What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

RB Kareem Hunt, CLE (10 Viewers)

menobrown said:
Also I think if you wanted to try and say Chubb's lack of pass catching was not a big issue and he's still have gone high in the draft you could have used Fournette as an example.  Had he never got hurt he might have compared favorably to someone like Fournette.

We'll never know. I'd concede it's possible he could have been like a top 10 pick,  but I really don't think so and in terms of when they were drafted  I think Gurley's injury was a bigger concern for NFL teams.

Also let me ask you this. Do you think Chubb is the same player as before he got hurt?
Click to expand...
Yes, I do think he is back to where he was before he got hurt. I mean that 90 yard run alone showed that. Pass catching can be developed. Frank Gore and Mark Ingram are two players I’m hoping I remember a little better that didn’t do a lot in the passing game in college that turned into good pro pass catchers. I’m also fairly certain Fournette had a large target share in college but I’d have to check on that.

Edit to add: Fournette did have a large target share in college (84th percentile) which was higher than Gurley, surprisingly.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bojang0301 said:
Yes, I do think he is back to where he was before he got hurt. I mean that 90 yard run alone showed that. Pass catching can be developed. Frank Gore and Mark Ingram are two players I’m hoping I remember a little better that didn’t do a lot in the passing game in college that turned into good pro pass catchers. I’m also fairly certain Fournette had a large target share in college but I’d have to check on that.

Edit to add: Fournette did have a large target share in college (84th percentile) which was higher than Gurley, surprisingly.
Click to expand...
I did not ask you the question on  if you think Chubb is still the same player to bait for you what I'm about to say next. I asked because I wanted to know when people said Chubb would have gone much higher in drafts if it's because they feel like he was a better player before he got hurt and that's why this contention was made.

He obviously tested great at the combine and I also tend to think he's the same player that he was which to me actually reinforces what I was trying to contend when I said he would not have been seen in same light as Barkley/Gurley. He was 2.5 years I believe removed from that injury, he tested great, if he's the same back as now as he was then I don't see a reason why he'd have lasted till pick 33 or whatever- which as you said is not bad but it's not top 10 either. The injury seems like old news by the time he was drafted.

 
menobrown said:
I did not ask you the question on  if you think Chubb is still the same player to bait for you what I'm about to say next. I asked because I wanted to know when people said Chubb would have gone much higher in drafts if it's because they feel like he was a better player before he got hurt and that's why this contention was made.

He obviously tested great at the combine and I also tend to think he's the same player that he was which to me actually reinforces what I was trying to contend when I said he would not have been seen in same light as Barkley/Gurley. He was 2.5 years I believe removed from that injury, he tested great, if he's the same back as now as he was then I don't see a reason why he'd have lasted till pick 33 or whatever- which as you said is not bad but it's not top 10 either. The injury seems like old news by the time he was drafted.
Click to expand...
IIRC, he hadn’t had a 20 carry game since his injury. Teams get fickle around draft time. Maurice Hurst played the full year and dropped to the 4th from a mysterious heart condition. You could very well be correct that it was not a case of the injury affecting the draft status though. 

Correction: he only had one 20 carry game his senior year. He had a few the season he came back from injury. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bojang0301 said:
IIRC, he hadn’t had a 20 carry game since his injury. Teams get fickle around draft time. Maurice Hurst played the full year and dropped to the 4th from a mysterious heart condition. You could very well be correct that it was not a case of the injury affecting the draft status though. 

Correction: he only had one 20 carry game his senior year. He had a few the season he came back from injury. 
Click to expand...
His first game back he had  over 20 carries for over 200yds and 2 or 3 TDs. He looked like they pushed him too early, and was used less frequently the rest of the year.

 
Bigboy10182000 said:
RB decisions last 11 months:

- 3/15: Signed Carlos Hyde to a 3-year, $15.25m deal. 

- 4/27: Drafted Nick Chubb in the 2nd round.

- 6/8: Signed Duke Johnson to a 3-year, $15.6m extension.

- 10/19: Traded Hyde to JAX for a 5th-round pick.

