fishgutmartyr

I'm not saying that I disagree with your POV, Money. I'm just looking back at some other EA drafts and thinking that we might be seeing something like the trade-up for Shockey again. Just a gut feeling that could very probably be wrong. I'd be more than happy to forego Arrington and get a LB in the first. But I'm not Ernie.

I'm not going by anything but a hunch, but considering the number of players we're getting in the backfield, and how hard we seem to be trying to get Arrington, it looks like EA is trying to fill most of our holes in FA, rather than some in FA and the rest in the draft. Again, I'm just speculating, but I wouldn't be surprised (if we get Arrington and someone like Pickett) if EA trades up in the 1st to get an OLT. What do you guys think?

This might actually be a good thing, because EA can't do the easy thing and stay Status Quo. PITA? Sure, but Clancy isn't exactly irreplaceable. He had 2-3 good games, but on the whole, he wasn't out of the ordinary. We'll see what happens.

Tonight, I will cry for you.

If that's true, we got a great deal. With that bonus, he's cuttable relatively early in the contract, and if he makes the interceptions, he's worth the raise.

I'm not going to kid you and say I know who to draft--I don't follow the college game. But I'd like to see Carpenter on the team because: 1) I've read good things about him 2) I've seen his dad play RB--and if he's like his dad personality-wise, he has the right attitude for LB 3) I'm a sentimental old fool. I don't like drafting secondary in the first round. It just seems a better investment to me to draft front seven in that round. YMMV.

Don't confuse my liking the signing with any particular dislike of Allen. I thought he was a good tackler, and could cover well. But he had lapses, and it was frustrating to watch him drop sure interceptions. Madison had to go through coaching changes in Miami, and did OK. And given a choice of having 3/4 young CBs learning under Allen or a multi-year pro-bowler, I'm going to pick the pro-bowler every time--even taking a marginal hit on one position's play. If the Newsday article is correct, the money sounds reasonable (basically Barrett Green's money), so I like it. If it makes you feel better, I agree on DT, but would rather get rid of Robbins who seems to be developing into a well-paid bench warmer.

I still don't think this is the kind of guy we need here. I'd rather get a mid-level young guy and draft LB in the first. I mean, if we're going to get a player who's going to blow assignments, let's at least get a rookie that will hopefully grow out of it. Spend the money on a safety and maybe a DT(replacing Robbins--if he shows up out of shape again). Youth and experience has to be in balance. We've got experience at LB, youth in secondary.

If it happens, I think it's a good signing. At this point in his career, Madison may not match up as a huge upgrade in a player/player comparison with Allen. But what he does bring to the secondary is tons of pro-bowl level experience--and since he is slowing down a little, he is going to have to rely on that technique and positioning more than in previous years: something that Webster and DeLoatch get to watch while on the field. IMHO that is where the value lies. That's why I'm not a big fan of drafting two CBs from the same year: you don't get that sort of apprenticeship. I think that's one of the reasons Allen, and to some degree Peterson, never developed beyond a certain level. I think with this signing you'll see an overall improvement in CB play.

BIGBLUE is right. It was jaw-dropping to watch him play his first season. You would sit there watching this guy get behind the LOS, and chase down the running back, who was running away from him, for a loss. And it wasn't a highlight because he would do it repeatedly. I honestly can't think of any player, especially on defense, that had such an impact on any given game. And I don't think I ever will. The draft wasn't as much of a big deal back then, as it is now. I remember reading about him making a splash in training camp, but that's about it.

I don't see the point of keeping Hasselbeck if you are getting Fiedler. I'd rather lose him, and get a low draft choice/UDFA. At best, you develop a second-stringer or trade bait, at worst, you cut him after a year and start again. If you are down to your 3rd-stringer, you're screwed anyway. I'm curious what Jennings can do. Ponder is a great KR, but doesn't seem to be going anywhere as a WR. Jennings was a KR in NFL-E, might as well see what he can do as a WR. It would be nice to see Taylor stay on the field as well.

