• Welcome to PurpleFlock! Be sure to sign up here so that you can chat with your fellow Ravens fans.

Terrell Suggs: Can/should we get him?

rmcjacket23

rmcjacket23

Ravens Ring of Honor
Grim said:
It’ll be interesting to see if Suggs shows up now, that’s for sure. Not sure the drama is over yet. You’d think the Chiefs asked him already.
Click to expand...
Yeah, couple of questions/thoughts I would have:
1. How does it work if he opts not to report? I assume the Chiefs basically put him on a "leave" list, which means he can't play with anybody else and probably doesn't get paid.
2. My assumption all along is that Suggs' agent has been reaching out to interested teams, and giving them the green light to claim him, with the expectation that he'll show up.
3. All along, him landing with the Ravens was a long shot. After all... if a team can claim him, let him sit on the sidelines, and not pay him, wouldn't they do that in a heartbeat?
 
JO_75

JO_75

Hall of Famer
Crazy thing is, how not a lot of teams put in a claim for him. To get down to the Chiefs is pretty far, also means the Titans didn't put a claim in either.
 
rmcjacket23

rmcjacket23

Ravens Ring of Honor
JO_75 said:
Crazy thing is, how not a lot of teams put in a claim for him. To get down to the Chiefs is pretty far, also means the Titans didn't put a claim in either.
Click to expand...
Makes at least some sense. Non-playoff contending teams really have no incentive or reason to add him, because they'd have to cut somebody else to add him to the roster, which would obviously involve a younger player in most cases.

I will say... he's more of a "Name" than an asset at this point. Like I don't think anybody adding him thinking he's the missing piece to their SB contending puzzle. Even for the Ravens, he's a situational rusher, much in the same way that somebody like McPhee was. I'd be disappointed if he came in and took a lot of snaps away from somebody like Ferguson, who seems to be playing better each week in my eyes.
 
JO_75

JO_75

Hall of Famer
Suggs should screw with them and report, then tell us everything about their playbook and help us.
 
rmcjacket23

rmcjacket23

Ravens Ring of Honor
rossihunter2 said:
not allowed to communicate with a player while they are on waivers - cant talk to them until they become a free agent - so chiefs claimed him without talking to him
Click to expand...
Sure, but I'd imagine there's behind the scenes discussions with Suggs' agent. Maybe that's not true, but I'd imagine its no different than what happens prior to real free agency, where players are theoretically not allowed to be in contact with teams.
 
Grim

Grim

Ravens Ring of Honor
rossihunter2 said:
not allowed to communicate with a player while they are on waivers - cant talk to them until they become a free agent - so chiefs claimed him without talking to him
Click to expand...
Good point and also even riskier in that case. Should be interesting regardless. I guess we will see what’ll happen then.
 
rossihunter2

rossihunter2

Staff Member
Moderator
Will be interesting to see if sizzle reports to the chiefs - albeit id love it if he didnt given how cocky all the chiefs fans are on twitter about why wouldnt he want to play for them...

there's some pros and cons - as a chief he likely gets the opportunity to get after tom brady again and you know how much he loves rushing and hitting and sacking brady, cons obviously he has to play for the chiefs
 
rmcjacket23

rmcjacket23

Ravens Ring of Honor
rossihunter2 said:
Will be interesting to see if sizzle reports to the chiefs - albeit id love it if he didnt given how cocky all the chiefs fans are on twitter about why wouldnt he want to play for them...

there's some pros and cons - as a chief he likely gets the opportunity to get after tom brady again and you know how much he loves rushing and hitting and sacking brady, cons obviously he has to play for the chiefs
Click to expand...
With them losing Okafor yesterday for what looks like a season-ender, Chiefs may be one of the few places where he can actually get considerable playing time.
 
rossihunter2

rossihunter2

Staff Member
Moderator
rmcjacket23 said:
Sure, but I'd imagine there's behind the scenes discussions with Suggs' agent. Maybe that's not true, but I'd imagine its no different than what happens prior to real free agency, where players are theoretically not allowed to be in contact with teams.
Click to expand...

in free agency there's a legal tampering period - but teams talk to agents at conference type places like the owners meetings and the nfl combine etc. where there's an ability to discuss etc.

but technically the agent isnt allowed contact during the waiver period either im pretty sure and if there is it would be tampering and there's no legal tampering period in this situation
 
Sami84

Sami84

Ravens Ring of Honor
rossihunter2 said:
Will be interesting to see if sizzle reports to the chiefs - albeit id love it if he didnt given how cocky all the chiefs fans are on twitter about why wouldnt he want to play for them...

there's some pros and cons - as a chief he likely gets the opportunity to get after tom brady again and you know how much he loves rushing and hitting and sacking brady, cons obviously he has to play for the chiefs
Click to expand...

he hasn't sacked brady in over a decade.
 
rossihunter2

rossihunter2

Staff Member
Moderator
rmcjacket23 said:
With them losing Okafor yesterday for what looks like a season-ender, Chiefs may be one of the few places where he can actually get considerable playing time.
Click to expand...

he'd have got playing time here as an edge setter and situational pass rusher - would have gotten some running down snaps from jaylon ferguson who's been susceptible to losing the edge at times

and the chiefs may well think he fills a hole for them - but its a bit of a risk given that it has been suggested that he would strongly consider not playing for anyone except the ravens
 
rmcjacket23

rmcjacket23

Ravens Ring of Honor
rossihunter2 said:
he'd have got playing time here as an edge setter and situational pass rusher - would have gotten some running down snaps from jaylon ferguson who's been susceptible to losing the edge at times

and the chiefs may well think he fills a hole for them - but its a bit of a risk given that it has been suggested that he would strongly consider not playing for anyone except the ravens
Click to expand...
I guess that sort of circles back to my original question which I don't know the answer to... what happens if he refuses to show up? My assumption is there's no risk for the Chiefs.

My thought is... if Lamar Jackson walked up to John this week and said "I'm healthy but I don't want to play on Sunday", the team would likely just suspend him for conduct detrimental, since he has no good reason not to play. In which case, not only do they not have to pay him, but he doesn't cost them a roster spot either.

Maybe that's not how it works in this case, but my preliminary guess is that if he refuses to report, it costs the Chiefs nothing. I think the risk is almost zero at this point.
 
rossihunter2

rossihunter2

Staff Member
Moderator
rmcjacket23 said:
I guess that sort of circles back to my original question which I don't know the answer to... what happens if he refuses to show up? My assumption is there's no risk for the Chiefs.

My thought is... if Lamar Jackson walked up to John this week and said "I'm healthy but I don't want to play on Sunday", the team would likely just suspend him for conduct detrimental, since he has no good reason not to play. In which case, not only do they not have to pay him, but he doesn't cost them a roster spot either.

Maybe that's not how it works in this case, but my preliminary guess is that if he refuses to report, it costs the Chiefs nothing. I think the risk is almost zero at this point.
Click to expand...

there's no risk because they had an empty roster spot
there's no guaranteed money left on that deal so they dont owe him anything other than gamechecks if he turns up
if he refuses to show up and retires they can put him on the reserve/retired list which would mean they hold his rights even if he un-retired

yeah the only risk is that he sits on their roster and does the bare minimum almost forcing them to not play him despite showing up and basically waste a roster spot - tbf i wouldnt put that past suggs given that he said this offseason that he respects the ravens too much to steal their money but was happy going to arizona and taking theirs in stead - if he wants to be vindictive and just turn up and collect gamechecks but not really bother then that's about the most inconvenienced they could get

chiefs have his rights but suggs has a little bit of power depending on how he wants to play this and how he feels about this - he doesnt have to say he doesnt want to play on sunday but he could practice and not bother with the playbook in a way that would make them not want to play him
 
RavensMania

RavensMania

Staff Member
Administrator
rmcjacket23 said:
Sure, but I'd imagine there's behind the scenes discussions with Suggs' agent. Maybe that's not true, but I'd imagine its no different than what happens prior to real free agency, where players are theoretically not allowed to be in contact with teams.
Click to expand...
in free agency they do have a 2 or 3 day legal tampering period. If you are suggesting they talk prior to this, you are probably correct, but it's not legal. That being said, every team does it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top