ctm

Either MM or Tannehill will be gone next year. It's inevitable one of them leaves. So it makes sense to try and find a cheap alternative this year and if they get lucky can be the #2 next year

He claims he's never spent the first dime of the money he made in the NFL. He's lived entirely off of endorsement money.

He had 1.5 sacks last year. If he was an effective pass rusher, he'd be going much, much higher.

Of course they can mix it up. But the point is that Reo wants Lawrence on the field who isn't a pass rusher. That's why he keeps talking about using an ILB. Having Lawrence on the field means the team only drops 6 instead of 7, no matter who they are.

You said use an ILB, that is what they are trying to avoid. Rush 4....drop 7 So the QB or the line has to recognize the blitz and take that guard to roll him to block Evans.

Name the 4

The whole point of this discussion is to avoid using an ILB and use 4 guys. Sure the team can use 5 if they wish, but Pees said he wanted to get to the point of using 4.

Casey, Landry, Wake, +1 more Just depends on whether they want Wake rushing off the edge or the interior. No need to blitz an ILB, that is what he's trying to avoid.

Pees has said that he wants to get to the point that he only has to rush 4 and drop the rest. That doesn't mean he won't blitz on occasion but if what he's saying is true, then another true pass rushing DL would be his priority.

And are likely to take 2 OL as evidenced by the visits and Wyatt's comment.

Nothing good happens when people start losing their job.

fify

When I looked at the numbers from Spotrac, I got around 22M and that's accounting for the 53 highest guys (including the rookies) and the practice squad.

Too many democrats and republicans as well live paycheck to paycheck. I doubt very many people on either side really want an economic downturn and risk unemployment.

@Legaltitan and I are both democrats. We just posted the opposite. No downturn. Reading comprehension...... And btw, remember when the Bush administration gave us the great recession in 2008? As soon as Obama took office, republicans started screaming about cutting spending, balancing the budget and refused to vote for a government stimulus. Republicans also did the same thing during the depression of the 1930's. They immediately wanted to balance the budget as soon as FDR took over. Republican macro-economics is backwards. They run a deficit when times are good and want to balance the budget when the economy is in recession or worse. It should be the other way around......balanced when times are good, deficit to stimulate the economy when in recession. That's their policy....not idle talk.