Elemas":brtudbng said:
What cost? He's still signed. You're going to have to pay at some point. Unless, you're approaching this as a rebuild? If that's the case, I suppose it makes perfect sense. Oh...that and trading Russell Wilson as well because, "keeping the guy regardless of cost" is a bad idea.
Genius!
Why does it have to be labeled a rebuild, just because we trade Earl?
Can we just call it a smart business decision? Weird occurrences in the media, old in football years, considered retirement and came back for money, potential hold out, wants huge guaranteed $$$ and years past age 30. Despite all of that, he still has pretty solid trade value. Better to trade now than live with a contract you regret and likely declining play. The cost and ultimately risk to long term success could be very high in holding onto him and paying what he demands.
Sure, next year we might not be as good, but you have to move on (reasons stated help facilitate). The good teams do it before it’s too late. Grow new talent. Holding on to guys that made it to the top with another version of the team isn’t always the right call. 3rd contracts are generally dangerous.
Russ and QB in general is an entirely separate situation and convo. Bit of hyperbole there in your example.