- 2/11: Signed Kareem Hunt.
Click to expand...
They also signed Brock Osweiler to a huge contract because they needed to use up their cap space somehow. I see the contract they gave Hyde being for similar reasons.

I didn't realize they signed Duke after acquiring Hyde and Chubb. They had so few receivers though and he was one of their better free agents. Also they needed to spend money somewhere.

 
Dr. Octopus said:
Yes but sharing a backfield with Chubb isn't going to help showcase him for his next contract.
Click to expand...
It won't but Hunt has already played at a high level with KC.

If the Browns tender Hunt as a 2nd round RFA it will be something like 3-4 million and that will somewhat set his price in the following free agency. More than the RFA contract.

Hunt does have to show he is still good at some point along the way as well, but he doesn't have to wrest the starting job to have pay days ahead.

 
As a Hunt owner since his rookie year I honestly don't even think he is that good. I know he put up some great numbers but I think he might be more of a situation back.  There is nothing i thought watching him that made him standout.  

 
Just a heads up... The minimum suspension for these incidents off the field is 6 games (Ezekiel Elliot Rule). He had two incidents confirmed and the NFL had been investigating the third as of January, so technically he's at 12 games minimum and counting. There's no guarantee he even sees the field in 2019.

 
The Frankman said:
Just a heads up... The minimum suspension for these incidents off the field is 6 games (Ezekiel Elliot Rule). He had two incidents confirmed and the NFL had been investigating the third as of January, so technically he's at 12 games minimum and counting. There's no guarantee he even sees the field in 2019.
Click to expand...
He won't be suspended 12 games IMO.  Probably 6 max.

 
I think its a decent possibility that Hunt never plays another down in the NFL.  Ray Rice was black balled as soon as the video surfaced of him hitting a woman.  Not sure how this is any different.  

If he does get to play for the Browns, maybe he can hold Chubb's water bottle for him and spell him for a play or two a game.  

 
abbottjamesr said:
I think its a decent possibility that Hunt never plays another down in the NFL.  Ray Rice was black balled as soon as the video surfaced of him hitting a woman.  Not sure how this is any different.  

If he does get to play for the Browns, maybe he can hold Chubb's water bottle for him and spell him for a play or two a game.  
Click to expand...
What

 
matuski said:
I would suggest watching the video of Rice, then watch the video of Hunt.

Seems like this would have been the best place to start.
Click to expand...
I just watched it.  While I agree it's not the same as the Ray Rice video in how violently the women were hit, having to be held back from further violence sure doesn't look good for him.  Elliot got six games for going up a girls shirt at a game, Ray Rice got kicked from the league for punching a woman.  Hunt should get at least a season for violently attacking a 19 yo woman and having to be held back from doing worse.

Just my two cents.   I feel there should be zero tolerance for domestic violence by the NFL.  I am hopping Goodell finds a set of balls and suspends him indefinitely.

 
abbottjamesr said:
I think its a decent possibility that Hunt never plays another down in the NFL.  Ray Rice was black balled as soon as the video surfaced of him hitting a woman.  Not sure how this is any different.  

If he does get to play for the Browns, maybe he can hold Chubb's water bottle for him and spell him for a play or two a game.  
Click to expand...
Last sentence is BS

 
Again, the reason I said  12 is the NFL has clearly defined it as 6 per incident (confirmed by the NFL on Twitter). If he gets the minimum 6 games, he had 2 incidents and the NFL is trying to find if the 3rd is worth penalizing. If they say it is, then that's three incidents. Best case scenario then becomes 18 games, which is basically 2019.

 
abbottjamesr said:
I just watched it.  While I agree it's not the same as the Ray Rice video in how violently the women were hit, having to be held back from further violence sure doesn't look good for him.  Elliot got six games for going up a girls shirt at a game, Ray Rice got kicked from the league for punching a woman.  Hunt should get at least a season for violently attacking a 19 yo woman and having to be held back from doing worse.

Just my two cents.   I feel there should be zero tolerance for domestic violence by the NFL.  I am hopping Goodell finds a set of balls and suspends him indefinitely.
Click to expand...
Meh.. I want to watch the guy play.

Suspend every dbag in the league and there isnt an NFL.

