2007 NFL offseason thread

Sudz · Post by **Sudz** » Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:19 pm

dbdynsty25 wrote:I am not sure how to judge the Dolphins offseason so far.

Release Randy McMichael, the most prolific tight end in their history and trade Wes Welker, their leading receiver and kick returner last year (in the division no less) just to save some money. Then they go out and spend 32 mil (20 guaranteed) on an aging Joey Porter. What the hell is going on in South Beach?

they dumped harrington.

Zeppo · Post by **Zeppo** » Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:33 pm

I can't belive this trade of Jones from the Bears to the Jets, including Chicagos' 2nd rounder, just for the Jets 2nd rounder. Admittedly, it's about 30 draft spots up, but still, there must be something about Jones's contract that forced Chicago's hand.

Meanwhile, the Redskins, who lost big Dockery to the Bills just as he was becoming a decent pro (can you believe it, the skins just couldn't pay that kind of dough? Who the heck's in charge now!

), and lost out to Dallas on the big man from AZ who would have replaced him (again, seems like a lot of money for an OL), have done surprisingly little this year so far. Outside of getting Smoot back (turns out they were right all along, and Minnesota was paying too much for him; he's being called a nickle back now, hmm) and signing Fletcher to play the Mike spot (many say he's over the hill, but the skins D hasn't been the same since they lost Pierce to run the show, and Lamar Marshall just isn't good enough, so even a less-than ideal Flethcer is a big improvement there), they haven't done much. They resigned and restructured everyone they needed to (including Jansen and Brunell), except for Shawn Springs who looks like he will be leaving

. He has a major cap hit this year, and apparently doesn't want to restructure at all. Bummer, but the man just can't play more than 8 or 9 games a season, so I can see why the skins don't want to pay him a lot. They say it's a new plan this offseason, something different and fresh for the Danny and his partner in idiocy, Vinny the C. I just hope this year the D can stop somebody, and if Campbell can continue to progress, maybe they can fight for that division crown. Whatever anyone says, this division is wide open this year.

dbdynsty25 · Post by **dbdynsty25** » Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:33 pm

Sudz wrote:they dumped harrington.

Umm...yeah. But that doesn't deserve the physical exertion it would take to type his name, thus I left it out.

RobVarak · Post by **RobVarak** » Tue Mar 06, 2007 2:01 pm

There were a couple of off-field considerations at play in the Jones deal. They paid Benson truckloads of money up front, and drafted him early, so Angelo was going to see him start this coming season. Angelo and Jones saw enough conflict in the locker room over Benson this season, and they knew that Jones, one of the most popular players on the team, would be a distraction.

There is also a bit of a war between the Bears and Drew Rosenhaus. He only represented two Bears: Jones and Briggs. Briggs was franchised earlier this week, and he said a lot of nasty things in response. I think the Bears were additionally happy to see one of those guys get out of their hair.

I agree that the Bears probably shouldn't have had to toss in their 2nd round pick, but according to the legendary Jimmy Johnson draft matrix, it's an ENORMOUS step up in value. I'm sure that's a factor as well.

Sudz · Post by **Sudz** » Tue Mar 06, 2007 2:09 pm

dbdynsty25 wrote:
Sudz wrote:they dumped harrington.
Umm...yeah. But that doesn't deserve the physical exertion it would take to type his name, thus I left it out.

dump and harrington is redundant too

Sully · Post by **Sully** » Wed Mar 21, 2007 3:16 pm

Atlanta gets :
1st round pick in 2007 (8th overall)
2nd round pick in 2007
2nd round pick in 2008

Houston gets:
1st round pick in 2007 (10th overall)
QB Matt Schaub

What were the Texans thinking?

dbdynsty25 · Post by **dbdynsty25** » Wed Mar 21, 2007 3:21 pm

Sully wrote:What were the Texans thinking?

That David Carr is a piece of sh*t. I just think they threw in one 2nd round pick too many...but I'm sure the Falcons were bluffing because they really didn't want to give up Schaub. That's what the Texans had to do to get it done.

