Deshaun Watson wants to be traded. Bears?

[den-the-coach]

Good trade him to Chicago, see how you like that weather...There's reason everybody says: "I'm from Chicago." It's because they can't wait to leave.

 

[dieterbrock]

"He gave them good faith"? He signed a contract for 156 mil with 73.5 mil guaranteed. So them saying "you'll have some input on team decisions" includes GM and HC hirings"? And the fact they hired somebody ( without his approval.....what island was he on?), means the cap hit punishment he's trying to saddle them with is fair repairations? BS.

Sounds like the old, "Hey, I pay you so just shut up and do what I say" mentality. Pretty sure that went out of style in the 1930's....
Here's the rub of it, Watson's agent and Houston began contract negotiations on his extension after his 5th year option was picked up.
We didnt hear about any nasty negotiations, because there werent any.
"My main focus is just being the best teammate, best leader, best quarterback I can be and whenever that time comes with my agent and the organization, the timing is going to be right. They're going to make sure they handle it well. For me right now, the focus is on being the best teammate, getting the new guys on the same page with me as the quarterback of this offense and making sure I'm staying healthy and ready to go whenever they call me, call us in to go play."
Watson was upset when they traded Hopkins which was then and is even moreseo now one of the worst trades ever
“I definitely was hurt when we let Hop go,” Watson said on What’s In Your Glass? “That’s my brother. That’s my dog.”
But he stood by his word, got ready for the season and signed his well deserved contract, said in late August that it wasnt his place to criticize the FO for the trade.
So when O'Brien was finally fired, the face of the franchise wanted to be involved in the hiring of the GM and HC. Who wouldnt be? O'Brien was an abject disaster, made moves that took the team from being a conference contender to a bottom dweller.
So Watson says he wants to have input, of course he should.
What did Houston do? They said absolutely, of course. And then proceeded to go back on their words like nobody's business.
The GM search? What a effing joke. Not only did they not involve Watson, they had a list of candidates being vetted, the final candidates if you will. And which guy did they hire? The guy who wasnt even on the list!!
After Caseiro hire, which was enough of an insult to Watson, McNair/Easterbay patted Watson on the head and doubled down on the commitment that they never intended to honor and said his input would be involved in the HC search.
And then they wouldnt even interview the 2 guys he liked in Saleh and Bienemy
So despite being pro-Owner on most of the debates, I cant see any defense of how Houston handled (IE Botched) this whole thing. And the idea that Watson doesnt have the right to feel betrayed because he's collecting a check? Is downright disgraceful IMO.
If no commitment was made to him from the team, though he may feel slighted, but wouldnt be in this position.
But they did.
Repeatedly
And then repeatedly ignored him and the false commitment
Eff them all, I hope they draft the next Ryan Leaf to replace DW and enjoy a decade of Linehan/Spagnolo futility

 

[dieterbrock]

Look man, i don't care how ridiculous it may see for him to have input on team decisions. If FO told him they would listen to him, then they should follow through and take his input. If they don't blatantly lie to him then its not really a problem. But they did, so they deserve every bit of the hurt of their decision.

100% Right on.
I cant see how it can been seen any other way.

 

[PARAM]

Sounds like the old, "Hey, I pay you so just shut up and do what I say" mentality. Pretty sure that went out of style in the 1930's....
Here's the rub of it, Watson's agent and Houston began contract negotiations on his extension after his 5th year option was picked up.
We didnt hear about any nasty negotiations, because there werent any.
"My main focus is just being the best teammate, best leader, best quarterback I can be and whenever that time comes with my agent and the organization, the timing is going to be right. They're going to make sure they handle it well. For me right now, the focus is on being the best teammate, getting the new guys on the same page with me as the quarterback of this offense and making sure I'm staying healthy and ready to go whenever they call me, call us in to go play."
Watson was upset when they traded Hopkins which was then and is even moreseo now one of the worst trades ever
“I definitely was hurt when we let Hop go,” Watson said on What’s In Your Glass? “That’s my brother. That’s my dog.”
But he stood by his word, got ready for the season and signed his well deserved contract, said in late August that it wasnt his place to criticize the FO for the trade.
So when O'Brien was finally fired, the face of the franchise wanted to be involved in the hiring of the GM and HC. Who wouldnt be? O'Brien was an abject disaster, made moves that took the team from being a conference contender to a bottom dweller.
So Watson says he wants to have input, of course he should.
What did Houston do? They said absolutely, of course. And then proceeded to go back on their words like nobody's business.
The GM search? What a effing joke. Not only did they not involve Watson, they had a list of candidates being vetted, the final candidates if you will. And which guy did they hire? The guy who wasnt even on the list!!
After Caseiro hire, which was enough of an insult to Watson, McNair/Easterbay patted Watson on the head and doubled down on the commitment that they never intended to honor and said his input would be involved in the HC search.
And then they wouldnt even interview the 2 guys he liked in Saleh and Bienemy
So despite being pro-Owner on most of the debates, I cant see any defense of how Houston handled (IE Botched) this whole thing. And the idea that Watson doesnt have the right to feel betrayed because he's collecting a check? Is downright disgraceful IMO.
If no commitment was made to him from the team, though he may feel slighted, but wouldnt be in this position.
But they did.
Repeatedly
And then repeatedly ignored him and the false commitment
Eff them all, I hope they draft the next Ryan Leaf to replace DW and enjoy a decade of Linehan/Spagnolo futility

