Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 13 to 24 of 87
  1. #13

    Re: Boldin Replaced by Durmervil and Huff?



    It is easy to go back and say the team should have squeezed Boldin in with the new acquisitions knowing what we know now. Before Pitta got hurt the move made perfect sense. Ozzie did not know what players he would get at what price at the time he made the move. He knew that he wanted to upgrade the defense and needed cap space to do it. He chose to cut Boldin because Pitta was a rising young player who could do the same things. The Ravens had a replacement for Boldin on the Roster and therefore could move him before the draft. The Ravens did not have a replacement at ILB and did not know whether they would get one capable of playing right away. The Ravens did not know how they would replace Leach at the time either although replacing a FB is not too difficult. If you remember Pees referred to Jameel as the starting ILB all off season. They were really counting on him being a big part of the defense.

    Savings after cutting or trading taking into account dead money:
    Leach savings: 1.7m
    McLain Savings 1.8m
    Boldin savings 4.5




  2. #14

    Re: Boldin Replaced by Durmervil and Huff?

    I loved Boldin as a Raven, but I could see the writing on the wall with him. He no longer had the ability to get open, you can only throw contested passes for so long before it turns into disaster. It was time to move on, he wasn't worth 6 million, not even close. He'd be a year older, a year slower, and a year weaker and more beaten up. He wouldn't be as good as he was last year, which outside of the playoffs was only pretty average.




  3. #15

    Re: Boldin Replaced by Durmervil and Huff?

    They would have kept Boldin if he'd agreed to less money. But they weren't going to restructure the contract of a wide-out at his age to a multi-year deal, and they aren't going to put out that kind of money on a one year deal.

    Newsome isn't lying. One way or another Boldin was going to clear some cap space to enable him to make a few moves in defense. Obviously, the Dumervil signing wasn't foreseen, but the Boldin move made it possible even with the Canty signing having already happened. If Boldin doesn't get traded and the Ravens decide to sit pat there, then Newsome couldn't have made the moves he did.

    We lost a lot on defense. Too much to replace through the draft. The Ravens needed more vets on the team- younger vets than they had last year. I've no doubt Ozzie was personally embarrased by the play of the defense last year and knew damn well it was more on him than on Pees. Instead of "Mount Cody," we have the Round Mound of Fall Down. When he wasn't hurt, Lewis wasn't the physical force he was in years past. We haven't had a Ravens defense so hapless against the run since '97...or maybe even '96.

    The offense is going to be fine even with the losses of Bolding and Pitta. Those losses hurt, but they'll be overcome. There's still a bunch of talent on offense, and the O-line (the most important piece) is going to be more consistent and better than last year, I suspect. McKinnie is/was the only question mark, and from what I see coming out of training camp there's no real concern about his ability and willingness to play. Once again, Harbaugh is proven right in how he's handled the player/s.

    Boldin was one of my favourite (non-Raven) players in the NFL before he was Raven. I was ecstatic when Ozzie moved to get him. He epitomized "Play Like A Raven." But I can't argue with Newsome's decision given the realities of the NFL today. The cap has to be managed, and Boldin wasn't worth more than the guys the Ravens have been able to acquire by letting him go.




  4. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Wilton, CT
    Posts
    12,827
    Blog Entries
    7

    Re: Boldin Replaced by Durmervil and Huff?

    Ozzie has a system and he's going to follow it. I like the fact that he brought up that he was that Boldin type player for Sipe and Kosar. He knows what that means more than anyone but it still wasn't going to change the way he looks at building a team. After the playoffs I was hoping that the Ravens would find a way for a cap friendly extension. That's why Ozzie is a great GM. He doesn't let those kind of emotions cloud his thinking. He knows what he needs to do and does it.
    He Who Dares.....Wins




  5. #17

    Re: Boldin Replaced by Durmervil and Huff?

    No problem with the opinion that the Boldin move was a mistake. I was a little confused by that move at the time too. We've done this before when we parted with Heap, Mason, Scott, AD, and others. Lots of people thought they were mistakes at the time too, but I don't remember putting equal effort into admitting being wrong if any at all. The cap is tight, and the team has a excellent track record of releasing players who were done. The same can be said for Reed. People were mad about Ellerbe, I don't see anyway he'll earn his salary, again we'll see. Rolando McClain had plenty of posts about what a horrible move it was to sign him. In the end, he didn't cost a cent and we look to be stacked at ILB now. Pollard is another one people were flipped out over. But Boldin seems to be the one move that lingers. Time will tell on Boldin as the season unfolds.

