not done enough in his career with what he has – to be considered a QB that rises to the occasion / plays well in big moments / comes through under pressure (however you want to word it). That's not comparing him to Brady or anyone else ... that is just his trajectory as a QB so far. I honestly hope he gets past that and proves otherwise.

quote:

ORIGINAL: marty

I think Goff and Cousins is a good comparison on many levels, but I would take Cousins over Goff. Too many balls in the dirt for Goff, Cousins is more accurate.

Derek Carr and Carson Wentz may also be fair comparison to Cousins. They all seem to crumble under pressure, but Wentz at least has some mobility.

Wentz is going to a team with a good OL, and defense, just lacks WRs, but since I think it's about 80% QB/20% WR, he should do well there, we'll see.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brad H

quote:

ORIGINAL: TJSweens

If it's a contest between the statistics that measure performance and a Brad H. eye test, I will go with the stats every time.

Unless they are playing in the same offensive system, with the same guys around them, in the same stadium, with the same weather against the same defenses, numbers are mostly irrelevant. What the Rams were trying to do on offense was completely different from what the Vikings were trying to do. Totally different offenses.

The statistical argument is naive and lazy.

quote:

ORIGINAL: TJSweens

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brad H

quote:

ORIGINAL: TJSweens

If it's a contest between the statistics that measure performance and a Brad H. eye test, I will go with the stats every time.

Unless they are playing in the same offensive system, with the same guys around them, in the same stadium, with the same weather against the same defenses, numbers are mostly irrelevant. What the Rams were trying to do on offense was completely different from what the Vikings were trying to do. Totally different offenses.

The statistical argument is naive and lazy.

No, finding a shitty QB to compare Cousins to because you don't like him and ignoring statistics because they don't support your argument is lazy.

I will stipulate that stats are not the whole picture, but they do measure how effective a QB operates in his given system with his given teammates. The stats also tell you what the QB was operating behind. The Vikings graded out as the 28th ranked pass blocking unit in the NFL. Isolate the middle of the line and it gets even worse. None of our interior linemen made the top 32 at their positions for pressure rate. That means they finished behind every starter and a few back ups. When the pressure comes that fast and hard from the inside, the QB has no time for receivers to come open, passing windows are non existent and they have to move to buy time and find passing window. Conversely, Goff operated behind one of the best O-lines in the game. He had clean pockets and enjoyed plenty of time to survey his options. His confusion in a clean pocket is on him.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brad H

quote:

ORIGINAL: TJSweens

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brad H

quote:

ORIGINAL: TJSweens

If it's a contest between the statistics that measure performance and a Brad H. eye test, I will go with the stats every time.

Unless they are playing in the same offensive system, with the same guys around them, in the same stadium, with the same weather against the same defenses, numbers are mostly irrelevant. What the Rams were trying to do on offense was completely different from what the Vikings were trying to do. Totally different offenses.

The statistical argument is naive and lazy.

No, finding a shitty QB to compare Cousins to because you don't like him and ignoring statistics because they don't support your argument is lazy.

I will stipulate that stats are not the whole picture, but they do measure how effective a QB operates in his given system with his given teammates. The stats also tell you what the QB was operating behind. The Vikings graded out as the 28th ranked pass blocking unit in the NFL. Isolate the middle of the line and it gets even worse. None of our interior linemen made the top 32 at their positions for pressure rate. That means they finished behind every starter and a few back ups. When the pressure comes that fast and hard from the inside, the QB has no time for receivers to come open, passing windows are non existent and they have to move to buy time and find passing window. Conversely, Goff operated behind one of the best O-lines in the game. He had clean pockets and enjoyed plenty of time to survey his options. His confusion in a clean pocket is on him.

Part of the reason the o-line graded out at 28 was because of the guy holding onto the ball too damned long and locking in on receivers.

IMO, they are both average, at-best quarterbacks. Neither is going to lead a franchise to a title, no matter how much talent you put around them. They don't have that "IT" that it takes to win in big games.

We'll have to agree to disagree.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

I don't even like Brady but theorize he elevated that whole TB team, just like he did with NE. He was probably a positive influence in the two weeks before the SB, and had the ultimate "been there, done that" stamp. And when it counted, in the big game, he delivered.

