papz

Imo, yes he was... and a lot. Every since he signed his large contract, people would always harp on his production. People were so focused on him not producing on the level of his contract, they tended to forget what good he brought to the table.

Well, he's certainly not Hall of Fame material nor a waiting highlight reel.

I would have been fine either way. If he made the team, I would have been rooting for him. If he were gone, I'd wish him the best.

Danno

Apparently the cost of a player determines how good or bad they are on the field on Sundays. Its two different discussions that seem to overwhelm the B&G simpletons.

thebdj

This is an interesting comment. If my interpretation of it is correct then you are upset by people who directly link production to cost.

Of course one does not befit the other. Just because you pay a lot for a player doesn't guarantee (and that is the important bit) he is a machine. Vice versa, you pay peanuts sometimes and don't always get mediocre Production or Practice Squad standards.

Unfortunately though there is a lot more pressure to perform when you have taken on a big contract. You eat into one of the most important parts of the game which is the salary cap. In 'you' taking a huge slice of the pie, there is less to share around other able-bodied players and thus, more potential chances at great playmakers.

In more simplistic terms, if you spent a lot of money on a sports car, you would expect luxury and speed. If all the vehicle did was get you from A to B then you may as well have bought a hatchback. A big price tag doesn't guarantee you that great player but it does enforce expectation and if you do not meet the expectation then you have to take the heat.

That sounds fair right? Not jumping on a 'Bash-Will-Smith' bandwagon, genuinely think he is a loss to the depth of the squad.