Mythos27 Posted July 23, 2024 Report Share Posted July 23, 2024 1 minute ago, rns90 said: Having followed other sports, these final decisions are almost always on ownership. I mean Vrabel probably had an opinion on it but ultimately the decision came down on what she wanted to do. And honestly (unless something comes out that Vrabel changed her mind about trading him) his opinion didn’t mean much and is kind of obscuring the fact that this was her move alone. Precisely. I like Amy. I think she's been a strong owner but she fucked this one up plain and simple. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsntLifeFunny Posted July 23, 2024 Report Share Posted July 23, 2024 13 hours ago, Callidus said: Its hard to imagine it was anyone else. However the talk about how Vrable kept rail roading Ran sounds like it could have been him. When they said collaboration they could have been serious about it being a 1A 1B arrangement where they had to agree on stuff to get it done. And I can see vrable's stubborn ass bitching till he got his way till it got him fired. 10 hours ago, TeamRamrod said: I just assume it was Vrabel until I hear otherwise because that just makes the most sense. I only heard about the Athletic article on the radio, but they were pretty clear when discussing it that it came from higher ups. I wouldn't include Vrabel in that. Maybe they were wrong, as I haven't read it, but that was definitely clear with how they spoke about it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rns90 Posted July 23, 2024 Report Share Posted July 23, 2024 2 minutes ago, Mythos27 said: Precisely. I like Amy. I think she's been a strong owner but she fucked this one up plain and simple. And I can see why she chose to keep him. I mean she’s probably around him as a human being while we are looking at this (coldly) as fans. Add in all the accolades and moments he has given in the past few years, I get it. I’m not going to defend because it is dumb but i understand it on a human/emotional level. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bizzyeddie Posted July 23, 2024 Report Share Posted July 23, 2024 5 minutes ago, Mythos27 said: Didn't connect these two but this is a great point. This feeds my concern of us potentially holding on too tightly to Levis. There is a pattern sentimentality emerging. I don't see a pattern between how they handled Mariota and what they did with Henry. Mariota was the team looking further down the line and trying to make the right decision for the future. Not dealing Henry was solely based on the present....They knew he was gone. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsntLifeFunny Posted July 23, 2024 Report Share Posted July 23, 2024 I'm just laughing @OILERMAN regardless of who it was that stopped it or how dumb it was not to pull the trigger. Tomato can was foing for a conditional 3rd for a half season rental! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mythos27 Posted July 23, 2024 Report Share Posted July 23, 2024 5 minutes ago, bizzyeddie said: I don't see a pattern between how they handled Mariota and what they did with Henry. Mariota was the team looking further down the line and trying to make the right decision for the future. Not dealing Henry was solely based on the present....They knew he was gone. With Mariota, the coaches felt they had to go above and beyond to show the owner that the guy just couldn't play even though they likely knew who should've been the starter from the beginning. In both instances the football side of the operation was influenced by resistance from ownership that stemmed due to sentimentality or potential fan reaction. If this were not the case, Mariota would've been benched earlier and Henry would've been gone by mid-season. This is not good. Also, if you knew Henry was gone why pass up a free 3rd/4th round pick? That makes 0 sense. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bizzyeddie Posted July 23, 2024 Report Share Posted July 23, 2024 21 minutes ago, Mythos27 said: With Mariota, the coaches felt they had to go above and beyond to show the owner that the guy just couldn't play even though they likely knew who should've been the starter from the beginning. In both instances the football side of the operation was influenced by resistance from ownership that stemmed due to sentimentality or potential fan reaction. If this were not the case, Mariota would've been benched earlier and Henry would've been gone by mid-season. This is not good. Also, if you knew Henry was gone why pass up a free 3rd/4th round pick? That makes 0 sense. I think the decision was much more influenced by the fact that Tannehill was on a 1 yr deal and looking to be a FA after the season. That and they were going to give Mariota a chance to become the guy they hoped he could be. The idea that Tannehill would look better in camp wasn't some shocker. He'd been in the league longer than Mariota and wasn't exactly a bum. You may not like the decision to go with Mariota but it's hard to say it was stupid or solely influenced by ownership and fan sentiment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
titanruss Posted July 23, 2024 Report Share Posted July 23, 2024 24 minutes ago, IsntLifeFunny said: I'm just laughing @OILERMAN regardless of who it was that stopped it or how dumb it was not to pull the trigger. Tomato can was foing for a conditional 3rd for a half season rental! He was signed the first day of free agency to a top 10 back contract to the team he wanted to go to for almost a year that was willing to part for a third to get him pre and mid season... "Nobody wanted him!" lolz Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
titanruss Posted July 23, 2024 Report Share Posted July 23, 2024 Amy was definitely a huge part of the trade being stopped. Ran alluded to - before, at the time, and after - situations where they would go to Amy to be the final say if needed. This was heavily rumored to be one of those times. Byard was the compromise. In hindsight, no doubt Amy saw Ran's way was the proper route to go. Ran obviously let Vrabel win decisions but Amy likely knew where everyone stood... so he eventually gave Vrabes enough rope to hang himself with and the power grab/ lack of collaboration showed her he's not what is needed going forward. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsntLifeFunny Posted July 23, 2024 Report Share Posted July 23, 2024 33 minutes ago, Mythos27 said: With Mariota, the coaches felt they had to go above and beyond to show the owner that the guy just couldn't play even though they likely knew who should've been the starter from the beginning. In both instances the football side of the operation was influenced by resistance from ownership that stemmed due to sentimentality or potential fan reaction. If this were not the case, Mariota would've been benched earlier and Henry would've been gone by mid-season. This is not good. Also, if you knew Henry was gone why pass up a free 3rd/4th round pick? That makes 0 sense. I disagree with this. The reason Mariota started 2019 is because he was the highest paid player on the roster. That's a Robinson issue and not on AAS. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsntLifeFunny Posted July 23, 2024 Report Share Posted July 23, 2024 12 minutes ago, titanruss said: He was signed the first day of free agency to a top 10 back contract to the team he wanted to go to for almost a year that was willing to part for a third to get him pre and mid season... "Nobody wanted him!" lolz "Well nobody else wanted him!!" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AussieTitanFan08 Posted July 23, 2024 Report Share Posted July 23, 2024 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
titanruss Posted July 23, 2024 Report Share Posted July 23, 2024 8 minutes ago, AussieTitanFan08 said: FWIW.. he didn't refute that they were offered that. Her refuted it was agreed to. He did say what they were offered wasnt enough to get it done.. which also could mean anything. We may think a future 4th / possible 3rd (trade chart current 5th/4th) should be enough - but maybe the FO or even Ran didnt think so. He could never say it was agreed to and shot down by Amy or even Vrabes. Or at least a good GM wouldnt say that to press. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
japan Posted July 23, 2024 Report Share Posted July 23, 2024 5 hours ago, IsntLifeFunny said: I disagree with this. The reason Mariota started 2019 is because he was the highest paid player on the roster. That's a Robinson issue and not on AAS. He was under his slotted rookie deal...lol Yeah, Robinson had to play him! He was making so much money!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsntLifeFunny Posted July 23, 2024 Report Share Posted July 23, 2024 14 minutes ago, japan said: He was under his slotted rookie deal...lol Yeah, Robinson had to play him! He was making so much money!! Always hilarious when you pipe up dum dum. No, he was on the 5th year deal being paid 20 million. That isn't his rookie deal. Remember, the same GM didn't give Conklin his rookie deal. Stick with Budadams and post less. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.