The comparison between stat-boy Cousins and Brady is laughable.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mark Anderson

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mark Anderson

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

Hell of a lot classier than they treated Antoine Winfield Sr that’s for sure

What happened? I must have missed something.

35 years old. Played here 9 years(two nice contracts). Asked him to take pay cut. Cut him. Tried to resign him for less.

Then, more or less, he retired after that.

As I recall, we were willing to pay Winfield around $3M to stay. He decided to sign with Seattle for damn near league minimum. Then they cut him in preseason.

They cut him one hour before free agency started - after the legal tampering window. Winfield's camp maintains that there was no offer for a paycut and that they were expecting business as usual. They pulled him out of his workout at Winter Park to tell him. He was coming off one of his best seasons in his career.

Don't you think that maybe Winfield played hardball and lost. I find it hard to believe that we didn't offer him a chance at a reduced rate.

I wish there would have been some direct quotes from Winfield in your articles. Just an NFL source speaking for Winfield camp.

Not saying it is right. He had a good season and we went to playoffs. Probably thought it was a slap in the face to take a pay cut. And rightfully so.

This. A pay cut is always a slap in the face. But it's also business in the NFL.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

quote:

ORIGINAL: marty

So Brady capitalized on the turnovers, and didn't make mistakes in the 1st half to put his team in the hole, and did this on the road against quality opposition, and he did the same thing in the SB, against a team that just won the SB the previous year.

There is NO guarantee Cousins would do that.

Only a fool would say any QB could do that. As none of Brady's throws looked terribly difficult, there are probably some that speculate Trubisky, Carr or Cousins could all havemade those throws, but just watching someone play in the clutch, doesn't make another player suddenly clutch.

Make up your mind on which argument you are trying to push. Or better yet, do some research AND then make a claim. Like Brady made the oline better. Prove it. I can post some stats that back up my argument for the SB. Brady was pressured only 3 times (10%) on plays 2.5 or less while Mahomes was pressure 43% in the same situations. Bucs oline had 33 carries, 145 yards, 4.4 average, 1 TD.

Who guaranteed Cousins could do that?

Who said any QB could do that? You need to work on your reading comprehension.

My original points: 1) I'm all for improving the Vikings QB situation. 2) Cousins, inaccurately imo, is getting all the blame for slow starts when it's multiple things.
3) Bucs had a vastly superior team to the Vikings last year in all phases except 1, the run game which was mitigated or caused by scheme (and as you can see the in the SB, ran it pretty effectively). And that the Bucs lifted Brady not the other way around.

1) Ofcourse, nobody should dispute that.

2) Pretty much true.

3) Certainly, the Bucs were a superior team to the Vikings ... vastly on defense, OL and TE. And coaching.

To say that the Bucs would have won big game after big game, from getting the #5 seed in-season as an 11-5 above-average-but-not-really-good-team through winning the SB ... without a Big Game QB, is a feeble argument. That's not what happened in 2020.

Sure, the rest of the team absolutely rose to the occasion, and the Chiefs were not the same team that beat the Bucs during the season.

But 2020 ended with a proven big game player making reads, decisions, throws one necessary play after another, one big game after another.

Cousins is a good QB with a great arm. He has yet to prove he is a big game player in any sense of the term.

Calling the Bucs an above average but not really good team, is a feeble argument. And no Brady did not make one necessary play after another. NFCCG is absolutely proof of that. Brady choked. 3 second half pics - in a row. One of them Brady chucked it up - floater not even close to his target in a critical spot. Bucs defense and GB bailed Brady out.

As Brad pointed out, they held Mahomes and the Chiefs to 3 field goals.

I apologize for the long-ass answer.

Going into the playoffs, anybody not involved in this debate would say the Chiefs, Packers, Saints and Bills were better teams ... easily. The next rung being the Bucs and 5 or 6 other 11-5 teams (Titans, Ravens, Browns, Colts, Seahawks ...) with the struggling Steelers, Rams?, WASH and Bears on the lowest playoff rung.

We can quibble over above average / good / very good ... IMO the Bucs were somewhere in the middle of the pack ...

