Only have so many picks and so much money. I’m not stuck on having to keep Sanders. He’s flawed. Not a workhorse. Terrible pass blocking.

26 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Sanders is an unique at his position also. Most RB  don’t last.

Because we don't use him,because Hurts hogs the ball-jebus

I want to stack the RB room with an actual committee. Or really a strong tandem.

Need more than one guy.

26 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

You gotta talk 2023 money and forward. 2022 isn’t relevant.

I’m not totally saying Sanders has to be paid. But I see a big dropoff from him to others.

What "others" We looked at adding Hunt, is he on par with Sanders?

1 minute ago, cunninghamtheman said:

I’m saying it’s actually possible to pay Sanders under that cap thing. Ceedy Deuce really hampers you. So my thought go along the lines if we could pay Sanders and draft the S. 

All options on the table. But you set on letting Sanders walk and drafting his replacement in the second. Why not a S?

Does it hamper me....from doing what?   Again... when spending money you have to look at replacement value.   Sanders much easier to replace.  Guy like CGJ isn't.   Spending half for Sanders and then say the difference at S to replace CGJ....vs paying CGJ and drafting a rookie RB.  

I can't say half price safety is going to do anything?  I can honestly say that I've seen plenty of RBs better than Sanders.  

Just now, GreenbleedinNC said:

Because we don't use him,because Hurts hogs the ball-jebus

You kill me with your Hurts hating. Hurts was practically the only good thing this last game. Carried us to victory. And you hate and call him a hog.

22 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Like I pondered earlier….I’ll even consider trading Hurts.

Got 22 starters at least to come up with

Now we're trading Hurts??

Just now, GreenbleedinNC said:

What "others" We looked at adding Hunt, is he on par with Sanders?

Hunt is a thug. So you gotta factor that in.

Just now, GreenbleedinNC said:

Now we're trading Hurts??

I’m spitballing every possibility.

4 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Just don’t see the comparisons between Sanders and CJG. Both starters. CJG better. But we’d all love to just pay all the All Pros. Can’t afford that. Simple math I’m for some reason having you long winded explain here. 18 mil versus 6 mil. The 6 mil guy is easier to fit in more scenarios. Plus your whole idea is let the 6 mil guy walk and having to use a high draft pick to overcome it. 

I would rather pay the all pros that impact games than pay the mediocre guys that you can replace.    

Finding a mid range pay scale safety while paying Sanders...harder way to win IMO....than CGJ and rookie RB in a commiteee

2 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

You kill me with your Hurts hating. Hurts was practically the only good thing this last game. Carried us to victory. And you hate and call him a hog.

I'm not burdening Hurts with overpaying Sanders.  

8 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

You really think we end up with those picks... no shot we stay put.   We also have free agency.   Not everything must be done via draft.  But you can bet RB is one they would love to select in round 2 or 3.   Remember the SB year....how did RB look in April of that year?

Depends which pick we get first in 1. I have already stated my theory if that pick ends up at 4. Right now it's pick 10 and my theory won't work at pick 10,so really need to see at the end where that NO pick is

 

3 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Does it hamper me....from doing what?   Again... when spending money you have to look at replacement value.   Sanders much easier to replace.  Guy like CGJ isn't.   Spending half for Sanders and then say the difference at S to replace CGJ....vs paying CGJ and drafting a rookie RB.  

I can't say half price safety is going to do anything?  I can honestly say that I've seen plenty of RBs better than Sanders.  

I can see your point. Just looking at every angle

4 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

I want to stack the RB room with an actual committee. Or really a strong tandem.

Need more than one guy.

We need to focus on the lines..  . 2017 style was built correctly.   Lines take priority.  Stacking a RB room has done what for any SB champ?  

We balked on paying the top FA S when the price rose. 

1 minute ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

Depends which pick we get first in 1. I have already stated my theory if that pick ends up at 4. Right now it's pick 10 and my theory won't work at pick 10,so really need to see at the end where that NO pick is

 

We aren't keeping both 1st round slots... you know one will be traded.

CGJ is better than Epps. But I believe we keep Epps and not Ceedy.

Not because we believe Epps better. Money.

Just now, cunninghamtheman said:

We balked on paying the top FA S when the price rose. 

Or we just didn't want to pay that guy... or maybe we don't want to pay CGJ either...but now given your choice....who would you rather pay? Which S?

8 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Just don’t see the comparisons between Sanders and CJG. Both starters. CJG better. But we’d all love to just pay all the All Pros. Can’t afford that. Simple math I’m for some reason having you long winded explain here. 18 mil versus 6 mil. The 6 mil guy is easier to fit in more scenarios. Plus your whole idea is let the 6 mil guy walk and having to use a high draft pick to overcome it. 

I hope we can retain the 3 we have, on short termers,butstill we need to start drafting top replacements. We were fortunate bradberry and CJG came free. We hit the DB trifecta,we need to start grooming some because top guys like we got aren't always available

1 minute ago, joemas6 said:

We need to focus on the lines..  . 2017 style was built correctly.   Lines take priority.  Stacking a RB room has done what for any SB champ?  

Cincy took WR stacking instead of what everybody demands should have been the lines. Worked out pretty well for them.

Just now, cunninghamtheman said:

CGJ is better than Epps. But I believe we keep Epps and not Ceedy.

Not because we believe Epps better. Money.

Again...in either scenario...I'm not paying Sanders. 

Just now, cunninghamtheman said:

Cincy took WR stacking instead of what everybody demands should have been the lines. Worked out pretty well for them.

Yes...WR stacking...much better than RB stacking....look at the results the last 20 years. 

7 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

You kill me with your Hurts hating. Hurts was practically the only good thing this last game. Carried us to victory. And you hate and call him a hog.

How is ball hogging turn into hate? It's DAMN FACTS you choose to ignore. he hogs the ball on 4th and 1,he hogs the ball at the GL what do you NOT see?????

Plus timing. We just saw a bad team in Indy. Gave our Oline fits. You believe we have the best Oline. But that matchup of our Oline vs their Dline they won. Really troubled us. Makes me really think about that belief.

Our WRs are finally there.  Lines need retooling.   You can find replacement for Sanders...not that difficult. 

One if the biggest takeaways from our playoff game had to be that Oline Dline matchup also. Favored them

So if we have the best Oline but keep losing that matchup something’s wrong. Not a great strategy.

Just now, cunninghamtheman said:

Plus timing. We just saw a bad team in Indy. Gave our Oline fits. You believe we have the best Oline. But that matchup of our Oline vs their Dline they won. Really troubled us. Makes me really think about that belief.

You believe Indy has the best RB...what gas that gotten them?    I'm not paying Sanders regardless of any scenario you bring up.

You have 2 points.   He is cheaper than other upcoming FAs...and Gainwell.  Neither is reason to pay Sanders.

1 minute ago, joemas6 said:

Our WRs are finally there.  Lines need retooling.   You can find replacement for Sanders...not that difficult. 

Dline yes but you keep being absolute about our top Oline. But we lose the Oline Dline matchup too much