Hansenbj Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 I just read the thread about going after Brandon Lloyd. I think he'd be great but he isn't worth a 1st round pick in my opinion. So my thought is why not go after Nate Burleson? He was only given a 3rd round tender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ImmortalDragon Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 I'm more impressed with Burleson than Lloyd, but theres no news about Burleson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inmate running the asylum Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Burleson had a really good season in 2005, not quite so good last year.... I guess due to injuries? :whoknows: However, Minnesota is about 30 gozillion under the cap, so it might be really difficult to outbid them for his services. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldskool Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 As a blocker he lacks the bulk and strength to be a dominant blocker but he really needs to improve in this phase of his play. He does not put much effort into plays when he is on the backside of a play and he cannot be counted upon to be a factor blocking downfield. His effort is very inconsistent and he lacks intensity when he is not the primary receiver. The bold section will be why we wont look at him besides the obvious 3rd round tender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heidenreich Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Burleson had a really good season in 2005, not quite so good last year.... I guess due to injuries? :whoknows:However, Minnesota is about 30 gozillion under the cap, so it might be really difficult to outbid them for his services. He was banged up last year, and it was a lot more difficult when he was the #1 guy.... But he put up huge numbers with Randy Moss, why not put up huge #'s with Santana? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Weirdo Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Burleson would be a good number 2 but Minny will keep him. Too much money under the cap. They have the most, actually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingdaddy Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Would you trade Ramsey straight up for Burleson? I would seriously consider it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thr0xx Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Would you trade Ramsey straight up for Burleson? I would seriously consider it. sounds like a good move....but we could use the draft pick that we would get for ramsey and burleson is inconsistent frequently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Byner21 Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Burleson would be a good number 2 but Minny will keep him. Too much money under the cap. They have the most, actually. If they have so much money, why didn't they tender him 1st-round money? Odd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kreitmaster Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Would you trade Ramsey straight up for Burleson? I would seriously consider it. In a heartbeat. He has proven he is a strong number 2 receiver. We certainly can't get a player as good in the draft with a 5th round pick, or whatever we may get in return for Ramsey from NY. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.