No option for Brooks

User avatar
D-train
Posts: 82742
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2019 1:33 am
Location: Quincy, MA

No option for Brooks

Post by D-train » Tue May 02, 2023 12:00 am

Good, I was NEVER impressed with that guy. Not terrible but meh at best.
dt

Gametime
Posts: 4543
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2019 9:19 pm

Re: No option for Brooks

Post by Gametime » Tue May 02, 2023 5:19 am

DT, I can’t agree more. Good tackler, but that’s it. Not real impactful. Struggles in coverage, and doesn’t seem to be proactive more reactive.

Gametime
Posts: 4543
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2019 9:19 pm

Re: No option for Brooks

Post by Gametime » Tue May 02, 2023 5:19 am

Definitely not at 12 million. No thank you.

Donn Beach
Posts: 20789
Joined: Thu May 02, 2019 1:06 am

Re: No option for Brooks

Post by Donn Beach » Tue May 02, 2023 6:14 am

And the Ravens declined queen's option, so mediocrity tie

User avatar
Sibelius Hindemith
Posts: 16477
Joined: Thu May 02, 2019 3:09 am
Location: Seattle

Re: No option for Brooks

Post by Sibelius Hindemith » Tue May 02, 2023 11:27 am

Another late first round pick that didn't pan out.

User avatar
D-train
Posts: 82742
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2019 1:33 am
Location: Quincy, MA

Re: No option for Brooks

Post by D-train » Tue May 02, 2023 11:29 am

Donn Beach wrote:
Tue May 02, 2023 6:14 am
And the Ravens declined queen's option, so mediocrity tie
Yeah wasn't any better and probably worse. Don't take LBs in the first round might be a good policy.

Somebody said Brooks was decent. Yeah Barton was decent and Ford was decent, Woods seemed better than Decent. A lot of guys were decent last season. Who was Really bad? Several had to be really bad to have about the worst run D in the League right? Maybe the decent guys weren't decent enough or a a bunch of decent guys = a Really bad defense.
dt

User avatar
Sexymarinersfan
Posts: 9090
Joined: Sat May 04, 2019 11:34 pm
Location: Ft. Worth Texas
Contact:

Re: No option for Brooks

Post by Sexymarinersfan » Tue May 02, 2023 1:00 pm

D-train wrote:
Tue May 02, 2023 11:29 am
Donn Beach wrote:
Tue May 02, 2023 6:14 am
And the Ravens declined queen's option, so mediocrity tie
Yeah wasn't any better and probably worse. Don't take LBs in the first round might be a good policy.

Somebody said Brooks was decent. Yeah Barton was decent and Ford was decent, Woods seemed better than Decent. A lot of guys were decent last season. Who was Really bad? Several had to be really bad to have about the worst run D in the League right? Maybe the decent guys weren't decent enough or a a bunch of decent guys = a Really bad defense.
So did we save any money in cap space? That's one area of football I don't even pretend to know how it works, nor do I want to.

Michael K.
Posts: 14641
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 5:27 am

Re: No option for Brooks

Post by Michael K. » Tue May 02, 2023 1:53 pm

Donn Beach wrote:
Tue May 02, 2023 6:14 am
And the Ravens declined queen's option, so mediocrity tie
I said it then. You don’t use first round picks on middle LBs. Was told “but, what about when Bobbie leaves.” Now? Bobbie is back and Brooks is on his last year. You draft defense in the first round that impact the passing game. End of story.

User avatar
Cascade Kid
Posts: 895
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2021 2:11 am

Re: No option for Brooks

Post by Cascade Kid » Tue May 02, 2023 2:09 pm

Sexymarinersfan wrote:
Tue May 02, 2023 1:00 pm
D-train wrote:
Tue May 02, 2023 11:29 am
Donn Beach wrote:
Tue May 02, 2023 6:14 am
And the Ravens declined queen's option, so mediocrity tie
Yeah wasn't any better and probably worse. Don't take LBs in the first round might be a good policy.

Somebody said Brooks was decent. Yeah Barton was decent and Ford was decent, Woods seemed better than Decent. A lot of guys were decent last season. Who was Really bad? Several had to be really bad to have about the worst run D in the League right? Maybe the decent guys weren't decent enough or a a bunch of decent guys = a Really bad defense.
So did we save any money in cap space? That's one area of football I don't even pretend to know how it works, nor do I want to.
Not this year. Brook's dead money and what he will get paid are the same, so releasing him saves $0 in 2023 therefore he will ride a roster spot for now. He had a $12.7M option next year. Not exercising the option will free that amount for next year.

User avatar
Sibelius Hindemith
Posts: 16477
Joined: Thu May 02, 2019 3:09 am
Location: Seattle

Re: No option for Brooks

Post by Sibelius Hindemith » Tue May 02, 2023 2:31 pm

Didn't they do the same thing with Penny? Then they re-signed him to a one year deal anyway.

Post Reply