Contract size has nothing to do with their position in the defense. Hayes is a totally different type of Linebacker than Smith.

 

Yea Hayes sucks Smith doesn't.

---

Contract size has nothing to do with their position in the defense. Hayes is a totally different type of Linebacker than Smith.

Totally different player as in he doesn't miss 5 tackles a game, then yes I agree.

---

Totally different player as in he doesn't miss 5 tackles a game, then yes I agree.

Totally irrelevant to the argument, but ok. The fact is Hayes had a chance to be a starter on this team for the future. He hasn't played well. We move on to the next one.

 

One good example of finding a diamond in the rough is Laroy Reynolds. If he continues to develop, he will be a beast of a player.

---

I think Bridgewater at 3 is better value than Mack at 3, yes.

 

<div> 
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL. Clown.
</div>
 
 
 

Let's not hijack the thread. It's safe to say he's a veteran. Leave it at that.

My aunt is a veteran at cooking. It doesn't mean she is good at it.


I agree though, no thread hijacking.

---

Totally irrelevant to the argument, but ok. The fact is Hayes had a chance to be a starter on this team for the future. He hasn't played well. We move on to the next one.

 

One good example of finding a diamond in the rough is Laroy Reynolds. If he continues to develop, he will be a beast of a player.

It has everything to do with the argument. You said Smith wasn't a scheme fit which is just flat out wrong. I would rather have Smith out there for 2 or 3 more years and Hayes his back up. That would have been fine.

---

Has anyone looked at the amount of dead money we're going to have next year after we cut Mincy, Poz, Lewis, and all the other deadbeats that Gene Smith gave huge contracts to?  Gene Smith set this team up for failure for the next few years - both with horrible drafts AND horrible contracts. 

---

 

 

One good example of finding a diamond in the rough is Laroy Reynolds. If he continues to develop, he will be a beast of a player.

 

What do you mean by "continues to develop"?  What has Reynolds done AT ALL?  Nothing.

He's a nobody until he proves otherwise.  He can't even get on the field ahead of guys like Allen and Hayes.  Two below average linebackers.  Sorry but I don't think Reynolds is an "asset" at all. 

---

<FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=3><B><FONT face=Verdana color=#ff6600 size=4></FONT></B></FONT>

It has everything to do with the argument. You said Smith wasn't a scheme fit which is just flat out wrong. I would rather have Smith out there for 2 or 3 more years and Hayes his back up. That would have been fine.

No, it wasn't just flat out wrong. It is the complete truth. There are different types of LBs. He did not fit our scheme.

 

You would rather have an aged veteran who won't even be there when we are winning instead of possibly finding your LB of the future? This whole rebuilding project is about the future. Not the present. This has been stated by Caldwell numerous times.

---

I think Bridgewater at 3 is better value than Mack at 3, yes.

 

<div> 
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL. Clown.
</div>
 
 
 

The Seahawks went through a total rebuild. Just like what we are doing. In fact, we are doing it, the SAME, EXACT, way. 

 

Daryl Smith didn't fit the scheme or the culture of the team. Caldwell made it clear that youth was going to be added to this team to build for the FUTURE. Having a veteran who didn't even fit the scheme of the defense being implemented and taking precious reps from possible future starters for this team is dumb. The Seahawks did the SAME exact thing, we did. They started a youth movement. We kept veterans. We just did it at different positions. 

 

Here's a breakdown of Seattle's first year of the rebuild that supposedly we're molding ourselves after.

 

Positions with the SAME starter in 2009 and 2010

 

QB-Hasselbeck, TE-Carlson, C-Spencer, T-Locklear, DT-Mebane, DT-Cole, LB-Hawthorne, LB-Curray, CB-Truffant

 

Positions they changed and how (notice the UPGRADES)

 

RB-Lynch (traded for him), WR-Buttler(on the 2009 roster), WR-Williams (Free Agency), DE-Clemons, Balmer (Free Agency), LB-Tatupu ( brought a guy up on the depth chart already on the roster), DB-Jennings and Miloy (already on the roster in 2009 moved up depth chart), Thomas (rookie)

 

So let's review of the 9 positions Seattle had new starters 4 where guys on the roster they moved up, 1 was a rookie, and 4 where free agents brought in from other teams.

 

The majority of Seattle 2010 team was on the roster in 2009, thus they worked with what they had until they could find upgrades the opposite of blowing it up.

---

What do you mean by "continues to develop"?  What has Reynolds done AT ALL?  Nothing.

He's a nobody until he proves otherwise.  He can't even get on the field ahead of guys like Allen and Hayes.  Two below average linebackers.  Sorry but I don't think Reynolds is an "asset" at all. 

Listen to some of the earlier press conferences. The more you know. 

---

I think Bridgewater at 3 is better value than Mack at 3, yes.