A couple of things. Sure Houston.....if they did in fact tell him he'd have input.......is wrong. But 73.6 mil wrong?

The red highlight part of your post......"of course he should"? Why? If they told him he would, sure, but otherwise why? Why should a guy who's getting paid to play QB have any input on who they hire for GM? Head coach, I could see him having an opinion. But in either case he shouldn't have any "pull" at all. If he gives them 2 names they aren't interested in why should they interview them?

He's the QB. Not part owner.
Having said that, if he's unhappy about it, and wants a trade, I can understand but either waive the no trade clause for all teams or sit out. You can say, this is irrepairable and I want out but you can't say I want to go to one of the top 6 teams in the league. Well you can but the hardball I'd be playing is sit out or waive the clause for all teams. I gotta recoup a good deal.

I just think these clowns who sign for ungodly money, then want more, particularly "say" is ridiculous. You want your franchise guy happy? I remember the days when getting paid was what mattered but these 21st century QBs move the goalpost. Getting paid isn't enough. Now they want to run the operation, so say is important. And if they're young or haven't had the big payday and the team is winning, then the money is the most important thing. Here's an idea. Sign your contract, play the game and save your money. When you retire, you can team up with a couple/few other ex-QBs and buy a franchise. Then you can have all the say you want.

 

[RamDino]

I can understand but either waive the no trade clause for all teams or sit out.

This ^... He doesn't want to play for the organization anymore, but why should the team have to get less in return because he is limiting their options. The "no trade" clause was put in so Watson could stay Houston for as long as he wanted. If he wants out, waive the no trade clause.

 

[Merlin]

If they don't move him before the draft they're idiots. But then again we know they're idiots. So hell.

Just don't trade him to the 9ers. Please God.

 

[Jorgeh0605]

A couple of things. Sure Houston.....if they did in fact tell him he'd have input.......is wrong. But 73.6 mil wrong?

The red highlight part of your post......"of course he should"? Why? If they told him he would, sure, but otherwise why? Why should a guy who's getting paid to play QB have any input on who they hire for GM? Head coach, I could see him having an opinion. But in either case he shouldn't have any "pull" at all. If he gives them 2 names they aren't interested in why should they interview them?

He's the QB. Not part owner.
Having said that, if he's unhappy about it, and wants a trade, I can understand but either waive the no trade clause for all teams or sit out. You can say, this is irrepairable and I want out but you can't say I want to go to one of the top 6 teams in the league. Well you can but the hardball I'd be playing is sit out or waive the clause for all teams. I gotta recoup a good deal.

I just think these clowns who sign for ungodly money, then want more, particularly "say" is ridiculous. You want your franchise guy happy? I remember the days when getting paid was what mattered but these 21st century QBs move the goalpost. Getting paid isn't enough. Now they want to run the operation, so say is important. And if they're young or haven't had the big payday and the team is winning, then the money is the most important thing. Here's an idea. Sign your contract, play the game and save your money. When you retire, you can team up with a couple/few other ex-QBs and buy a franchise. Then you can have all the say you want.

They should interview his candidates because of the 73.6 mil lol. Texans FO are idiots. Also the whole "waive the no trade clause" argument is silly. It's a line item in a contract that Texans willingly signed, that isn't always there. They knew the risk they were taking, but again the Texan's FO are idiots.

But you are right about something, in the 21st century the goal post has been moved. The "Shut up and take the money" argument no longer cuts it in todays world. Texan's FO seem to think business can still be run like they are in the 20st century. This was completely mismanaged by them. Again, the Texan's FO are idiots.

 

[dieterbrock]

A couple of things. Sure Houston.....if they did in fact tell him he'd have input.......is wrong. But 73.6 mil wrong?

The red highlight part of your post......"of course he should"? Why? If they told him he would, sure, but otherwise why? Why should a guy who's getting paid to play QB have any input on who they hire for GM? Head coach, I could see him having an opinion. But in either case he shouldn't have any "pull" at all. If he gives them 2 names they aren't interested in why should they interview them?

He's the QB. Not part owner.
Having said that, if he's unhappy about it, and wants a trade, I can understand but either waive the no trade clause for all teams or sit out. You can say, this is irrepairable and I want out but you can't say I want to go to one of the top 6 teams in the league. Well you can but the hardball I'd be playing is sit out or waive the clause for all teams. I gotta recoup a good deal.

I just think these clowns who sign for ungodly money, then want more, particularly "say" is ridiculous. You want your franchise guy happy? I remember the days when getting paid was what mattered but these 21st century QBs move the goalpost. Getting paid isn't enough. Now they want to run the operation, so say is important. And if they're young or haven't had the big payday and the team is winning, then the money is the most important thing. Here's an idea. Sign your contract, play the game and save your money. When you retire, you can team up with a couple/few other ex-QBs and buy a franchise. Then you can have all the say you want.

What does it matter if he’s paid 1$ or 1 billion? They told him they’d include him in the HC and GM search and then blatantly excluded him.

 

[PARAM]

Well we'll see what happens. I bet he gets traded but I bet his list expands.

@Jorge.....yes the Texans knew that clause was in the contract. It's in a lot of contracts. But Watson also knew the contract he signed was for 4 years. And he wants out after 1, regardless of why. That's not upholding the CONTRACT he signed, which said nothing about "having a say".

 

[Loyal]

If they don't move him before the draft they're idiots. But then again we know they're idiots. So hell.

Just don't trade him to the 9ers. Please God.

I don't fear him. He better by God fear facing Aaron Donald twice a year if he goes to Frisco...

 

[PARAM]

Now the "favorite" team is Chicago. Aaron Rodgers probably thinks "first Cousins joins the North, then Stafford is gone and now Watson might come here? Oh well, I'll just beat him too"

How good would Chicago be and would that make the North the best division of QBs? I don't know. The NFC West has some good ones. The AFC North too. I think those 3 would be the top 3, with the AFC West extremely close behind, if not right there.

 

[CGI_Ram]

How good would Chicago be and would that make the North the best division of QBs? I don't know.

Good question. That would certainly boost the North.

NORTH
Green Bay Rodgers
Minnesota Cousins
Detroit Goff
Chicago Watson

WEST
Rams Stafford
Seattle Wilson
San Fran Garappolo
Arizona Murray

 

[CGI_Ram]

If they don't move him before the draft they're idiots. But then again we know they're idiots. So hell.

Just don't trade him to the 9ers. Please God.

It sure feels like they should.

Having that cloud hang around into the off-season would seem bad.

 

[CGI_Ram]

Column: Ryan Pace and the cap-crunched Chicago Bears have heavy lifting ahead of them as they plan for a QB — and many other parts — heading into free agency

All of the focus for the Chicago Bears is on acquiring a quarterback, but not to be forgotten is what the team can do to improve the roster around that position. To think only Mitch Trubisky and to…

www.chicagotribune.com

The cap-crunched Chicago Bears have heavy lifting ahead of them as they plan for a QB — and many other parts

All of the focus for the Chicago Bears is on acquiring a quarterback, but not to be forgotten is what the team can do to improve the roster around that position.

To think only Mitch Trubisky and to a lesser extent Nick Foles are to blame for the team’s 16-16 regular-season record over the last two seasons is to miss the point, and the Bears realize they have gray areas to fortify in preparation for a pivotal season for general manager Ryan Pace and coach Matt Nagy.

