PDA

View Full Version : Give up our first for Mike Wallace



jppmvp90
02-21-2012, 09:55 AM
what are everyones thoughts? our first is last anyways, so no biggie. steelers cant keep wallace cause of cap issues. imagine wallace nicks and cruz???

thomsoad
02-21-2012, 09:57 AM
Personally, I would rather use the 1st round on an OL.

Flip Empty
02-21-2012, 10:02 AM
The Giants won't be able to keep Wallace because of cap issues as well.

Anyway, the team is set at WR - even with the probable departure of Manningham. Bigger problems elsewhere.

Spizi
02-21-2012, 10:11 AM
Without taking account for the cap I would do that without hesitation. Mike Wallace is a legit top 10 WR in the NFL. He can take the top off the coverage and would easily replace and surpass manningham.

MikeIsaGiant
02-21-2012, 10:13 AM
We'll have some nice cap issues. I agree with a poster above (forgot the username) that I rather keep the first round pick for the OL.

Zoboomafoo
02-21-2012, 10:15 AM
Jeez, if there were no cap considerations, signing Carl Nicks would be a higher priority than signing Wallace. However, there is no way the Giants could afford to get Wallace under the cap. And if they had the room, it would be better to re-sign Manningham at a lower cost than Wallace, and I doubt Wallace would have much more impact on the offense than Manningham would.

Spizi
02-21-2012, 10:19 AM
I doubt Wallace would have much more impact on the offense than Manningham would.

FAIL.

Bohemian
02-21-2012, 10:20 AM
Of course, I would definitely like Wallace on the team, but the cap issue would be difficult to deal with afterwards. I think that if we can think of paying a player on such a scale, then we could probably look into resigning Manningham, and improving Cruz's contract, as it would be great to keep the already established chemistry intact.

I think Wallace would be amazing, but not when we could use 'franchise' kind of money, as we could just keep one of the top 5 receiver corps intact for that kind of cash.

Sorry for being redundant, as I just woke up and my coffee has not fully taken effect yet.

Go Blue!

Zoboomafoo
02-21-2012, 10:22 AM
Wallace is better than Manningham, but Wallace, Nicks, and Cruz aren't that much better than Manningham, Nicks, and Cruz. Maybe it's different in videogames.

MikeIsaGiant
02-21-2012, 10:23 AM
Wallace is better than Manningham, but Wallace, Nicks, and Cruz aren't that much better than Manningham, Nicks, and Cruz. Maybe it's different in videogames.


Agreed here.

G-Man67
02-21-2012, 10:25 AM
no thanks, i get that our 1st is more like a 2nd, but still no thanks

Bohemian
02-21-2012, 10:41 AM
no thanks, i get that our 1st is more like a 2nd, but still no thanks

The good thing about being a super bowl winner, is that it makes us realize the importance of seeing things from the team perspective; where as other teams always seem to fool their fans all the time with big signings. Of course, by those others, I mean to mainly point at the Eagles, Cowboys and Jets.

There is no doubt about Wallace being a superior receiver in comparison to Manningham, but there is no way that Manningham can be called a liability. Manningham is no Shockey to be sure. I do think that he is replaceable, but I do think that regardless who replaces him, it will be difficult to think of loosing the developed chemistry. Plus, thinking of how Manningham's development has occurred, it is not difficult to see how he could keep improving as a route runner in the coming years.

I guess that it all depends to the kind of money that his agent will be demanding, and how much other teams offer. Otherwise, keeping him makes complete sense.

Snappinnecks
02-21-2012, 10:55 AM
As bad as we ran the ball this year I'm stunned to think you guys think we need a WR!

THE_New_York_Giants
02-21-2012, 11:05 AM
Congrats! You just had a bad idea!

buddy33
02-21-2012, 11:16 AM
Forgetting about the little cap problem that exsists for a second, no. Why wouldn't thy just sign back Manningham? The 1st round pick is the last one? So it's useless? They drafted KP after they won their last Super Bowl.

TheEnigma
02-21-2012, 11:18 AM
This draft has a pretty good WR class so I'd rather use my 1st rounder on a WR if the value is there at the spot but even the later rounds should offer an opportunity for a good player.

Tommy_Ribs
02-21-2012, 12:17 PM
If there was ever a year to grab a young FA and give up a first rounder it is this year, since we have the 32nd pick.

Mike Wallace would be great, but we probably won't have the cap-room either.

The Team to look out for could be Baltimore or New England really going after him hard.

nygsb42champs
02-21-2012, 12:29 PM
How are the Giants going to be able to afford him? we have no cap room either.

egyptian420
02-21-2012, 12:50 PM
How are the Giants going to be able to afford him? we have no cap room either.
+1.....I know every season during free agency there's pretty much a thread about every single big name FA and whether or not we should get them, but this is one season where if you're going to talk FA, you should talk about who we're going to lose

G-Men Surg.
02-21-2012, 12:53 PM
Give up a first and no cap room and to top it all he wants big buck this year ?
No thanks I prefer to keep it in house with JJ or if by some miracle MM works something out with FO, I also like what Devin Thomas did at the end of the season, he looks like he is working hard and by all means its paying off.
Sorry bro I'm not on that bandwagon.