Yes – you are right ... Brady did not play well in the NFCCG (although he threw 2 TDs which helped). The Bucs defense completely bailed out Brady and won that game ... the Bucs run game was actually the second biggest contributor with some huge gaffes by the packers as probably the third.

When I say 'play after play', it's a mis-statement because it implies 'every necessary play' which is impossible. Maybe 'do enough to win', I dunno, obviously I'm not talking about every game or making the necessary play in every situation – no player has ever done that.

I am not really a Brady fan, never have been. I do grudgingly admit that he somehow consistently finds ways to win in spite of his physical limitations. I used to hate that with the Pats ... for some reason, it entertained me this past season.

As far as the SB – you cannot have it both ways and argue that our stupid OL is holding Cousins back from 'winner' status but that the Bucs Def were great by stuffing Mahomes regardless of his lousy OL (Not to mention playing through injury). The Bucs defense is good but not near the SB's Ravens or Bears level – Brady was a critical factor and, yes, came through in some clutch moments. (not play after play which was a silly exaggeration).

To get back to the original point, Cousins has not done enough in his career with what he has – to be considered a QB that rises to the occasion / plays well in big moments / comes through under pressure (however you want to word it). That's not comparing him to Brady or anyone else ... that is just his trajectory as a QB so far. I honestly hope he gets past that and proves otherwise.

Thanks unome

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

I don't even like Brady but theorize he elevated that whole TB team, just like he did with NE. He was probably a positive influence in the two weeks before the SB, and had the ultimate "been there, done that" stamp. And when it counted, in the big game, he delivered.

The comparison between stat-boy Cousins and Brady is laughable.

He sent his family away for the two weeks prior to this year’s super bowl so he could properly prepare. Yes. Dude’s a stone cold killer.

quote:

ORIGINAL: TJSweens

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brad H

quote:

ORIGINAL: TJSweens

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brad H

quote:

ORIGINAL: TJSweens

If it's a contest between the statistics that measure performance and a Brad H. eye test, I will go with the stats every time.

Unless they are playing in the same offensive system, with the same guys around them, in the same stadium, with the same weather against the same defenses, numbers are mostly irrelevant. What the Rams were trying to do on offense was completely different from what the Vikings were trying to do. Totally different offenses.

The statistical argument is naive and lazy.

No, finding a shitty QB to compare Cousins to because you don't like him and ignoring statistics because they don't support your argument is lazy.

I will stipulate that stats are not the whole picture, but they do measure how effective a QB operates in his given system with his given teammates. The stats also tell you what the QB was operating behind. The Vikings graded out as the 28th ranked pass blocking unit in the NFL. Isolate the middle of the line and it gets even worse. None of our interior linemen made the top 32 at their positions for pressure rate. That means they finished behind every starter and a few back ups. When the pressure comes that fast and hard from the inside, the QB has no time for receivers to come open, passing windows are non existent and they have to move to buy time and find passing window. Conversely, Goff operated behind one of the best O-lines in the game. He had clean pockets and enjoyed plenty of time to survey his options. His confusion in a clean pocket is on him.

Part of the reason the o-line graded out at 28 was because of the guy holding onto the ball too damned long and locking in on receivers.

IMO, they are both average, at-best quarterbacks. Neither is going to lead a franchise to a title, no matter how much talent you put around them. They don't have that "IT" that it takes to win in big games.

We'll have to agree to disagree.

Again, the stats don't support your argument. In fact you have it backwards. Cousins got rid of the ball in about league average time. The line gave Cousins significantly less than league average time to throw.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ratoppenheimer

.
.
This just in....

Courtney Cronin@CourtneyRCronin
Rick Spielman: "Kirk Cousins is our quarterback."

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brad H

quote:

ORIGINAL: TJSweens

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brad H

quote:

ORIGINAL: TJSweens

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brad H

quote:

ORIGINAL: TJSweens

If it's a contest between the statistics that measure performance and a Brad H. eye test, I will go with the stats every time.

Unless they are playing in the same offensive system, with the same guys around them, in the same stadium, with the same weather against the same defenses, numbers are mostly irrelevant. What the Rams were trying to do on offense was completely different from what the Vikings were trying to do. Totally different offenses.

