No option for Brooks
Re: No option for Brooks
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.
-
Donn Beach
- Posts: 20789
- Joined: Thu May 02, 2019 1:06 am
- Sibelius Hindemith
- Posts: 16477
- Joined: Thu May 02, 2019 3:09 am
- Location: Seattle
Re: No option for Brooks
Yeah wasn't any better and probably worse. Don't take LBs in the first round might be a good policy.Donn Beach wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2023 6:14 amAnd the Ravens declined queen's option, so mediocrity tie
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
- Sexymarinersfan
- Posts: 9090
- Joined: Sat May 04, 2019 11:34 pm
- Location: Ft. Worth Texas
- Contact:
Re: No option for Brooks
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.D-train wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2023 11:29 amYeah wasn't any better and probably worse. Don't take LBs in the first round might be a good policy.Donn Beach wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2023 6:14 amAnd the Ravens declined queen's option, so mediocrity tie
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.
-
Michael K.
- Posts: 14641
- Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 5:27 am
Re: No option for Brooks
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.Donn Beach wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2023 6:14 amAnd the Ravens declined queen's option, so mediocrity tie
- Cascade Kid
- Posts: 895
- Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2021 2:11 am
Re: No option for Brooks
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.Sexymarinersfan wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2023 1:00 pmSo 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.D-train wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2023 11:29 amYeah wasn't any better and probably worse. Don't take LBs in the first round might be a good policy.Donn Beach wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2023 6:14 amAnd the Ravens declined queen's option, so mediocrity tie
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.
- Sibelius Hindemith
- Posts: 16477
- Joined: Thu May 02, 2019 3:09 am
- Location: Seattle
Re: No option for Brooks
Didn't they do the same thing with Penny? Then they re-signed him to a one year deal anyway.