T-New WAS to be on ESPN First Take

[Chago]

I don't think he's coming on. First Take ran once and he wasn't on. They are running it again. They did say he would be on shortly, but it never happened. That was weird.

 

[Hostile]

As fans, that's how we think, but I seriously doubt that owners and general managers would do that to each other. When they make a deal, they're not trying to get one over on the other team, they're trying to come to a fair resolution and acceptable outcome for both teams. If they started doing stuff like that, it creates ill-will, and then people don't want to do business with you anymore. Ken Williams talked about that the other day. I don't imagine it's any different in NFL. If Pac Man is available, we're not going to attempt to screw the Titans over like that.

You are probably right. They'd do that to a player to keep form paying a bonus, but not to another owner.

 

[Manwiththeplan]

What does benched mean? Not a starter? Not in the active lineup even though not injured?

I've got to be honest, if we have a nothing on the line game for week 17 again in 2008, I bench the man to recoup that 5th round pick.

if at any point he's suspended again, we get a 5th, not inactive.

 

[Catch-22]

I don't think he's coming on. First Take ran once and he wasn't on. They are running it again. They did say he would be on shortly, but it never happened. That was weird.

Pretty sure you're right. Maybe Newman heard that Skip Bayless was going to be asking him questions and he bailed out

 

[Bob Sacamano]

I think benched means if he runs into disciplinary problems w/ the Cowboys and they inactivate him

 

[Romo2Dez4six]

Pretty sure you're right. Maybe Newman heard that Skip Bayless was going to be asking him questions and he bailed out

i think the upper brass told him to pass on that for now.

 

[Smith22]

I used the DVR after hearing he would be on, and he never appeared. :bang2::bang2:

 

[Smith22]

if at any point he's suspended again, we get a 5th, not inactive.

That is correct.

 

[TheKey]

What does benched mean? Not a starter? Not in the active lineup even though not injured?

I've got to be honest, if we have a nothing on the line game for week 17 again in 2008, I bench the man to recoup that 5th round pick.

I believe that not playing means he is in some kind of trouble or suspended. Injured Reserve counts against us too. Also, doing something like you suggested is exactly what makes teams decide not to trade with you in the future.

 

[Idgit]

As fans, that's how we think, but I seriously doubt that owners and general managers would do that to each other. When they make a deal, they're not trying to get one over on the other team, they're trying to come to a fair resolution and acceptable outcome for both teams. If they started doing stuff like that, it creates ill-will, and then people don't want to do business with you anymore. Ken Williams talked about that the other day. I don't imagine it's any different in NFL. If Pac Man is available, we're not going to attempt to screw the Titans over like that.

Mike Lynn called. He says 'you're adorable.'

 

[superpunk]

Mike Lynn called. He says 'you're adorable.'

Of course it does happen that one team really gets one over on the other, but I don't think that's their intention. The Walker deal probably would have been OK with them if it had worked out how they imagined. It was kind of their fault that it didn't, from what I read, because of how they used him.

Maybe it's naive, but I think if you're always trying to get one over on other GMs, your trading well will dry up really quick. Particularly if you did something like Hos suggested.

 

[Idgit]

Of course it does happen that one team really gets one over on the other, but I don't think that's their intention. The Walker deal probably would have been OK with them if it had worked out how they imagined. It was kind of their fault that it didn't, from what I read, because of how they used him.

Maybe it's naive, but I think if you're always trying to get one over on other GMs, your trading well will dry up really quick. Particularly if you did something like Hos suggested.

Yah. I agree with you. I just recall hearing Jimmy talking about how quickly he decided to jettison players for those conditional picks, and it cracked me up.

Jerry's actually a big one for striking fair deals for both sides. He makes sure the other party shoulders their own risks, but he's always fair and sometimes more than fair. It works out over the long run because nobody likes being taken advantage of. Something the Eagles had to find out the hard way.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Of course it does happen that one team really gets one over on the other, but I don't think that's their intention. The Walker deal probably would have been OK with them if it had worked out how they imagined. It was kind of their fault that it didn't, from what I read, because of how they used him.

Maybe it's naive, but I think if you're always trying to get one over on other GMs, your trading well will dry up really quick. Particularly if you did something like Hos suggested.

If this was us and say the Commanders then i could see it. i could actually even see Bud Adamans doing this to us as he still holds a grudge it seems. But if you listen to Jones during his presser for the draft he talks about how he makes deals with future deals in mind.

Its not as if the league circles wouldnt know about us trying something like that and that it wouldnt weigh on future negotiations.

People can say what they want about Jerry but hes not a liar or a swindler.

 

[Iago33]

It looks like Jerry covered all the bases with this one. Anyone still miffed about the trade just doesn't like Adam Jones or just doesn't get it, maybe both.

Why in the world should we "like" Adam Jones? What character attributes could one attribute to him and say, "yeah, I really like that guy"?

Put me in the "both" category.

 

[Boyzmamacita]

Why in the world should we "like" Adam Jones? What character attributes could one attribute to him and say, "yeah, I really like that guy"?

Put me in the "both" category.

You don't have to "like" every player on the team you root for. My point is that Jerry covered all the possibilities. If Adams Jones doesn't play for us, we get a 4th rounder back. If he does play for us, we instantly have upgrades at punt returner and nickel corner. From a business standpoint, it makes perfect sense. It's the personal standpoint where "like" and "dislike" come into play. Since there's nothing we can do about it as fans, we might as well hope for the best and be thankful that Jerry covered all the bases.