 
The Frankman said:
Again, the reason I said  12 is the NFL has clearly defined it as 6 per incident (confirmed by the NFL on Twitter). If he gets the minimum 6 games, he had 2 incidents and the NFL is trying to find if the 3rd is worth penalizing. If they say it is, then that's three incidents. Best case scenario then becomes 18 games, which is basically 2019.
Click to expand...
I thought it was 6 games for domestic violence? Technically he has zero DV's but hitting a female fits in the spirit of the rule, not so sure about hitting a dude.

 
menobrown said:
I thought it was 6 games for domestic violence? Technically he has zero DV's but hitting a female fits in the spirit of the rule, not so sure about hitting a dude.
Click to expand...
There was a lot of incorrect speculation in that post. The hotel incident while technically not domestic violence will be treated that way (like you said it fits the spirit of the rule). Allegedly punching a guy in a bar is not subject to that rule. McCoy beat up an off duty cop in a bar and wasn’t even suspended. I don’t recall a third incident but I’m guess that wasn’t DV either.

He may get more than six games because of multiple incidents but it is not an automatic six for each one.

 
Dr. Octopus said:
There was a lot of incorrect speculation in that post. The hotel incident while technically not domestic violence will be treated that way (like you said it fits the spirit of the rule). Allegedly punching a guy in a bar is not subject to that rule. McCoy beat up an off duty cop in a bar and wasn’t even suspended. I don’t recall a third incident but I’m guess that wasn’t DV either.

He may get more than six games because of multiple incidents but it is not an automatic six for each one.
Click to expand...
I agree but think Goodell looks for any excuse to suspend him as long as possible for pr purposes only. I think it’s 50/50 he doesn’t play this year. Not sure if his contract would kick in the year after with the browns or not.

 
voiceofunreason said:
I agree but think Goodell looks for any excuse to suspend him as long as possible for pr purposes only. I think it’s 50/50 he doesn’t play this year. Not sure if his contract would kick in the year after with the browns or not.
Click to expand...


I can’t help but ask.  If you’re correct and he has to sit out the year, what incentive is there in successfully participating in meaningful rehabilitation?   I guess second chances are only a fairy tale if that’s the case.

 
Biabreakable said:
They also signed Brock Osweiler to a huge contract because they needed to use up their cap space somehow. I see the contract they gave Hyde being for similar reasons.

I didn't realize they signed Duke after acquiring Hyde and Chubb. They had so few receivers though and he was one of their better free agents. Also they needed to spend money somewhere.
Click to expand...
Unless I'm misremembering I don't think that's accurate.

They signed Brock because they got paid a 2nd round pick to do it (ironically the pick they used to draft Chubb, btw).  And that was 2 years ago that trade was made for that contract, not last offseason.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
FreeBaGeL said:
Unless I'm misremembering I don't think that's accurate.

They signed Brock because they got paid a 2nd round pick to do it (ironically the pick they used to draft Chubb, btw).  And that was 2 years ago that trade was made for that contract, not last offseason.
Click to expand...
Your memory is fully intact

 
Brock Osweiler Cut by Browns After Offseason Trade from Texans

Barring a series of outlandish contracts, Cleveland was never going to spend its space and would have a tough time getting to the salary floor. Instead, it basically paid $16 million for a second-round pick and viewed Osweiler as the cost of doing business. Brown's statement made it abundantly clear how they prioritized their two acquisitions.
Click to expand...
You can see here that Osweilers contract cost the Browns almost $16 million in 2017 even though they cut him before the season. They had $46 million tied up in dead money alone. That is money that comes off the books eventually. In 2018 the dead money was down to $25 million and the Browns gave the Osweiler money to Tyrod Taylor as a bridge. Mostly because they need to spend a percentage of the salary cap anyways, and the Browns have tons of cap space.

As far as how much the Browns spent of RB last year, They spent 5% of their cap space in 2018 at the RB position if you count the Hyde contract which turned into 2 million in dead cap space after they traded him.

You can see here that the Browns spent the 14th most at the RB position in 2018.

