View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently October 25th, 2014, 12:21 am



Reply to topic  [ 86 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
 Tim Tebow, Lions H-back 
Author Message
Post Re: Tim Tebow, Lions H-back
rao wrote:
wjb21ndtown wrote:
rao wrote:
wjb21ndtown wrote:
I'm trying to shed salary... I don't care what we get for Hill. I agree with his worth, but it's better than nothing, and it's damn sure better than paying him $1.3M or whatever it is that he's due.

You develop players to make them better, period. It's not to trade him, and it's not to start him, it's to have a better team, flat out.


That's not true at QB, if you already have what you feel is your franchise QB.


Ri-damn-diculous...


Yes you are.

I guess Belichick been doing it wrong.


Billicheck doesn't develop non-starting Qbs? Are you kidding me?

You make absolutely no sense.


May 2nd, 2013, 8:13 pm
Post Re: Tim Tebow, Lions H-back
sweetd20 wrote:
By signing Tebow they wouldn't be saving enough money to make a noticeable difference. I believe he will be entering his 4th season and league minimum has to be around $700,000 if not higher plus he isn't inking anything without signing, workout, and roster bonuses. The right move would have been to move Hill if possible and let Moore and his noodle arm go while making a guy like Bray their priority FA signing. Bray needs work and needs to learn what it means to be dedicated to his craft but he has the big arm to at least get it to Calvin downfield if Stafford were to get hurt.


Zac Dysert is someone that I wanted us to draft. That kid was a steal.

Still, I'd take the $300-500k, + a possible draft pick for Hill, even if it's a 6th or 7th.

regularjoe12 wrote:
Let us not forget we are only 2 years separated from wondering if Staff had any durability at all. What we have in Hill is well worth his price tag. He knows the offense and proved that he can keep it functional if Staff goes down.

I have seen Tebow throw. If he had to lead this team for a full game or more it is a loss. I am not interested in saving what is essentially pennies by comparison to make the team worse.

The only spot I could see Tebow taking and it NOT wanting to make me vomit, is Logan's spot. Maybe not as a returner, but for the occasional slash plays. But that's a minimum wage paying job.


What we have in Hill is well worth the price tag for what? And what's the "big scary deal" about having Hill not here and Stafford getting hurt? Hill is something like 34, and if he has to come in we're phucked anyhow... We're not making the playoffs, why over-pay a backup Qb that won't be here if and when we're ever "good."


May 2nd, 2013, 8:17 pm
NFL Veteran

Joined: November 28th, 2007, 12:50 pm
Posts: 1387
Location: Newport Beach, Ca
Post Re: Tim Tebow, Lions H-back
wjb21ndtown wrote:
rao wrote:
wjb21ndtown wrote:
rao wrote:
wjb21ndtown wrote:
I'm trying to shed salary... I don't care what we get for Hill. I agree with his worth, but it's better than nothing, and it's damn sure better than paying him $1.3M or whatever it is that he's due.

You develop players to make them better, period. It's not to trade him, and it's not to start him, it's to have a better team, flat out.


That's not true at QB, if you already have what you feel is your franchise QB.


Ri-damn-diculous...


Yes you are.

I guess Belichick been doing it wrong.


Billicheck doesn't develop non-starting Qbs? Are you kidding me?

You make absolutely no sense.


I never said his QBs become starters, but the last few times he drafted a QB was to be trade bait. He absolutely drafted them with the thought using them as a trade chip in the future. He wasn't developing them to sit on his roster or take over for Brady.


May 2nd, 2013, 8:25 pm
Profile
Post Re: Tim Tebow, Lions H-back
rao wrote:
wjb21ndtown wrote:
rao wrote:
wjb21ndtown wrote:
rao wrote:
wjb21ndtown wrote:
I'm trying to shed salary... I don't care what we get for Hill. I agree with his worth, but it's better than nothing, and it's damn sure better than paying him $1.3M or whatever it is that he's due.

You develop players to make them better, period. It's not to trade him, and it's not to start him, it's to have a better team, flat out.


That's not true at QB, if you already have what you feel is your franchise QB.


Ri-damn-diculous...


Yes you are.

I guess Belichick been doing it wrong.


Billicheck doesn't develop non-starting Qbs? Are you kidding me?

You make absolutely no sense.


