Poll: Bates, Bell or none too costly
Bell (age 28) 10 million per year
Bates (age 26) 14 million per year
None, go with Hill and draft a rookie
[Show Results]
 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Bell for 10 million per year or Bates for 14 million per year
#10
(02-08-2023, 10:37 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: In either scenario, I'd feel like we were being raked over the coals. I'd rather just restart, spend lots of resources on defense in the draft and spend our money on reliable offensive linemen and OL depth.

I am tired of our season ending because Joe didn't have 2 seconds to throw on the most crucial play of the game.

Exactly.  If Joe can just have time to throw the ball, I think it changes the entire team.  Don't really think we need to break the bank at WR because Joe already knows who will be open due to his football IQ.  RB, we can buy 1/2 a starter on OL by saving some money on this position. On the flip side for defense, I think we can save some money because we're likely ahead in most games.  No need to overpay for vets like Bates.  Younger players will likely cost less.

I want to see a clean pocket for 4 seconds once in awhile!  I think it'd be a completely different game.  Joe would just kill them.
"Our offensive line is going to surprise a lot of people" - Mike Brown (7-26-21)
Reply/Quote





Messages In This Thread
RE: Bell for 10 million per year or Bates for 14 million per year - 2MinutesHate - 02-09-2023, 03:53 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)