I don't think there is any question that the Browns have been overspending in free agency because they have so much cap space they might as well do so. They have been smart about it, rolling cap space forward into future years. They have the 5th most cap space in the league this year due to a lot of that dead money clearing their books now.

 
Biabreakable said:
Brock Osweiler Cut by Browns After Offseason Trade from Texans

You can see here that Osweilers contract cost the Browns almost $16 million in 2017 even though they cut him before the season. They had $46 million tied up in dead money alone. That is money that comes off the books eventually. In 2018 the dead money was down to $25 million and the Browns gave the Osweiler money to Tyrod Taylor as a bridge. Mostly because they need to spend a percentage of the salary cap anyways, and the Browns have tons of cap space.

As far as how much the Browns spent of RB last year, They spent 5% of their cap space in 2018 at the RB position if you count the Hyde contract which turned into 2 million in dead cap space after they traded him.

You can see here that the Browns spent the 14th most at the RB position in 2018.

I don't think there is any question that the Browns have been overspending in free agency because they have so much cap space they might as well do so. They have been smart about it, rolling cap space forward into future years. They have the 5th most cap space in the league this year due to a lot of that dead money clearing their books now.
Click to expand...
WAT

 
Bronco Billy said:
I can’t help but ask.  If you’re correct and he has to sit out the year, what incentive is there in successfully participating in meaningful rehabilitation?   I guess second chances are only a fairy tale if that’s the case.
Click to expand...
Being suspended for 1 yr only and being able to return after that is plenty incentive to successfully participate in a rehab program.   I am not sure why you think a year suspension warrants giving up and not doing what it takes to get back on the field. 

Returning after one year if you rehab and meet whatever counseling etc requirements are needed to meet the terms of the suspension so you can get back after that year seems like a second chance to me. 

 
Most interesting aspect of Hunt signing might be him coming home to Cleveland.  

There's a lot of guys I played with/know where going home would be the WORST thing for them and Kareem's dad getting arrested Jan. 25 for selling crack cocaine would seem to reinforce that.
Found this interesting from Ross Tucker this morning. 
Click to expand...
 
Gally said:
Being suspended for 1 yr only and being able to return after that is plenty incentive to successfully participate in a rehab program.   I am not sure why you think a year suspension warrants giving up and not doing what it takes to get back on the field. 

Returning after one year if you rehab and meet whatever counseling etc requirements are needed to meet the terms of the suspension so you can get back after that year seems like a second chance to me. 
Click to expand...


Because this is his first offense with violence against a woman that anyone knows about, because there are alleged mitigating curcumstances regarding that violence that the tape supports in his actions, that the violence - while repugnant and worthy of significant punishment, which I have supported from the beginning - could have been much more egregious given the opportunity he had to inflict it, and because he has already lost 5 games with pay and the remainder of his contract terminated because of it, and because by all accounts he has shown great remorse and is modifying his behavior through his efforts in meaningful therapy for his issue.

If you’re just going to apply the stick and not give out any carrot when circumstances might warrant it, then the effect of the discipline and desire to rehabilitate is going to be diminished, possibly significantly.  Use him as a shining example that a young guy can change his life and those of others by changing himself, that the league will recognize a guy who is willing to do whatever it takes to make himself a better person, and it will likely engender more positive outcomes in the future.  Look, we got you for tuning up that girl, but we see how hard you’ve worked to be a better man and we’ll relent on half that sentence and include time served already - but understand that if you regress and it happens again you not only get the full weight of punishment a second offender gets but also the time you recovered from the first added on to that too. 

It seems resasonable to me.  Maybe not to you.

 
Bronco Billy said:
Because this is his first offense with violence against a woman that anyone knows about, because there are alleged mitigating curcumstances regarding that violence that the tape supports in his actions, that the violence - while repugnant and worthy of significant punishment, which I have supported from the beginning - could have been much more egregious given the opportunity he had to inflict it, and because he has already lost 5 games with pay and the remainder of his contract terminated because of it, and because by all accounts he has shown great remorse and is modifying his behavior through his efforts in meaningful therapy for his issue.