Sully · Post by **Sully** » Wed Mar 21, 2007 3:27 pm

dbdynsty25 wrote:
That David Carr is a piece of sh*t.

And a QB with 162 career passing attempts, and a rating of 69, is that much better? Carr put up decent numbers last season. I don't think he was the problem. Maybe the problem is the guys in front of him that have allowed him to be sacked 158 times over the past 3 seasons.

EZSnappin · Post by **EZSnappin** » Wed Mar 21, 2007 3:29 pm

Sounds like the Texans thought the best QB Atlanta had was worth a couple of second rounders. The two spot drop isn't going to hurt them this year.

Atlanta must think Michael Vick is both talented and durable, though he's proven neither.

I think the Texans got the best of the deal, but then again I don't think the Texans made a huge mistake not taking Reggie Bush (not taking Vince Young, on the other hand... let's just say I like him more than Schaub).

cdastros · Post by **cdastros** » Wed Mar 21, 2007 5:39 pm

Sully wrote:
dbdynsty25 wrote:
That David Carr is a piece of sh*t.
And a QB with 162 career passing attempts, and a rating of 69, is that much better? Carr put up decent numbers last season. I don't think he was the problem. Maybe the problem is the guys in front of him that have allowed him to be sacked 158 times over the past 3 seasons.

I don't know how many Texans games you have watched, but David is not a good NFL QB. It is really not his fault because he got sacked into oblivion so he has zero pocket presence. When most QB feel pressure, they either step up into the pocket or slide to the left or right a little to buy more time. When David feels pressure he takes a sack. He didn’t use to do that but it is like David has been punched in the face 200 times, he is eventually going to flinch the next time he sees a punch coming. I think David just needs to be a backup QB for a while to get over his shell shock.

I do think that two 2nd rounders are way to much for Schuab. The Texans have to many needs at other positions to be giving up multiple first day picks for anyone.

Sully · Post by **Sully** » Wed Mar 21, 2007 6:41 pm

cdastros wrote:
Sully wrote:
dbdynsty25 wrote:
That David Carr is a piece of sh*t.
And a QB with 162 career passing attempts, and a rating of 69, is that much better? Carr put up decent numbers last season. I don't think he was the problem. Maybe the problem is the guys in front of him that have allowed him to be sacked 158 times over the past 3 seasons.
I don't know how many Texans games you have watched, but David is not a good NFL QB. It is really not his fault because he got sacked into oblivion so he has zero pocket presence. When most QB feel pressure, they either step up into the pocket or slide to the left or right a little to buy more time. When David feels pressure he takes a sack. He didn’t use to do that but it is like David has been punched in the face 200 times, he is eventually going to flinch the next time he sees a punch coming. I think David just needs to be a backup QB for a while to get over his shell shock.

I do think that two 2nd rounders are way to much for Schuab. The Texans have to many needs at other positions to be giving up multiple first day picks for anyone.

Bad QB's complete 68% of their passes? BTW, that number was tops in the NFL last season.

dbdynsty25 · Post by **dbdynsty25** » Wed Mar 21, 2007 7:09 pm

Sully wrote:Bad QB's complete 68% of their passes? BTW, that number was tops in the NFL last season.

How many wins did that equal?

Sully · Post by **Sully** » Wed Mar 21, 2007 7:12 pm

dbdynsty25 wrote:
Sully wrote:Bad QB's complete 68% of their passes? BTW, that number was tops in the NFL last season.
How many wins did that equal?

That's beside the point. The Houston Texans didn't lose 10 games because of David Carr's play at QB.

dbdynsty25 · Post by **dbdynsty25** » Wed Mar 21, 2007 7:14 pm

Sully wrote:
dbdynsty25 wrote:
Sully wrote:Bad QB's complete 68% of their passes? BTW, that number was tops in the NFL last season.
How many wins did that equal?
That's besides the point. The Houston Texans didn't lose 10 games because of David Carr's play at QB.

Well he certainly hasn't show much of a progression from his first few years. That's the problem. When you've got a young guy that you have given ample opportunity to improve...and he doesn't...eventually you have to cut bait and move on. Now is that time.

Sully · Post by **Sully** » Wed Mar 21, 2007 7:16 pm

dbdynsty25 wrote:
Sully wrote:
dbdynsty25 wrote: How many wins did that equal?
That's besides the point. The Houston Texans didn't lose 10 games because of David Carr's play at QB.
Well he certainly hasn't show much of a progression from his first few years. That's the problem. When you've got a young guy that you have given ample opportunity to improve...and he doesn't...eventually you have to cut bait and move on. Now is that time.

Well, I won't deny that, but it's hard to put blame on a guy that's probably seen the turf more than any other QB in the past 3 seasons. For the second season in a row, it seems like the Texans are focusing all of their attention in the wrong areas.

I guess my point is that Houston gave up way too much for a guy that doesn't look to be much of a upgrade, if any, over Carr.

dbdynsty25 · Post by **dbdynsty25** » Wed Mar 21, 2007 7:25 pm

Sully wrote:I guess my point is that Houston gave up way too much for a guy that doesn't look to be much of a upgrade, if any, over Carr.

Which is exactly what I said after you listed the parameters of the deal. You can blame the QB when he doesn't get any better...when in fact, his line has improved over those three years (at least his sack totals went down from the first year).

bkrich83 · Post by **bkrich83** » Wed Mar 21, 2007 7:51 pm

Having watched I don't know 8 or 9 Texans games last year, I can say he improved, I can also say he wasn't their problem. I can for sure say their offensive line was not improved.

They probably had the worst pair of bookend offensive tackles I have ever seen. I have never seen so many instances where BOTH tackles get beat off the ball, get beat to their outside shoulder, and then both outside rushers meet at the QB, just as he takes his bounce step in his drop.

Getting rid of David Carr, is doing him a favor. He had no chance to be succesful with that team. And unless they make major adjustments up front, and start to run the ball effectviely, we'll be having this same conversation about Matt Schaub, or whomever else they attempt to plug in there.

bdunn13 · Post by **bdunn13** » Thu Mar 22, 2007 12:21 am

I think I am the only Falcons fan on this forum. I am first and foremost a falcons fan. I am seldomly a fan of a single player(Hines Ward comes to mind as I am a huge fan of his). However, there is only maybe 1 other QB in the NFL that could have won the past 3 years with the Falcons.. and that is McNabb. Vick gives them the best chance as their line is not very good. QBs often get too much of the credit for winning and too much of the blame for losing. Games are won by the OL and DL. Put Manning on the Falcons and you have a 5 win team.

EZSnappin wrote:Atlanta must think Michael Vick is both talented and durable, though he's proven neither.

I think he has shown both. No one can honestly argue the guy is not the most physically gifted QB in the league. And over the past 3 seasons he has missed 2 games while taking more punishment than prob any QB in the league except for maybe Carr. So he has started 95+% of the Falcons games over the past 3 seasons and thats not counting the playoffs a couple of years ago.

Over the same stretch McNabb has missed 13 games, TO 11, Palmer 2 and no one questions their durability.

Last year was also the first year as a starter where he lost more games than he won while getting little to no help from his WRs, OL or defense during that stretch... The Falcons D was good the year they were 11-5.

As far as the trade, the falcons basically gave Shaub up for 2 number 2s. I think the trade was pretty even. I don't see the Texans upgrading much as I think Carr can play if given talent around him. When the Texans came into the league I believe they took 3 offensive lineman in the expansion draft and ended up cutting all of them. We wil have to see how it pans out but for Carr, if he can get on with a decent team I think he can do well. So, we have to see how the falcons use those 2 picks and how well Shaub does.

bdunn13 · Post by **bdunn13** » Thu Mar 22, 2007 12:22 am

bkrich83 wrote:
Getting rid of David Carr, is doing him a favor. He had no chance to be succesful with that team. And unless they make major adjustments up front, and start to run the ball effectviely, we'll be having this same conversation about Matt Schaub, or whomever else they attempt to plug in there.

