|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
Yes outbidding a notorious overspender and failure of an ownwer in Snyder would have been so helpful to us. Smart people who are building a team would be so very wise to do that.
It's unfortunate that I have to continuously point out that there's a fundamental difference here. One discussion judges the merits of giving up what Holmgren had eventually offered for RG3. The second discussion, which is COMPLETELY separate from the aforementioned one, revolves around how badly Holmgren not only handled the negotiations in the first place, but embarrassed himself and the organization afterwards.
In either case, if you're going to trash the decision to offer a kings ransom for RG3, you are trashing Holmgren because he DID make that offer.
The truth is that neither you nor I nor anyone else can TRULY judge whether or not the Redskins made a wise move in paying what they did to get RG3. For years people praised the Chargers for "fleecing" the Giants in the Eli Manning deal. Two Super Bowls later, people aren't saying that. 
However, what CAN be judged is how Holmgren butchered the process. The facts are the facts and cannot be changed or historically revised. He was told to make his best offer. He didn't. He tried to make the offer better and was told it was too late.
There's nothing else to say. He failed. How people don't understand that is beyond me.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,586
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,586 |
Quote:
In either case, if you're going to trash the decision to offer a kings ransom for RG3, you are trashing Holmgren because he DID make that offer.
And what was that "final offer" that Holmgren made exactly?
Quote:
The truth is that neither you nor I nor anyone else can TRULY judge whether or not the Redskins made a wise move in paying what they did to get RG3.
What we can do is compare it to similar offers made in the past and compare them for any second overall pick in the draft..(including the Manning trade) And by that gauge, they overpaid by a ton.
Quote:
For years people praised the Chargers for "fleecing" the Giants in the Eli Manning deal. Two Super Bowls later, people aren't saying that.
What people? Until one or the other won a SB, I can't see how anyone would consider it "getting fleeced". I believe in pedigrees to a great extent which is why I wanted us to draft Clay Matthews Jr.
I always felt the jury was out on that trade for a long time. Actually right up until the Giants won the SB.
Quote:
However, what CAN be judged is how Holmgren butchered the process. The facts are the facts and cannot be changed or historically revised. He was told to make his best offer. He didn't. He tried to make the offer better and was told it was too late.
And can you tell me what that offer was? Can you tell me if it was Lerner or Holmgren who decided to "up the best offer" that was made to begin with? That's the thing about revising history.... If we don't have 100% of the facts on the table to begin with, we may not even understand all of the history with which to be tossing around accusations about.
Quote:
There's nothing else to say. He failed. How people don't understand that is beyond me.
I didn't have any major objections to Holmgren leaving. I was not a staunch supporter of his by any means. But on this account, I feel it's obvious people are reaching due to so few of the actual facts an what the final offer was and or who initiated making a second offer.
Holmgren had a job to do and Lerner had a product to sell. It's by no means revisionist history to say that none of us really know what went on behind closed doors there.
I mean after all, it's not like Holmgren is Lance Armstrong or something......
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
And what was that "final offer" that Holmgren made exactly?
Whatever our original offer was, then he came back afterwards and upped the offer, one that Holmgren himself said was equal to the offer of the Redskins.
Ya know...let's just skip all that.  We know where we're going here, and we also know where this would digress to. Here's Peter King talking to Les Snead of the Rams. This is how it played out:
Quote:
Les Snead says Holmgren tried to up his offer
But according to Rams GM Les Snead, that's not the whole story. He confirmed to me Sunday what I'd heard the night the trade broke. Snead said he told all teams interested on March 8 that he was going to have the trade done by the end of that day, and he was going to ask each team to give its best offer for the trade. At that point, he said, after listening to all the proposals, he was going to take the best offer -- unless the offer was not anywhere near what the Rams wanted for the pick.
Those were the rules, Snead said Sunday, that he made clear to each team. Snead asked for everyone's best offer in individual phone calls. It's unclear what Cleveland's offer was, but Washington offered three first-round picks and one second-round pick. That offer, Snead said, was better than Cleveland's offer. So he told Washington officials that they'd won the bidding and told the Browns they'd lost. At that point, Snead said, Cleveland tried to make another offer, and Snead said the window was closed; the Rams were taking Washington's offer.
So Holmgren didn't make his best offer. The Redskins did. Holmgren had lost. He tried to up his offer. The Rams said no. Holmgren stated in front of the football world that his offer was every bit as good as the Redskins offer. His own words.
From here all that exists is heresay by people around the NFL world, including ESPN and Fox Sports Ohio (Pat Mac, if your curious). Pat says he believes we didn't offer the additional 2nd round pick at first, but then came along and offered it the second time around. That additional 2nd rounder would have made our offer better because of our higher picks. Quote:
Per Pat Mac:
Several reports late Friday had the Browns willing to part with three first-rounders for Griffin, but not a second-round choice. That two, the 37th overall pick, was the breaking point between the Browns drafting a guy considered among the most dynamic to come out in years and standing pat and not knowing who the quarterback will be.
Of course those weren't the rules. Snead told Holmgren to make his best offer first.
Holmgren made a tactical error. That's part of the reason he's gone.
Quote:
The truth is that neither you nor I nor anyone else can TRULY judge whether or not the Redskins made a wise move in paying what they did to get RG3.
---
What we can do is compare it to similar offers made in the past and compare them for any second overall pick in the draft..(including the Manning trade) And by that gauge, they overpaid by a ton.
What good would that do when you don't know if the player is any good?
If RG3 has a 6-year career that is good but not great and ends because of concussions, they'll have made a bad deal.
If RG3 has a 12-year HOF career and wins a Super Bowl, the Redskins will have made a Helluva deal.
You can't judge a deal by similar deals in the past. Those are irrelevant and immaterial to this deal because we have no idea how RG3 will do.
Quote:
And can you tell me what that offer was? Can you tell me if it was Lerner or Holmgren who decided to "up the best offer" that was made to begin with? That's the thing about revising history.... If we don't have 100% of the facts on the table to begin with, we may not even understand all of the history with which to be tossing around accusations about.
Revising history? Reporting history. Big difference. See the story by Peter King above, then read Holmgren's words stating his offer was every bit as good as the Redskins offer.
Like you, I wasn't hugely sold on Holmgren, just like I wasn't hugely sold on Crennel. I did like certain aspects of the hirings, as I've always been a 3-4 guy and Crennel brought that, just like I've always been a WCO guy, and Holmgren brought that. Until I saw how Holmgren kept micro-managing things and screwing up the decisions, I took a wait-and-see approach. I'd even admitted that in spite of absolutely hating the drafting of McCoy. There isn't any revisionist history going on here, only factual statements by people involved.
We don't have the last 2% of how it all played out with RG3 but we have 98% of it. That's enough to realize what happened. We know Holmgren didn't make his best offer in spite of being instructed to. We know that his offer was very similar to that of the Redskins because he'd stated it was. We know that Holmgren really wanted him and went to great lengths to get him. We know that he failed and that the team with less ammo got the deal done.
What we don't know is whether or not the deal was a good one. We won't know that until RG3's career is winding down, whether that's sooner or later. Why? Because you can't judge a deal until you see the final product. So I will reserve judgment on that one for the time being. To say it was good or bad now is itself a failure. All we can judge is whether or not Holmgren made a mistake, and it's rather obvious that he did. The crying in front of the camera was just bitter icing on the cake, but that didn't help his cause either.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456 |
Toad you are reaching at best on this. Mike made an offer it was his "best offer" and the highest ever in the history of the NFL and he got outbid. Now you are correct Mike should have just let it go but saw he was close and made a 2nd offer.
So I will ask you this again, his best offer would have been our next 100 1st round picks would that have secured a move up 2 spots? Then what if washington bid their next 100 1st round picks and a 2nd would we have failed by not making our "best offer"? would he have been a jack for then trying to add in a 2nd?
No matter how you try to spin that part we made our best offer Mike mucked up by seeing how close we were and tried to up it but to say we didnt make our best offer is BS it was the highest offer ever in history to move up 2 spots.
And this is "as you say" the end of the story.
Im not buying and Im glad we lost TBH.
If you need 3 years to be a winner you got here 2 years to early. Get it done Browns.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,586
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,586 |
Quote:
You can't judge a deal by similar deals in the past. Those are irrelevant and immaterial to this deal because we have no idea how RG3 will do.
