JLocker10 Posted March 2, 2014 Report Share Posted March 2, 2014 Hopefully Rubin is cut and we sign him. Fills a big need at NT. Everyone talks about edge rusher and it is important. We do definitely need one. But we're also soft up the middle against the run. Big weakness past few seasons. Getting a big plugger like Rubin and a Spikes/Dansby would help a lot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nash Posted March 2, 2014 Report Share Posted March 2, 2014 Where does hill fit on this defense ? He gets too much for a backup and I don't really think he can be a quality starter in a 3-4 hybrid Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OILERMAN Posted March 2, 2014 Author Report Share Posted March 2, 2014 No way would I pay Verner 11.8M and take that kind of cap hit all in 2014. Either sign him or let him walk. If they have the space what's the harm? It wouldn't be restrictive in any kind of way It sounds like the tag isn't an option anyway Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Face Posted March 2, 2014 Report Share Posted March 2, 2014 Hopefully Rubin is cut and we sign him. Fills a big need at NT. Everyone talks about edge rusher and it is important. We do definitely need one. But we're also soft up the middle against the run. Big weakness past few seasons. Getting a big plugger like Rubin and a Spikes/Dansby would help a lot. Yeah it's a huge need, and has been for awhile. Having a guy like this also really helps the pass rush on 1st & 2nd downs. Everyone tends to just think about rushing the passer on 3rd & 8, but him being able to occupy blockers & getting a push on 1st & 2nd downs is huge. Most great D's have a huge DT/NT, they're pretty tough to find. Guys like this don't just plug up the run, they constantly disrupt offenses on passing & running downs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 2, 2014 Report Share Posted March 2, 2014 Rubin is more than a space eater too. Good tackle numbers for a DT. Consider how weak Casey is against the run Rubin makes perfect sense if available. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
reo Posted March 2, 2014 Report Share Posted March 2, 2014 Doesn't look like he's going anywhere http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000329901/article/ahtyba-rubins-roster-spot-safe-with-cleveland-browns Update: Rubin's roster spot appears to be safe after all. After meeting with the organization at the NFL Scouting Combine, Rubin's agent told The Plain Dealer the Browns are "happy to have him on the team" with "no changes to his salary." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Face Posted March 2, 2014 Report Share Posted March 2, 2014 That sucks Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ctm Posted March 3, 2014 Report Share Posted March 3, 2014 If they have the space what's the harm? It wouldn't be restrictive in any kind of way It sounds like the tag isn't an option anyway We had the same argument last year. Posters were claiming it was OK to pay CJ because we had cap space we can waste. Same principal now. Cap space rolls over year to year. If we don't use it on Verner this year, it will be available for someone else next year. Like Casey or Morgan. There is no good argument for overpaying and wasting cap space. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
reo Posted March 3, 2014 Report Share Posted March 3, 2014 We had the same argument last year. Posters were claiming it was OK to pay CJ because we had cap space we can waste. Same principal now. Cap space rolls over year to year. If we don't use it on Verner this year, it will be available for someone else next year. Like Casey or Morgan. There is no good argument for overpaying and wasting cap space. although there's the part where keeping CJ's salary didn't hurt us last year and we have plenty of space again this year Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OILERMAN Posted March 3, 2014 Author Report Share Posted March 3, 2014 We had the same argument last year. Posters were claiming it was OK to pay CJ because we had cap space we can waste. Same principal now. Cap space rolls over year to year. If we don't use it on Verner this year, it will be available for someone else next year. Like Casey or Morgan. There is no good argument for overpaying and wasting cap space. Well arguing that keeping CJ was ok because they had cap space was stupid. The difference is Verner is a quality player and CJ sucked. And tagging Verner for one season is the same thing as rolling over unused cap space for the next season. The argument is not about cap space, it's about keeping a quality player on the roster this coming season. I wouldn't consider it a waste in the least. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OILERMAN Posted March 3, 2014 Author Report Share Posted March 3, 2014 And as I stated before, I'm fine whatever they do with Verner, I can see the case for all 3 options and trust the defensive staff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZEPPELIN Posted March 3, 2014 Report Share Posted March 3, 2014 We had the same argument last year. Posters were claiming it was OK to pay CJ because we had cap space we can waste. Same principal now. Cap space rolls over year to year. If we don't use it on Verner this year, it will be available for someone else next year. Like Casey or Morgan. There is no good argument for overpaying and wasting cap space. Why would we be overpaying? He played like a Top 5 corner so paying him the average is not overpaying. Top CBs are very expensive, but it is one of the most important positions. After paying CJ that kind of money, if we don't pay our biggest defensive playmaker a one year extension it would be totally stupid. This is why I'm not a big fan of Webster. So far, it has been a mixed bag between some solid draft picks and stupid decisions. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ctm Posted March 3, 2014 Report Share Posted March 3, 2014 (edited) although there's the part where keeping CJ's salary didn't hurt us last year and we have plenty of space again this year It reduced the amount of cap space rolled over. And if we didn't use the space this year, then it can roll over to 2015, etc. etc. Edited March 3, 2014 by ctm Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ctm Posted March 3, 2014 Report Share Posted March 3, 2014 Well arguing that keeping CJ was ok because they had cap space was stupid. The difference is Verner is a quality player and CJ sucked. And tagging Verner for one season is the same thing as rolling over unused cap space for the next season. The argument is not about cap space, it's about keeping a quality player on the roster this coming season. I wouldn't consider it a waste in the least. You said: If they have the space what's the harm? I interpret that as an argument about cap space. The harm is about reducing the rollover. If you can't use it effectively this year, then there will be a use for it next year. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ctm Posted March 3, 2014 Report Share Posted March 3, 2014 Why would we be overpaying? He played like a Top 5 corner so paying him the average is not overpaying. Top CBs are very expensive, but it is one of the most important positions. After paying CJ that kind of money, if we don't pay our biggest defensive playmaker a one year extension it would be totally stupid. This is why I'm not a big fan of Webster. So far, it has been a mixed bag between some solid draft picks and stupid decisions. If you think he's a top 5 guy, then extend him which would keep the cap hit way under 11.8M. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.