Vtgmenfan89
02-21-2012, 02:49 PM
I wonder sometimes if people understand there is a salary cap, and that we have holes to fill that are far more important to the continuation of our success. We just had two 1000 yard receivers for the first time in franchise history. WR is one of the last positions next to QB and D-line we need to address with any sort of FA big money or early draft pick.

O-line or TE with that pick in my opinion, unless there is a defensive stud still sitting there that we can't pass up. I personally really like the Stanford TE with that pick. 1st round TE's have a very high success rate and that would solidify the position for us. 6'6 244 (plus he prob adds some weight in the NFL) in the middle of the field with the weapons we already have? Yes, please

Morehead State
02-21-2012, 02:54 PM
what are everyones thoughts? our first is last anyways, so no biggie. steelers cant keep wallace cause of cap issues. imagine wallace nicks and cruz???
</P>


1. Mike Wallace is a free agent and isn't available in a trade</P>


2. WR is the strongest position on our roster. Why would we give up a first and not deal with real needs.</P>


3. Did I mention that Wallace is a free agent?</P>

slipknottin
02-21-2012, 03:11 PM
Assuming the giants could actually afford him, absolutely I would give up the first for him.

Drez
02-21-2012, 03:21 PM
what are everyones thoughts? our first is last anyways, so no biggie. steelers cant keep wallace cause of cap issues. imagine wallace nicks and cruz???
</P>


1. Mike Wallace is a free agent and isn't available in a trade</P>


2. WR is the strongest position on our roster. Why would we give up a first and not deal with real needs.</P>


3. Did I mention that Wallace is a free agent?</P>


</P>


1. Did you forget to mention that he's RESTRICTED free agent with a high tender on him. It wouldn't be a trade, it'd be part of the cost of signing him.</P>

Morehead State
02-21-2012, 03:30 PM
what are everyones thoughts? our first is last anyways, so no biggie. steelers cant keep wallace cause of cap issues. imagine wallace nicks and cruz???
</P>


1. Mike Wallace is a free agent and isn't available in a trade</P>


2. WR is the strongest position on our roster. Why would we give up a first and not deal with real needs.</P>


3. Did I mention that Wallace is a free agent?</P>


</P>


1. Did you forget to mention that he's RESTRICTED free agent with a high tender on him. It wouldn't be a trade, it'd be part of the cost of signing him.</P>


</P>


Don'y you have to give up more than a first to sign a restricted FA?</P>

Zoboomafoo
02-21-2012, 03:32 PM
Depends on the tender level. $2mil is a first. $2.5mil and over is a first and third. You'd think it would be the latter.

Providence
02-21-2012, 03:32 PM
We had one of the best passing attacks in the league this year and these message boards are lit up with posts hoping that we "sign X WR" or "trade for X WR." Doesn't make sense to me.

FloydEddings2
02-21-2012, 03:46 PM
Love Wallace but not for this team. There are only so many balls to go around and you can say that we already have two number ones and one who is woefully under paid.

How would you feel if your team said we can't pay you but we're going to bring in a guy at your position and pay him what you believe you deserve? It's fun to speculate but there is no way this is going to happen.

Morehead State
02-21-2012, 03:57 PM
We had one of the best passing attacks in the league this year and these message boards are lit up with posts hoping that we "sign X WR" or "trade for X WR." Doesn't make sense to me.</P>


Gotta completely agree with this. To try to sign Wallace or any other high price WR would be a kin to "Eagles 2011" behavior.</P>


Adress needs. Thats what free agency is for. And you don't give up high draft picks to sign a guy that doesn't do that.</P>


Can't believe a guy like Slip would take any other position.</P>

TheBookOfEli
02-21-2012, 03:58 PM
Nah. OL, TE, or RB in the first round.

Zoboomafoo
02-21-2012, 04:10 PM
Considering the cap problems and all of the Giants free agents that need re-signing, Reese will probably only pick up one if any FAs from other teams, just like last year.

slipknottin
02-21-2012, 04:16 PM
Depends on the tender level. $2mil is a first. $2.5mil and over is a first and third. You'd think it would be the latter.

there is no first and third round tender this year.

Its either just a first, or franchise tag which is two firsts. Pitt can not afford the franchise tag on him.

