Golgo-13 Posted February 1, 2002 Share Posted February 1, 2002 I saw very little talk about them trading for Stephen. They were talking about picking up two of our picks for their number three...I could see Danny and Vinny doing that one. Any thoughts on this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Om Posted February 1, 2002 Share Posted February 1, 2002 Nice introductory angle, Iget. <br /><br />Unfortunately, as you can see from the recent discussions on the board, the Stephen Davis thing has hardly registered a blip. <img border="0" title="" alt="[smile]" src="smile.gif" /> <br /><br />Now, if the deal is to pick up the #3 and keep Mr. Davis ... yeah, I can see us having something to talk about around here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Om Posted February 1, 2002 Share Posted February 1, 2002 Ahem.<br /><br />Pay no attention to the moron trying to engineer a sig pic.<br /> <br /> [ February 01, 2002: Message edited by: Om ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted February 1, 2002 Share Posted February 1, 2002 i'm usually wrong, but i'll give it a shot. optimistic talk notwithstanding, we are in rebuild mode. a team doesn't go 8-8 two years in a row and not have some outstanding problems. additionally, we have a new coaching staff. one trades away the future (for higher picks) for two reasons (and this is where i'm likely off track): 1) a franchise talent of the ages is available; 2) you're one player away from true superiority and that higher pick makes it a virtual certainty you can draft such a player. i don't see us in either situation. there is no lawrence taylor or john elway in this year's draft and we have several holes to fill this year and next year. this leads me to think we stay put at 18 or actually trade down for more picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golgo-13 Posted February 1, 2002 Author Share Posted February 1, 2002 So you wouldn't consider Peppers or either of the premire QB's major talent?...just curious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brave Posted February 1, 2002 Share Posted February 1, 2002 Om, I love that sig pic. Told you that before. It certainly is large, though. But don't worry, I'm not thinking that you're COMPENSATING or anything. <br /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[big Grin]" src="biggrin.gif" /> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Om Posted February 1, 2002 Share Posted February 1, 2002 I like the damn thing, too, but don't have the skillz (or hosting capability) to shrink it down. Hence, I think I'll nix it again. <br /><br />Sigh. Too large ... same old problem. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Cool]" src="cool.gif" /><br /> <br /> [ February 01, 2002: Message edited by: Om ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rat_Boy Posted February 1, 2002 Share Posted February 1, 2002 It depends on Detroit's asking price. Is it our #1 this year and next year for #3? I mean, that would be #18 this year, and probably #18 next year at best, hopefully much lower of course, for their #3 this year.<br /><br />I think the root trade is worth it, but I don't think we need to do it really.<br /><br />But, if the Dan wants Carr, I wouldn't be shocked to see this trade. That being said, I don't think we get him anyway, unless we deal with Houston.<br /><br />Casserly might take Carr just to spite the Dan. <img border="0" title="" alt="[smile]" src="smile.gif" /> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CounterTre Posted February 1, 2002 Share Posted February 1, 2002 Hey Om I haven't forgotten:) I've just been pretty busy the last few days and had cable go down on me quite a bit. If you have a pic that's too big email it to me and ill shrink it for ya until I get the other one done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Om Posted February 1, 2002 Share Posted February 1, 2002 Cool. Check private messages, brother. <img border="0" title="" alt="[smile]" src="smile.gif" /> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted February 1, 2002 Share Posted February 1, 2002 The Rams were 6-10 in 1998 and the Ravens were 8-8 in 1999, yet both went on to win the Super Bowl the next year.<br /><br />Both teams had strengths but found ways to overcome their weaknesses.<br /><br />One common thread here revolves around the quarterback.<br /><br />Well, in 1998 the Rams quarterback was Tony Banks and the Ravens quarterback in 1999 was also Tony Banks.<br /><br />The Rams moved on to acquire Trent Green and Kurt Warner while the Ravens won with Trent Dilfer.<br /><br />So, just because we have a team with a good running game and solid defense, but lack a trigger man on offense does not mean this team is that far away from contending given some shrewd moves in the draft and free agency.<br /><br />What I see here on this board is alternatively too much optimism and then too much pessimism.<br /><br />The Redskins were not as close to contending as a lot of people thought they were in 2000. But the team IS closer now than most people think.<br /><br />Everyone incuding the front office has to maintain some balance in the thoughts about this team.<br /><br />Yes, two 8-8 records in a row shows some degree of mediocrity, but as the Packers and 49ers proved this year, a good finish and one good offseason is often times enough to push that .500 type team to the next level the following season.<br /><br />Unlike many here I don't expect Mr. Gator to disassemble this team and start over. I think he is smart enough to realize he has to do what he does best, evaluate quarterbacks for suitability and then find receivers to match his program.<br /><br />For all we know Mr. Gator modifies his system somewhat and players like Davis and Gardner remain and are highly productive.