Results 49 to 60 of 219
Thread: Ravens NOT signing Brockers
-
03-27-2020, 09:03 AM #49Regular 1st Stringer
- Join Date
- Apr 2017
- Posts
- 507
Re: Ravens NOT signing Brockers
Probably the agents doing. There were rumors of us in on Suh. Think that changed everything to be honest
-
-
03-27-2020, 09:08 AM #51
Re: Ravens NOT signing Brockers
I would imagine that after there was worry of the contract failing for a physical, Brocker's agent reached out to teams. The Ravens deal was public information so the Rams bumped the original Ravens deal up 1.5M giving Brocker's leverage in negotiation. Then Brockers decided to take more money, not move cities, and not learn a new playbook instead of taking a smaller or more bonus incentive based deal with the Ravens.
-
03-27-2020, 09:17 AM #52
-
03-27-2020, 09:17 AM #53
Re: Ravens NOT signing Brockers
That's fair, but Brockers is 29 and we had him signed for 3 years.
Daniels is 30, Snacks is 31, and Hankins is 28. We could theoretically sign 2/3 of these guys for the same money or less on a 1-2 year deal. More depth could be helpful. Also, I'd imagine we spend a pick in the 4-6 range on a DL.
-
-
Re: Ravens NOT signing Brockers
I was excited to get Brockers so this is disappointing, but stuff happens. It is what it is. Hopefully they will be able to find someone to replace him.
back on twitter
"Well that was an appropriate last ride for Pees. A Bengals WR streaking in for a game winning touchdown in the closing minutes is the man’s preferred medium to express his art." - GreenWave52
-
03-27-2020, 09:25 AM #56
Re: Ravens NOT signing Brockers
Does anyone think this contract falling through impacts our odds of extending Judon?
-
Re: Ravens NOT signing Brockers
Although Walsh's system of offense can compensate for lack of talent; however, defense is a different story. According to Walsh, talent on defense was essential and could not be compensated for. What did Walsh do in 1981? He acquired physical and talented players on defense.
-
03-27-2020, 09:28 AM #58Veteran Poster
- Join Date
- Aug 2011
- Location
- Westminster, Md
- Posts
- 2,854
Re: Ravens NOT signing Brockers
Espenesa back in play for us now first round now...
-
Re: Ravens NOT signing Brockers
Although Walsh's system of offense can compensate for lack of talent; however, defense is a different story. According to Walsh, talent on defense was essential and could not be compensated for. What did Walsh do in 1981? He acquired physical and talented players on defense.
-
03-27-2020, 09:45 AM #60
Re: Ravens NOT signing Brockers
I definitely see your point and think that the Ravens getting Woods is unlikely. I just wanted to pose a situation where the Ravens use their cap for a receiver instead of Dlineman and utilize more of their draft capital on the Dline (while still likely drafting a receiver). The Rams came to mind because they have low draft capital and low cap and could use both.
Bookmarks