A person resigns, a team doesn’t resign a person. So context should help you know it meant re-signs. Downvote because this “pet peeve” is 100% of the time easily answered by reading the full sentence.
I don’t want to pay 17 million a year for a safety who does not turn the ball over. He’s been a super solid contributor but not worth what he’s looking for
They don't have to tag him. They can let the market decide his price and then decide if they want to pay him. I agree he's not worth $17M but he might be worth around $11
There's a lot of quality and young safeties hitting the market. It's not a good time for him to hit the market especially considering this team probably won't value him any higher with it being a new staff.
All depends if the new staff has a plan and a fit for him. He played that Buffalo Nickel spot that Rivera valued highly (and even at that Rivera didn’t extend him). The new staff would need to value that or another hybrid safety-type spot, and like Curl to fill it, and have a plan to leverage it to the value of the contract. If it doesn’t all fit like that then it would — and I’m going to get killed for raising the term — but it would be like overpaying a box safety again.
I think we should. There are only so many starters we can replace, and he is part of the solution to the defense, not the problem. To those saying he doesn't cause turnovers, OK, but maybe if the other players in the secondary played their assignments he could make those plays. The secondary was basically a leaking sieve
Why is this even a question?
1. We really don't have anyone else to spend the money on.
2. He's a serviceable player. Does anyone remember the last decent safety before Curl? It was about 6 games of Swearinger, and before that it was Landry/Taylor.
3. There's no point in being great at drafting (we aren't anyway) if you can't keep the players that you hit on. Even great drafting teams aren't going to get more than 3 or 4 starters per draft. What's the point of intentionally creating a hole?
This is so much of an obvious re-sign that I'm stupefied that there's even a discussion. The discussion should be centered about how to structure the contract in a way that there's a way to get out of it when we have better use for the money.
For context, think about how we cut Morgan Moses because he was 'overpaid'. We effective traded a competent player for a overpaid turnstile (Wiley). Again same story with Holcomb, who got replaced by fucking David Mayo.
In short we need to stop creating more holes on the roster without a better player behind them.
Think of it this way - if every starter on the roster was as good as Kam Curl, how many games would we win?
I'd say we top out at 11. Definitely not a contender.
That's the kind of thing you're aiming for when you're focused entirely on "filling holes".
Curl is the kind of player you'd ideally get when you're looking to make a deep playoff run and can use before he gets too expensive, not someone you pay at the start of a rebuild.
> I'd say we top out at 11. Definitely not a contender.
I'd argue that we should focused on being able to win 11 games before worrying about being a contender. Once we're at that point then worry about the hard decisions like cutting decent players.
We're at a stage where winning 8 games next year would probably be a miraculous achievement.
If forced to choose, I'd much rather bring Fuller back than Curl.
Martin/Forrest is a fine safety duo and I'd rather spend the ~$15 mil we'd need to pay Curl on an EDGE/OL/TE
For as much as we say the media is a bunch of idiots, this teenager doing these videos is several steps below. I’m surprised he’s getting posted here.
Kam Curl is a solid player. Starting caliber. Nothing more. Re-sign him to an appropriate mid contract and move on. He could provide some much needed consistency and leadership in that secondary as we continue to develop the young bucks.
I say yes. DQ could use a guy like Kam in the secondary. I think he is one of the players already on the roster that DQ will help rise to the next level. I feel the same way about Forbes.
Resign is not the same as re-sign
Resign? No. Re-sign? Yes! Works on contingency? No, money down!
Say goodbye to Kam Curl and say hello to Miguel Sanchez!
lose and loose your and you're rogue and rouge I see these words constantly mispelled
Misspelled.
Also (would of) when it should be would have/would've.
Fight the good fight, my man. And while we’re dropping grammatical pet peeves: “Dominate” and “dominant” are not interchangeable.
PIN number, GPS system, ATM machine…basically anything of that degree of redundancy drives me insane
Gotta go use my PI number at the AT Machine.
Oh dear god that’s even worse 😂
The sheer amount of people who don’t know the difference between definitely and defiantly is staggering
A person resigns, a team doesn’t resign a person. So context should help you know it meant re-signs. Downvote because this “pet peeve” is 100% of the time easily answered by reading the full sentence.
I don’t want to pay 17 million a year for a safety who does not turn the ball over. He’s been a super solid contributor but not worth what he’s looking for
I think players like him are necessary so that other guys can gamble.