 

<div> 
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL. Clown.
</div>
 
 
 

Has anyone looked at the amount of dead money we're going to have next year after we cut Mincy, Poz, Lewis, and all the other deadbeats that Gene Smith gave huge contracts to?  Gene Smith set this team up for failure for the next few years - both with horrible drafts AND horrible contracts. 

 

I don't think we should cut Poz... or even Mincey for that matter.  Sure, their contracts are too huge, but I dont want another offseason like this past one. 

 

What's their plan?  Cut Poz so we can draft a LB that MIGHT be as good?  No thanks.  Every team has a few players with bad contracts, no big deal.

---

<FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=3><B><FONT face=Verdana color=#ff6600 size=4></FONT></B></FONT>

No, it wasn't just flat out wrong. It is the complete truth. There are different types of LBs. He did not fit our scheme.

 

You would rather have an aged veteran who won't even be there when we are winning instead of possibly finding your LB of the future? This whole rebuilding project is about the future. Not the present. This has been stated by Caldwell numerous times.

 

:woot: You think Geno Hayes is a part of the future LB core

---

Listen to some of the earlier press conferences. The more you know. 

 

I don't care about press conferences.  I'm sick of us overrating some bums.  He hasn't done anything for me to be excited about him.  I'm sick of "jars on the shelf" players that never get on the field or never really contribute.  This team is horrible.  Like, worst in the history of the NFL horrible possibly.  If you're not starting for em, sorry but you're not part of the future.

---

<FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=3><B><FONT face=Verdana color=#ff6600 size=4></FONT></B></FONT>

I don't care about press conferences.  I'm sick of us overrating some bums.  He hasn't done anything for me to be excited about him.  I'm sick of "jars on the shelf" players that never get on the field or never really contribute.  This team is horrible.  Like, worst in the history of the NFL horrible possibly.  If you're not starting for em, sorry but you're not part of the future.

 

Seriously if you can't crack the lineup on this roster, you ain't cracking the lineup on ANY roster, EVER.

---

Here's a breakdown of Seattle's first year of the rebuild that supposedly we're molding ourselves after.

 

Positions with the SAME starter in 2009 and 2010

 

QB-Hasselbeck, TE-Carlson, C-Spencer, T-Locklear, DT-Mebane, DT-Cole, LB-Hawthorne, LB-Curray, CB-Truffant

 

Positions they changed and how (notice the UPGRADES)

 

RB-Lynch (traded for him), WR-Buttler(on the 2009 roster), WR-Williams (Free Agency), DE-Clemons, Balmer (Free Agency), LB-Tatupu ( brought a guy up on the depth chart already on the roster), DB-Jennings and Miloy (already on the roster in 2009 moved up depth chart), Thomas (rookie)

 

So let's review of the 9 positions Seattle had new starters 4 where guys on the roster they moved up, 1 was a rookie, and 4 where free agents brought in from other teams.

 

The majority of Seattle 2010 team was on the roster in 2009, thus they worked with what they had until they could find upgrades the opposite of blowing it up.

 

So I guess Meester, Rackley, Nwaneri, Posluszny, Allen, Lowery, Mincey, Alualu don't fit your notion of veteran role players? Because that's exactly what they are. I think you missed this point. This is year 1 of the rebuild. How many quality starters would you like them to find in 1 year?

 

:woot: You think Geno Hayes is a part of the future LB core 

 
Wrong. Never said that actually. I said in a post on Page 3 he hasn't played well and that we would be moving on from him. Read the thread.

---

I think Bridgewater at 3 is better value than Mack at 3, yes.

 

<div> 
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL. Clown.
</div>
 
 
 

No, it wasn't just flat out wrong. It is the complete truth. There are different types of LBs. He did not fit our scheme.

 

You would rather have an aged veteran who won't even be there when we are winning instead of possibly finding your LB of the future? This whole rebuilding project is about the future. Not the present.e This has been stated by Caldwell numerous times.

Absolutely I would rather have an aged vet who is the better player. You keep good players. It is that simple. No one on this defense seems to fit this scheme. The defense is terrible. Smith would be better than Hayes if he were still here. I can guarantee that.


It is always about the future. No team builds a team for one season. Is Hayes going to be here when we start winning? Not looking like it. What is the difference?

---

I agree. 

 

When you decide to move on from Smith, the replacement better be some rookie... not a washed up Geno Hayes who couldn't cut it in multiple NFL franchises.  I'm not saying I'm against signing a guy like Hayes, because he can be a good backup.... but you don't start him.

 

You KNOW he's not good enough to be a starter on a good defense.  So why start him?  Just so you look for HIS replacement next year?  Why not just keep Smith who can play better (only question mark is health)?  Or why not give the job to Reynolds?  He can't be that much worse... Or is he?

---

<FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=3><B><FONT face=Verdana color=#ff6600 size=4></FONT></B></FONT>

How can you even think like this? Is it really this hard to understand? How in the world could Caldwell made this roster more competitive without sacrificing the future? Even then, if we did sign some overpriced F/A's, we'd only be able to squeeze out 3-4 wins anyway.

