Grove and Smiley were very good players when they were healthy here. They gambled and lost on their health, but they clearly identified and signed good football players, and there was a lot of people who were absolutely livid they signed Jake Grove that were completely wrong.
Yes, but then again, there's been plenty of teams and administrations who ended up finding a good quarterback who initially picked wrong or couldn't find one.
Well hopefully Henne improves, just in case though I would not mind Young. Real key for us is restarting the running game, that happens Henne SHOULD be fine.
I'm glad that there are people, particularly you two, who are down with my plan. I do think it leaves us a bit weak at RB, but if you solidify the offensive line with a guy like Blalock at LG (thus being able to move Richie to his more natural position at RG), then you would hope that a RB stable of Thomas, Norwood, Hilliard, and Sheets would be able to get it done. Maybe they opt to dump Sheets, because of Norwood, in favor of a more power back.
Soliai, Langford, Wake, Davis, Smith and Randy Starks. All defensive players that are up for their contracts within the next 2 seasons or should be getting one instead of going into their final year of their deal (Davis). This is why I don't see this team going after Tony McDaniel. Dare I say Starks is done in Miami within 2 seasons also if Odrick can show he can handle the job. Oh and if somehow, by way of divine intervention that Henne takes off this season....he could cost us a potential buttload of $$$ if he were to finally click.
Sure they're good players but they ended up not being good signings. It's not a knock, it is just what it is.
It's also what a team has to do when your coming off/year from 1 & 15. Remember the days when we thought Vernon Carey was a good LT and Rex Hadnot was awesome? Cringe worthy line that was.
Eh, that makes more sense, but still think Owners are not going to just pay out money when they would not have to of paid if for the labor issues, the NFL does not really work like that, they want cheap, full value for talent they have invested in whenever they can get it.
I'am talking about what is available in terms of a complimentary style to Thomas, Mike Bush and Tolbert are not complimentary, their skillsets are not what I'am looking for, I wasn't including Dwilliams in my assessment because it looks as though he just might be out of our price range..As far as what this offense needs to compliment it, Bradshaw has a bit more to bring to the table in terms of toughness and explosiveness than Reggie imo...The man has a 4.8 average for his career, Bush has 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 4.2 in four of his 5 years in the league... I wouldn't mind either player on my team, but imo, bradshaw pound for pound is the toughest bastard in the league when he carries the rock.
Well they did draft a quarterback to be the face of the franchise. They still believe in him so they've done what you wrote. Whether you believe the same as they do is a different story, no?
Though from my recollection by far most people who questioned the signing of Grove did it only out of durability concerns. I was not one of them, but they were right. I liked the signing at the time personally, but would have kept Satele as a backup or let him compete at guard.
It seems to me we'd better off using our cap room to resign those core defensive players than making too big a splash in free agency. It may be worth the gamble to try to extend Henne before the season, rather than waiting till after. If we guess right and he does well it looks like a heck of a bargain. Then of course there is the other possibility.
Your plan should leave us with room to resign or extend some of our own soon to be free agents. Much as I'd like Blalock, Lawson,(or Barnes), Norwood (or Bradshaw) and Bulger, I don't want us to not be able to afford to resign Langford, Starks, Soliai, Wake, et al. The sooner we extend Langford and Wake especially, the better.
Thomas would be the complement, not vice-versa. Why would you plunk down millions of dollars for a free agent running back only to make him the #2 behind a rookie? You don't. I never said they were complementary. I said they were tougher runners than Bradshaw. The only two free agents who'll likely be out of our price range are Nnamdi Asomugha and Peyton Manning. The high salary floor and real money requirements, along with three years of free agent classes compressed into one, means that every team is going to whip out the checkbook, us included. Bradshaw fumbles often. That's a deal-breaker for this regime. I'm trying to tell you that he isn't even the "toughest bastard" free agent RB, let alone in the NFL. You are describing a version of Ahmad Bradshaw that does not exist. He would still be an excellent addition to the team, but we'd probably be better off splitting the money Bradshaw would command and giving it to both Bushes. All of a sudden our backfield is three deep, we've added speed, gotten younger at a workhorse position, and have added something to our backfield blocking as well. Wake and Ireland seem to have some sort of handshake agreement to work on his contract, if I recall correctly. Langford will get an extension. Starks doesn't need one, especially because his position is up in the air. Soliai isn't going to get an extension until after the 2011 season.