I never said his QBs become starters, but the last few times he drafted a QB was to be trade bait. He absolutely drafted them with the thought using them as a trade chip in the future. He wasn't developing them to sit on his roster or take over for Brady.


So you're saying that he never "developed" these guys to play better backup Qb for the Pats., it was always this underscored plan to trade them away?

You're so full of cake its awesome


May 2nd, 2013, 8:28 pm
ST Coordinator – Danny Crossman
User avatar

Joined: March 30th, 2006, 12:48 am
Posts: 3827
Location: Davison Mi
Post Re: Tim Tebow, Lions H-back
wjb21ndtown wrote:
sweetd20 wrote:
By signing Tebow they wouldn't be saving enough money to make a noticeable difference. I believe he will be entering his 4th season and league minimum has to be around $700,000 if not higher plus he isn't inking anything without signing, workout, and roster bonuses. The right move would have been to move Hill if possible and let Moore and his noodle arm go while making a guy like Bray their priority FA signing. Bray needs work and needs to learn what it means to be dedicated to his craft but he has the big arm to at least get it to Calvin downfield if Stafford were to get hurt.


Zac Dysert is someone that I wanted us to draft. That kid was a steal.

Still, I'd take the $300-500k, + a possible draft pick for Hill, even if it's a 6th or 7th.

regularjoe12 wrote:
Let us not forget we are only 2 years separated from wondering if Staff had any durability at all. What we have in Hill is well worth his price tag. He knows the offense and proved that he can keep it functional if Staff goes down.

I have seen Tebow throw. If he had to lead this team for a full game or more it is a loss. I am not interested in saving what is essentially pennies by comparison to make the team worse.

The only spot I could see Tebow taking and it NOT wanting to make me vomit, is Logan's spot. Maybe not as a returner, but for the occasional slash plays. But that's a minimum wage paying job.


What we have in Hill is well worth the price tag for what? And what's the "big scary deal" about having Hill not here and Stafford getting hurt? Hill is something like 34, and if he has to come in we're phucked anyhow... We're not making the playoffs, why over-pay a backup Qb that won't be here if and when we're ever "good."


Hmm...you must not have watched the games I did. Hill surprised us all with how well he ran the offense...well all of us that don't expect perfection anyways. He's not as good as Staff, no doubts, but the offense didn't break down, and that's what you want in a backup. To cut him just to save enough money to have no impact on this years roster is silly IMO. You were talking bout how the front office moves are viewed by the players,how do you think they view this as something other than a cheapass move by a tightwad organization? Especially when you are replacing him for an unproven nobody? Or worse a proven bust? Ditching Hill serves no purpose. He not overpaid by enough to make any difference at this point.

_________________
2013 Lionbacker Fantasy Football Champion


May 2nd, 2013, 8:29 pm
Profile
NFL Veteran

Joined: November 28th, 2007, 12:50 pm
Posts: 1387
Location: Newport Beach, Ca
Post Re: Tim Tebow, Lions H-back
wjb21ndtown wrote:
So you're saying that he never "developed" these guys to play better backup Qb for the Pats., it was always this underscored plan to trade them away?

You're so full of cake its awesome.


Actually I said he developed them to become as valuable as possible to be traded, which would result in them hopefully becoming good back-ups in the process with the absolute best possibility being they are able to be starters in the league drawing maximum value.

Nice going to the personnel attack. I let you draw me into it on that post a second ago, but I'll leave the petty stuff to you from now on.


May 2nd, 2013, 8:41 pm
Profile
Post Re: Tim Tebow, Lions H-back
rao wrote:
wjb21ndtown wrote:
So you're saying that he never "developed" these guys to play better backup Qb for the Pats., it was always this underscored plan to trade them away?

You're so full of sh!t it's sick.


Actually I said he developed them to become as valuable as possible to be traded, which would result in them hopefully becoming good back-ups in the process with the absolute best possibility being they are able to be starters in the league drawing maximum value.

Nice going to the personnel attack. I let you draw me into it on that post a second ago, but I'll leave the petty stuff to you from now on.


You're even a ************** when you're allegedly taking the high road... I'm done with you. You talk in circles and argue just to argue.


May 2nd, 2013, 8:54 pm
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: January 26th, 2005, 9:34 pm
Posts: 10302
Location: Sycamore, IL
Post Re: Tim Tebow, Lions H-back
Wow, was the name calling really necessary?

