Why would you cut Hartline? You just signed him and did you see the offense Sunday after he got hurt?
Just how many relatives does Pat Devlin have on here? He is our very own Tim Tebow without the big smile, the muscles and the obligatory blessings. (and hopefully a better pass completion percentage of 47%.If you are comfortable with Matt Moore as backup then you must also be comfortable with Tannhill starting too. We saw what Matt Moore and Tannehill can do in the last two games. I'm more comfortable with Devlin starting and Tannehill backing him up, which is the way it's going to be soon if we can finally get rid of Ireland and return to winning ways.
It would have been a really smart contract for both Miami and Moore to sign him to the deal we did with this intention in mind: have him as insurance for us if needed and if not trade him before the deadline to a contending team, like when the Packers lost Rodgers.
OR
It would be a really stupid contract if we planned on actually paying him the $5 million next season all along.
I'm legitimately torn on what Jeff Ireland's thought process must have been at the time though.
I no longer believe M.Moore is this great back-up that we believe him to be.
Wallace I dont think will get restructured unless Aponte can pull some accounting magic out her tiny ass (i think its tiny but i might be mistaken). But if you do, you extend him out further with big money and not sure you want to do that under this regime if we are unsuccessful. Eat his 17 mil cap hit this year and he becomes much more doable for years later for whatever.
Matt Moore is really not needed here anymore. I am sure Jeff Ireland, since he found Matt, could get another backup for half the price if needed. Otherwise, I think Devlin fits this system well. He needs to be signed then. Matt Moore has small hands and is not good over time should RT go down with injury particularly in bad weather. Which we are bound to be in for the rest of eternity. He is no longer worth that money.
We need to draft alot of our Oline bigtime for the future. Draft picks are cheaper now and you can get guys in this draft who can come in right away. I would like to get Albert in KC but that is costly. Mckinne could be had for half price I think and you draft your future T's to replace him year after or when he is injured. but I now think we need two stud G's who can come right in as rookies and plug/play. There are some good ones out there.
See if you can get Soliai to come down just a tad on his 6 mil. Or make it so he has more guarranteed money from start. Spreads out over time that way.
Forgive me for not having the exact numbers in front of me. But both these gents have quite a 2014 salary.
What do you anticipate? Moore either restructuring or getting cut?
I like Hartline a lot. He fits our scheme, but I'm weary of the cap hit.
Of course Mike Wallace is up for discussion as well...
Thoughts?
If you are comfortable with Matt Moore as backup then you must also be comfortable with Tannhill starting too. We saw what Matt Moore and Tannehill can do in the last two games. I'm more comfortable with Devlin starting and Tannehill backing him up, which is the way it's going to be soon if we can finally get rid of Ireland and return to winning ways.
The problem with Hartline is he is what we have in numbers right now (Wallace, Gibson, and Mathews). We can collect all the smaller, not very good at fighting for the football WR's we want and they may all have some individual pluses, but we are still lacking what is proven to be the most successful WR prototype in the league right now. That being big guys that excel in catching the ball in traffic and at it's highest point. Miami will not be the offensive team we want them to be without that type WR and a quality RB. I'm not saying dumping Hartline is a thing to do just for money but if letting him go was part of a move to either bring in a WR or RB we need I'd be for it.
I'm not leaving out the OL but that's a different discussion.
I don't understand the cap concerns here. We have $38M to spend with keeping the contracts we now have, and have no reason to look at re-structuring or cutting anyone. I expect the cap to increase based on TV revenue, and Patterson to be cut. This will give us $40-50M to spend.
IF we go crazy and need more, Wallace can be re-structured by guaranteeing more with no extension. Again, there is no problem whatsoever with cap space, far from it.