View Single Post
  #27 (permalink)  
Old -06-03-2008
r8rh8rmike's Avatar
r8rh8rmike
Status: Online
Pro Bowl Ram
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Long Beach, Ca.
Age: 49
Posts: 4,339
Rep Power: 26
r8rh8rmike has a brilliant futurer8rh8rmike has a brilliant futurer8rh8rmike has a brilliant futurer8rh8rmike has a brilliant futurer8rh8rmike has a brilliant futurer8rh8rmike has a brilliant futurer8rh8rmike has a brilliant futurer8rh8rmike has a brilliant futurer8rh8rmike has a brilliant futurer8rh8rmike has a brilliant futurer8rh8rmike has a brilliant future
Re: Bruce's comments on his move

Quote:
Originally Posted by ramsbruce View Post
On the flipside I think we are thin at WR. We have Holt with knee problems, Bennett who can't seem to stay healthy and then a few young guys and most likely a rookie or two. So purely from a business/Rams team standpoint I think they made a mistake not keeping Bruce for two reasons. One we need the depth, and two the leadership he brings. I don't think the price tag was too high.
I couldn't agree more ramsbruce. IMO, the case could be made that Ike was our best, most dependable WR at a time when we're looking suspect, and letting him go was not only a bad public relations move, it was a bad business move, and ultimately a bad player personnel move.

Business is business, but the bottom line is not always the best course of action.
Reply With Quote