I am not sure this is logical. If the 4th best DL is better than the 1st best TE, it is not. Pick the better player.
Now if the two players are close and the slightly lower player is in a position of need, then go with the lower player.
This makes complete sense. I do not understand the voices to move him without a better replacement.
It is also easier to find a G than a LT so focus on G.
I am missing the analytics where cutting a cheap player to be replaced by another cheap player helps the cap.
Cut Ducasse because of his performance, not salary cap. For the others, keep them until you find someone better.
This was better than expected. I would think interest will decline when the weak improves.
Some observations based on one game:
» I liked the camera on the repay official.
» QB play was poor. More work needed in practice.
» OL play was poor. The defenses generally were able to push them around easily.
» I was expecting more new offensive plays and pay calling. Seemed old school to a degree.
» I did not miss the kickoffs at all. Thought I would but no.
» Seems like quality coaches, refs need work.
Overall a good first effort. Hard to see the league doing well financially as football has such a high overhead.
How does he compare vs Green, Brown, Jones, etc? Is his production that much above his peers?
The regular season is what gets you in the HOF conversation. The playoffs are a bonus.
Spot on. It is less likely he will be successful without coordinator experience. Does not mean he will but he is really training for his second opportunity ala McDaniels.