49ers trade Bruce to St. Louis | Page 5

Jun 8, 2010 at 7:19 AM

CorvaNinerFan
Veteran
Posts: 10,401

The reason we traded Bruce to the Rams is the same as trades the Niners have made so their former players can retire in SF. It's the right thing to do...as much as Bruce contributed to our WR corps while he was a Niner, his glory years were in St. Louis.

Jun 8, 2010 at 7:28 AM

#62

WheresWaldo
Member
Posts: 2,440

Does anybody really care about Bruce?

Jun 8, 2010 at 7:36 AM

#63

valrod33
Hall of Small
Posts: 137,970

Originally posted by GEEK:
Originally posted by valrod33:
Originally posted by GEEK:
Originally posted by valrod33:
Originally posted by RDB4216:
Originally posted by GEEK:
Unless the NFL waived the trade requirements, the Rams prob traded him for a conditional 7th round pick. If Bruce doesn't appear in 16 games, have 2000+ receiving, and 20+ TDs, then we won't receive the draft pick for him.

Exactly! As you cannot TRADE a player for NOTHING (That would be called giving)...even if someone wants to post that to be the case in all caps.

it was a ceremonial trade, the rams have been quoted as saying that no players or draft picks were given up. Why cant people understand that

My point is from a legality view for the NFL to approve the trade. The terms Maiocco stated in his twit kinda backs up what I said - the trade involved some stupid ass terms and criteria in order for the NFL to process it.

why does it matter though, this move wasnt made to get "something" back from the Rams. It was a move made so that Bruce can retire a Ram. The trade was probably for 1 dollar but do you think either team wants to announce something like that?

Why cant this just be what it is? A trade that allows a great player to retire with his original team, nothing more nothing less

It doesn't really. My initial post was responding to some of the noobs questions on the matter from page 1-2.

You and I both know its for the reasons you stated.

whatever dude, i dont know why you hate me so much

BTW, he was traded for a 2012 conditional pick, the condition is that he plays this year

[ Edited by valrod33 on Jun 8, 2010 at 07:36:53 ]

Jun 8, 2010 at 9:15 AM

#64

GEEK
Veteran
Posts: 19,195

Originally posted by valrod33:
Originally posted by GEEK:
Originally posted by valrod33:
Originally posted by GEEK:
Originally posted by valrod33:
Originally posted by RDB4216:
Originally posted by GEEK:
Unless the NFL waived the trade requirements, the Rams prob traded him for a conditional 7th round pick. If Bruce doesn't appear in 16 games, have 2000+ receiving, and 20+ TDs, then we won't receive the draft pick for him.

Exactly! As you cannot TRADE a player for NOTHING (That would be called giving)...even if someone wants to post that to be the case in all caps.

it was a ceremonial trade, the rams have been quoted as saying that no players or draft picks were given up. Why cant people understand that

My point is from a legality view for the NFL to approve the trade. The terms Maiocco stated in his twit kinda backs up what I said - the trade involved some stupid ass terms and criteria in order for the NFL to process it.

why does it matter though, this move wasnt made to get "something" back from the Rams. It was a move made so that Bruce can retire a Ram. The trade was probably for 1 dollar but do you think either team wants to announce something like that?

Why cant this just be what it is? A trade that allows a great player to retire with his original team, nothing more nothing less

It doesn't really. My initial post was responding to some of the noobs questions on the matter from page 1-2.

You and I both know its for the reasons you stated.

whatever dude, i dont know why you hate me so much

BTW, he was traded for a 2012 conditional pick, the condition is that he plays this year

I hate you because you have less body hair than me.

So basically I hate everyone in the world...

