Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Will the Bucs trade for Favre? « previous next »
Page: 1 2 3 4 ... 6

cyberdude557

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 11834
Offline
#15 : May 20, 2008, 01:33:19 PM

What happened with Plummer was the Broncos were getting screwed by his deal. He wanted to get traded to the Texans but Shannahan would have none of that. So they made a deal with TB as a way to unload him. The Bucs wanted to use him but even if didnt play the Bucs get $7 million out of the deal and only lose a 7th rounder. So in the end, everyone wins something....except for Plummer.

Pewter Spot

*****
Pro Bowler

Posts : 1767
Offline
#16 : May 20, 2008, 01:35:05 PM

The Bucs won't have 4 QB's on the 53-man roster.

1. Jeff Garcia
2. Luke McCown
3. Brian Griese

Josh Johnson wil be signed and then moved to the Practice Squad where he can sit for up to 3 seasons without fear of him being picked up through waivers.

Jake Plummer is not going to be on the 53-man roster JUST LIKE HE WASN'T LAST YEAR!
Bruce Gradkowski will be cut before TC
Chris Simms will likely be cut before TC also

NO! On Brett Favre.

Any time you place a player on the PS he has to clear wavers without signing onto another team. Also, once the player is on the PS he can be signed by any team at any time. Johnson was not drafted to be placed on the PS. there is a 10% chance he ends up there this year. The only reason I give it 10% is because I "never" say never.


I didn't know we lose the 3-year rights (for a lack of the proper term) if we place him or any rook on the PS. Thanks for clarifying.

leeroybuc93

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 4433
Offline
#17 : May 20, 2008, 01:42:44 PM

The Bucs won't have 4 QB's on the 53-man roster.

1. Jeff Garcia
2. Luke McCown
3. Brian Griese

Josh Johnson wil be signed and then moved to the Practice Squad where he can sit for up to 3 seasons without fear of him being picked up through waivers.

Jake Plummer is not going to be on the 53-man roster JUST LIKE HE WASN'T LAST YEAR!
Bruce Gradkowski will be cut before TC
Chris Simms will likely be cut before TC also

NO! On Brett Favre.

Any time you place a player on the PS he has to clear wavers without signing onto another team. Also, once the player is on the PS he can be signed by any team at any time. Johnson was not drafted to be placed on the PS. there is a 10% chance he ends up there this year. The only reason I give it 10% is because I "never" say never.


I didn't know we lose the 3-year rights (for a lack of the proper term) if we place him or any rook on the PS. Thanks for clarifying.

Yep.  Practice squad players are fair game for everyone.  With his upside someone would pluck him more than likely.  He's either going to end up on the active roster or somewhere else.

BucsnNoles

*****
Pro Bowler

Posts : 1213
Offline
#18 : May 20, 2008, 01:53:45 PM

You stated that is was likely and that it wasn't unlikely.  Neither are facts and are the basis for your entire post.  This is the single dumbest post I've seen in a very long time. 
Apparently you don't have the best comprehension skills.  When someone says, "I think......." that doesn't mean that they are stating it as a fact.

bigbuc345

*****
Pro Bowler

Posts : 1104
Offline
#19 : May 20, 2008, 01:57:13 PM

i think we are pretty set for QB's right now between the new addition of Josh Johnson and Brian Griese we should be alright.  Most likely not.

leeroybuc93

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 4433
Offline
#20 : May 20, 2008, 01:58:01 PM

You stated that is was likely and that it wasn't unlikely. Neither are facts and are the basis for your entire post. This is the single dumbest post I've seen in a very long time.
Apparently you don't have the best comprehension skills. When someone says, "I think......." that doesn't mean that they are stating it as a fact.

Well let's see...

Quote
Showing my ignorance, huh?  Look at the facts, huh?  What did I state that wasn't fact?  The Bucs always go into camp with a big stable of QB.  I didn't say that the Bucs would keep them all on the 53 man roster.  And, yes, 4 QB's is a little much to have on the 53 man roster.

Apparently you can't understand your own words.  The entire basis of your post is based on what you think, so why are you asking us to look at the facts?  There are none!  Thanks for making my point for me.  That was too easy!