 

This is Gene Smith's fault. Not Caldwell. Not Bradley. Get it through your head. This isn't rocket science.

^^^ Totally agree!

 

So your saying Caldwell holds no fault in assembling this roster this year? Either Caldwell or Gus take some blame in this season, unless you accept the notion this level of suck is on purpose.

Totally disagree!! I said this before and I'll say it again, what the heck did you want Caldwell and Bradley to do? Magically pull top star talent out of the air and place them on our roster? If we got rid of all the scrubs currently on the roster or on the roster at the beginning, we'd have like 6 total players. Where you gonna get the other 47??? And you can't just spend and overspend in FA; that doesn't fix the problem (i.e our FA spending probably the last 5-6 years). The only way to get more talent to replace the current non-talent, is through the draft and possibly a few FA signings, if they are available. Remember, there may be a lot of other teams that want to sign that FA. And who would want to come to play in Jacksonville honestly? With all the media hashing and no national coverage or respect, signing FA is very hard for us (i.e why we overspend a lot of the time). Everyone needs to come to the fact that this year is going to suck big time, but this rebuild is actually a rebuild. Not something fashioned up to look like a rebuild to hide the fact that the GM/owner/HC doesn't know what they are doing (i.e Shack, Geney poo, Weaverlicious, etc). This will take 3 years in my eyes for us to get back being truly competitive with the best of teams, consistently. Be patient people!!

 

Go Jags!

---

Let's Get Em!!!! Go Jags!

We didnt keep Smith because he's old. He wouldnt be on the team in 3 years when we would be contending. The point of this season is trying to find some under the radar guys who could contribute long term in the new scheme, like Brandon Browner or Red Bryant of the Seahawks did in the first year of their rebuild.

 

The past regime does give the current regime a pass for this year, because Gene only drafted 3 good starters in 4 drafts (Monroe, Shorts, Blackmon). He also brought in mediocre and overpaid free agents. And you morons think that can be fixed sustainably overnight? If Caldwell's players all suck in 2 years like Genes did of course everyone will be angry with him. But it seems like hes a better evaluator of talent than Gene (not hard to do, but this draft looks pretty good).

 

If you disagree with Gus' strategy to essentially punt on this season, look at the Redskins in 2011. They had a new regime, a coach who knew none of the QBs on his roster were the answer, but also knew that Gabbert and Ponder sucked, so they skipped on addressing the most important position in year 1 to have a shot to get a franchise guy in year 2.

 

Its extremely difficult to find a franchise QB outside the top 10. Point out the outliers all you want, the percentage drops staggeringly from 15 onwards. This is the toughest and most important player to get, and you usually have to really suck in order to find one.

 

Lets evaluate the coaches next year when they have a more talented roster to work with. Jedds play calling is obviously not going to look the same with a good QB and above average offensive line play. That opens up the playbook so much more than what we have to deal with now. Right now if we are in a 3rd and 8+ we have absolutley no shot of converting. Thats why there are so many runs on 2nd and 10 to try to get in a reasonable distance for our crap QB and crap o-line to do their job. But most casual fans dont understand this.

 

On the defensive side of the ball Gus cant make the LBs fill their gaps correctly or the defensive line to not suck. If a coach could fix these things then no team would be bad. Again, have patience and evaluate next year when there is more to work with.

---

Absolutely I would rather have an aged vet who is the better player. You keep good players. It is that simple. No one on this defense seems to fit this scheme. The defense is terrible. Smith would be better than Hayes if he were still here. I can guarantee that.


It is always about the future. No team builds a team for one season. Is Hayes going to be here when we start winning? Not looking like it. What is the difference?

Smith is better than Hayes. Correct. But that's not the point in hand. Hayes was average in TB and was buried in the depth chart. Caldwell brought him in here because he had potential to be an everydown LB. If Smith was still here, we would not know that. Now that we know that Hayes is pretty garbage, we will most likely move on to the next one. This is exactly how Seattle rebuilt their roster. Continuously bringing in players on 1 year deals/tryout basis contracts. 

 

What is the difference? Well, if Hayes did turn out to be a good LB, wouldn't you be praising Caldwell for the let go of Smith and the signing of Hayes? 

 

We have the same situation with the CBs. Caldwell let Cox walk in F/A, and brought in F/As on one year/tryout basis contracts. Will Blackmon and Alan Ball have played better than Cox and former. They blanketed receivers all day today. Kaep ran more today than any other game this season. There's a reason for it. 

 

It's all about finding quality players. You find football players where you find football players. 

 

EDIT; IN NO WAY AM I FINE WITH THE PLAY OF THE DEFENSE TODAY, IT JUST FIT THE ARGUMENT. 

---

I think Bridgewater at 3 is better value than Mack at 3, yes.

 

<div> 
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL. Clown.
</div>