Now sign CJG. I was hoping to keep 2/3. 1 already done

1 hour ago, stine said:

Maybe they sign Fournette? was released so no compensation issue

I think he would fit in great. Fourrnette,Penny,Gains,Scott would be a nice RBBC. if not Fournette, I like Damien Harris

26 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

Maybe,but a nice top RB core addition to your team never hurt anyone and you have control for 5 year. I suspect they can move back a few spot,get Richardson,pick up another pic,because they DO need line work. So it's almost like a 2 for 1 deal. I don't see much advantage losing Montgomery just to sign Eckler.  

Yeah...I disagree with that last sentence 

25 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

Slay is gone on a post 6/1

Very predictable 

3 minutes ago, EaglesTD123 said:

 

That was not said. Writers love to add fuel to the fire. heck, he has not even agreed to a trade yet! lol

13 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Yeah...I disagree with that last sentence 

IDK why, you're paying out either way. Unless it's similar to us where you're saving alot of loot,the move seems redundant. I Mean why would we lose Sanders to sign Zeke for near the same money. IDK what he wants/gets,but big savings would be the only way. They are in position to get what some are calling the next Barkley. You just lost your RB,so makes sense to go get a rook since you have signed a boatload of other players. That is 1 position you don't need to worry about re-signing for 4 years

3 minutes ago, stine said:

 

That was not said. Writers love to add fuel to the fire. heck, he has not even agreed to a trade yet! lol

It's a joke

3 minutes ago, stine said:

 

That was not said. Writers love to add fuel to the fire. heck, he has not even agreed to a trade yet! lol

LMAO no he hasn't because he has all these demands. he wants certain WR's and a bunch of other things. This is why I said he won't be happy in NY. He will WHINE them into cutting him later. But leave it to the jets to make more bad decisions. he will sulk and carry on if he doesn't get his way

7 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

IDK why, you're paying out either way. Unless it's similar to us where you're saving alot of loot,the move seems redundant. I Mean why would we lose Sanders to sign Zeke for near the same money. IDK what he wants/gets,but big savings would be the only way. They are in position to get what some are calling the next Barkley. You just lost your RB,so makes sense to go get a rook since you have signed a boatload of other players. That is 1 position you don't need to worry about re-signing for 4 years

Because Eckler is much better than Montgomery.  And I think it's dumb to invest the money and the pick on the RB.  Show me the top RBs drafted high with team success in the league?  You waste an opportunity to select a top lineman for a RB?    For this 5th year of control?   You want the linemen under control for 5 years, not the RB.   The bargain of a top 15pick for linemen is there...but that same money is fairly expensive for a RB.   

Just look around and see the salaries so far in free agency.  

1 hour ago, stine said:

I was hoping either Dillard or TJ would get us a 5th but not according to one site I read. Still, it is early, so who knows?

CGJ isn’t getting Bates money. Hopefully a fourth.

Zeke dumped

14 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

CGJ isn’t getting Bates money. Hopefully a fourth.

So week 3 you would pay CGJ $13 mil... but now you wouldn't?

17 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

So week 3 you would pay CGJ $13 mil... but now you wouldn't?

How much did Bates get? Check your figures.

Called it to start the season to pay CGJ 13 mil. Price hasn’t gone up for me.

Just now, cunninghamtheman said:

How much did Bates get? Check your figures.

You just said CGJ isn't getting Bates money.  So he should get less right?

18 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

So week 3 you would pay CGJ $13 mil... but now you wouldn't?

Would 13 get you a third round comp pick?

Just now, cunninghamtheman said:

Called it to start the season to pay CGJ 13 mil. Price hasn’t gone up for me.

Probably not much for him either is my point.  Are you drawing the line at 14 mil?

Just now, cunninghamtheman said:

Would 13 get you a third round comp pick?

Not close 

Just now, joemas6 said:

You just said CGJ isn't getting Bates money.  So he should get less right?

Bates got 16…I’ll help you out a little here

Just now, joemas6 said:

Not close 

So what sense does anything you posted quoting my posts have?

Just now, cunninghamtheman said:

Bates got 16…I’ll help you out a little here

Right  ... so that's what I'm saying...I'm agreeing with you...he won't get $16...he will be Right at the number you were willing to pay in September.  Why would it change?   If he gets  $14 mil you would not sign him?

21 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

So week 3 you would pay CGJ $13 mil... but now you wouldn't?

Never been said by me. Been consistent since the season started. You are just making words up to put in my mouth. Said 13 to start this last season. Still at 13. You can’t just make stuff up to say I stated it.

1 minute ago, cunninghamtheman said:

So what sense does anything you posted quoting my posts have?

So... let's follow... 

1. You wanted to sign him for $13 mil per in week 3.

2. Bates got 16 mil

3.  CGJ won't get 16 mil

4.   So you want the 5th maybe 4th round comp pick 

So my question...why wouldn't you just pay CGJ slightly more than the $13 mil per now?    Because you want a pick around 180 or possibly 140 in 2024?

Why not just sign CGJ?

4 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Never been said by me. Been consistent since the season started. You are just making words up to put in my mouth. Said 13 to start this last season. Still at 13. You can’t just make stuff up to say I stated it.

You constantly said during the season..  ( the reason is because you have to take a shot at Howie every chance you get) ...   " I would have signed CGJ....oops... Cee Dee Deuce. ..to 13 mil week 3.    His price just going up to $18 -20 mil per now...Howie was dumb" 

That's been your talk for months... now you are denying you said that and those #s???

He isn't making $18 mil....you also wanted to tag him for $14 mil...it was a bargain....  so now doesn't it seem smart thar they waited and not use the tag?

That tag counts 100% and would count now, by the deadline at 4pm today.  Which would be dumb business.   Now if they lose CGJ... so be it.  But you would assume he signs a deal right around that tag #.  Why not lock that # in long term. .it's better business!