BucsnNoles

*****
Pro Bowler

Posts : 1213
Offline
#21 : May 20, 2008, 02:02:05 PM

Why is 4 QB's to much to have on the 53 man roster?  How many times does the 53rd man see on the field?  How did having Buenning and Davis on the roster last season negatively affect how the team played?  They both counted on the 53 man roster and neither saw the field.  How many teams made it through the year with their starter?  How many teams used more then 2 QB's? 

You only needed one sentence to prove your ignorance.  "History has shown us that our FO likes to trade for QB's that are going to retire and don't want to play for us."  The FO liked Plummer because they thought he would play for a team other then the Broncos and thought he had some juice left in the tank.  As a number two QB he would have been a great fit.  They made a smart trade with the Broncos giving up a 4th if he shows or a 7th if he doesn't.  With his rights they also get 7 mil if he doesn't show up.  tell me where the fault in their logic lies?
HA!
Let's see where to start with this one.....
You don't think that 4 QB's is a little TOO much for the 53 man roster?  Why don't you look back at last year, for instance, and tell me how many teams had 4 QB's on their 53.  I'll wait here.
Players on IR don't count towards the 53.
Before we even completed the trade for Plummer he said that he WOULD NOT play for the Bucs, but of course we waste a draft pick anyway.  So it's a give that he's not showing up, right?  Where is the 7 mil that we get?  Ohhh....that's right, we haven't gotten any of it.  And it is only POSSIBLE that we can recoup up to 7 mil.  And would that money to do to help the team?  That's right....Absolutely nothing.  It doesn't go towards that cap.  It just goes in the Glazer's pockets.
And you tell me that I'm ignorant.  That's funny stuff.  Thanks for the laugh.

BucsnNoles

*****
Pro Bowler

Posts : 1213
Offline
#22 : May 20, 2008, 02:04:16 PM

You stated that is was likely and that it wasn't unlikely. Neither are facts and are the basis for your entire post. This is the single dumbest post I've seen in a very long time.
Apparently you don't have the best comprehension skills. When someone says, "I think......." that doesn't mean that they are stating it as a fact.

Well let's see...

Quote
Showing my ignorance, huh?  Look at the facts, huh?  What did I state that wasn't fact?  The Bucs always go into camp with a big stable of QB.  I didn't say that the Bucs would keep them all on the 53 man roster.  And, yes, 4 QB's is a little much to have on the 53 man roster.

Apparently you can't understand your own words.  The entire basis of your post is based on what you think, so why are you asking us to look at the facts?  There are none!  Thanks for making my point for me.  That was too easy!
HA!
We both know that you're the one that brought up "facts", sweety.  Now just log off and leave the football talk to the men.

BucsnNoles

*****
Pro Bowler

Posts : 1213
Offline
#23 : May 20, 2008, 02:05:30 PM

Not to mention Jake Plummer is just 33 years old and has atleast 5 more years left in the tank. So it was a great trade and your saying that "history has shown us that our FO likes to trade for QB's that are going to retire and don't want to play for us" is quite rediculous considering we've been around for 33 years and traded once FOR a QB that chose retirement instead of continuing his NFL career with us.

It may not be ignornace but something else is surely blinding you.
The current FO has been around for 33 years?  You guys are funny.

leeroybuc93

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 4433
Offline
#24 : May 20, 2008, 02:08:00 PM

Why is 4 QB's to much to have on the 53 man roster? How many times does the 53rd man see on the field? How did having Buenning and Davis on the roster last season negatively affect how the team played? They both counted on the 53 man roster and neither saw the field. How many teams made it through the year with their starter? How many teams used more then 2 QB's?

You only needed one sentence to prove your ignorance. "History has shown us that our FO likes to trade for QB's that are going to retire and don't want to play for us." The FO liked Plummer because they thought he would play for a team other then the Broncos and thought he had some juice left in the tank. As a number two QB he would have been a great fit. They made a smart trade with the Broncos giving up a 4th if he shows or a 7th if he doesn't. With his rights they also get 7 mil if he doesn't show up. tell me where the fault in their logic lies?
HA!
Let's see where to start with this one.....
You don't think that 4 QB's is a little TOO much for the 53 man roster? Why don't you look back at last year, for instance, and tell me how many teams had 4 QB's on their 53. I'll wait here.
Players on IR don't count towards the 53.
Before we even completed the trade for Plummer he said that he WOULD NOT play for the Bucs, but of course we waste a draft pick anyway. So it's a give that he's not showing up, right? Where is the 7 mil that we get? Ohhh....that's right, we haven't gotten any of it. And it is only POSSIBLE that we can recoup up to 7 mil. And would that money to do to help the team? That's right....Absolutely nothing. It doesn't go towards that cap. It just goes in the Glazer's pockets.
And you tell me that I'm ignorant. That's funny stuff. Thanks for the laugh.