Just a few quick hits: I love Ahmad Bradshaw, but he isn't the toughest "pound for pound" runner in the NFL. I feel like that's a moniker given to little guys. It's a lot like calling white guys hard working and smart and black guys athletic. It's just these terms given by the media when in actuality is just looking for press. I'm not attacking you here DJ. I agree he's a tough bastard. I love the guy. He's a Son of Marshall and I'd love to have him here. However, he isn't the toughest RB. That is Adrian Peterson and it isn't close. Whether he's bigger or not, but whatever pound Peterson has got, it's tougher for sure. I don't see us attacking the OLine in FA. I think we're going to attack exactly what we've heard from Sparano and Ireland. I think you see us go after an experienced, veteran QB that can come in and legitimately give Chad Henne a run for his money at QB. I've heard they want some athleticism from that position, so that could lead us to believe Dennis Dixon or Vince Young could be options. I think we'll make a strong push to get a RB that has the ability to make big plays. I think we'll go after one of the better OLB's to improve the pass rush also. If we've got some money to spend, we might try and find ourselves another TE, but I don't know. I see our priorities, from the eyes of our front office, as QB, RB, OLB.
And that's part of my logic. It's another reason why I tend to underestimate our free agency activity. We have guys currently on the roster who we're going to want to devote some money to.
No way, people ripped Jake Grove for performance issues. He was trash up and down as far as the board was concerned.
why would I plunk down millions of dollars?..because Thomas is the only guy on our roster at this point on a unit that needs to be rebuilt, money is going to have to be invested into the unit..unless of course your happy with hilliard and sheets..I'am not.. Thomas and Bradshaw is the best combination you can put together if you were to draw it up..Thomas is making 2nd round money, so you pay Bradshaw accordingly..it fits to me schematically, and from a salary cap perspective..The offense needs another weapon, there is money available. The fumbling issue I can't debate at this point, but I'am sure each one will be closely scrutinized before his services are easily dismissed like you are insinuating.
Again, split the money between two additional RBs, rather than blow a bunch of money on one RB who plays in a manner that this regime doesn't want. I don't see how that's the best combination. At that point you've got a bunch of duplicated skills and you still have a high risk of turnover. The best single RB to pair with Daniel Thomas would be DeAngelo Williams. Thomas' versatility would contrast nicely with Williams' elite rushing. But no RB is worth the contract he's going to get, so it's best to aim lower in terms of money spent and grab Michael Bush, who's a hard runner with a good all-around game. Then you add Reggie Bush for passing downs and change of pace rushing. All of a sudden, you have three guys with overlapping skills at reasonable contracts. You're relatively proof against injury, because you have three guys instead of two, and you also keep more money to funnel toward other, less fungible positions. You're basically trying to tell me that 2 heads are better than 3. I suspect the issue here is that you don't know Michael Bush. Go watch him.
i love your solution to fix the running game, but i think michael bush will be lot more expensive then people think, and reggie bush won´t be cheap either and will he really be released ?, but if we would manage to make it happen, i would love it
Sure Des, I agree with that, I would rather have Thomas, M Bush, and R bush than Thomas and Bradshaw.. If we can get that done I would be all for it.. For me, I think Thomas and Bradshaw, with hilliard and sheets as backups would be just fine, but if there is a scenario where we can get 2 players the caliber of those two bushes, OK.
