(09-28-2018, 05:47 AM)Upper Wrote:

(09-28-2018, 12:15 AM)NYC4jags Wrote: LOL

So dumb. 
It's not that simple. You love to leave out that Cousins has 60 million more in guaranteed money than Blake. Not the first time you've been called on it either.

It was a 3 year deal fully guaranteed for Cousins, not some 6-7 year monstrosity. There is zero chance we're cutting Blake next year and eating 16.5 mil dead cap. So the only scenario in which guaranteed money matters is if Blake is so bad that we want to cut him in year 3. And obviously if Blake is so bad that he's nuked 2 seasons of prime championship window and we want to cut him in year 3 and start over with a new QB then the whole debate is DOA.

I would throw in a condescending LOL or LMAO and call you so dumb for arguing that the ability to cut a QB if he's so bad that he single handedly derailed a championship window can be construed as a win, but that's not my style.  On the flip side, when the point you're trying to support is that pathetic I can see the rationale for going with the ad hominem. I wouldn't want to try to defend it on its merits either.

Hmm.... maybe I've read the contract info wrong.. but I thought his salary for THIS season was 20 million.
That would leave only 6.5 million left to be paid in guarantees. I'm not sure we need to worry about the dead cap next season, since our big players don't have to be extended until 2020.

Either way though... Bortles could be benched with that contract much in the same way Bradford (and Glennon last season) were despite heavy contract numbers.

Also: by being a douche and then saying being a douche isn't your style, you seem extra douche-y.

--oh and Cousins looked pretty good last night, and awful against the Bills.
Is that the kind of consistency we should have paid almost 100 million for?

---