The GM is in charge of the whole operation.  When you can trade a late round pick for 7 million dollars, you do it.  This is after all, a business.  

BuckEmUp

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 4926
Offline
#25 : May 20, 2008, 02:09:08 PM

Teams that used 3 QB last season:
Bills
Dolphins
Ravens
Browns
Cheifs
Giants
Bears
Packers
Vikings
Falcons
Bucs
Cards
Rams


Teams that used 4 or more QBs last season:
Raiders
Panthers
49ers

Teams that used 1 QB all season:
Bengals
Saints


So that means 16 teams used 3 or more QB's in a season while only 2 only needed one.  13 teams nearly needed a 4th QB during the season and 3 did.  Do you see something in common with the majority of the teams that needed to use 3 QB's last season?  Most of them missed the playoffs.  What do you think that means for the importance of having at least 3 QB's you know cal play at an NFL level?


leeroybuc93

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 4433
Offline
#26 : May 20, 2008, 02:11:43 PM

You stated that is was likely and that it wasn't unlikely. Neither are facts and are the basis for your entire post. This is the single dumbest post I've seen in a very long time.
Apparently you don't have the best comprehension skills. When someone says, "I think......." that doesn't mean that they are stating it as a fact.

Well let's see...

Quote
Showing my ignorance, huh? Look at the facts, huh? What did I state that wasn't fact? The Bucs always go into camp with a big stable of QB. I didn't say that the Bucs would keep them all on the 53 man roster. And, yes, 4 QB's is a little much to have on the 53 man roster.

Apparently you can't understand your own words. The entire basis of your post is based on what you think, so why are you asking us to look at the facts? There are none! Thanks for making my point for me. That was too easy!
HA!
We both know that you're the one that brought up "facts", sweety. Now just log off and leave the football talk to the men.

Hahaha!  I haven't got someone to give up that fast in years!  Glad to see one more noob on the board that I can crush in less than 5 posts. 

BucsnNoles

*****
Pro Bowler

Posts : 1213
Offline
#27 : May 20, 2008, 02:11:59 PM

The GM is in charge of the whole operation.  When you can trade a late round pick for 7 million dollars, you do it.  This is after all, a business. 
So the Glazers are the team?  It helps the Glazers' pockets get fatter, but it doesn't help the team.  All that we did was lose a draft pick.  And I can guaranteed you that they won't recoup the whole 7 mil.  The last thing I read about it said that they'll be lucky to get any.

Pewter Spot

*****
Pro Bowler

Posts : 1767
Offline
#28 : May 20, 2008, 02:12:28 PM

Not to mention Jake Plummer is just 33 years old and has atleast 5 more years left in the tank. So it was a great trade and your saying that "history has shown us that our FO likes to trade for QB's that are going to retire and don't want to play for us" is quite rediculous considering we've been around for 33 years and traded once FOR a QB that chose retirement instead of continuing his NFL career with us.

It may not be ignornace but something else is surely blinding you.
The current FO has been around for 33 years? You guys are funny.

Funny? Notice the quote I used from your post? You didn't say current. You said our FO has a history...not our current FO has a history.

BucsnNoles

*****
Pro Bowler

Posts : 1213
Offline
#29 : May 20, 2008, 02:13:04 PM

Teams that used 3 QB last season:
Bills
Dolphins
Ravens
Browns
Cheifs
Giants
Bears
Packers
Vikings
Falcons
Bucs
Cards
Rams


Teams that used 4 or more QBs last season:
Raiders
Panthers
49ers

Teams that used 1 QB all season:
Bengals
Saints


So that means 16 teams used 3 or more QB's in a season while only 2 only needed one.  13 teams nearly needed a 4th QB during the season and 3 did.  Do you see something in common with the majority of the teams that needed to use 3 QB's last season?  Most of them missed the playoffs.  What do you think that means for the importance of having at least 3 QB's you know cal play at an NFL level?

I see that you're a little slow, but how many teams had 4 QB's on the roster at once.
Page: 1 2 3 4 ... 6
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Will the Bucs trade for Favre? « previous next »
:

Hide Tools Show Tools