So you might pay 80k for a Chevy Impala because you don't care nor do you consider what anyone else prior to you have paid for it?
That's all you have to gauge things on, prior, similar deals.
And you bring up a point I was planning on alluding to as this progressed, but we can do it now.....
You pointed out EXACTLY why you shouldn't pay that much. Remember all those injuries you were talking about? And have you looked at the odds of success for number 1 overall QB draft picks?
The fan in me hears what you're saying. Unfortunately it's not reality. Business is what the NFL is.
And once again, behind closed doors, we have no way to know if Lerner told Holmgren to up the offer or not. We do know Holmgren is the one who offered the second deal for RG3, we just don't know who was in charge of telling him to make that second offer.
I'm sure none of the people/articles you posted know either.....
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,574
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,574 |
Actually I think the Rams front office was even more stupid by NOT accepting a later and BETTER bid. I don't fault Mike one bit or think he "failed" in the bidding process except he simply didn't offer more than the next guy the first time. That's NOT a failure of the process Toad, only the result in YOUR mind.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 825
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 825 |
Ok toad, I'll concede that Holmie had his share of failings and I'll even concede that Holmie never handled the story revolving around the draft trade well.
Beyond that though I have to give the credit to the Rams front office for creating a marketplace. From a pure business viewpoint, it was a thing of beauty. They did this in 2 steps using very basic market mechanisms.
First, they started with a dutch auction. Recall the Rams public demand for 3 1st.
Per wikipedia. A Dutch auction is a type of auction in which the auctioneer begins with a high asking price which is lowered until some participant is willing to accept the auctioneer's price, or a predetermined reserve price (the seller's minimum acceptable price) is reached.
Second, they used a First-price sealed bid auction. Recall the Rams deadline.
Again per wiki. A first-price sealed-bid auction is a form of auction where bidders submit one bid in a concealed fashion. The submitted bids are then compared and the person with the highest bid wins the award, and pays the amount of his bid to the seller.
In summary, the Rams were very shrewd. I give them credit, and despite Holmie's many failings I don't fault him for the actual failed RG3 trade.
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/captainphil/browns bills sig 5.jpg) When it gets cold and snows and the wind blows, you gotta be able to run the ball. - TR
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
Mike made an offer it was his "best offer" and the highest ever in the history of the NFL and he got outbid. Now you are correct Mike should have just let it go but saw he was close and made a 2nd offer.
If he was willing to pay more, then by definition he didn't make his "best" offer.
His "best" offer would have been the absolute most he'd be willing to part with. He wasn't instructed to make a "good" offer. "Best" is final, the maximum, the one-time-most-you'll-absolutely-pay.
Quote:
So I will ask you this again, his best offer would have been our next 100 1st round picks would that have secured a move up 2 spots? Then what if washington bid their next 100 1st round picks and a 2nd would we have failed by not making our "best offer"? would he have been a jack for then trying to add in a 2nd?
That depends on one man: Mike Holmgren.
If those 100 1st round picks were his absolute best offer, meaning that he wouldn't have given one 2nd round pick more, then no, he wouldn't have screwed the deal up. If those 100 1st round picks AND a 2nd round pick was his best offer, and had that offer been greater than the offer the Redskins made, then based on the wants, desires, and needs of Mike Holmgren, he'd have failed because he didn't make his best offer first.
*This isn't about the amount of compensation.* It's about Mike Holmgren not offering all that he was willing to pay. He wanted a do-over. The Rams weren't giving do-overs. That's the failure of judgement which cost Mike Holmgren the QB he wanted, and why he failed as the President of the Browns in that scenario.
I'm trying to get you and anyone else who doesn't see the picture that it's not about the amount of compensation. The reason Holmgren screwed up is because he didn't make his best offer, which, according to Les Snead, was exactly what the terms of the bidding were.
I think part of the problem here is the word "Negotiation" because there never was a negotiation. This was a bid.
Quote:
No matter how you try to spin that part we made our best offer
That is a factual impossibility when you continue with the following quote in the exact same sentence:
Quote:
Mike mucked up by seeing how close we were and tried to up it
...because if he were willing to pay more than he offered first, that first offer was not his best offer.
Do you still not see the difference...
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,802
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,802 |
Okay. Just a thought in my head on this.
