- 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
Interesting tweet about what loomis asked for
Posted on 2/1/23 at 1:46 am
Posted on 2/1/23 at 1:46 am
7
Posted on 2/1/23 at 3:06 am to Chalkywhite84
It is interesting and it was always pretty predictable we’d get screwed here bc we always ran the risk of losing him for nothing.
And it’s not like trading a player. The coach ultimately gets to decide where he goes or he just waits out his contract, so it’s not as simple as finding the highest bidder.
It was always foolish that we legitimately had a herd of people on here that we could get Arizona’s 3rd pick and then trade it for Lamar Jackson or some shite.
A head coach is simply not worth a franchise QB trade value wise.
And it’s not like trading a player. The coach ultimately gets to decide where he goes or he just waits out his contract, so it’s not as simple as finding the highest bidder.
It was always foolish that we legitimately had a herd of people on here that we could get Arizona’s 3rd pick and then trade it for Lamar Jackson or some shite.
A head coach is simply not worth a franchise QB trade value wise.
Posted on 2/1/23 at 5:59 am to Chalkywhite84
Saints were desperate to trade payton and folded to a team with very little draft picks.
Posted on 2/1/23 at 6:14 am to Chalkywhite84
I think we could have and successfully pushed for a 2 this year and a 1 next year, but the team is set on having a 1 this season.
I highly doubt the broncos finish better than 29th and if you believe Russ is washed, there is a good chance that pick is somewhere in the middle of the first, even with Payton doing Payton things.
I highly doubt the broncos finish better than 29th and if you believe Russ is washed, there is a good chance that pick is somewhere in the middle of the first, even with Payton doing Payton things.
Posted on 2/1/23 at 6:25 am to Chalkywhite84
@mikeklis
Trade II: 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th-round picks over two years. Again, too rich for Broncos. But as time went on and Broncos had other options (Harbaugh, DeMeco), the Saints risked getting nothing in return for Payton, who could have returned to NFL FOX. (more) #9sports
Mike Klis
·
Trade III: Eventually, Broncos sent 1st-rder (29), plus 2nd-rd in 2024 to Saints for Sean Payton and NO's 3rd-rder in 2024.
Win-win. Saints get 1st-rd pick for coach they no longer had. Broncos essentially give up late, 1st-rder for arguably top HC candidate in 20 yrs.
I like the way the deal shrinks from 1,2,3,4 over 2 years to what we got and it’s a “win-win”.
Nope it’s a win for the Broncos and a fleecing of Loomis. That isn’t anywhere near meeting in the middle.
Posted on 2/1/23 at 6:37 am to Geauxldilocks
Loomis always loses in trades.
Broncos knew that.
Broncos knew that.
Posted on 2/1/23 at 6:46 am to Geauxldilocks
I would have been fine with taking their 3rd this year, plus 1st and 2nd next year without giving up anything of value. I can't help but think the win-now, pay-layer philosophy remained after Sean left
Posted on 2/1/23 at 6:54 am to Geauxldilocks
If the broncos had to pay the first compensation, why would Sean wanna take the job? No coach wants to walk into a team that was horrible and no picks too. You have to make it work for 3 parties
This post was edited on 2/1/23 at 6:55 am
Posted on 2/1/23 at 7:32 am to msstate7
Because the team isn’t horrible. The defense was good, the offense has weapons all over the field. He’s being brought in to fix the issue which was Russ and mediocre offensive game plans.
Posted on 2/1/23 at 7:47 am to dj30
We never had as much leverage as some folks on here want to believe. Loomis couldn’t just trade him to whatever team offered the best deal if CSP didn’t want to go there. And if CSP wanted to go to Denver then that’s where it was going to be no matter what, and you just have to make the best deal you can. Now if you want to fault Loomis for being CSP’s friend and not being willing to tell him “if I can’t get a great deal then I’m not going to trade you and you’ll have to sit out a year” I guess you can do that, but that would’ve run the risk of getting nothing at all.
Posted on 2/1/23 at 7:55 am to Chalkywhite84
I get it on one hand, the Gruden trade was a little different beacuse he was an active coach at the time. The Parcells deal or whatever Arians had when he went to TB after stepping out a year or two at Arizona is much more of a baseline.