<br /><br />At the same time he brings in say a new #1 quarterback and a new #1 receiver with some NFL experience.<br /><br />Those may be the changes that are necessary.<br /><br />We may end up with a lot of the same players starting next season at the skill positions: Gardner, Alexander, Davis with the aforementioned changes from Banks, Westbrook and Lockett.<br /><br />The line may look very similar. Samuels and Jansen won't be replaced. Coleman likely will be re-signed if the money is right. We may have a change at guard with Szott and the Raymer's future is up in the air as well.<br /><br />But considering the Rams replaced 8 starters on their defense and ended up going 14-2 this past season, gives me reason to think that replacing 4 starters, 2 at skill slots, on the offense here in 2002 is not necessarily a recipe for disaster.<br /><br />In fact it might be enough to propel this team forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamebreaker Posted February 1, 2002 Share Posted February 1, 2002 fansince62: <br /><br />The Titans went 8-8 for 2 or 3 seasons in a row before making it to the superbowl. So just because you go .500 doesn't mean the team has serious problems, it just means a few things need to be addressed(like the passing game). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CounterTre Posted February 1, 2002 Share Posted February 1, 2002 here ya go OM...<br /><br /> <img src="http://www.roughriderz.com/quillicon.jpg" alt="" /> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Om Posted February 1, 2002 Share Posted February 1, 2002 To me, the coming season is all about who ends up behind center. I guess each of us has to decide for himself if he trusts SS to work with the front office to find the guy he feels is the right fit. And by that, I do mean including the possibility of trading someone even as productive as Stephen Davis if that's what it takes to land the right guy.<br /><br />Personally, my wish is keep Stephen, and see someone like Blake or Brunnell brought in to run the show for 2 or 3 years, while the search for The Youngster to mold is done methodically and without the need to rush into anything. If we find a Carr or Harrington to our liking enough to go after them hard, then fine ... I'm going to assume until proven otherwise that SS and Co. know more about this than I do and trust their judgement. If they do not find those guys compelling enough, though, we wait another year and keep scouring the hinterlands (Canada, say <img border="0" title="" alt="[smile]" src="smile.gif" /> ) and Arena League and sandlots and grocery stores and unemployment offices for an alien like Warner or Garcia, just in case.<br /><br />Meanwhile, the thought of a Blake -- with the legit threat of a downfield passing game keeping defenses honest -- turning and handing off to Stephen Davis, is intriguing indeed. As is the thought of Blake going play-action and looking for a Gardner or Gaffney ( *pauses for effect* ) on a deep out or post. <br /><br />It's just that life rarely works out where you get something really good for nothing. Yeah, some folks do hit the lotto, but for the most part, you have to give something to get something. <br />Here's to hitting the powerball ... but keeping our options open in the meantime.<br /><br />*<br /><br />Ahh ... thanks Tre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CounterTre Posted February 1, 2002 Share Posted February 1, 2002 or how about this...very basic and not exactly what you want for your final product, but this was just a quick slop job while I'm takin a break. <img border="0" title="" alt="[smile]" src="smile.gif" /> <br /><br /> <img src="http://www.roughriderz.com/OMquill.jpg" alt="" /> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Om Posted February 1, 2002 Share Posted February 1, 2002 <img border="0" title="" alt="[Cool]" src="cool.gif" /> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CounterTre Posted February 1, 2002 Share Posted February 1, 2002 Hehe I can get picky even about something as little as this...looks better when it blends in don't ya think? or did you like the black better? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted February 1, 2002 Share Posted February 1, 2002 GB, bulldog....i'm not saying we have serious problems. i'm thinking that we have aging de's, are short a dt, need a new QB, probably need a new safety, might need a guard or two depending on szott/what's his name decisions. in my humble opinion, i don't think we will resolve all of these personnel issues in one season; hence, my two year look. are we on the rise? you bet. are we contending with the iggles for top of the division next year with these personnel issues and a new system? not so sure. i just don't think there are any lavars in this years draft - and if we are willing to trade a bushell of picks to move to the front of the pack, we better be sure all these personnel concerns are answered. just my 2 cents....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted February 1, 2002 Share Posted February 1, 2002 can you think of many teams this offseason that won't have as long or a longer laundry list of needs?<br /><br />this isn't the 1970's or 1980's were there were 4 or 5 complete football teams running around blowing people out and creating havoc at 13-3.<br /><br />Most teams are 6-10 to 10-6 and depending on what kind of performance they get from lower draft picks and second tier free agents, will ascend or descend in the standings.