What organizational sense does it make to stubbornly say, "You had your chance!" and not take a better offer if it comes along? My initial reaction is I'd be ticked if I heard our front office did a one day only session and wouldn't manipulate the bidders to see if they could get even more.
Am I not considering something like it would maybe make impact future negotiations to be more forward and less chincy?
Politicians are puppets, y'all. Let's get Geppetto!
Formerly 4yikes2yoshi0
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
You can't judge a deal by similar deals in the past. Those are irrelevant and immaterial to this deal because we have no idea how RG3 will do.
----------
So you might pay 80k for a Chevy Impala because you don't care nor do you consider what anyone else prior to you have paid for it?
Is it a Chevy Impala? How do I know? I haven't seen this vehicle run. I don't know if it runs, nor how well. I don't know how reliable it is, nor how well it will perform in the future. Will it win the biggest race of all? Or will it blow-up before it ever finishes a single solitary mile?
My point is that you can't judge whether or not the Redskins over or even under-paid for RG3 any more than You couldn't judge whether or not you over or even under-paid for a vehicle you have no idea about.
You say I have an Impala. You imply I know exactly what the car is all about. You say RG3 is a known quantity, and therefore you can judge whether or not the Redskins over-paid.
I wanna borrow your crystal ball
What you're talking about is assessing value to a draft slot not a drafted player.
There are precedents for how much a slotted draft position may be worth, but once that pick is used on the player, the "value" for that draft position is history. Only the final evaluation of a players career in totality can determine if a team over or under-paid for a player.
Big difference.
By the way...if you're selling Chevy Impalla's for $80k...need a partner?
Quote:
And you bring up a point I was planning on alluding to as this progressed, but we can do it now.....
You pointed out EXACTLY why you shouldn't pay that much. Remember all those injuries you were talking about? And have you looked at the odds of success for number 1 overall QB draft picks?
Ahhh...now you're talking about the other side of this discussion. We've flipped the coin from heads...to tails, hehe.
Yup, now you're talking about the value of the player not the draft slot.
It's your opinion the Redskins paid too much. You may be right. You may be wrong. It's a high price, but the determination of value becomes highly subjective. Is it one Super Bowl win? Two? Three? What's the going rate for buying Super Bowls?
If I told you you'd have a 40% chance of winning the Super Bowl in two years if you give me three 1st-round draft picks? How about a 20% chance? Or a 60% chance? How much is RG3 worth in that regard? 2% chance? 33%?
I'm over-exaggerating to make one simple point: Judging the worth of RG3 the player is not the same as judging the value of the 1st pick in the draft.
Hey, if you say they paid too much, ok, sure, that's how you feel. I wanted us to acquire RG3 in the worst way. I was about a strong a pimp as there was for him. (My plan-B was Richardson, hehe. Imagine the fun I'd be having with anti-RG3 posters if he'd be doing for us what he's doing for Washington ) But you know what I said when I found out the terms of the deal? I believe my exact quote was:
"I don't know if I'd have done that deal."
I'm not sure right now if I'd have done that deal, but I'll tell you what, if in the next decade the Redskins win a Super Bowl, I'd then say the Redskins made out like kings.
I just don't believe the deal can be fairly judged, especially in the first-half of his rookie season on a team that isn't all that great. The big fear for RG3 has already been realized, which is that he's taken a concussion. That was my big fear. The Ref's keep those threads. It's back there, hehe. He has the same problem as Vick, which is that in spite of having world-class speed, neither guy has the natural instincts to avoid big hits. That is something I'm sure you've taken into account in your own personal evaluation.
I just don't want people confusing the two points. They are separate conversations.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
Beyond that though I have to give the credit to the Rams front office for creating a marketplace. From a pure business viewpoint, it was a thing of beauty.
Yes, it was, Phil.
But you wanna get a jolt, man?
The Rams actually failed themselves.
Had the Rams gone the more traditional...and less ethical  ...route, they'd have actually ended up with more, either from the Browns or the Redskins. We already know The Walrus upped his offer to include our 2nd, which was a better deal than what the Redskins ended up paying.
So to answer the other question...why wouldn't the Rams go a traditional negotiation...I can say that if Snead had told teams what the terms were, which is to say make your best and only offer first, then turned around and started negotiating, he'd forever be known as a crook and a worm, and teams and players would be less likely to do deals with him.