If you’re just going to apply the stick and not give out any carrot when circumstances might warrant it, then the effect of the discipline and desire to rehabilitate is going to be diminished, possibly significantly.  Use him as a shining example that a young guy can change his life and those of others by changing himself, that the league will recognize a guy who is willing to do whatever it takes to make himself a better person, and it will likely engender more positive outcomes in the future.  Look, we got you for tuning up that girl, but we see how hard you’ve worked to be a better man and we’ll relent on half that sentence and include time served already - but understand that if you regress and it happens again you not only get the full weight of punishment a second offender gets but also the time you recovered from the first added on to that too. 

It seems resasonable to me.  Maybe not to you.
Click to expand...
There are two things at play here and although connected are still separate in many regards. 

The KC organization decided that they didn't want to be associated with a person that completed the actions that Hunt did.  This could include the event itself, the previous warnings, the possible lies he told the organization upon initial notice of an incident, etc.  He may have been told they had zero tolerance moving forward and if anybody did anything of this nature their contract would be terminated (yes, I understand the hypocrisy of KC and Tyreek Hill in that statement which is why I said moving forward).  We do not know what the organization said to the players about such conduct.  Because of all that his contract was terminated. 

Now the NFL has the right to be able to enforce punishment for breaking league rules that are separate from the organization.  In addition, any other organization (such as the Browns) can sign Hunt to a contract of their own.  He is not prevented from doing exactly what he did in signing with another team.  However, the NFL still can institute punishment based on their protocol once he is under the league umbrella (signing with the Browns puts him under their jurisdiction).  Could the NFL say that getting his contract voided is punishment enough for a first time offender that is taking it on himself to go to counseling etc?  Sure, but they are under no obligation to do so.  They have received  a lot of backlash for the way they have handled things in the past so it makes sense they want to try and be consistent with similar actions (DV for instance) regardless how individual franchises handle  these situations. 

I have no problem with the NFL still instituting a harsh penalty for something that Hunt did and then allowing him to continue his career.  I have no issue with the NFL instituting a common suspension for certain infractions that shouldn't be affected by any additional punishment each individual franchise wants to dole out.  Each entity should be able to run their business as they want to as long as it is clear to the players how it will be done.  I don't think any of this is unreasonable. 

It's a fine line trying to have a harsh enough penalty to be a deterrent for the action taking place at all and giving a second chance for someone making a mistake that they regret.  If the player truly regrets their actions then any hoops the NFL or Franchise institutes to allow the player to return should be followed.  Reducing the standard penalties because the player finally decided to get the help they needed after they got caught (instead of before doing something bad) isn't necessary to me.  It's the price they have to pay for doing bad things.   The "carrot" that is being dangled is being able to play a game for huge amounts of money for your profession.  Asking someone to not beat up a girl to be able to do this, and make sure you don't do it again seems like a very good "carrot" to me. 

 
Tired of reading ....beat up a girl....in all this. The guy did not beat up a girl, he shoved her because she refused to leave, then he kicked at her. He didn;t....beat her up....at all.

YES....he shouldn't have gone that route, yes he did wrong and deserves to be punished.  But when it comes to abuse that video would never be used as a good example. it was weak.

Now the Browns have a stud RB and the Chiefs are weaker,  they should have suspended him.  Being cool with the Tyreek Hill situation then pulling this....OH NO...hmm?

 
MAC_32 said:
WAT
Click to expand...
The incredulous responses to a obviously known fact is obnoxious. How about you show me what is wrong with my statement and further the conversation?

Every team has to spend 90% of their cap space every year. So giving players front loaded contacts (overspending on them in one season).

Its not like I said the Browns haven't made good moves in the process of doing that, but yes they had to spend the money somehow.

Anyhow the idea that the Browns are spending more money on the RB position than other teams because of the Duke Johnson and Carlos Hyde contracts is not the case.

 
Biabreakable said:
Anyhow the idea that the Browns are spending more money on the RB position than other teams because of the Duke Johnson and Carlos Hyde contracts is not the case.
Click to expand...
I don't think anyone said that.  I just said that they've invested a lot of assets in the position recently.  Two fairly hefty contracts (for RBs), a premium draft pick, and now a big PR hit that most teams weren't willing to take all in just the last 12 months.

 
abbottjamesr said:
I think its a decent possibility that Hunt never plays another down in the NFL.  Ray Rice was black balled as soon as the video surfaced of him hitting a woman.  Not sure how this is any different.  