It all starts with the quarterback. Surely everything is not on the table, as Pace suggested Tuesday. That would suggest the Bears didn’t make proper use of the nearly two months they have had since a playoff loss to the New Orleans Saints to rule out many options.

The Bears must have a handful of plans in place, starting with aiming big for a trade candidate, potentially pursuing a free agent such as Ryan Fitzpatrick or Jameis Winston or even drafting a quarterback.

The thinking among multiple sources is the Bears have prioritized making a run at Seattle Seahawks quarterback Russell Wilson. His agent included the team on a list of four clubs Wilson would approve a trade to, although it hasn’t yet reached the point where he’s asked out. Two of the other three teams on Wilson’s list probably can be ruled out. The New Orleans Saints are mired in salary-cap hell and the Dallas Cowboys are expected to keep Dak Prescott. The fourth is the Las Vegas Raiders, and they’ve showed strong public support for Derek Carr.

Whether Seattle actually considers trading Wilson could hinge on the Seahawks’ ability find a quarterback that would keep them in a win-now mode, and that’s another complicating factor.

Pace said they’re considering “different combinations,” meaning the team will need to add parts to the offense — line, wide receiver, tight end — and defense after fitting the quarterback’s contract into the 2021 picture.

The Bears are among a group of teams that will be hit hard by a reduced salary cap. Pace said the Bears expect it to come in at about $180 million, and some have suggested it could creep up to about $185 million. It was $198.2 million in 2020. That’s not a difference of $13 million to $18 million because teams plan and budget with the future in mind, expecting an annual rise of about $10 million. So if the 2021 cap comes in at $180 million, it’s actually going to be about $28 million below where the Bears figured it would be at this time a year ago — before the COVID-19 pandemic gripped the sports landscape.

The franchise has been creatively creating cap space pretty much annually by restructuring the contracts of many of its highest-paid players, a group that includes Khalil Mack, Charles Leno, Cody Whitehair, Eddie Goldman, Kyle Fuller and Kyle Long. While that helps the team in the short term, it makes those numbers larger on the back side of the deals, which is something the team is grappling with right now with a player such as Fuller, who is carrying a $20 million cap hit in the final year of his contract. That’s why an extension for Fuller makes sense, but he has leverage because the Bears lack depth at the position and would be hard-pressed to release him.

Free safety Eddie Jackson is a prime candidate for a restructure to lower his cap hit of $11.45 million. Maybe the Bears will take a similar approach with outside linebacker Robert Quinn, who has a $14.7 million cap hit but has a fully guaranteed base salary of $11.5 million. The Bears could attack the problem by moving cap commitments into future years when the overall cap number is expected to rise, especially after the NFL finalizes new television contracts and the pandemic is in the past.

But the Bears have difficult decisions ahead. Using an estimate of $180.5 million for a 2021 salary cap, overthecap.com calculated the Bears are more than $6.9 million over the cap after the release nickel cornerback Buster Skrine. Six teams have a bigger cap deficit, and all must be in compliance by March 17, the start of the new league year. That estimate comes before a 2020 cap rollover, which will credit the Bears about $7.6 million.

Pace is going to be busy making roster decisions on current players while continuing to sort through the quarterback maze. When thinking about combinations, let’s look at the spots that have to be filled.

Quarterback: Unless the Bears plan to roll with Nick Foles and a draft pick, they have to create room for a newcomer. If they trade for a quarterback, they might explore a renegotiation to make the contract that comes with him a better fit. Wilson is set to earn $19 million this season, not an exorbitant amount when looking at the cap. Keep in mind Seattle would take a $39 million cap hit if it trades WIlson before June 1, another potential obstacle to a deal.

No. 1 wide receiver: The Bears can keep Allen Robinson in place with the franchise tag, which would come at a price of nearly $18 million. So to tag Robinson, the Bears would have to create a huge chunk of space. If they don’t tag Robinson, they’ll need to find a go-to wide receiver, which won’t be cheap. Remember: That doesn’t include the space they’ll need to add a quarterback as well. One more thing to consider: If the Bears want to remain a potentially attractive destination for Wilson, don’t they have to ensure Robinson remains on their roster?

Strong safety: Three players have started next to Eddie Jackson over the last three seasons — Tashaun Gipson, HaHa Clinton-Dix and Adrian Amos — and unless the Bears re-sign Gipson, it will be four in four years.

