I never suggested he can force them to take a deal they don't want. But the black and white fact of the matter is he can scuttle any deal for any reason and that's a shitty spot to be in and why ntcs are dumb.
More…basically this would be the anti-O’Brien trade. When he traded for tunsil should of agreed to a long term contract before. What this is suggesting is with the cap room we have if we acquire burns we can lock him up to a long term deal/extension.
Everyone in Houston was glad when he signed that contract and wouldn’t have thought twice about putting a no trade clause in it if thats what it took… who could have foreseen that Deshaun would quit and ask the team for a trade 5 months after the deal was signed. BOB and Jack made some horrible decisions but the Watson contract wasn’t necessarily one of them. To bad Watson turned out to be a snake.
You're right. But we're fans. GMs are paid to keep cooler heads about these things. 8 players in the whole of the NFL having ntcs shows just how uncommon it is.
I would be very happy with this. Draft Walker at # 3 and Sauce at #6 and the defense will look much better.
Sounds like it. It's a good and bad idea. Good if you are truly happy with all three deals and rank them equally. Bad if you like one deal more than the other and let the sexual predator choose where he wants to go and cost you value. But by having agreed upon trades, it makes it possible to get a deal done tonight or tomorrow while taking the ball out of Watson's court, as far as diminishing his value to lessen the return (any more than he already has). It also allows you to continue to look like the good guy.
I actually think it's the opposite. Restructuring a guys deal in order to pay him now vs later, all so you can trade him, seems like a B.O.B. move. Not to mention, Tunsil already announced, he's staying. In one of the more hilarious ways possible:
