Eugene Monroe Thread (merged) - Released by Ravens

[ludy51]

7 minutes ago, LosT_in_TranSlatioN said:

I guess you could say that his future isn't "potted" yet

Are you saying he hopes the rules aren't set in stone?

[Sizzlebshu]

Honestly, idc how the front office is trying to spin this, this move came from upper management pressure probably more than anything else. 

Upper management probably didnt like the guy for a multitude of reasons ie his contract, his health risks, the fact that the coach didnt like him, his weed stance affecting the team image etc.... and probably forced Ozzie's hand as a result. 

Just think about it. Assuming we don't do a new deal almost immediately after, what is the harm in holding Monroe? There is none unless he goes after blowing up the team. It would have been better to hold him for when injuries hit us or other teams so that we could reap the rewards. 

[usmccharles]

21 minutes ago, Sizzlebshu said:

Honestly, idc how the front office is trying to spin this, this move came from upper management pressure probably more than anything else. 

Upper management probably didnt like the guy for a multitude of reasons ie his contract, his health risks, the fact that the coach didnt like him, his weed stance affecting the team image etc.... and probably forced Ozzie's hand as a result. 

Just think about it. Assuming we don't do a new deal almost immediately after, what is the harm in holding Monroe? There is none unless he goes after blowing up the team. It would have been better to hold him for when injuries hit us or other teams so that we could reap the rewards. 

I haven't been following the whole weed stance, but I agree this doesn't make much sense, having trouble understanding the pro's to this move.  How much money did we save exactly?  I could see a Tucker deal coming, but is getting our kicker signed right before/during the season worth giving up depth at LT/OL? I don't see how anything will justify it....now we wait

[RaineV1]

29 minutes ago, usmccharles said:

I haven't been following the whole weed stance, but I agree this doesn't make much sense, having trouble understanding the pro's to this move.  How much money did we save exactly?  I could see a Tucker deal coming, but is getting our kicker signed right before/during the season worth giving up depth at LT/OL? I don't see how anything will justify it....now we wait

It wouldn't be a good trade off if he was reliable depth. But a backup that's likely to get hurt two plays after stepping in isn't that useful.

[usmccharles]

45 minutes ago, RaineV1 said:

It wouldn't be a good trade off if he was reliable depth. But a backup that's likely to get hurt two plays after stepping in isn't that useful.

I do agree, the injury issues were always a concern.  But lets say Stanley started and Monroe was on the bench, Stanley goes down at least we have someone to step in for the time being. Cutting someone because they might get injured when they are apparently healthy over depth is just a little confusing to me. 

I must of missed where it said how much cap we gained...

[Somerset Ravens]

3 hours ago, usmccharles said:

I do agree, the injury issues were always a concern.  But lets say Stanley started and Monroe was on the bench, Stanley goes down at least we have someone to step in for the time being. Cutting someone because they might get injured when they are apparently healthy over depth is just a little confusing to me. 

I must of missed where it said how much cap we gained...

We will save 6,500,000 this year against the salary cap, that being his 2016 salary. We will still have 4,400,000 in dead money carrying over to 2017. It will be interesting to see what we do with the 6,500,000 we saved.

[usmccharles]

5 minutes ago, Somerset Ravens said:

We will save 6,500,000 this year against the salary cap, that being his 2016 salary. We will still have 4,400,000 in dead money carrying over to 2017. It will be interesting to see what we do with the 6,500,000 we saved.

I see us signing Tucker to an extension soon

isn't Vasquez (spelling?) still available?

Edited June 17, 2016 by usmccharles

[Somerset Ravens]

Just now, usmccharles said:

I see us signing Tucker to an extension soon

I hope you are right. I would like to see Tucker as our kicker long term.

[rmw10]

5 hours ago, Sizzlebshu said:

Honestly, idc how the front office is trying to spin this, this move came from upper management pressure probably more than anything else. 

Upper management probably didnt like the guy for a multitude of reasons ie his contract, his health risks, the fact that the coach didnt like him, his weed stance affecting the team image etc.... and probably forced Ozzie's hand as a result. 

Just think about it. Assuming we don't do a new deal almost immediately after, what is the harm in holding Monroe? There is none unless he goes after blowing up the team. It would have been better to hold him for when injuries hit us or other teams so that we could reap the rewards. 

Again, maybe I'm just crazy, but it seems pretty simple to me.

1.  We weren't paying him $6.5M with his injury history and to be a backup.  Eugene Monroe wasn't going to accept a backup job when there are countless other places across the league that he can start.  Clearly we weren't the only team not willing to pay him that as trade talks broke down because Monroe and NYG couldn't agree on a restructured contract.  While we didn't necessarily need the cap space, we just weren't going to pay him that.

2.  The relationship was done.  No matter how Harbaugh spun it in the press conference, the issue was deeper than just football.  Zrebiec has been saying that the team and Monroe rarely saw eye to eye on a lot of things.  Monroe never bought into the team's plan.  Is Monroe right?  Maybe, who knows.  The point is that there was a complete lack of trust on both sides.  The relationship was done and it was time to part ways, which was the best move for both sides.  I get that it's easy to look at Monroe and see a decent football player when healthy, but I really wish people would step outside of the box a bit and realize this was a move made on grounds deeper than the game itself.  A team isn't going to keep a player around that differs so much.  It's a team game.

[ravensdan]

5 hours ago, Sizzlebshu said:

Honestly, idc how the front office is trying to spin this, this move came from upper management pressure probably more than anything else. 

Upper management probably didnt like the guy for a multitude of reasons ie his contract, his health risks, the fact that the coach didnt like him, his weed stance affecting the team image etc.... and probably forced Ozzie's hand as a result. 

Just think about it. Assuming we don't do a new deal almost immediately after, what is the harm in holding Monroe? There is none unless he goes after blowing up the team. It would have been better to hold him for when injuries hit us or other teams so that we could reap the rewards. 

100% agree. This is a very uncharacteristicly short sighted decision. *unless they know something in regards to the drug policy. 

[usmccharles]

15 minutes ago, ravensdan said:

100% agree. This is a very uncharacteristicly short sighted decision. *unless they know something in regards to the drug policy. 

Its a little early too judge that as we don't know if or what plans they have

[rmw10]

Here's another thing I saw the other day.  Eugene Monroe had a $1.5M injury guarantee.  That's why we got rid of him now and not later.  Had we gotten to camp and he got hurt, we'd be paying him another $1.5M not to play.

Per Spotrac:

" In 2016, $1.5 million of his base salary is guaranteed for injury only. "

Edited June 17, 2016 by rmw10

[berad]

The normally anti-Harbs and 'Harbaugh doesn't like strong personalities' Mike Preston wrote in his column that it was a good move to release Monroe. Said he had a cancerous attitude and teammates were questioning his toughness. Take it for what it is, a Preston column...

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

6 hours ago, usmccharles said:

I haven't been following the whole weed stance, but I agree this doesn't make much sense, having trouble understanding the pro's to this move.  How much money did we save exactly?  I could see a Tucker deal coming, but is getting our kicker signed right before/during the season worth giving up depth at LT/OL? I don't see how anything will justify it....now we wait

We saved a whole $2m basically. Save $6.5m this year, but take on $4.4m in dead money next year.

Dont really see the sense in it either. Sorry you couldnt work out a trade in the ONE day you gave yourself.... but no one was in desperation mode either. Hold him, wait until someone loses their starting LT and has a sense of urgency to grab him in a trade. Or, hold on to the insurance in case Stanley goes down or something.

These are grown men. I just dont see any situation in which the FO or coaching staff should have put the petty differences ahead of whats best for this football team in terms of on field performance.

[rmw10]

19 minutes ago, berad said:

The normally anti-Harbs and 'Harbaugh doesn't like strong personalities' Mike Preston wrote in his column that it was a good move to release Monroe. Said he had a cancerous attitude and teammates were questioning his toughness. Take it for what it is, a Preston column...

I've seen this elsewhere, too.  Teammates weren't huge fans of his personality.

I'm fully with you, berad.  I don't see the appeal in keeping him around.  I'm glad you understand how trust and relationships work when it comes to a team sport.  Too many people are looking at the individual.

[Somerset Ravens]

4 minutes ago, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

We saved a whole $2m basically. Save $6.5m this year, but take on $4.4m in dead money next year.

Dont really see the sense in it either. Sorry you couldnt work out a trade in the ONE day you gave yourself.... but no one was in desperation mode either. Hold him, wait until someone loses their starting LT and has a sense of urgency to grab him in a trade. Or, hold on to the insurance in case Stanley goes down or something.

These are grown men. I just dont see any situation in which the FO or coaching staff should have put the petty differences ahead of whats best for this football team in terms of on field performance.

We saved $ 6.5m, the dead money ( unamortized bonus ) is there as soon as his contract was signed. What we save is his 2016 salary. $ 6.5m is too much to pay for a backup OT who is an injury risk.

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

1 hour ago, rmw10 said:

Again, maybe I'm just crazy, but it seems pretty simple to me.

1.  We weren't paying him $6.5M with his injury history and to be a backup.  Eugene Monroe wasn't going to accept a backup job when there are countless other places across the league that he can start.  Clearly we weren't the only team not willing to pay him that as trade talks broke down because Monroe and NYG couldn't agree on a restructured contract.  While we didn't necessarily need the cap space, we just weren't going to pay him that.

2.  The relationship was done.  No matter how Harbaugh spun it in the press conference, the issue was deeper than just football.  Zrebiec has been saying that the team and Monroe rarely saw eye to eye on a lot of things.  Monroe never bought into the team's plan.  Is Monroe right?  Maybe, who knows.  The point is that there was a complete lack of trust on both sides.  The relationship was done and it was time to part ways, which was the best move for both sides.  I get that it's easy to look at Monroe and see a decent football player when healthy, but I really wish people would step outside of the box a bit and realize this was a move made on grounds deeper than the game itself.  A team isn't going to keep a player around that differs so much.  It's a team game.

But I could just as easily say to those supporting the decision to release him: I wish you could look outside your fandom and commitment to the Ravens and realize that Eugene Monroe was well within his right with everything he did that the Ravens didnt like. If anything, I'd almost say the team was in the wrong to get upset and hold it against him (for ex, honoring the contract he signed, wanting him to change his body, not wanting him to passionately and publicly support his belief).

I've said it before and I'll say it again, if monroe had wanted more money a year after signing a new contract bc he played well and the team didnt give it to him so he decided to hold out or become disgruntled - we'd blast him. If he decided to show up to camp overweight to camp - the team prob wouldnt let him on the practice field until he lost it. And if he disagreed with a charity or cause the team as supporting, and he publicly criticized or distanced himself from one of those things - the media and fans would probably kill him (i mean imagine if when Harbs brings military members to the field, if Monroe had a presser and they asked how great it is having the military heros at the practice field and he answers i dont know... i just dont get it. I can tell you right now, the team in no way speaks for me or represents my feelings on the military..... we'd kill him) 

Anyways... Monroe maybe didnt completely buy in, but he also wasnt drafted here. He was sent here, and hes a pro. Some guys are just that way and view this as a job. Show up and do work. And he was professional and worked hard. IMO the team contributed as much if not more than he did to the issues. Monroe was willing to still show up and do the job, it was the team who wasnt willing to let him. And that personal vendetta gets in the way of putting the best team on the field.

To me, thats not the way you do things. I usually put trust in the FO, but this looks like there was no plan in place - they just got fed up and cut him. Hurst is the back up tackle... no one else has been brought in. We should have learned this lesson last year. You give your injured QB another $100m extension while injured, and then go into hte very next season with the same exact issue - and all bc your feelings got hurt? That just doesnt seem like Ozzie decision making.

I get what youre saying that its "deeper than football", but guess what? This team is for the fans, and fans want football. The best football. I dont care about whats deeper, if its hurting my football. There are always going to be differing personalities and beliefs and part of the HC's and FO's job is to do whatever it take to meld them together and get your best players on the field playing together. And, again, these "deeper issues" that we're supposed to be understanding of are caused by the team. The team causes them, and then im supposed to be sympathetic for them? Sorry, i just cant get on board with that.

Edited June 17, 2016 by BOLDnPurPnBlacK

[rmw10]

Just now, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

But I could just as easily say to those supporting the decision to release him: I wish you could look outside your fandom and commitment to the Ravens and realize that Eugene Monroe was well within his right with everything he did that the Ravens didnt like. If anything, I'd almost say the team was in the wrong to get upset and hold it against him (for ex, honoring the contract he signed, wanting him to change his body, not wanting him to passionately and publicly support his belief).

I've said it before and I'll say it again, if monroe had wanted more money a year after signing a new contract bc he played well and the team didnt give it to him so he decided to hold out or become disgruntled - we'd blast him. If he decided to show up to camp overweight to camp - the team prob wouldnt let him on the practice field until he lost it. And if he disagreed with a charity or cause the team as supporting, and he publicly criticized or distanced himself from one of those things - the media and fans would probably kill him (i mean imagine if when Harbs brings military members to the field, if Monroe had a presser and they asked how great it is having the military heros at the practice field and he answers i dont know... i just dont get it. I can tell you right now, the team in no way speaks for me or represents my feelings on the military..... we'd kill him) 

Anyways... Monroe maybe didnt completely buy in, but he also wasnt drafted here. He was sent here, and hes a pro. Some guys are just that way and view this as a job. Show up and do work. And he was professional and worked hard. IMO the team contributed as much if not more than he did to the issues. Monroe was willing to still show up and do the job, it was the team who wasnt willing to let him. And that personal vendetta gets in the way of putting the best team on the field.

To me, thats not the way you do things. I usually put trust in the FO, but this looks like there was no plan in place - they just got fed up and cut him. Hurst is the back up tackle... no one else has been brought in. We should have learned this lesson last year. You give your injured QB another $100m extension while injured, and then go into hte very next season with the same exact issue - and all bc your feelings got hurt? That just doesnt seem like Ozzie decision making.

I'm not saying Monroe wasn't within his right, but that doesn't mean that the ties didn't need to be severed.  That's literally all it comes down to.  Neither side had trust in each other anymore.  It's really not that hard to comprehend, to me.  Why would a team keep a guy that don't trust to be on the field or to be a steady locker room guy, for $6.5M at that?  I don't disagree that maybe the team would have acted the ways you mentioned under those circumstances, but at the end of the day, the teams hold the power.  Is it the most fair or just way?  Nope, but that's how it works.  This was not only the right decision, but a necessary decision.

[Somerset Ravens]

8 minutes ago, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

But I could just as easily say to those supporting the decision to release him: I wish you could look outside your fandom and commitment to the Ravens and realize that Eugene Monroe was well within his right with everything he did that the Ravens didnt like. If anything, I'd almost say the team was in the wrong to get upset and hold it against him (for ex, honoring the contract he signed, wanting him to change his body, not wanting him to passionately and publicly support his belief).

I've said it before and I'll say it again, if monroe had wanted more money a year after signing a new contract bc he played well and the team didnt give it to him so he decided to hold out or become disgruntled - we'd blast him. If he decided to show up to camp overweight to camp - the team prob wouldnt let him on the practice field until he lost it. And if he disagreed with a charity or cause the team as supporting, and he publicly criticized or distanced himself from one of those things - the media and fans would probably kill him (i mean imagine if when Harbs brings military members to the field, if Monroe had a presser and they asked how great it is having the military heros at the practice field and he answers i dont know... i just dont get it. I can tell you right now, the team in no way speaks for me or represents my feelings on the military..... we'd kill him) 

Anyways... Monroe maybe didnt completely buy in, but he also wasnt drafted here. He was sent here, and hes a pro. Some guys are just that way and view this as a job. Show up and do work. And he was professional and worked hard. IMO the team contributed as much if not more than he did to the issues. Monroe was willing to still show up and do the job, it was the team who wasnt willing to let him. And that personal vendetta gets in the way of putting the best team on the field.

To me, thats not the way you do things. I usually put trust in the FO, but this looks like there was no plan in place - they just got fed up and cut him. Hurst is the back up tackle... no one else has been brought in. We should have learned this lesson last year. You give your injured QB another $100m extension while injured, and then go into hte very next season with the same exact issue - and all bc your feelings got hurt? That just doesnt seem like Ozzie decision making.

The team has the right to cut Eugene Monroe .  The FO obviously feels he was not worth the additional $6.5m they would have to pay him for 2016. It is a business decision.

[Kinda_Dante]

Why is this thread still a thing? Eugene has moved on and the team has moved on. It's time we as fans move on, whether you think it's the right move or the wrong move it's done.

[Tank 92]

25 minutes ago, rmw10 said:

I've seen this elsewhere, too.  Teammates weren't huge fans of his personality.

I'm fully with you, berad.  I don't see the appeal in keeping him around.  I'm glad you understand how trust and relationships work when it comes to a team sport.  Too many people are looking at the individual.

It seems a lot of people think that the pieces of a team are just "plug and play" according their level of talent. Developing a winning TEAM involves so much more than just pulling together a group of talented individuals. 

To repeat an earlier post, it just turned out that for whatever reason(s), Monroe was just never a good fit here. That doesn't mean anyone is right or wrong and it's best for him and the team that he was released.   

[Tank 92]

The question is what is it about  Maryland that Eugene didn't like? The fishing isn't good enough?  Or maybe the availability of "commodities" wasn't to his liking.  

Edited June 17, 2016 by Tank 92

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

1 hour ago, Somerset Ravens said:

The team has the right to cut Eugene Monroe .  The FO obviously feels he was not worth the additional $6.5m they would have to pay him for 2016. It is a business decision.

His cap hit waqs $8.5m this year if we kept him. Its ~$2m this year now that we cut him, saving $6.5m THIS year. But next year, without the player on the roster, we have a $4.something million cap hit. So, taking the $8.5m cap hit we wouldve had this year by keeping him (and the $0 dead money next year if we decided to release him next offseason), and combining the $2m dead money this year, and $4m+ next year... its only about $2m in savings. 

Idc how you slice it... most of the $6.5m in savings is gonna roll over to next year anyways, where its utility or value is largely whiped out by the $4.5m in dead money sitting there next year. If we carry it all over to next year, all but $2m is whiped out by the dead hit. So, we only really have $2m in cap space to play with that we wouldnt have otherwise had. If you use all $6.5m this year, then next year you have a full $4.4m you cant use.

 

Paying $2m for a starting caliber LT to either start or be backup is a smart business decision. Cutting him is a personal or emotional decision.

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

1 hour ago, rmw10 said:

I'm not saying Monroe wasn't within his right, but that doesn't mean that the ties didn't need to be severed.  That's literally all it comes down to.  Neither side had trust in each other anymore.  It's really not that hard to comprehend, to me.  Why would a team keep a guy that don't trust to be on the field or to be a steady locker room guy, for $6.5M at that?  I don't disagree that maybe the team would have acted the ways you mentioned under those circumstances, but at the end of the day, the teams hold the power.  Is it the most fair or just way?  Nope, but that's how it works.  This was not only the right decision, but a necessary decision.

We were going to keep Ray Rice when clearly no one in the locker room agreed with him hitting his wife. We kept Ed Reed when he was publicly calling out the franchise QB. We've kept many defensive players who called out the offense for being inept - cant imagine that sits well in the locker room.

All im saying, is that this is professional sports. If you cant "get along" to complete the objective over some petty BS, then I have to question the professionalism. Thats all im saying. And it seems this philosophy is applied inconsistently.

I feel like we used to be one of the teams that would take in guys that were disgruntled or notorious for not fitting in other places, and they'd thrive here bc we ignored the petty kind of stuff and allowed/accepted guys as themselves so long as they showed up and played. Now, obviously Monroe wasnt showing up to play, bc he was injured. But he did show up to play once cleared and healthy.

And i think thats something that the good teams do well.... NE, Arizona, Cincy, Pitt, Seattle, Den, etc... And to an extent we still are like that (Trent, Rolando, Mallett, SSS, Weddle) but in other cases we dont. Marginal players like Cody, Jah, Deonte, Asa, and others got chance after chance after chance with literally 0 production.

I get that its over, and i dont even feel bad for Monroe - he played his part. Just looking at our LT situation, its a better situation with Monroe in the fold. I dont think theres any arguing that... and the net $2m savings, or any increase in "locker room chemistry" (which i think is highly overrated, these are adult professionals) doesnt overcome the loss in talent.

 

Clearly theres 2 very differing opinions. And just as you can say you dont get how one doesnt understand letting go a player you dont see eye to eye with.... its just as easy to say i dont see how someone can look at the LT situation and say we're a better team right now. And if a move makes us a worse team without an equal or greater benefit somewhere else - its the wrong move. And we're not replacing that loss with $2m or even $6m, and the added camaraderie isnt replacing it either.

Not exactly the same, but part of the reason Pollard and Reed were let go were organizational differences and not falling in line (yes their play declined rapidly too), and we've spent 3 years, a bunch of money, and and numerous draft picks trying to solve it. Thats different obviously bc keeping those guys wouldnt solve the problem either since theyre both out of the league now - but its still a case of letting a guy go for some of the wrong reasons without a solid plan in place to transition.

And thats my main gripe - the reasons for letting Monroe go are weak at best, and theres no plan in place other than continue to run Hurst as the back up. Maybe we'll see a move to shore this thing up, but i doubt it. 
 

[berad]

30 minutes ago, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

We were going to keep Ray Rice when clearly no one in the locker room agreed with him hitting his wife. We kept Ed Reed when he was publicly calling out the franchise QB. We've kept many defensive players who called out the offense for being inept - cant imagine that sits well in the locker room.

All im saying, is that this is professional sports. If you cant "get along" to complete the objective over some petty BS, then I have to question the professionalism. Thats all im saying. And it seems this philosophy is applied inconsistently.

I feel like we used to be one of the teams that would take in guys that were disgruntled or notorious for not fitting in other places, and they'd thrive here bc we ignored the petty kind of stuff and allowed/accepted guys as themselves so long as they showed up and played. Now, obviously Monroe wasnt showing up to play, bc he was injured. But he did show up to play once cleared and healthy.

And i think thats something that the good teams do well.... NE, Arizona, Cincy, Pitt, Seattle, Den, etc... And to an extent we still are like that (Trent, Rolando, Mallett, SSS, Weddle) but in other cases we dont. Marginal players like Cody, Jah, Deonte, Asa, and others got chance after chance after chance with literally 0 production.

I get that its over, and i dont even feel bad for Monroe - he played his part. Just looking at our LT situation, its a better situation with Monroe in the fold. I dont think theres any arguing that... and the net $2m savings, or any increase in "locker room chemistry" (which i think is highly overrated, these are adult professionals) doesnt overcome the loss in talent.

 

Clearly theres 2 very differing opinions. And just as you can say you dont get how one doesnt understand letting go a player you dont see eye to eye with.... its just as easy to say i dont see how someone can look at the LT situation and say we're a better team right now. And if a move makes us a worse team without an equal or greater benefit somewhere else - its the wrong move. And we're not replacing that loss with $2m or even $6m, and the added camaraderie isnt replacing it either.

Not exactly the same, but part of the reason Pollard and Reed were let go were organizational differences and not falling in line (yes their play declined rapidly too), and we've spent 3 years, a bunch of money, and and numerous draft picks trying to solve it. Thats different obviously bc keeping those guys wouldnt solve the problem either since theyre both out of the league now - but its still a case of letting a guy go for some of the wrong reasons without a solid plan in place to transition.

And thats my main gripe - the reasons for letting Monroe go are weak at best, and theres no plan in place other than continue to run Hurst as the back up. Maybe we'll see a move to shore this thing up, but i doubt it. 
 

 

Sorry can't stand for this line of thinking

Quote

Veteran safety Ed Reed didn’t always love Harbaugh. Their relationship has had its ups and downs in the five years Harbaugh’s been head coach of the Ravens. On Sunday night, Reed could only sing the highest of praises for the head coach who helped him to his first Lombardi Trophy.

“I’m so happy for coach,'' Reed said. "For all we’ve been through? Man, it didn’t start off perfect. It was tough. There were tough times. We battled. We fought. We argued. We disagreed. We agreed. We discussed. We talked about things. We didn’t talk about things. We walked past each other sometimes and didn’t say nothin’. Now, we see each other, and we tell each other we love each other. I’m so happy for coach, man.”

 

Quote

This is the Ravens locker room. Loose. Funny. Real. They like each other, their city, and their coach. It’s all a testament to John Harbaugh. Instead of molding the team and expecting the players to adapt to his personality and approach, he let's them be . . . well, them.

“Coach Harbaugh has embraced me. He allows me to be me,” said the outspoken Pollard.

“You heard Terrell [Suggs] come in here, he’s as loud as they come. This is what it is. We said we were going to do this at the beginning of the year, we stayed true to it, and now . . . it’s a blessing to be a Baltimore Raven.”

It’s that flexibility and willingness to go against the grain that’s made the elder Harbaugh such a successful coach.

 

http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/super-bowl-xlvii-john-harbaugh-made-baltimore-ravens-believers-jim-harbaugh-san-francisco-49ers-020313

We've brought too many strong-willed players here for people to claim Harbaugh is opposed to it.

[cobrajet]

2 hours ago, Kinda_Dante said:

Why is this thread still a thing? Eugene has moved on and the team has moved on. It's time we as fans move on, whether you think it's the right move or the wrong move it's done.

That is not fair of you to tell fans to move on. He was just cut a few days ago. If some of us still want more answers and we have a right to vent. IMHO, cutting Monroe is one of the biggest decisions made by the front office since the trade of Q to San Francisco and that is still being discussed on here.

Why is it such a big decision....Here is why:

When Monroe got injured, they put in Hurst and our 100 million dollar quarterback got injured because of it. We then pulled Hurst and put in K.O. at LT and found out he was pretty decent. K.O. then left for the money in free agency. That left only one experienced capable LT on this team and that was Monroe. Yes we drafted Stanley and he should be way better than Hurst but has never played a down in a NFL game and that is going to be a learning curve for him.

Now what scares the hell out of the rest of us that are upset about the cut is that we have to hope that Stanley can step in day 1 and be decent enough to protect our 100 million dollar quarterback, who is coming back on a surgically repaired knee. On top of that, we all have to worry now that he stays healthy through his first NFL season which may include playoff games, because our backup right now is.......you guessed it......Hurst. We were much better off on our o-line last season because K.O. was here. Before the cut, we at least had a potentially decent backup LT on the team.

I am not buying the argument that Monroe gets hurt every year so he will also get hurt again this year. Why, because he needed that shoulder surgery a few years ago and he finally decided to get it and IMHO is finally capable of starting a season at close to 100% He even put that out more than a month ago, how he is finally feeling as good as has he had in years. That gave me hope that he can actually play this season without compensating for his bum shoulder and that can make a huge difference this season. Maybe Monroe is not a road grader in the run game, but when healthy, he is a pretty damn good LT in the passing game.

The other two issues, some of us have, is #1 Why would you cut Monroe this soon? Yes, we get that something may be in the works but if it is then cut him and immediately announce to us what it is. The longer the time goes by, it looks like.....there is nothing in the works. If he was such a cancer for the team and that is why you had to cut him, then tell us that. But that leads us to #2 and that is, What did Monroe (a veteran NFL player) do that was so terrible that you felt the need to get so upset with him over? BOLDnPurPnBlacK's post today makes the perfect argument for this. Please go back and re-read it because I completely agree with him! Keep in mind after you read BOLDnPurPnBlacK's issue, remember......like I stated yesterday.......The Front Office and Coach could not tolerate Monroe but yet they stood by a certain non-veteran wide receiver whose limited snaps on offense looked like he put butter on his fingers and in the return game - the ball flew out of his hands every time he got hit and this guy was arrested a second time for possession of marihuana by the Baltimore County Police. On top of that arrest, they felt the need to show probable cause and seek a search warrant, which was signed by a Baltimore County Judge, to go execute at his home. When I compare Monroe with this other player, it just leaves me scratching my head.

This is why some of are still keeping this thread active.

Edited June 17, 2016 by cobrajet

[Kinda_Dante]

@cobrajet While I agree that from a football standpoint it would be better to have kept Monroe, but it seems like a case of he didn't want to be here and the team was ready to move on. There are reports that his teammates also questioned his attitude.

The coaches and FO are never, at least in an organization like the Ravens, going to say a player was a cancer to our locker, so them doing that is completely out of the question.

Also, I don't think it's unfair to ask cause no new points are being made this conversation is going in circles.

[atomicfront]

2 hours ago, Kinda_Dante said:

Why is this thread still a thing? Eugene has moved on and the team has moved on. It's time we as fans move on, whether you think it's the right move or the wrong move it's done.

Why have any thread with that logic?  People want to discuss Monroe if you dont' want to read about it don't open a thread with his name in the title.

[Somerset Ravens]

1 hour ago, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

His cap hit waqs $8.5m this year if we kept him. Its ~$2m this year now that we cut him, saving $6.5m THIS year. But next year, without the player on the roster, we have a $4.something million cap hit. So, taking the $8.5m cap hit we wouldve had this year by keeping him (and the $0 dead money next year if we decided to release him next offseason), and combining the $2m dead money this year, and $4m+ next year... its only about $2m in savings. 

Idc how you slice it... most of the $6.5m in savings is gonna roll over to next year anyways, where its utility or value is largely whiped out by the $4.5m in dead money sitting there next year. If we carry it all over to next year, all but $2m is whiped out by the dead hit. So, we only really have $2m in cap space to play with that we wouldnt have otherwise had. If you use all $6.5m this year, then next year you have a full $4.4m you cant use.

 

Paying $2m for a starting caliber LT to either start or be backup is a smart business decision. Cutting him is a personal or emotional decision.

The dead money ( unamortized bonus ) for Monroe that totals 6.6m will be there regardless if he cut him now or next year. It will count against our cap eventually. Cutting him now saves the 6.5m salary for 2016. IMO saving the 6.5m makes a lot of sense.

[cobrajet]

54 minutes ago, Kinda_Dante said:

@cobrajet While I agree that from a football standpoint it would be better to have kept Monroe, but it seems like a case of he didn't want to be here and the team was ready to move on. There are reports that his teammates also questioned his attitude.

The coaches and FO are never, at least in an organization like the Ravens, going to say a player was a cancer to our locker, so them doing that is completely out of the question.

Also, I don't think it's unfair to ask cause no new points are being made this conversation is going in circles.

I have heard rumors on here about, that but nothing more than that. Even if he was a little bit of a sour puss the last few weeks, we may have been too if our employer did not have our backs. Look at his side.....take a pay cut, we don't support your cause, we fully expect a rookie to win your job, sit on the sideline so you don't get hurt while we try to trade you. Many of the veterans that may have had Monroe's back and may have provided him support are still rehabbing their own injuries. We got a lot of young guys now that are just happy for the opportunity to be here, and maybe it is hard for them to empathize with Monroe.

You may be true that we may never get all the answers but look how long the Boldin trade went round and round and personally I think trying to rush a trade and then cutting Monroe and eating his salary is bigger. At least we got the 49ers to take Boldin's cap hit and had the decency to trade him to a playoff contending team for a seventh round pick. There were no reports that our organization "got upset" that Boldin did not agree to Ozzie's pay cut. With Boldin, I remember talk to the effect that "it is part of the business, we signed the contract." We have to keep in mind that Monroe is a veteran that, when healthy, was no scrub on the field. The guy got injured and when he finally had his surgery, the only option he had for dealing with his pain was opiate medication, which he did not feel comfortable taking. He decided to take up a cause for an alternative to that, and whether anyone agrees or disagrees with that, he is not breaking any laws. He is not a rookie backup, so we have to allow some lead-way to a veteran, who put his body through a lot of abuse over the years.....right?

Edited June 17, 2016 by cobrajet