Nickel cornerback: Finding a veteran might not be a luxury the Bears have with a cap crunch, which means seeing whether Duke Shelley or Kindle Vildor can handle the job.

Defensive line depth: Roy Robertson-Harris is expected to get a pretty solid payday in free agency, and the Bears can’t afford him. Mario Edwards Jr., Brent Urban, John Jenkins and Daniel McCullers are free agents, so while this isn’t a pressing need, the Bears must find at least two players who can fit nicely into the rotation.

Specialists: Kicker Cairo Santos, punter Pat O’Donnell and long snapper Patrick Scales are all out of contract. The Bears either have to pay Santos after his record-setting season or face the prospect of seeing him exit via free agency and then searching for a kicker. Again.

The Bears can create $7 million in cap space if they cut 34-year-old tight end Jimmy Graham, who led the team with eight touchdown receptions. They can create $5.4 million in cap space if the cut right tackle Bobby Massie. But if those players are cut, it would create two roster needs.

Perhaps the Bears are considering approaching Graham or Massie about playing for less money next season. If Pace trades his first-round pick in a blockbuster deal to add a quarterback — or plans to use that pick to draft a quarterback — the chance of finding a Day 1 starting right tackle in the draft is greatly reduced. Maybe the Bears would consider having Massie at their price to at least give them an option if they figure a quarterback would be in play with their first-round pick.

The good news for the Bears is that it’s going to be a bloodbath over the next 10 days or so as players are cut around the league with teams working to get into better cap position. A glut of experienced players is going to be on the street, creating a buyers’ market. Teams probably won’t be able to find a starting right tackle in the bargain bin who represents a legitimate upgrade but might find a functional tight end and certainly a veteran safety on the cheap.

“It’s going to be about adjusting,” Pace said. “We’re not the only team in the league that is dealing with these circumstances. Everyone’s prepping for at tighter cap. We have a plan in place. It involves different things. There’s different ways for us to create room with our cap, not just releasing players. That’s a hard part of the business.

“There’s a window here to improve our team. ... We have foundation pieces in place on our roster. We’ve proven we have a playoff-ready roster. We’ve been there two of the last three years and we’ve got a lot of young talent we need to develop. Obviously our expectations are much higher than that. But it’s about building upon what we already have, making the necessary strides.”

 

[CGI_Ram]

it’s going to be a bloodbath over the next 10 days or so as players are cut around the league with teams working to get into better cap position. A glut of experienced players is going to be on the street, creating a buyers’ market.

This keeps being said over and over.

 

[kurtfaulk]

This keeps being said over and over.

and just before the season starts they'll announce record broadcast deals that will lift the cap by $40 million. just after they've screwed players sideways on 1 year deals.

.

 

[CGI_Ram]

and just before the season starts they'll announce record broadcast deals that will lift the cap by $40 million. just after they've screwed players sideways on 1 year deals.

.

Selfishly, for the Rams... it’s possibly good, right? We need cheaper FA.

 

[Mackeyser]

A bit more control is fine but......6 months ago he signed a 4 year contract for 156 mil with 73.6 guaranteed. What the hell went wrong in 6 months that justifies demanding a trade? He spend the money? That ain't control. That's aggravated rape.

I've answered this before because folks either don't remember or don't care, but it's entirely germane to the subject.

The answer is Earl Thomas. He played while in the midst of a dispute and broke his leg.

Dak Prescott is another answer. He played betting on himself and sustained a leg injury and was out for most of the season.

One of the few axioms that border on Player Law in the NFL is ALWAYS take the guaranteed money.

It's not on the player to be fortune tellers, know what the future holds and then seek their ultimate resolution in a way that minimizes the difficulty on the owners.

Also, and this also bears repeating... this was ENTIRELY the fault of the Texans ownership/FO.

After Watson was unhappy about them shipping Nuke out, they went to him and offered the promise that they would consult him on any GM and HC hires. They even hired an executive search firm that kept Watson's desires in mind.

Then Jack Easterby fired the search firm and hired Nick Caserio from New England who couldn't block the upgrade (they'd tried to hire him the year before in a side move and Belichick blocked the move).

Watson and his people were left like, "WTF? Y'all came to me to make promises and then after spending hundreds of thousands of dollars, you just fire the firm and hire whoever you wanted originally without the input from me that y'all ASKED for?"