Jun 8, 2010 at 9:16 AM

#65

valrod33
Hall of Small
Posts: 137,970

Originally posted by GEEK:
Originally posted by valrod33:
Originally posted by GEEK:
Originally posted by valrod33:
Originally posted by GEEK:
Originally posted by valrod33:
Originally posted by RDB4216:
Originally posted by GEEK:
Unless the NFL waived the trade requirements, the Rams prob traded him for a conditional 7th round pick. If Bruce doesn't appear in 16 games, have 2000+ receiving, and 20+ TDs, then we won't receive the draft pick for him.

Exactly! As you cannot TRADE a player for NOTHING (That would be called giving)...even if someone wants to post that to be the case in all caps.

it was a ceremonial trade, the rams have been quoted as saying that no players or draft picks were given up. Why cant people understand that

My point is from a legality view for the NFL to approve the trade. The terms Maiocco stated in his twit kinda backs up what I said - the trade involved some stupid ass terms and criteria in order for the NFL to process it.

why does it matter though, this move wasnt made to get "something" back from the Rams. It was a move made so that Bruce can retire a Ram. The trade was probably for 1 dollar but do you think either team wants to announce something like that?

Why cant this just be what it is? A trade that allows a great player to retire with his original team, nothing more nothing less

It doesn't really. My initial post was responding to some of the noobs questions on the matter from page 1-2.

You and I both know its for the reasons you stated.

whatever dude, i dont know why you hate me so much

BTW, he was traded for a 2012 conditional pick, the condition is that he plays this year

I hate you because you have less body hair than me.

So basically I hate everyone in the world...

lol

Jun 8, 2010 at 9:18 AM

#66

RonMexico
Moderator
Posts: 74,757

should of asked for a first rounder

Jun 8, 2010 at 9:24 AM

#67

evil
Veteran
Posts: 45,781

Originally posted by RonMexico:
should of asked for Sam Bradford

Fixed.

Jun 8, 2010 at 9:27 AM

#68

redrathman
Veteran
Posts: 5,578

Originally posted by KRS-1:
Originally posted by RonMexico:
should of asked for a can of Spam™.

Fixed.

Fixed again.

Jun 8, 2010 at 10:18 AM

#69

evil
Veteran
Posts: 45,781

Originally posted by redrathman:
Originally posted by KRS-1:
Originally posted by RonMexico:
should of also shipped them redrathman

This.

Fixed.

Jun 8, 2010 at 10:19 AM

#70

zillabeast
Veteran
Posts: 20,042

Does anyone know if we got anything in return? I would think that a late round pick next year would have made a little sense at least, no?

Jun 8, 2010 at 10:33 AM

#71

redrathman
Veteran
Posts: 5,578

Originally posted by zillabeast:
Does anyone know if we got anything in return? I would think that a late round pick next year would have made a little sense at least, no?

Nope. This was simply easier (and a bit more classy) to do than releasing Bruce outright.

Bruce held no value.

Jun 8, 2010 at 10:44 AM

#72

Giggidy
Veteran
Posts: 435

Originally posted by AC49er:
Great professional

Jun 8, 2010 at 10:54 AM

#73

SFBlue
Member
Posts: 1,047

Hopefully he has a change of heart, decides he wants to return, make the cut and we get a future pick

I think this is a classy move by the Rams more so than the Niners. We dump whatever his remaining contract was on them. I'm not sure why the Rams would not have waited for him to be released.

Jun 8, 2010 at 10:59 AM

#74

Tru2RedNGold25
Veteran
Posts: 7,972

Originally posted by redrathman:
Originally posted by zillabeast:
Does anyone know if we got anything in return? I would think that a late round pick next year would have made a little sense at least, no?

Nope. This was simply easier (and a bit more classy) to do than releasing Bruce outright.

Bruce held no value.

Actually we sort of did but not really

MM reports that we would get a conditional pick in 2012 if Bruce plays this season but we all know he wont so yeah unless The lambs get desperate for a receiver & call him to unretire NOTHING in return

f*ck it!!!!!

Jun 8, 2010 at 1:40 PM

#75

Sjceruti
Veteran
Posts: 1,528

Hopefully we got some footballs in return...