If he does get to play for the Browns, maybe he can hold Chubb's water bottle for him and spell him for a play or two a game.  
Click to expand...
Ray Rice was blackballed for being washed up, period. No doubt in my mind he would have been back in the NFL if he had a lot more tread on those tires.

 
JohnnyU said:
Not to mention his violent act was a million times worse than Hunt's.
Click to expand...
This is very true.  They are different degrees of violence for sure.

Ray Rice could have killed his girlfriend with that hit. 

What Hunt did was totally unacceptable, but it was not something with high chances of causing a serious injury. 

We don't know much about the other incidents yet, though. 

 
ZenoRazon said:
Being cool with the Tyreek Hill situation then pulling this....OH NO...hmm?
Click to expand...
There seems to be some unwritten rule that you're allowed one guy with a high profile background of violence against women per team. If you have 1, you believe in 2nd chances. If another comes to light after you already have 1, you have to react in a horrified manner and remove the player (even though there is no doubt the chiefs knew what was on the video prior to it being released).

Then a team with no high profile woman beaters gets to fill their "2nd chance" role on the cheap. 

Once again, the NFL is full of poop and hypocrisy.

 
jtd13 said:
There seems to be some unwritten rule that you're allowed one guy with a high profile background of violence against women per team. If you have 1, you believe in 2nd chances. If another comes to light after you already have 1, you have to react in a horrified manner and remove the player (even though there is no doubt the chiefs knew what was on the video prior to it being released).

Then a team with no high profile woman beaters gets to fill their "2nd chance" role on the cheap. 

Once again, the NFL is full of poop and hypocrisy.
Click to expand...
I think it's the PR affect videos have. 

If there is a video it's hard to spin it away.  

 
jtd13 said:
There seems to be some unwritten rule that you're allowed one guy with a high profile background of violence against women per team. If you have 1, you believe in 2nd chances. If another comes to light after you already have 1, you have to react in a horrified manner and remove the player (even though there is no doubt the chiefs knew what was on the video prior to it being released).

Then a team with no high profile woman beaters gets to fill their "2nd chance" role on the cheap. 

Once again, the NFL is full of poop and hypocrisy.
Click to expand...
There is no way Hunt is a....woman beater.  Hell, me and my three older sisters have gone FAR further than that nothing skuffle.  I adore my sisters.

I get what you are saying however.

 
Biabreakable said:
The incredulous responses to a obviously known fact is obnoxious. How about you show me what is wrong with my statement and further the conversation?

Every team has to spend 90% of their cap space every year. So giving players front loaded contacts (overspending on them in one season).

Its not like I said the Browns haven't made good moves in the process of doing that, but yes they had to spend the money somehow.

Anyhow the idea that the Browns are spending more money on the RB position than other teams because of the Duke Johnson and Carlos Hyde contracts is not the case.
Click to expand...
They're not facts.  They're bad assumptions.  Below are the facts:

QB - Mayfield (draft), Taylor (trade), Stanton ($4.15 mil gtd)

RB - Chubb (draft), Duke (draft), and Hunt (scrap heap)

WR - Landry (trade + extend), Higgins (draft), Callaway (draft), Ratley (draft), Perriman (scrap heap)

TE - Njoku (draft), Fells ($4.65 mil gtd)

OT - Hubbard (9 mil gtd), Robinson (scrap heap), Harrison (udfa)

OG - Zeitler ($23 mil gtd), Bitonio (draft), Corbett (draft)

C - Tretter (6.5 mil gtd)

DE - Garrett (draft), Ogbah (draft), Smith ($4.5 mil gtd), Thomas, (draft), Zetter (scrap heap)

DT - Ogunjobi (draft), Coley (udfa)

LB - Schobert (draft), Kirksey (draft), Collins (trade + extend), Avery (draft)

CB - Ward (draft), Carrie ($10 mil gtd), Mitchell ($3.5 mil gtd), Gaines ($1.4 mil gtd)