Snead wanted it done quickly and efficiently. Mission accomplished.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456 |
You dont see it some of us do. Its not a big deal to me Im glad we dont have him and mike failed. I have no problem moving on. We shall just have to agree to disagree. 
If you need 3 years to be a winner you got here 2 years to early. Get it done Browns.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Deal.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
We play the Chargers this week, and they ARE good against the run, yielding only 3.5 yards per carry. As I'm making the point that we aren't good running the ball, it would be my luck that we actually show up this week, hehe, but conventional wisdom says we aren't going to be able to do jack-squat against this team.
Just thought I would bring this back up in light of Richardson's 5.1 ypc... 
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,563
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,563 |
Quote:
Beyond that though I have to give the credit to the Rams front office for creating a marketplace. From a pure business viewpoint, it was a thing of beauty.
That's the way it looked at Draft time, but honestly, I'm not sure they wouldn't have been better off long term trading Bradford and drafting RG3. time will tell, but at this point, I think RG has more potential upside then Bradford.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
but honestly, I'm not sure they wouldn't have been better off long term trading Bradford and drafting RG3. time will tell, but at this point, I think RG has more potential upside then Bradford.
RGIII is already better than Bradford is right now. Bradford is in his 3rd year, RGIII has played 8 games and if I had to pick one of them to win a game for me next week, I'd already take RGIII... to heck with upside.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,563
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,563 |
Quote:
Quote:
but honestly, I'm not sure they wouldn't have been better off long term trading Bradford and drafting RG3. time will tell, but at this point, I think RG has more potential upside then Bradford.
RGIII is already better than Bradford is right now. Bradford is in his 3rd year, RGIII has played 8 games and if I had to pick one of them to win a game for me next week, I'd already take RGIII... to heck with upside.
Yeah,, I wrote that and said to myself, he's already better than Bradford..
So I think that St. Louis blew it.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,445
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,445 |
I wouldn't make that case just yet.
Wait and see how the guys they took with the picks they got pan out, plus wait to see how RGIII looks 18+ months from now.
He could easily be another Cam Newton (remember that guy.. last year's Golden Child of the NFL?).... set the world on fire last season, and has looked like crap this season. Defenses will adjust...
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
but honestly, I'm not sure they wouldn't have been better off long term trading Bradford and drafting RG3. time will tell, but at this point, I think RG has more potential upside then Bradford.
RGIII is already better than Bradford is right now. Bradford is in his 3rd year, RGIII has played 8 games and if I had to pick one of them to win a game for me next week, I'd already take RGIII... to heck with upside.
Yeah,, I wrote that and said to myself, he's already better than Bradford..
So I think that St. Louis blew it.
now, I agree with the general sentiment, but St. Louis could not have traded Bradford with that contract. He was on the "old rookie wage scale" so he has a ridiculous contract and if the Rams took RGIII, then they likely would have had to keep Bradford as a highly paid backup QB (if you cut him, then all his bonus money accelerates to this year's cap).
given how good RGIII has been, they should have done it, but that was an awful big gamble to make last March (especially given what the Redskins were offering in trade).
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,563
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,563 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
but honestly, I'm not sure they wouldn't have been better off long term trading Bradford and drafting RG3. time will tell, but at this point, I think RG has more potential upside then Bradford.
RGIII is already better than Bradford is right now. Bradford is in his 3rd year, RGIII has played 8 games and if I had to pick one of them to win a game for me next week, I'd already take RGIII... to heck with upside.
Yeah,, I wrote that and said to myself, he's already better than Bradford..
So I think that St. Louis blew it.
now, I agree with the general sentiment, but St. Louis could not have traded Bradford with that contract. He was on the "old rookie wage scale" so he has a ridiculous contract and if the Rams took RGIII, then they likely would have had to keep Bradford as a highly paid backup QB (if you cut him, then all his bonus money accelerates to this year's cap).
given how good RGIII has been, they should have done it, but that was an awful big gamble to make last March (especially given what the Redskins were offering in trade).
That's all true,, of course, me thinking RG3 is better than Bradford is all hindsight.
And Purp said it,,, it's too early really..
