Cousins to start 2015 Season

16m+ in cap space to sign players that are good at their jobs, possibly 3m+ this year if someone bites on a trade (not likely). salary cap is a liquid asset that you can always turn into player contracts, and there's cap carryover now. you can't put him back on the field at that price. his knees would be holding the franchise hostage.You may have missed the post that sparked the current discussion but its this: The 5th year option is still an issue but outside of the money (which can be massaged) getting rid of Griff doesn't bring any gain on the football field.

So, yes the 5th year option is an issue.

But outside of that what is the benefit on the field of not having Griffin on the team, not on the field but on the team?

How does Griffin being gone make the team better?

Sure, we can get to this entirely different discussion about what offense and whatever else.

But first, I would like to get back to our discussion. What benefit does it bring on the field to have Griffin off the team? After all that's what our discussion was about. Looking at the flip side of booting Griffin off the team. If J and Kirk succeeds great, everyone parks everyone wins. But, if J and Kirk fail and we've also got rid of Griffin where's the benefit there?

It removes a big distraction. The guy I saw looking away and rolling his eyes during QB meetings with coaches on the sidelines at the Jax game isn't someone I would want on my team. Then there is everything else,
other than Archie Manning what father of an NFL QB is better known than RG2 and that isn't a good thing. What he says to reporters makes you wonder
how he had such a high grade point average in school. He isn't worth the BS
that comes with him for a back-up QB.

Ok thanks good to know. I remember Allen saying total control over player personnel and never really saying anything about coaches, so I was left to wonder. Nice to know from someone in the know, thanks Smoot.

Glad Smoot answered this as well, but I specifically remember one press conference earlier this year when that specific question was asked. Needless to say he was very vague about "personnel" as it relates to coaches/staff. He was pretty much putting it out there that HE was the one in charge of that decision. I remember being livid because I was thinking "exactly what has changed", and thought at the time it was going to be a cluster fuck with one guy (BA) in charge of coaching decisions and one guy (SM) in charge of player personnel.

There is zero on field benefit to Griffin being on this team and there is no circumstance where his being on the field as the qb of the skins improves this team. None, zero, zilch, nada. He brings no value to the offense at all. Hence he should be gone. Basically its addition by subtraction. If he is gone we can bring in a 53rd guy who can sit on the bench just as well as Griffin can, but no media guy will ask 10 questions of joe schmo backup dude.

Sent from my S6 Edge

I mean Scot reports to Allen, but if there is an HC change Scot will lead that and expect that HC to pick his staff

I mean Scot reports to Allen, but if there is an HC change Scot will lead that and expect that HC to pick his staff

See this is a problem. Scott should be reporting to Dan. Period. As long as Bruce Allen is around, there is high chance this shit is going to blow up.
Fuck you Snyder.

See this is a problem. Scott should be reporting to Dan. Period. As long as Bruce Allen is around, there is high chance this shit is going to blow up.
Fuck you Snyder.

Actually, this removes the owner farther from football decisions IMO. I'm fine with Allen and McC making football decision: Allen brings his money management knowledge and McC the football knowledge.

Maybe think a little bit before ranting the same ol' thing?

I mean Scot reports to Allen, but if there is an HC change Scot will lead that and expect that HC to pick his staff

It's cool that the HC now gets to pick his staff. That's a change from the dumb ways of Snyder and Bruce and Vinny

There is zero on field benefit to Griffin being on this team and there is no circumstance where his being on the field as the qb of the skins improves this team. None, zero, zilch, nada. He brings no value to the offense at all. Hence he should be gone. Basically its addition by subtraction. If he is gone we can bring in a 53rd guy who can sit on the bench just as well as Griffin can, but no media guy will ask 10 questions of joe schmo backup dude.

Sent from my S6 Edge

and the team can move forward. RG3 at this point is nothing but a distraction and can only hurt the team focus. I don't see a scenario that justifies carrying him on the roster. One guy will never make a team but one certainly can destroy one..

You may have missed the post that sparked the current discussion but its this: The 5th year option is still an issue but outside of the money (which can be massaged) getting rid of Griff doesn't bring any gain on the football field.

So, yes the 5th year option is an issue.

But outside of that what is the benefit on the field of not having Griffin on the team, not on the field but on the team?

How does Griffin being gone make the team better?

Because he has repeatedly broken the only rule of press conferences. The "I", not "we", screwed up rule.

It's always "I screwed up." And "We played well". That is the damage he has done off the field over the past couple years.

He hasn't repaired it either, because he has never taken any responsibility for his poor play. Instead of tweeting Ezekiel 25:17, he could have tweeted that he called the wrong protection while Willie Smith was getting killed in the media the next day.

Please listen to Cooley's film breakdown on the Detroit game. RGIII did nothing to help his players on or off the field that game.

Gruden and even RGIII has talked about how he needs his guys and organization to support him to make him better. He theorized that type of support contributes to Rodgers and Brady's success. The fact that RGIII is saying this is laughable.

When is the last time another QB publicly calling out the guys around him for his poor play? (I'm sure it's happened before. I don't know of a specific incident but I can see Cam Newton doing this type of thing after he steals a RB's touchdown ball.)

On the field: the team is risking a huge cap hit next season in exchange for nothing short of terrible play. He hasn't demonstrated any improvement despite receiving Bradyesque support from the organization.

Off the field: he has been held to a completely different standard without demonstrating any justification since 2012. 52 guys on the roster are held accountable for their mistakes, and some are accountable for his apparently.

Makes for a poisonous locker room.

There is zero upside to keeping him around any length of time after he is medically cleared.