I think signing 1 would be the more plausible scenario, on all accounts, thats why I say Bradshaw would be the best fit..the 2 bushes put to many resources into one position...where would thomas get his rep's?..at some point you've got to work your draft picks, and that is the position to do so, and thomas's skillset is made to work.
The Saints re-signed Pierre Thomas, drafted Mark Ingram, and kept Chris Ivory around. Yeah, I think it's likely that Reggie Bush will be available. If not, Darren Sproles would be a decent alternative, though I think Bush is better at the same tasks. I don't think Michael Bush will be prohibitively expensive. There will be three years worth of free agents hitting all at once, remember. There are a lot of running backs who will be free agents, and teams loaded up on a pretty good RB class this year, or drafted insurance players last year. That's not to say that guys won't be overpaid, it's just that I think teams won't cough up huge amounts for Michael Bush when he's not even the headline RB on this market. IMO, this is a very good year for mid-level free agents who will play above their contract value. As much as I love Nnamdi Asomugha, for example, he's not going to provide the same bang for the buck that Josh Wilson, or even Jonathan Joseph, would.
Is a DeAngelo bird in hand worth more than two, in the Bush's? Yes. Michael Bush is a very solid, good RB. He is also a complete back in running, catching, and blocking. He is what I hope we have a better version of in Thomas. Reggie Bush is all about what he can do, not what he has done. He had a great offensive mind coaching, and a great QB. Yet, he has done little or nothing. The "DeAngelo Bird" was an elite play maker, who can change games and win one or two by himself. Bradshaw is somewhere in the upper middle in comparison. I would overpay, to a degree, to have Williams, the like which we have not seen in a Phins uniform. I would list Sproles 2nd, and Bradshaw 3rd.
i think al davis will overpay to keep bush and zach miller in a raiders uni, man if this work out though what a confusion, reggie and michael bush....
You and I both DJ. Williams is a play maker who can take it to the house any time he touches the ball. Aside from the obvious, play action would take on a whole new meaning for Henne and his receivers. I've gone back and forth on our RB options, and he is my final answer.
The Saints re-signed Pierre Thomas Desides, they did but, it was a very strange contract. No signing bonus, and if he is not on the team to collect roster bonuses, the Saints lose next to nothing.
That's my thinking Al. I want to go to a game and hope to see a jitterbug pinball wreaking havoc. Those type of runners do not come around often.
between bradshaw, reggie bush, michael bush, williams, sproles, i think i changed my mind of who i would want around 10 times in the last few days, if this freakin FA would finally start this all could come to an end finally
I've done the same, and have come up with DeAngelo Williams each time. Others will be a big upgrade but, he is a play maker, and a game changer. There aren't many.
I wouldn't say he's done nothing, he's just not Gale Sayers (thanks, Tom Jackson). He clearly adds another dimension to the Saints offense, especially as a backfield receiver. Again, Darren Sproles is an acceptable alternative. There is no running back in the game today who can win games by himself. Football doesn't work like that. DeAngelo is an excellent talent, that said. I just don't see why you'd pay gobs of money for any running back. If Al Davis intended to overpay Michael Bush or Zach Miller, he would have done so already. He overpaid Stanford Routt before the lockout, yet Nnamdi Asomugha, Bush, and Miller are all without contracts. I think he'll pay Zach Miller and let Nnamdi and Bush walk. Darren McFadden made Michael Bush expendable.
More I think about it, the more I like Slaton or Kevin Smith, they are attainable at least, DW or Bradshaw? Just do not believe they will be on the mkt and DW is dinged to often.
"There is no running back in the game today who can win games by himself. Football doesn't work like that. DeAngelo is an excellent talent, that said. I just don't see why you'd pay gobs of money for any running back." Thanks for the education on how football works. I have to disagree. I'm sure you would say the same on STs, and a player like Ginn not beating the Jets. A RB can, and has, won games by his play. Hell, even Ricky did so on a number of occasions. You pay the money for a player who is a game changer, and Williams is certainly that.
