Page 5 of 19 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 49 to 60 of 219
  1. #49

    Re: Ravens NOT signing Brockers

    Probably the agents doing. There were rumors of us in on Suh. Think that changed everything to be honest





  2. #50
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Wayne Manor, Gotham
    Posts
    48,760
    Blog Entries
    8

    Re: Ravens NOT signing Brockers

    Quote Originally Posted by Corey View Post
    Dream scenario is they figure out how to get Yannick from the Jags and sign him to a long term deal.
    He's 250 pounds. I'd love to have him but that would be a completely different role than Brockers.





  3. #51

    Re: Ravens NOT signing Brockers

    Quote Originally Posted by smoothSeph View Post
    Probably the agents doing. There were rumors of us in on Suh. Think that changed everything to be honest
    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.





  4. #52

    Re: Ravens NOT signing Brockers

    Quote Originally Posted by chartman View Post
    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.
    It’s really not “more money” though it’s more of an equalizer given California’s high income tax.





  5. #53

    Re: Ravens NOT signing Brockers

    Quote Originally Posted by Jazz1988 View Post
    I think The Ravens wanted to get faster and more versatile on the defense line. Not sure if those guys would had helped.
    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.





  6. #54
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Frederick, MD
    Posts
    61,298
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Ravens NOT signing Brockers

    Quote Originally Posted by edromeo View Post
    Christian Covington
    Young/Good run stopper
    I second this. He’s a good player.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Disclaimer: The content posted is of my own opinion.





  7. #55
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Calvert County
    Posts
    17,340
    Blog Entries
    1

    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





  8. #56

    Re: Ravens NOT signing Brockers

    Does anyone think this contract falling through impacts our odds of extending Judon?





  9. #57

    Re: Ravens NOT signing Brockers

    Quote Originally Posted by chartman View Post
    The lack of picks is another reason I could see them moving Woods for a pick considering how strong this receiver draft is. They're also in the bottom half of the league in 2021 salary cap without the Brockers deal and they need to pay Ramsey or their fan base riots. Woods carries a 10M cap next year which gives them more future flexibility.
    Maybe, I don't know what they'll wind up doing whether it's cuts/trades or restructures, I was just pointing out that they can fit him in the cap. Even if it goes down to $1.9 million in space, there are other teams with even less space.
    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.





  10. #58
    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...





  11. #59

    Re: Ravens NOT signing Brockers

    Quote Originally Posted by TuxRavens View Post
    What about Shelby Harris from DEN? 29 YO, 6 sacks in 2019. Said to be available for ~ $5 Million/ year.
    I'd be very interested in Harris.
    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.





  12. #60

    Re: Ravens NOT signing Brockers

    Quote Originally Posted by Raveninwoodlawn View Post
    Maybe, I don't know what they'll wind up doing whether it's cuts/trades or restructures, I was just pointing out that they can fit him in the cap. Even if it goes down to $1.9 million in space, there are other teams with even less space.
    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

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Link To Mobile Site
var infolinks_pid = 3297965; var infolinks_wsid = 0; //—->