- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: As commish should I let this trade go through?
Posted on 11/6/14 at 12:07 pm to drizztiger
Posted on 11/6/14 at 12:07 pm to drizztiger
I don't see it as lopsided enough to veto it. He is losing Charles only (Stacy is worth nothing) and getting Jennings (good when healthy) + West, who may take over the running duties in Cleveland (Tate has been sucking).
I personally would rather get Charles, but this isn't a trade that needs a veto, in my opinion.
I personally would rather get Charles, but this isn't a trade that needs a veto, in my opinion.
1
Posted on 11/6/14 at 12:15 pm to TIGERSby10
You're completely ignoring the fact that he already has Lacy and Ingram. plus Charles.
Those 3 would be his 2 RBs and Flex almost every week. Trading Charles for injured Jennings and RBBC West makes absolutely zero sense.
Even if both were healthy and starting, he can't play 4 RBs and Lacy, Ingram and Charles have all had their bye week.
Those 3 would be his 2 RBs and Flex almost every week. Trading Charles for injured Jennings and RBBC West makes absolutely zero sense.
Even if both were healthy and starting, he can't play 4 RBs and Lacy, Ingram and Charles have all had their bye week.
Posted on 11/6/14 at 10:11 pm to drizztiger
quote:
Sure - If you count the 2 games Charles didn't play or got hurt after 2 carries
You mean the EXACT problems that usually plague a runner that has his annual workload? Gotcha.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News