Situations often make a huge difference. Which is why Clowney went for peanuts, yet Tunsil was worth two first round and a second round pick.
NFL 2019 Season
- Thread starter 137th Gebirg
- Start date
Situations often make a huge difference. Which is why Clowney went for peanuts, yet Tunsil was worth two first round and a second round pick.
Well, speaking in broad generalities, yes you're right, but speaking specifically about the Mack and Clowney situations; what are you citing as the differences in the two situations that prevent the two trades from being compared?
The contract situation. The Clowney trade was done after the deadline for a franchise player to sign a long term deal. Any team trading for him only has him for this season, if he chooses, Clowney can walk at the end of the season.
Mack was under contract, the Texans merely held Clowney’s rights. Just like Tunsil was worth more to the Texans because of need and he is under contract for two more seasons.
Yeah, but you get one of the best names in all of football: Barkevious Mingo!
Fuck the Astros.
(Sorry)
Now I know who to pick a fight with in the MLB thread.
Clowney had to go, but as BillJ said we weren't going to get a whole lot for him because of his contract situation. Still though, we should have gotten a bit more than we did. Those two LBs we got, one of them will be playing in the XFL this spring after he's cut and the other will do fine as a backup. We're already calling them Mongo and Mutant on our Texans board. LOLOLOL
I agree. Think it points to no one in the front office really having a clue.
So, you're saying the trades were different because the Texans screwed up. However, these were two similar players with similar value, being traded for the same reasons. They should have reaped similar returns.This is what makes the trades similar.
Here is the bottom line; Texans tagged Clowney but apparently didn't want to pay him the salary that would have been in order for him. So they traded him.
Similarly, the Raiders, though they hadn't yet tagged Mack, still didn't want to pay him. So they traded him.
But, from what I'v been reading the Texans did screw this up royally, which is the reason they got so little in return.
The two trades can be compared, easily, it's just the way the Raiders and Texans handled their business that can't be compared. If Gruden had done what the Texans did, we'd never hear the end of it.
So I'm thinking that what I should have written was that not only does the Clowney trade make the Raiders' Mack trade look better and better, it also makes the Raiders look pretty smart -- well, as smart as you can look trading away an all time great.
They didn't have similar value because of their contractual status. Chicago had the opportunity to negotiate and lockup Khalil Mack long-term before giving the Raiders anything. The Seahawks can't do that. The Seahawks are essentially rolling the dice on Clowney. Even if he has a great year they may not or won't be able to lock him up long-term (dependent on their cap situation). Clowney could end up being a 12- or 13-game rental by the time he gets in football shape and learns the defense.
What will make the Raiders look smart is hitting on the picks they got for Mack. If Houston ends up with the next Calvin Johnson or Mike Singletary, with that third round pick they got, they will look like geniuses. The Raiders will be under the microscope because of what they got in return for Mack. It will be a failure on their end if they don't end up with at least one high impact player.
IIRC, Gruden blamed it all on Reggie McKenzie.
https://www.nbcsports.com/bayarea/r...ack-trade-part-raiders-firing-reggie-mckenzie
Oh, it wasn't such a risk for Seattle. Clowney is a potential future HoF'er and is the same age as Mack. Additionally, the Seahawks were one of his preferred destinations. It was a no brainer for the Hawks despite what you think are big differences between his and Clowney's situations.
Besides, Seattle knows that if they can't work out an extension with Clowney, they can tag him, although I'm sure that would be a very last resort. There were some superficial differences between the Mack and Clowney situations, but none that prevent the two situations from being compared. At their core, they were similar.
No, that would make the Raiders look smarter. If you're going to trade a player of Mack's stature, first thing you have to do is get great value back. The Raiders accomplished that.
Thanks, Captain Obvious. Add this one; IF a bullfrog had wings he wouldn't bump his ass every time he hits the ground.
Here's the thing, if the Raiders make the playoffs this season and if they do the same next season, I really won't care much about whether or not we maximized the picks we got for Khalil. But I do have to assume that if we begin making the playoffs that even if we didn't get a perennial Pro Bowler with the Mack picks, we at least got some solid players with them. Khalil was a great player for us, but he wasn't putting us in the playoffs.
If you're going to trade a player like Mack, the Raiders handled it perfectly. They made the deal without making anyone look bad, without rancor, promptly, and got a good return. They made the move sooner rather than later. The Texans, in a similar situation, screwed the pooch.
Last edited:
They really weren’t similar. But we’ll have to just disagree on that point
You did go to the playoffs with Mack on the roster, and he sure seemed to make a difference for a team that knows how to use him.
Imagine how much better the Raiders defense would be with Mack still on the roster?
Last edited:
And the drama continues.
Can't believe the Hawks traded for Clowney. I hope it works out.
It will be interesting to see how long it takes him to get in shape and learn enough of the playbook to have an impact.
Is he still whining about the helmet thing, or is it something new?
I think he’s whining about being fined for missing time while it was going on.
He is whining that the organization is fining him for missing team practices which is a part of his contract and the fines are apart of the CBA. But, apparently it's OK to post that to social media and declare your organization as "hating on me" for it.
Stupid drama.
Raiders might as well leave Oakland with a bang. I was hoping they would give those fans a season to remember.
I mean, I can see that, but let's at least get the rest of the team involved in the memorable season. And maybe on the field too. Maybe
Reminder: Jon Gruden. Ten years. $100 million.
I will never understand that deal. Take away the Super Bowl he won with Dungy's team, and he was sub-.500 in Tampa.