While dealing with this nonsense, they ignored all of Watson's suggestions for HC, only added Eric Bienemy after Watson complained publicly and that was for a Zoom interview that presumably the Texans leaked that, "he didn't interview very well".

So the short answer to the two issues raised is:

1) you ALWAYS take the guaranteed money because the NFL is a savage fucking business and the owners will drop your ass like a hot potato unless you're outperforming your contract

2) the Texans went to their star QB and OFFERED promises and OFFERED to consider his input only to outright break their promise on the GM almost immediately, further disrespect Watson because they couldn't be bothered to make a fucking phone call and he found out on social media and then ignore any input he did make explicitly by not asking a single candidate on his list to interview initially.

I will NEVER understand people siding with owners.

Personally, I've never ONCE cheered for one of 32 multi-millionaires or now billionaires and I say that appreciating our current ownership situation.

Players and coaches make the game. Period. No one's keeping stats with "Adjusted Tax Deferments Per Stadium" or "Licensing Dollars per Player".

None of this is to say that we have to or should root for every player or even that there aren't bad players by whichever metric you might choose to use.

But, honestly, after all of the bullshit by owners over the years, it's them who should just "sit back and shut up" seeing as they contribute nothing except resources and as the Green Bay Packers have proven, you don't need a singular rich asshole to run a successful franchise, so their "resources" aren't remotely unique.

At best owners hire good people and let them run things. At worst, they get in the way. The old school wild cat owners like Paul Brown and Al Davis are LONG gone.

Owners ain't shit, but it's okay for them to lie, cheat and steal? Nah, fam. Not remotely. The difference is that the new generation isn't having it anymore and I'm all for it.

Okay, rant over.

 

[Mackeyser]

Okay MAN, that's one opinion.

Mine is he signed a 156 mil deal with 73 guaranteed and now that he has that deal, he wants Houston to trade him to somebody else who will continue paying him that money? Because he claims he was told he would be consulted on team decisions and wasnt asked about the GM? Maybe he was. Maybe he wasn't. Maybe he was on vacation and didn't get back to them fast enough. Maybe those team decisions were about the offense, maybe game plan, maybe free agents, etc. And now that he has butthurt and wants out, he wants to pick where he goes or at least severely limit their options?

Not cool. Sit out, or waive the no trade for all destinations! He's under contract and stands to strap them with some serious dead money. Fact is, he's got that deal and will receive the rest of that money.....either way...if he plays for them or they make a trade with somebody. The only way he doesn't get that money is by sitting out. If the relationship is irrepairable, there's nothing to lose is there? It's pretty simple. Waive the no trade for ALL teams.

If the situation is completely untenable, then out is all that matters, right?

Sorry, but this is just another type of "shut up and dribble" bullshit take.

So, Watson is supposed to just take the money and 100% live up to his contract, but the Texans aren't supposed to live up to their promises made openly and publicly?

Seriously, whatever.

Watson at no time has been "butthurt". That's a gross mischaracterization meant to diminish the professional responsibilities of the Houston Texans org while putting all of the onus on the player who was lied to and disrespected.

You do realize that these players have ambition, right? They want to win championships... most of them, anyway?

It wasn't okay to dismiss the Bob McNair comments calling players, "inmates running the asylum" and it's absolutely not okay to volunteer promises and then blatantly break them because the fallback is just, "shut up and play".

Fuck all that noise.

 

[Giles]

Sorry, but this is just another type of "shut up and dribble" bullshit take.

So, Watson is supposed to just take the money and 100% live up to his contract, but the Texans aren't supposed to live up to their promises made openly and publicly?

Seriously, whatever.

Watson at no time has been "butthurt". That's a gross mischaracterization meant to diminish the professional responsibilities of the Houston Texans org while putting all of the onus on the player who was lied to and disrespected.

You do realize that these players have ambition, right? They want to win championships... most of them, anyway?

It wasn't okay to dismiss the Bob McNair comments calling players, "inmates running the asylum" and it's absolutely not okay to volunteer promises and then blatantly break them because the fallback is just, "shut up and play".

Fuck all that noise.

I agree with everything you said but at the same time Watson knew that the Texans fo was garbage and still choose to sign the contract. The Texans aren't gonna take less just because Watson is pissed off and they shouldn't. If Watson really wanted out he would waive the no trade clause and go anywhere but houston.