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 825
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 825 |
Quote:
Quote:
Beyond that though I have to give the credit to the Rams front office for creating a marketplace. From a pure business viewpoint, it was a thing of beauty.
Yes, it was, Phil.
But you wanna get a jolt, man?
The Rams actually failed themselves.
Had the Rams gone the more traditional...and less ethical ...route, they'd have actually ended up with more, either from the Browns or the Redskins. We already know The Walrus upped his offer to include our 2nd, which was a better deal than what the Redskins ended up paying.
So to answer the other question...why wouldn't the Rams go a traditional negotiation...I can say that if Snead had told teams what the terms were, which is to say make your best and only offer first, then turned around and started negotiating, he'd forever be known as a crook and a worm, and teams and players would be less likely to do deals with him.
Snead wanted it done quickly and efficiently. Mission accomplished.
So now you are advocating for a behavior pattern economists explain in a model known as The Prisoners Dilemma. Which is reasonable, because I also act this way in one-off situations.  But long term relationships in business truly matter.
Sure the Rams could have maximized their value on this one deal, but they are a fresh front office, they need credibility... the value long term of being seen as a reasonable trade partner out ways any potential upside from a nefarious deal.
When it gets cold and snows and the wind blows, you gotta be able to run the ball. - TR
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
Quote:
We play the Chargers this week, and they ARE good against the run, yielding only 3.5 yards per carry. As I'm making the point that we aren't good running the ball, it would be my luck that we actually show up this week, hehe, but conventional wisdom says we aren't going to be able to do jack-squat against this team.
Just thought I would bring this back up in light of Richardson's 5.1 ypc...
Checking the weather would have been prudent on my part, as when the weather turns out like that, it changes everything, kinda like how it would become obvious that no QB's would have good passing days.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
So now you are advocating for a behavior pattern economists explain in a model known as The Prisoners Dilemma. Which is reasonable, because I also act this way in one-off situations. But long term relationships in business truly matter.
I'm not advocating such a plan at all. I'd be sick to my stomach if a Browns shot-caller went that route. I'm just pointing out that had the Rams elected to have open negotiations from the very beginning they'd have ended up with even more draft picks.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189 |
Quote:
Snead wanted it done quickly and efficiently.
And with the team he wanted to deal with.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
Quote:
Snead wanted it done quickly and efficiently.
And with the team he wanted to deal with.
Sure was nice of Holmgren to help him do just that.
(i know you, you sneaky sum-beotch )
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 825
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 825 |
Ok, we will have to agree to disagree. As I do not believe the Rams could have created a marketplace that would have delivered the value they did through a traditional open market.
My rationale for this is based on the value of first-price sealed bid auctions. In my experience they extract greater value than open markets. The variance has to do with the uncertainty of bidding against the 'unknown'.
When it gets cold and snows and the wind blows, you gotta be able to run the ball. - TR
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,586
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,586 |
As with QB's every Impala is different. You may get 250k miles out of one with very little maintenance involved, and the next one may give you problems the entire time you have it and blow up at 150k. Just as with QB's, every car gives you differing results. Try again Toad. All you know about an Impala are how it looks and the track record of past Impalas. Just like QB's Toad........
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Meh, Impala's are a silly analogy because nobody knows if RG3 will be great or something less, and that's what you tried to compare: The value of an unknown QB in RG3 to a known value of a car.
I just would like you to affirm your statement that the Redskins paid too much for RG3.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 17,284
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 17,284 |
Quote:
I just would like you to affirm your statement that the Redskins paid too much for RG3.
Not if he keeps getting better and better.
Can't put a price on a franchise QB
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 51,039
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 51,039 |
Quote:
Quote:
I just would like you to affirm your statement that the Redskins paid too much for RG3.
Not if he keeps getting better and better.
Can't put a price on a franchise QB
They are invaluable.
If RG3 turns out to be the franchise guy I said all along I think he'll be, then the Redskins got off cheap. How many picks would a team give up for a guy like Aaron Rodgers ..... or Tom Brady ...... or Peyton Manning as a young player ...... or his brother .......