    I am weary that 5 months after Boldin was traded almost every thread gets hijacked by a compulsion to drive home the same redundant point without adding anything new to the conversation. It's the same recycled opinion over and over for a player wearing out his first 49er jersey. It's duly noted ad nauseum, several people believe trading Boldin was a mistake and are still not satisfied that they've sufficiently articulated that thought. I'm sure there's more to come.




  6. #18

    Re: Boldin Replaced by Durmervil and Huff?

    Quote Originally Posted by Raveninwoodlawn View Post
    Sure...if you turn specific statements like "I dont agree woth this move" into "we are going to suck" in your own mind.

    Some people get so incredibly defensive and appalled that someone dares to disagree with a single move, that those people completely go off the deep end and turn it into a bunch of "you dont believe in this team or Ozzie" nonsense.

    Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk 2
    I don't know about defensive and appalled. I think it's more just frustration that people are still crying about it. Many of us have simply moved on since March.




  7. #19

    Re: Boldin Replaced by Durmervil and Huff?

    Quote Originally Posted by Money227 View Post
    I don't know about defensive and appalled. I think it's more just frustration that people are still crying about it. Many of us have simply moved on since March.
    Nobody's crying about it.

    Most of the time it's actually brought up, it's brought up by those that supported the move in a "see, we know what we're doing" type of way.

    Sorry you don't want to hear any opposing views on it, but here's the deal...this is a message board and everybody doesn't have the same opinions.

    And that Boldin decision is going to be brought up from time to time throughout this season, right or wrong by the media and posters and fans. You are unfortunately going to have to deal with it if you stay here or take in any media.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
    Although Walsh's system of offense can compensate for lack of talent; however, defense is a different story. According to Walsh, talent on defense was essential and could not be compensated for. What did Walsh do in 1981? He acquired physical and talented players on defense.




  8. #20

    Re: Boldin Replaced by Durmervil and Huff?

    Quote Originally Posted by Haloti92 View Post
    True, but he was added before the $6M came off the books.
    Not sure why that really matters, though? IMO, it doesn't matter when each particular move was made, but where they are now Cap-wise - or, more importantly, where they are on 8/31 when they have to be fully under the Cap.

    Said differently, they didn't trade Boldin so that they would have $6M to use that instant, but to use over the next several weeks and months. It's all part of the puzzle, that money added to what they already had, and then used for the various parts over the next couple of months.

    It's an issue of the combination of signings, not just one specific signing, that Ozzie appears to be alluding to.
    Last edited by B-more Ravor; 08-12-2013 at 04:07 PM.
    “Talk's cheap - let’s go play.” - #19, Johnny Unitas

    Follow me on Twitter @ravenssalarycap




  9. #21

    Re: Boldin Replaced by Durmervil and Huff?

    Quote Originally Posted by Raveninwoodlawn View Post
    Nobody's crying about it.

    Most of the time it's actually brought up, it's brought up by those that supported the move in a "see, we know what we're doing" type of way.

    Sorry you don't want to hear any opposing views on it, but here's the deal...this is a message board and everybody doesn't have the same opinions.

    And that Boldin decision is going to be brought up from time to time throughout this season, right or wrong by the media and posters and fans. You are unfortunately going to have to deal with it if you stay here or take in any media.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
    I welcome different opinions. I simply had a difference of opinion when you described people's reactions as "defensive and appalled".




  10. #22

    Re: Boldin Replaced by Durmervil and Huff?

    Quote Originally Posted by Money227 View Post
    I welcome different opinions. I simply had a difference of opinion when you described people's reactions as "defensive and appalled".
    That certainly isn't the first time you referred to differing opinions regarding that situation as "crying about it".


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
    Although Walsh's system of offense can compensate for lack of talent; however, defense is a different story. According to Walsh, talent on defense was essential and could not be compensated for. What did Walsh do in 1981? He acquired physical and talented players on defense.




  11. #23

    Re: Boldin Replaced by Durmervil and Huff?

    Quote Originally Posted by Raveninwoodlawn View Post
    That certainly isn't the first time you referred to differing opinions regarding that situation as "crying about it".


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
    The "crying about it" doesn't refer to the difference of opinion, it refers to the continual regurgitation of the difference of opinion. It just gets old to some people. That's all I'm saying (and it's my opinion). Hell...maybe I'm wrong and we actually haven't talked about the Boldin trade enough.




  12. #24

    Re: Boldin Replaced by Durmervil and Huff?

    Brandon Stokely can give you the regular season production that Boldin gave you, especially with Caldwell calling the plays, at a small fraction of the price.
    "When questioned, the Elders explained that they were in search of magical powers. However, they're actually searching for the whereabouts of a certain ring. This ring is a legendary treasure that long ago was known to exist"




Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Russell Street Report Website Design by D3Corp Ocean City Maryland