Jump to content

The Merged Trade for Deebo Samuel Thread


playtowinthegame
 Share

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, RVAJet815 said:

Lynch really doesn't want to do this. He's not trading Deebo until he literally has no choice. 

He has a choice.

1) Trade him for the best offer.

2) Force him to remain a Niner. This would potentially make future potential FA's look elsewhere and risk him refusing to play anyway then getting much less in trade value down the road.

  • Upvote 2
  • Sympathy 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, bitonti said:

The difference between good franchises and bad ones is that good ones don't let their stars shoot their way out of town 

 

 

And the Jets haven’t even had a star player who could’ve shot his way out of town.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Barry McCockinner said:

You mean like the Steelers, Chiefs and Packers?

Did Davonte Adams and Tyreek hill openly bash their franchises? These were business moves. 

Teams that let their stars insult them in public and make the trade anyway are showing their bellies. It's not like some strong negotiation tactic. It's weakness 

John lynch runs a legit franchise. Jd runs an embarrassment 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Barry McCockinner said:

He has a choice.

2) Force him to remain a Niner. This would potentially make future potential FA's look elsewhere and risk him refusing to play anyway then getting much less in trade value down the road.

Pales in comparison to precedence setting of letting everyone you draft decide if they feel like still being on the team every off-season 

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Barry McCockinner said:

He has a choice.

1) Trade him for the best offer.

2) Force him to remain a Niner. This would potentially make future potential FA's look elsewhere and risk him refusing to play anyway then getting much less in trade value down the road.

I'm also wondering if this is about driving up contract re-negotiations.

  • My feelings are hurt
  • Here's an extra 5M
  • Oh, I feel better now!

And remember, not all trade requests end up in trades (though quite a few of the recent high profile ones have).

  • Sympathy 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Paradis said:

Pales in comparison to precedence setting of letting everyone you draft decide if they feel like still being on the team every off-season 

I forget who brought it up but I feel like the owners are 100% going to do something to put a stop to this thing. The precedent has pretty much already been set this offseason across the league.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Barry McCockinner said:

I forget who brought it up but I feel like the owners are 100% going to do something to put a stop to this thing. The precedent has pretty much already been set this offseason across the league.

The only way it happens is owners to start calling bluffs and letting these guys sit out.  

Not easy to do - but I can't think of any way they can change a rule to stop players from threatening to hold out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Some of you are going to be very unhappy when/if this trade doesn't happen. 

You're so invested already.  

 

I am already thrilled cause it aint happening.

Receiver at 10!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  Lets go Joe!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Stay the course!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  No Deebo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Barry McCockinner said:

I get what you're saying but if an owner does that today it hurts them and the player. 

For sure.

I just don't see any other rule that the owners can implement to change it.   They have plenty of rules in place to protect them from this.

I do think the - they will be harmed in free agency - thing is overblown and doubt that's the case.  Guys know not to get involved in other people's contracts or money - but I doubt they're going to do something not best for them either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

For sure.

I just don't see any other rule that the owners can implement to change it.   They have plenty of rules in place to protect them from this.

I do think the - they will be harmed in free agency - thing is overblown and doubt that's the case.  Guys know not to get involved in other people's contracts or money - but I doubt they're going to do something not best for them either.

It would be difficult to implement.

They could try putting in some black ball language into the CBA where players who refuse to uphold their contracts can't be signed by another team. This would be unlikely to be accepted by the players association without significant give back - maybe contracts need to have some automatic escalators built in if players significantly outplay their deal or something. I don't know, just spit balling.

They could also just agree to black ball players without making it official.

I just find it hard to believe they're going to continue to allow players to peace out whenever they want without some protections.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...