<br /><br />let's take the Eagles for a moment. They have to address their running back situation. Staley is not as productive as he once was and is carrying a large contract at age 29. Outside, the Eagles need to upgrade their receiver corps. They still don't have a true #1 and it has hurt them at points. Also on offense, the team lost its starting center for the season and must consider whether it is worth the money to bring Miller back or go in another direction.<br /><br />On defense, the Eagles showed they needed some more size on the defensive line. Trotter, their best linebacker, is an upcoming free agent and I think that could be quite a nasty situation in terms of his contract. It is clear from his one year tender that Reid and the team were not willing to meet his initial demands and another pro bowl season with 100+ tackles is not going to make him lower his numbers any.<br /><br />In the secondary, you are looking at a solid group. The best player, Troy Vincent is 33 years old. Damon Moore suffered an ACL injury in the playoffs. Do the Eagles restructure Vincent's contract? Can the team count on Moore coming back at the start of 2002 or do they need to acquire another SS?<br /><br />See, EVERY team has question marks. It is just that some like Philly and GB don't have them at the quarterback position. <img border="0" title="" alt="[smile]" src="smile.gif" /><br /> <br /> [ February 01, 2002: Message edited by: bulldog ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Om Posted February 1, 2002 Share Posted February 1, 2002 Not quite sure I follow, CT. I do like the black background as it is now ...<br /><br />(maybe we should do this via private message so as not to mess with the thread <img border="0" title="" alt="[smile]" src="smile.gif" /> ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CBMGreatOne Posted February 1, 2002 Share Posted February 1, 2002 Not since Dallas from 92-95 has any team been NFC East Champ for two consecutive seasons. <br /><br />Let's look at the division champs from 99 to present<br /><br />99: AFC: East Indy, Central Jax, West Seahawks<br />NFC: East Skins, Central Bucs, West Rams<br />00: AFC: East Dolphins, Central Titans, West Raiders<br />NFC: East Giants, Central Vikings, West Saints<br />01: AFC: East Pats, Central Steelers, West Raiders<br />NFC: East Eagles, Central Bears, West Rams<br /><br />Now, if you look closely only two teams even made this list twice, the Raiders and Rams, and the only team to do it in consecutive seasons was the Raiders. <br /><br />Based on this alone I believe the divisional crown will elude the Eagles next year, and with Divisions trimmed to four teams, we should be able to edge Dallas and NYG out for our turn at the title once again.<br /><br />There's just so much parity in the NFL nowadays that I see us after such a great finish last year as a team that should contend for a division title right away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted February 1, 2002 Share Posted February 1, 2002 We sign Blake before the Draft we have to look at solidifying the line with the first round pick.<br /><br />We have two receivers that given the opportunity should fill the need.<br /><br />Gardner in the offseason should be working on his hands,route running and increasing his speed.<br /><br />His second year may be something to build upon and we Still need to see how good Skaggs is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted February 1, 2002 Share Posted February 1, 2002 bulldog....and the counter is that most 10-6/6-10 teams don't make it to the SB. even fewer win it. you know very well that there is an "above the layer" of 3-4 teams in the nfc. the skins aren't one of them. they need some smart drafts to get there - our track record with FAs/trades has been mixed). the fact is, we didn't win the big games when we had to this year. we were competitive, but came out on the short end on the scoreboard. a core is in place, but there are some glaring problems we are all aware of, principly defensive line and QB. sure the rams turned it around, but you must concede it was based on massive good fortune with 3 number 1 picks (if memory serves). as for the iggles, no matter how much i personally detest their fans, facts are they have been trending upward under Reid. I could just as easily argue that it is often the case that it takes RBs a full season to recover from injuries before they return to form. in as much as we argue gardner needed to get his rook year out of the way, the same can be said for mitchell. i think theiy are going to be very tough (esp their defense; yea vincent is 33 and darrel is what? 40?) - they have a plan and have kept to it the last few years: the evidence of success is on the field. don't get me wrong, it is obvious (bears, pats, etc) that a team can move into the playoffs and do well. i'm not sure, however, that parity translates into SB victories - which is all that matters. the ravens last year weren'tparity, they had one of the greatest defenses the league has ever seen (i.e., they weren't an example of how a parity competitive team can succeed). now, if the patsies win, i'll eat my shorts, bow in humble subsevience, and tout your laurels far and wide. until then, excellence is the standard i'm shooting for!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
riggins44 Posted February 1, 2002 Share Posted February 1, 2002 I wouldn't trade away picks. We should try to<br />fill our needs via draft and free agency. In<br />free agency we don't need the stars, just the <br />guy that will come in and do what is asked. It's<br />near impossible to buy a championship in football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lort Posted February 1, 2002 Share Posted February 1, 2002 I agree they would have to be morons to trade stephen davis. I think their just trying to call our bluff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.