Omg What The F!

**Dade** · 09-01-2008, 05:19 PM

Originally Posted by TTRaven

I doubt he even starts a game for the Ravens. He's only here into Troy Smith comes back.

That maybe true but we have no idea how long Troy will be out. I'm starting to think it'll be awhile. Still doesn't make this the smartest move.

**F Angelos** · 09-01-2008, 05:21 PM

If he's the #2 I'm pissed. If Smith is healthy week 1 and Joey is #3 then this is no big deal. Are we sure Ozzie hasn't been replaced by a lookalike? His decisions lately are insane.

**StingerNLG** · 09-01-2008, 05:27 PM

I don't know about Smith, but I think this means they are about to IR Boller. I can't imagine anything else at this point.

And Dante is still not a Raven. :)

**Dade** · 09-01-2008, 05:31 PM

Originally Posted by StingerNLG

I don't know about Smith, but I think this means they are about to IR Boller. I can't imagine anything else at this point.

Yeah they're gonna IR Boller but would you pick Harrington over Simms?

**Old Man Fan** · 09-01-2008, 05:40 PM

I'm wondering if it's not more of a question of how Simms viewed us. I bet he wanted a real chance to start and was told he'd be a backup and probably #3 when Smith got back. With Flacco starting you got to think that Simms saw that he wouln't get much of a shot here.
My second thought is that if we get to the point where we need Harrington then the season is shot anyway. Flacco will be hurt, Smith will be hurt so you go to #3. Seasons over anyway. Let's hope that scenario doesn't happen.

**pyite32** · 09-01-2008, 06:18 PM

This is a horrible move any way you slice it. Harrington is a joke and should not be on a NFL Roster anywhere, anytime.

**RavenScallywag** · 09-01-2008, 06:21 PM

ok, here's a thought...

Any vested veteran on the Week 1 roster has their full year salary guaranteed. So, most teams looking to keep a vet around only part time will cut them before the Week 1 games, then re-sign them in Week 2.

Let's just say we're planning to cut whatever vet QB we brought in before Week 1. Well, you want to sign him now so he can start digesting the playbook. But, my guess is a guy like Simms might balk at this, since he's in higher demand. Harrington and Bouman are probably less in demand. So, I'm betting Simms said if the Ravens cut him in Week 1 and another team made an offer, he'd fly the coup, whereas Harrington doesn't have a choice, so he probably opted to stick it out.

That is the only way I accept us signing Harrington over Simms. ESPN said it was because Harrington has actually played recently, but he's played god awful, so I don't buy that.

**The Fanatic** · 09-01-2008, 06:39 PM

I'd rather see the Bramlett kid serve as a backup then Harrington.

The Bramlett dude has his short comings for sure, but what he was able to do the other night was more impressive to me then anything Harrington has done in 7 years in the league.

**TTRaven** · 09-01-2008, 06:49 PM

Harrington has not been signed according to PFT. It's being reported by Brent Harris that both Simms and Harrington could be offered deals.

**StingerNLG** · 09-01-2008, 06:53 PM

Originally Posted by Dade

Yeah they're gonna IR Boller but would you pick Harrington over Simms?

I didn't say it was a good signing!

**psuasskicker** · 09-01-2008, 06:55 PM

What makes anyone here think Simms and/or Culpepper even WANT to sign with us?

- C -

**The Fanatic** · 09-01-2008, 07:02 PM

Originally Posted by psuasskicker

What makes anyone here think Simms and/or Culpepper even WANT to sign with us?

- C -

Can't speak about Culpepper, but apparently Simms is/was actually in Baltimore at the Ravens complex.

I'll have to assume he came in to talk about playing for the Ravens and didn't just drop in there because he came to town for a crabcake sandwich.:grbac: