Jake Long in retrospect

[Gtown Purple]

Do you think taking the hard line on the injury waiver was the right move?

[rmw10]

Hard to say.  He could go into Minnesota and re-injure his knee in game 1, or he could be healthy for the rest of the year.  Put me in the camp of rather having him than not having him, but the Ravens opted to go in another direction clearly.  I don't think it's a bad decision, but from an outsider's perspective who has no knowledge of the physical, I wouldn't have played hardball.  I just would have signed him so I never had to see James Hurst play LT for us again.

[flynismo]

I believe it was, given his history, as well as the fact that his best days were over years ago. The absolute best case scenario was that he remained healthy and motivated, and never saw the field. Or if he did, perform at an acceptable level...we certainly weren't expecting 2009 Jake Long, were we?

[Gtown Purple]

5 minutes ago, flynismo said:

I believe it was, given his history, as well as the fact that his best days were over years ago. The absolute best case scenario was that he remained healthy and motivated, and never saw the field. Or if he did, perform at an acceptable level...we certainly weren't expecting 2009 Jake Long, were we?

Don't think so but what can be worse than Hurst? I think we could have signed him after the season started to not guarantee his contract if we were concerned about his injuries.

[flynismo]

2 minutes ago, Gtown Purple said:

Don't think so but what can be worse than Hurst? I think we could have signed him after the season started to not guarantee his contract if we were concerned about his injuries.

Could it be worse than Hurst? Very unlikely. Could it have been as bad as Hurst? That's a possibility, but still on the unlikely side. Could it have been marginally better? This is a strong possibility.

Just want to emphasize that quality LTs, very rarely see the open market. Even ones destined for backup duties are highly sought after.  With that in mind, the fact that we balked, even though we basically were going to pay him peanuts...that should tell you an awful lot, considering that us fans know very little about what's going on there with that situation.

Just trust the FO's judgment on this one. They're right a lot more often than they are wrong.

[jazz1988]

It's possible The Ravens were willing to pay him more than  The Vikings. Either way his contract isn't guranteed but he probably had a better chance to make more money if he had accepted the deal with The Ravens. 

[AppStRavenfan]

Oft injured - and the last time he played he wasn't very good either way - and refused to sign an injury waiver. Would've been better than Hurst probably but you can't blame the FO for not wanting to sign him without an injury waiver, If the Vikes weren't beyond desperate he would have remained unsigned until he accepted he needed to sign one.

[Gtown Purple]

1 hour ago, flynismo said:

Could it be worse than Hurst? Very unlikely. Could it have been as bad as Hurst? That's a possibility, but still on the unlikely side. Could it have been marginally better? This is a strong possibility.

Just want to emphasize that quality LTs, very rarely see the open market. Even ones destined for backup duties are highly sought after.  With that in mind, the fact that we balked, even though we basically were going to pay him peanuts...that should tell you an awful lot, considering that us fans know very little about what's going on there with that situation.

Just trust the FO's judgment on this one. They're right a lot more often than they are wrong.

I wasn't expecting him to be a starter by any stretch, swing tackle maybe but god anything but James Hurst.

[harfordravenfan]

1 hour ago, flynismo said:

Just trust the FO's judgment on this one. They're right a lot more often than they are wrong.

^This

 

[VermontRaven]

1 hour ago, flynismo said:

Could it be worse than Hurst? Very unlikely. Could it have been as bad as Hurst? That's a possibility, but still on the unlikely side. Could it have been marginally better? This is a strong possibility.

Just want to emphasize that quality LTs, very rarely see the open market. Even ones destined for backup duties are highly sought after.  With that in mind, the fact that we balked, even though we basically were going to pay him peanuts...that should tell you an awful lot, considering that us fans know very little about what's going on there with that situation.

Just trust the FO's judgment on this one. They're right a lot more often than they are wrong.

Yeah, I agree.  I trust the FO as well.  And it took over 5 regular season games for a team to pick him up.  That should tell you something as well, given how hard it is to find a decent backup LT in this league.