The statistical argument is naive and lazy.

No, finding a shitty QB to compare Cousins to because you don't like him and ignoring statistics because they don't support your argument is lazy.

I will stipulate that stats are not the whole picture, but they do measure how effective a QB operates in his given system with his given teammates. The stats also tell you what the QB was operating behind. The Vikings graded out as the 28th ranked pass blocking unit in the NFL. Isolate the middle of the line and it gets even worse. None of our interior linemen made the top 32 at their positions for pressure rate. That means they finished behind every starter and a few back ups. When the pressure comes that fast and hard from the inside, the QB has no time for receivers to come open, passing windows are non existent and they have to move to buy time and find passing window. Conversely, Goff operated behind one of the best O-lines in the game. He had clean pockets and enjoyed plenty of time to survey his options. His confusion in a clean pocket is on him.

Part of the reason the o-line graded out at 28 was because of the guy holding onto the ball too damned long and locking in on receivers.

IMO, they are both average, at-best quarterbacks. Neither is going to lead a franchise to a title, no matter how much talent you put around them. They don't have that "IT" that it takes to win in big games.

We'll have to agree to disagree.

Again, the stats don't support your argument. In fact you have it backwards. Cousins got rid of the ball in about league average time. The line gave Cousins significantly less than league average time to throw.

You can keep using numbers to prop him up all you want. It isn't going to make him a better quarterback.

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mark Anderson

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mark Anderson

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

Hell of a lot classier than they treated Antoine Winfield Sr that’s for sure

What happened? I must have missed something.

35 years old. Played here 9 years(two nice contracts). Asked him to take pay cut. Cut him. Tried to resign him for less.

Then, more or less, he retired after that.

As I recall, we were willing to pay Winfield around $3M to stay. He decided to sign with Seattle for damn near league minimum. Then they cut him in preseason.

They cut him one hour before free agency started - after the legal tampering window. Winfield's camp maintains that there was no offer for a paycut and that they were expecting business as usual. They pulled him out of his workout at Winter Park to tell him. He was coming off one of his best seasons in his career.

Don't you think that maybe Winfield played hardball and lost. I find it hard to believe that we didn't offer him a chance at a reduced rate.

I wish there would have been some direct quotes from Winfield in your articles. Just an NFL source speaking for Winfield camp.

Not saying it is right. He had a good season and we went to playoffs. Probably thought it was a slap in the face to take a pay cut. And rightfully so.

This. A pay cut is always a slap in the face. But it's also business in the NFL.

No shit. Just like Rudy refused a pay cut. One got a timely release coordinated so he could send out his goodbye letter and have two weeks in a free agent market with almost no other free agents competing and the other got blind sided only after that entire period had expired. Thank you for hammering home my point.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mark Anderson

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mark Anderson

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

Hell of a lot classier than they treated Antoine Winfield Sr that’s for sure

What happened? I must have missed something.

35 years old. Played here 9 years(two nice contracts). Asked him to take pay cut. Cut him. Tried to resign him for less.

Then, more or less, he retired after that.

As I recall, we were willing to pay Winfield around $3M to stay. He decided to sign with Seattle for damn near league minimum. Then they cut him in preseason.

They cut him one hour before free agency started - after the legal tampering window. Winfield's camp maintains that there was no offer for a paycut and that they were expecting business as usual. They pulled him out of his workout at Winter Park to tell him. He was coming off one of his best seasons in his career.

Don't you think that maybe Winfield played hardball and lost. I find it hard to believe that we didn't offer him a chance at a reduced rate.

I wish there would have been some direct quotes from Winfield in your articles. Just an NFL source speaking for Winfield camp.

Not saying it is right. He had a good season and we went to playoffs. Probably thought it was a slap in the face to take a pay cut. And rightfully so.

This. A pay cut is always a slap in the face. But it's also business in the NFL.

No shit. Just like Rudy refused a pay cut. One got a timely release coordinated so he could send out his goodbye letter and have two weeks in a free agent market with almost no other free agents competing and the other got blind sided only after that entire period had expired. Thank you for hammering home my point.

Actually you should thank me for providing a buffer post so you could pretend to have not seen what Mark had to say, with plausible deniability.