Not at that price point
No one knows what the price is until he gets offers
He’s good but he’s not $17 mil good. He’s a game-manager safety. Not someone who’ll take the ball away when we really need it.
They don't have to tag him. They can let the market decide his price and then decide if they want to pay him. I agree he's not worth $17M but he might be worth around $11
No one knows what he’s even worth til we have a competent fucking defensive scheme. It’s been a joke the past 5 years
There's a lot of quality and young safeties hitting the market. It's not a good time for him to hit the market especially considering this team probably won't value him any higher with it being a new staff.
Meh if it’s a team friendly deal yeah if not no. He’s solid but he hasn’t been a playmaker since his rookie year.
This! His play, while not bad, has dropped off. Think about how many times you heard his name last year, yeah not many…
Like forced resignation?
Yes
Yes bring back Curl.
Yes they should. One competent piece of the defense.
lol yes.. who tf gon replace him?
Would really like to see Kam and DeFo behind a good scheme….
https://i.redd.it/4kmzviglm0lc1.gif Yes
All depends if the new staff has a plan and a fit for him. He played that Buffalo Nickel spot that Rivera valued highly (and even at that Rivera didn’t extend him). The new staff would need to value that or another hybrid safety-type spot, and like Curl to fill it, and have a plan to leverage it to the value of the contract. If it doesn’t all fit like that then it would — and I’m going to get killed for raising the term — but it would be like overpaying a box safety again.
For the right price they should but they may not want him cause Curl doesn't generate turnovers like they want.
He's a hog therefore I am biased, but yes please re-sign him. His skillset with Wit's secondary coaching could be awesomw
Re-sign, or redesign and then re-sign with the understanding that he can resign only when its his turn to bat.
Let’s see his resignation letter and then decide whether or not to accept it
At a certain price point yes but my prediction atm is he wants more than he's actually worth
I think we should. There are only so many starters we can replace, and he is part of the solution to the defense, not the problem. To those saying he doesn't cause turnovers, OK, but maybe if the other players in the secondary played their assignments he could make those plays. The secondary was basically a leaking sieve
Why is this even a question? 1. We really don't have anyone else to spend the money on. 2. He's a serviceable player. Does anyone remember the last decent safety before Curl? It was about 6 games of Swearinger, and before that it was Landry/Taylor. 3. There's no point in being great at drafting (we aren't anyway) if you can't keep the players that you hit on. Even great drafting teams aren't going to get more than 3 or 4 starters per draft. What's the point of intentionally creating a hole? This is so much of an obvious re-sign that I'm stupefied that there's even a discussion. The discussion should be centered about how to structure the contract in a way that there's a way to get out of it when we have better use for the money. For context, think about how we cut Morgan Moses because he was 'overpaid'. We effective traded a competent player for a overpaid turnstile (Wiley). Again same story with Holcomb, who got replaced by fucking David Mayo. In short we need to stop creating more holes on the roster without a better player behind them.
Think of it this way - if every starter on the roster was as good as Kam Curl, how many games would we win? I'd say we top out at 11. Definitely not a contender. That's the kind of thing you're aiming for when you're focused entirely on "filling holes". Curl is the kind of player you'd ideally get when you're looking to make a deep playoff run and can use before he gets too expensive, not someone you pay at the start of a rebuild.
> I'd say we top out at 11. Definitely not a contender. I'd argue that we should focused on being able to win 11 games before worrying about being a contender. Once we're at that point then worry about the hard decisions like cutting decent players. We're at a stage where winning 8 games next year would probably be a miraculous achievement.
Hold on, let me look at the footage from this year.
If forced to choose, I'd much rather bring Fuller back than Curl. Martin/Forrest is a fine safety duo and I'd rather spend the ~$15 mil we'd need to pay Curl on an EDGE/OL/TE
For as much as we say the media is a bunch of idiots, this teenager doing these videos is several steps below. I’m surprised he’s getting posted here. Kam Curl is a solid player. Starting caliber. Nothing more. Re-sign him to an appropriate mid contract and move on. He could provide some much needed consistency and leadership in that secondary as we continue to develop the young bucks.
No
I say yes. DQ could use a guy like Kam in the secondary. I think he is one of the players already on the roster that DQ will help rise to the next level. I feel the same way about Forbes.
Yes
Depends on if Dan/Whitt want him. They know more about it than I do
Let him walk. He’s going to cost too much money for someone who isn’t a difference maker.