...As an Eagle hater, I got a rush. Check out the comments, it's like reading a diary. Check the date of the article. THEY DON'T EVEN KNOW YET!!!! Thank you, Google.

Let the Eagles take him. Him and Trotter have so much chemistry together.

Martin, I don't want to hit this too hard, but Phil didn't exactly have the NFL all-stars on offense his first two years. When you have weapons like Doug Kotar, Billy Taylor (RBs), Gary Shirk (TE), Tom Mullady, Johnny Perkins, and Earnest Gray(he was the good wide receiver ), you just aren't going to look good. Considering the only Suburbanite on the team in 1979 was Benson, and he was a rookie starting at LT, you kind of start to understand why Simms was injured so much early on. I don't mean this as a denegration of Manning's accomplishments to date: I'm just pointing out the situations that he and Simms started with couldn't be more different. Well, all right, Manning's OL left a little to be desired in 2004 as well.

At least let the front offices know what's going on so they stop jerking around the players and fans. Can you imagine being told you're fired, and then getting called back and hearing "oops"? It's insane.

Collins might not be leaving after all... Isaac Bruce was on the market for a while, then off...maybe, sorta. :brooding: I'm not even looking until Thursday. I won't even pretend to understand this anymore.

Another question: With the delay in FA, how much of the talent that was released is going to be picked up by their teams again? I think I've read that the NFL is going to cut the teams that released players because of the cap some slack because of the changing situation. Again, curious, because the current situation is giving me bed-spins.

We were looking at Chris Hovan last year--does the front office look at him again this year? Just curious.

Absolutely! I didn't mean to infer that they'd drop from contention, just that they'll be playing on a mortal plane again.

I don't expect too many changes for the Jags, Panthers, Bucs, or Seahawks. They're all rock-solid teams that need only minor adjustment. The only way they really decline is through injuries. I can't imagine that Chicago wouldn't concentrate on offense this off-season, so they should improve. Philly will improve, they're simply not a 6-10 team, although I do think their 13-3 seasons are over. The Colts are interesting. Their offense is going to be determined by James--does he stay or go? If he goes, how badly will he be missed? And it's going to depend on when we see them as well. Their defense started to wear down a little towards the end of the season. Freeney definitely did. So we'll see.

I guess I'm a little gunshy about drafting defensive backfield in the 1st: our last two, Williams and Allen, were decent players but both are a little disappointing. We still don't know about Peterson, and we drafted Webster with our first pick last year. Personally, I think we have enough young guys back there, and need a little more experience. I've got my fingers crossed for Rhonde. I like your idea for DT. Even if Clancy stays, I don't think Robbins will be around too much longer. We're looking at the same body of evidence and we're seeing two different but reasonable points of view: you're saying we've got a good backup in Whitfield (and I agree with you), so we're set for when Luke goes down for his 1-2 games this year. I'm looking at the same information, and saying that the following season, when Luke goes down 3-4 games, we're going to have a rookie back-up (Whitfield can't stay around forever). This is more of a disagreement (if you can even call it that) on timing, not the move itself. So I guess I'll see you in the parking lot in 15 minutes. Swords or pistols?

Figured I'd get this in before some idiot hits "quote+ reply." I agree with most of what you wrote, although it would pain me to get a CB in the first (prefer a LB, but take the best player). This part bugged me: Your point would seem to me make my argument for getting an LT this year. If Pettigout will "inevitably" get injured this year, it would seem even more likely next year, or the year after. I like Whitfield as well, but the Giants are going to have to bite the bullet sometime, and I'd prefer they do it while Pettigout's back is relatively stable. Other than that, great job. Hope your term paper was this well-written.

:lol: I'd love to hear Madden say that...

Gotta love schadenfreude :lol:

In my magical kingdom (where the salary cap exists for everyone but the Giants, and all the other GMs are lobotomized and heavily sedated), I would love to steal Brandon Lloyd from the 49ers. That kid was making some serious catches with "Ike Anthrow"-level QBs.