The Rams have Bradford ..... and he may turn out to be one of those guys ... but if he isn't, then trading away the rights to RG3 may have set them back years and years. Further, guys like Brooker, drafted with the pick the Rams acquired from the Skins, better be hits.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
Quote:
The Rams have Bradford ..... and he may turn out to be one of those guys
he might but still has a long way to go. i have never liked him as a QB, but because of the rookie class and the rest of the year's storylines, it has been under-reported the fact that Bradford is having his best career year. by leaps and bounds.
and all of that without a RB (S-Jax took 2 steps back this year) or WR1 (Amendola and Gibson are their starters).
he is still only at league average as a QB and that won't get it done with his salary, but that is several huge steps forward compared to last year (or his rookie year).
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
Quote:
How many picks would a team give up for a guy like Aaron Rodgers ..... or Tom Brady ...... or Peyton Manning as a young player ...... or his brother .......
Apparently not many since each was drafted right in their slot without the overpaid price they paid for RG3. So based on what Washington gave up, RG3 should be much better than anyone you listed, and astronomically better than Tom Brady.
But we can't judge how good he WILL be just yet. I recall a QB named Cam Newton, that wowed people early last year. He hasn't carried that success into year 2 though.
And if RG3 doesn't learn to slide or run out of bounds, he may not have a long career.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
Quote:
How many picks would a team give up for a guy like Aaron Rodgers ..... or Tom Brady ...... or Peyton Manning as a young player ...... or his brother .......
Apparently not many since each was drafted right in their slot without the overpaid price they paid for RG3. So based on what Washington gave up, RG3 should be much better than anyone you listed, and astronomically better than Tom Brady.
I'm pretty sure that was the point... Peyton went #1 overall so you can't use him as an example.. but if people knew what Rodgers and Brady were going to become, you don't think they would have both been taken much earlier and probably fought over with trade offers?
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
Speculation is what makes oil prices rise. Andrew Luck was supposedly a can't miss, and chances are he is, but he doesn't get as much press as RG3. I think it's racial bias.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,704
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,704 |
I must be the only person in America still not 100% sold on RGIII being a true Franchise QB.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,802
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,802 |
Even more impressive than that is the crap he's had on the line, too. When he's pocket clean, he can be a top ten guy. Their number two overall pick, Jason Smith, who was supposed to be their "franchise left tackle for a decade" busted out horribly. Ended up not being good enough to even handle the right side and was traded for a Jets backup. Their starting center, Scott Wells, missed all of the pre-season. Roger Saffold's missed most of the year and looks like his injury will persist. Here was their starting OL against the Pats: Berry Richardson, Shelley Smith, Joe Barksdale, Robert Turner, and Harvey Dahl. To be anywhere near average when they're trotting out OL/WR/RB scraps like that is nothing short of amazing. Just look at how Skelton looked last night against the 49ers. Arizona might be the only team with a worse unit right now (also decimated by injuries).
He doesn't have elite arm strength, but Bradford- especially with his accuracy and smarts (if he can stay in on system long enough)- has the tools to be a top ten guy and enough to win a Super Bowl with the right surrounding cast.
Last edited by 4yikes2yoshi0; 10/30/12 01:06 PM.
Politicians are puppets, y'all. Let's get Geppetto!
Formerly 4yikes2yoshi0
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,643
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,643 |
Quote:
I must be the only person in America still not 100% sold on RGIII being a true Franchise QB.
Im not 100%, but I am pretty close.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,563
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,563 |
Quote:
Quote:
I must be the only person in America still not 100% sold on RGIII being a true Franchise QB.
Im not 100%, but I am pretty close.
Somebody brought it up the other day when I said maybe the Rams Goofed and should have traded Bradford and kept RG3... I think it was either DC or Purp who made an excellent point, look at Cam Newton, a darling of the league last year, not much of anything this year.
Ya just never know.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
I must be the only person in America still not 100% sold on RGIII being a true Franchise QB.
No you're not. There are only about 7 or 8 true proven franchise QBs in the NFL.. most of them already have a ring and then there are a couple others I would put in that class... and none of them are in their first 3 years.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 |
Quote:
I must be the only person in America still not 100% sold on RGIII being a true Franchise QB.
Cam Newton was better last season than RGIII is now. Look where he is at. I will reserve my judgment until RGIII throws more than three balls past the 20 yards.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Holmgren Officially Gone
|
|