_________________
_____
I have no faith this team will win a game the rest of the year. The kitties finish at 7-9 and Miss the playoffs as GB wins out and takes it from the kitties.
Image


May 2nd, 2013, 9:09 pm
Profile
Post Re: Tim Tebow, Lions H-back
regularjoe12 wrote:
wjb21ndtown wrote:
sweetd20 wrote:
By signing Tebow they wouldn't be saving enough money to make a noticeable difference. I believe he will be entering his 4th season and league minimum has to be around $700,000 if not higher plus he isn't inking anything without signing, workout, and roster bonuses. The right move would have been to move Hill if possible and let Moore and his noodle arm go while making a guy like Bray their priority FA signing. Bray needs work and needs to learn what it means to be dedicated to his craft but he has the big arm to at least get it to Calvin downfield if Stafford were to get hurt.


Zac Dysert is someone that I wanted us to draft. That kid was a steal.

Still, I'd take the $300-500k, + a possible draft pick for Hill, even if it's a 6th or 7th.

regularjoe12 wrote:
Let us not forget we are only 2 years separated from wondering if Staff had any durability at all. What we have in Hill is well worth his price tag. He knows the offense and proved that he can keep it functional if Staff goes down.

I have seen Tebow throw. If he had to lead this team for a full game or more it is a loss. I am not interested in saving what is essentially pennies by comparison to make the team worse.

The only spot I could see Tebow taking and it NOT wanting to make me vomit, is Logan's spot. Maybe not as a returner, but for the occasional slash plays. But that's a minimum wage paying job.


What we have in Hill is well worth the price tag for what? And what's the "big scary deal" about having Hill not here and Stafford getting hurt? Hill is something like 34, and if he has to come in we're phucked anyhow... We're not making the playoffs, why over-pay a backup Qb that won't be here if and when we're ever "good."


Hmm...you must not have watched the games I did. Hill surprised us all with how well he ran the offense...well all of us that don't expect perfection anyways. He's not as good as Staff, no doubts, but the offense didn't break down, and that's what you want in a backup. To cut him just to save enough money to have no impact on this years roster is silly IMO. You were talking bout how the front office moves are viewed by the players,how do you think they view this as something other than a cheapass move by a tightwad organization? Especially when you are replacing him for an unproven nobody? Or worse a proven bust? Ditching Hill serves no purpose. He not overpaid by enough to make any difference at this point.


RJ, my point is, he's making over $1M to sit on the bench. What value is that? We're not going to the playoffs with or without Staff. You only pay a quality backup for insurance to not get knocked out of a playoff spot if your starting Qb gets injured.


May 2nd, 2013, 9:15 pm
ST Coordinator – Danny Crossman
User avatar

Joined: March 30th, 2006, 12:48 am
Posts: 3827
Location: Davison Mi
Post Re: Tim Tebow, Lions H-back
You undeniably make the team worse, to get what exactly? The nickels and dimes we'd get would not make a lick of difference in this years roster, and I'm pretty sure this s his last year is it not?

What's the point other than to piss off his teammates, by having the front office hurt the team ( even if it is just by a little tiny bit) just to save a few pennies?

If trading/cutting hill meant the difference in us affording the guy that WILL elivate the team, then I'm all for it. But it won't. He's not paid THAT much.
Ditching hill at this point doesn't help the team at all.

_________________
2013 Lionbacker Fantasy Football Champion


May 2nd, 2013, 10:04 pm
Profile
Post Re: Tim Tebow, Lions H-back
regularjoe12 wrote:
You undeniably make the team worse, to get what exactly? The nickels and dimes we'd get would not make a lick of difference in this years roster, and I'm pretty sure this s his last year is it not?

What's the point other than to piss off his teammates, by having the front office hurt the team ( even if it is just by a little tiny bit) just to save a few pennies?

If trading/cutting hill meant the difference in us affording the guy that WILL elivate the team, then I'm all for it. But it won't. He's not paid THAT much.
Ditching hill at this point doesn't help the team at all.


It's not just to get rid of Hill, you also PICK UP your future backup, and you get to groom him to be here when you're actually good. That's the point. Further, Tebow allows you to practice against the spread option, which is huge.


May 2nd, 2013, 10:18 pm
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 86 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.