Posted on 2/1/23 at 8:09 am to Laaz2750
Yeah there were 3 parties. It seems like too many fans are conflating Payton and whatever team he chose as one solid option, when they were 2 separate parties. If Payton's only desired location was Denver, then we lost leverage because he can go make millions on Fox next year.
The Chargers and Cardinals were always pipe dreams due to their owners. They aren't breaking the bank to pay a HC. Once LAC kept their coach, Payton basically had one location he wanted to go to. That choice gave Denver all the leverage.
The Chargers and Cardinals were always pipe dreams due to their owners. They aren't breaking the bank to pay a HC. Once LAC kept their coach, Payton basically had one location he wanted to go to. That choice gave Denver all the leverage.
Posted on 2/1/23 at 8:24 am to SlowFlowPro
The pick return is actually what's expected.
The annoyance is we gave up a 3rd.
Albeit a low probability, we could be giving up 65 pick for 64.
The annoyance is we gave up a 3rd.
Albeit a low probability, we could be giving up 65 pick for 64.
Posted on 2/1/23 at 8:26 am to htran90
Return pick should’ve been a 4th this year or 3rd in ‘24
Posted on 2/1/23 at 8:28 am to Chalkywhite84
Okay sure we got a first back great. Im not necessarily upset about what we got for him. the bullshite of sending them a third on top of the coach they so desperately wanted is getting completely cucked.
Posted on 2/1/23 at 8:28 am to Chalkywhite84
Meanwhile, Broncos ownership...
goodfellascigarscene.gif
goodfellascigarscene.gif
Posted on 2/1/23 at 8:48 am to Geauxldilocks
quote:
Trade II: 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th-round picks over two years. Again, too rich for Broncos.
How did we go from this to "ok, lets remove 2 of those picks and throw in a 3rd rounder". Seems logical
The next option in my mind should have been:
1st, 2nd, 3rd over 2 years for Payton and our 4th
Posted on 2/1/23 at 10:48 am to 3PieceSpicy
quote:But many seem to forget that the Broncos ran the risk of losing their only shot at a big time hire (which was their strong desire). It is not like they could just wait until next year. Loomis is just not a good negotiator. If he starter that high, he sure did fold pretty far.
It is interesting and it was always pretty predictable we’d get screwed here bc we always ran the risk of losing him for nothing.
And it’s not like trading a player. The coach ultimately gets to decide where he goes or he just waits out his contract, so it’s not as simple as finding the highest bidder.
It was always foolish that we legitimately had a herd of people on here that we could get Arizona’s 3rd pick and then trade it for Lamar Jackson or some shite.
A head coach is simply not worth a franchise QB trade value wise.
Posted on 2/1/23 at 10:50 am to Laaz2750
Agreed, we did not have the leverage many thought....
We had different leverage.
IF SP wanted to go to Denver....then tell him, we'd rather lose him for nothing.
He'd have to wait years, because the Broncos would have hired another coach who would have gotten at least 3 years to right the ship.
A deal where everyone loses is more equitable than one where one side walks with a "20 year top coaching candidate" and the other side only gets a 1st round pick.
This is where if you wanted the big reward, you'd have to take the risk...tell denver and SP to pound sand, and get his true market value.
Loomis got out negotiated. IMO...his track record shows he was always VERY good as a bean counter and moving money around, not necessairily a negotiator.
We had different leverage.
IF SP wanted to go to Denver....then tell him, we'd rather lose him for nothing.
He'd have to wait years, because the Broncos would have hired another coach who would have gotten at least 3 years to right the ship.
A deal where everyone loses is more equitable than one where one side walks with a "20 year top coaching candidate" and the other side only gets a 1st round pick.
This is where if you wanted the big reward, you'd have to take the risk...tell denver and SP to pound sand, and get his true market value.
Loomis got out negotiated. IMO...his track record shows he was always VERY good as a bean counter and moving money around, not necessairily a negotiator.
Posted on 2/1/23 at 10:57 am to 3PieceSpicy
quote:
It was always foolish that we legitimately had a herd of people on here that we could get Arizona’s 3rd pick
agreed, and we were never getting 2 firsts. The problem with this trade is us giving them a 3rd. The 1st and 2nd would be a good trade, but giving up one of our picks is stupid. That 2nd rounder next year will be at the end of the round while our 3rd will be high. We basically moved up 10 spots. Dumb.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News