S - Randall (trade), Peppers (draft), Kindred (draft), BBC (scrap heap)

---

2016 money > $3 mil (just picked a reasonable #) - Tramon Williams + Demario Davis (they fit your criteria but I'd argue they weren't overpay's - they were positive contributors at positions void of a starter), RG3 (he doesn't fit because Hue), McCown (was already here)

2017 - Brock (but actually Chubb), Haden (already here), Britt (facepalm) - but would have been used to extend Pryor if he weren't an idiot

2018 - nobody

---

So in 4 years you can easily point to one player that fits your criteria - Britt - and he wasn't even what the team wanted to.  Flimsily point to two - because Brock wasn't about Brock, it was about what turned into Chubb.  And...really can't make a strong argument for anyone else.

The facts are this team was ripped down to the studs and was rebuilt via acquiring draft capital, taking shots on cheap young talent, and (for the most part) unproven but young(ish) free agents who would accept modest contracts the team could get out of easily.  The team was either 1st or 2nd in cap space in each of the last 3 years.  The only free agents that received > $10 mil gtd were Zeitler, Brock, and Britt.  And if you wiggle to $10.5 then it's only Zeitler and Brock.  And again, Brock wasn't brought here to QB - he was brought here to acquire a pick for when this team would be good.  And he wasn't a free agent anyway.  All of this is why this team has so much cap space now along with extra draft picks (again), despite already having a capable starting lineup.

---

tl;dr - WAT

 
ZenoRazon said:
There is no way Hunt is a....woman beater.  Hell, me and my three older sisters have gone FAR further than that nothing skuffle.  I adore my sisters.

I get what you are saying however.
Click to expand...
I was speaking more from a perception standpoint. But I wouldn't say there's no way. Maybe the video doesn't automatically make him a woman beater, but his conduct was not a reasonable and normal reaction. Most people don't get so angry as to physically impose themselves on someone much smaller and weaker than them.

I grew up with 8 sisters. Interactions with older sisters don't have the same rules as interactions with the rest of society 😂

But anyway, my main point is that teams probably don't ask "how bad is this incident vs. that guy's incident that we already have on the team?" I think it's more to do with how many black eyes they can take. Chiefs already made their choice with Tyreek, so even though his action was much worse, they had to appear like they gave a crap about violence against women when the Hunt stuff became public. 

 
CalBear said:
He will get claimed. The team claiming him will say "we're very concerned about the incident and will have a deep conversation with Hunt about our expectations for his behavior and what punishment is appropriate." Or some BS like that. Code for "he's a good cheap player and as long as no other video shows up we're good."
Click to expand...
Actual text:

We fully understand and respect the complexity of questions and issues in signing a player with Kareem’s history and do not condone his actions. Given what we know about Kareem through our extensive research, we believe he deserves a second chance but certainly with the understanding that he has to go through critical and essential steps to become a performing member of this organization, aside from what the NFL determines from their ongoing investigation. We fully understand that Kareem is subject to discipline by the NFL. Here at the Browns, there is a detailed plan with expectations laid out that he understands and must follow, because any similar incident will not be tolerated. We will support Kareem through this process and utilize our resources, however permitted, to help him become successful on and off the field as long as he continues to show the commitment necessary to represent this organization.
Click to expand...
I shoulda been in PR. It still means "he's a good cheap player so we're signing him as long as he can keep his nose clean."

 
Casting Couch said:
RBBC : Hunt / Chubb

50/50 share ?
Click to expand...
No.

80/20 Chubb/Duke, unless another back is brought in and Duke is shipped out.

Re-assess based on performance if Hunt gets near the end of his suspension without another issue.  If it's going well then Hunt's not just going to be handed a big piece of pie.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

LawFitz
RB Chris Brooks, MIA
2
Replies
73
Views
4K
SoBeDad
S
greenmountaingoat
Ainias Smith-WR- Draft eligible Texas A&M
Replies
9
Views
309
Drunken Cowboy
D
JohnnyU
Is the 2024 RB Class really that bad?
2 3
Replies
116
Views
5K
Soulfly3
Soulfly3

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 11 (members: 0, guests: 11)
Top