Agreed.

kevinpars · Post by **kevinpars** » Thu Mar 22, 2007 7:20 am

The Falcons need bodies and this trade gives them bodies. He was basically going to be an insurance policy anyway. He was going to be an unrestricted free agent next year, so the Falcons would have either lost him or had to commit to him as a starter after this season.

The Falcons have needs at offensive and defensive lineman, they could use some more linebackers and they probably need a DB because Jimmy Williams probably isn't the future as a starting DB.

dbdynsty25 · Post by **dbdynsty25** » Thu Mar 22, 2007 10:30 am

kevinpars wrote:The Falcons have needs at offensive and defensive lineman, they could use some more linebackers and they probably need a DB because Jimmy Williams probably isn't the future as a starting DB.

Oh, I was under the impression that Mike Vick was going to be a starting DB soon.

Leebo33 · Post by **Leebo33** » Thu Mar 22, 2007 10:50 am

bdunn13 wrote:Put Manning on the Falcons and you have a 5 win team.

Wow. I'd probably go the exact opposite way (unless you are referring to Eli) given the statistical evidence and track history of Manning as an NFL QB. It is far more likely that the Falcons, or any other club for that matter, would consistently be a double-digit winning club with Peyton Manning at QB. The Colts did not have a double-digit winning season for 20 years prior to Manning's arrival in Indy! Now, they've produced double-digit wins in 7 of the past 8 seaons despite having the 21, 11, 29, 10, 8, 29, 21, and 16th best defense.

bkrich83 · Post by **bkrich83** » Thu Mar 22, 2007 12:00 pm

Leebo33 wrote:
bdunn13 wrote:Put Manning on the Falcons and you have a 5 win team.
Wow. I'd probably go the exact opposite way (unless you are referring to Eli) given the statistical evidence and track history of Manning as an NFL QB. It is far more likely that the Falcons, or any other club for that matter, would consistently be a double-digit winning club with Peyton Manning at QB. The Colts did not have a double-digit winning season for 20 years prior to Manning's arrival in Indy! Now, they've produced double-digit wins in 7 of the past 8 seaons despite having the 21, 11, 29, 10, 8, 29, 21, and 16th best defense.

Possibly. They also surrounded Manning with a lot of talent both up front and at the skill positions. The Colts also put Manning in an offense that's perfectly suited to his skill set.

I am not sure the same things could be said for the Falcons and Vick. Nor is there any guarantee that the Falcons would have done the same thing for Manning. If anything, from a system perspective, they actually tried to fit Vick in to an offense that he really does not have the skillset for.

Thing about Manning, is he's so dedicated to his craft, he's such a student of the game, and he works so hard, that I feel he'd probably be pretty succesful where ever he went. But there's no guarantee he'd do in Atlanta what's he doing in Indy.

Leebo33 · Post by **Leebo33** » Thu Mar 22, 2007 12:41 pm

bkrich83 wrote:But there's no guarantee he'd do in Atlanta what's he doing in Indy.

Oh, that is absolutely true. I just think it is a real stretch to conclude that a team would not perform better with one of the best QBs in NFL history as compared to how it would do with Mike Vick. There's no way the Falcons are a 5 win team with Peyton Manning and a 7-11 win team with Vick. No way.

bdunn13 · Post by **bdunn13** » Thu Mar 22, 2007 1:07 pm

Leebo33 wrote:
bkrich83 wrote:But there's no guarantee he'd do in Atlanta what's he doing in Indy.
Oh, that is absolutely true. I just think it is a real stretch to conclude that a team would not perform better with one of the best QBs in NFL history as compared to how it would do with Mike Vick. There's no way the Falcons are a 5 win team with Peyton Manning and a 7-11 win team with Vick. No way.

I say 5 wins for Manning in Atlanta is a stretch. He would be going from the best OL in the league to one of the worst. This does not even bring in to the picture he would be leaving a WR core that makes the spectacular catch while getting a core that can not even make the routine catch.