Morehead State
02-21-2012, 04:17 PM
Considering the cap problems and all of the Giants free agents that need re-signing, Reese will probably only pick up one if any FAs from other teams, just like last year.</P>


Disagree. I see us picking up cheap vets, possibly at RT and maybe a 3rd or 4th CB. But I don't see us signing any high priced FA's. I don't look for us to make any splashes in the first several days.</P>

Morehead State
02-21-2012, 04:19 PM
Depends on the tender level. $2mil is a first. $2.5mil and over is a first and third. You'd think it would be the latter. there is no first and third round tender this year. Its either just a first, or franchise tag which is two firsts. Pitt can not afford the franchise tag on him.</P>


Why on earth would we sign a high price free agent, giving up a first for a position where we are especially strong.</P>


You need to work for the Eagles Slip. they like your phylosophy. It worked out well last season for them.</P>


You use free agency to fill holes and you use the draft to build your team. Its NFL 101 for God's sake.</P>

slipknottin
02-21-2012, 04:21 PM
Why on earth would we sign a high price free agent, giving up a first for a position where we are especially strong.</P>


You need to work for the Eagles Slip.* they like your phylosophy. It worked out well last season for them.</P>


You use free agency to fill holes and you use the draft to build your team.* Its NFL 101 for God's sake.</P>

I said they couldnt afford him...

Theoretically, if they didnt have to sign Wallace to a big contract, he essentially would be building through the draft. A 1st round pick for a receiver who is better than any of the receivers in the draft.

And as much as everyone says the giants have Cruz and Nicks, teams can take away two receivers. But they can not take away three receivers.

Wallace is three months older than Cruz, and arguably the best deep threat in the league.

Morehead State
02-21-2012, 04:26 PM
Why on earth would we sign a high price free agent, giving up a first for a position where we are especially strong.


</P>


You need to work for the Eagles Slip. they like your phylosophy. It worked out well last season for them.</P>


You use free agency to fill holes and you use the draft to build your team. Its NFL 101 for God's sake.</P>


I said they couldnt afford him... Theoretically, if they didnt have to sign Wallace to a big contract, he essentially would be building through the draft. A 1st round pick for a receiver who is better than any of the receivers in the draft. And as much as everyone says the giants have Cruz and Nicks, teams can take away two receivers. But they can not take away three receivers. Wallace is three months older than Cruz, and arguably the best deep threat in the league.</P>


You don't sign a high priced free agent unless its for a position of need. Period.</P>


We have needs other places and thats where we should spend our resources.</P>

slipknottin
02-21-2012, 04:30 PM
>You don't sign a high priced free agent unless its for a position of need.* Period.</P>


We have needs other places and thats where we should spend our resources.</P>

I said earlier that they cant afford him. Im not sure who you are arguing with.

Morehead State
02-21-2012, 04:36 PM
&gt;You don't sign a high priced free agent unless its for a position of need. Period.


</P>


We have needs other places and thats where we should spend our resources.</P>


I said earlier that they cant afford him. Im not sure who you are arguing with.</P>


Even if we could "afford him" you don't sign high priced free agents unless its a position of need.</P>


The Eagles could afford Nhamdi last season. They blew $12MM on him when they could have spent that on some O linem,en and some LB's.</P>


Everyone has a cap. Everyone has to spend their money carefully. You don't drop a ton on one position when that position is already a position of great strength. And leave other needs unattended.</P>


Thats why I'm arguing with you.</P>

slipknottin
02-21-2012, 04:38 PM
You don't sign a high priced free agent unless its for a position of need.* Period.

I think WR is a position of need. Nobody has a less valuable 1st round pick than the giants. If they had the cap room, I would absolutely want them to try to bring in one of the best FA WRs.


And CB was a position of need for the eagles. They were playing an undrafted FA across from Asante Samuel. Or do you not remember.

MattMeyerBud
02-21-2012, 04:39 PM
i can't believe that this thread even exists

Morehead State
02-21-2012, 04:41 PM
You don't sign a high priced free agent unless its for a position of need. Period. I think WR is a position of need. Nobody has a less valuable 1st round pick than the giants. If they had the cap room, I would absolutely want them to try to bring in one of the best FA WRs. And CB was a position of need for the eagles. They were playing an undrafted FA across from Asante Samuel. Or do you not remember.</P>


I seem to remember a trade they made with the Cards. Or do you not remember that.</P>

slipknottin
02-21-2012, 04:43 PM
I seem to remember a trade they made with the Cards.* Or do you not remember that.</P>

For a CB who is inconsistent at best.

Zoboomafoo
02-21-2012, 04:48 PM
Theoretically, if they didnt have to sign Wallace to a big contract, he essentially would be building through the draft. A 1st round pick for a receiver who is better than any of the receivers in the draft.
He may be better, but if money is no object, why not snatch up Vincent Jackson and Wes Welker while they're at it? You can't cover 5.

Also, Mario Williams.

MattMeyerBud
02-21-2012, 04:51 PM
Theoretically, if they didnt have to sign Wallace to a big contract, he essentially would be building through the draft. A 1st round pick for a receiver who is better than any of the receivers in the draft.
He may be better, but if money is no object, why not snatch up Vincent Jackson and Wes Welker while they're at it? You can't cover 5.

Also, Mario Williams.

Or why not just SIGN a Vincent Jackson or Wes Welker???

If we had the money to give Wallace a deal, why wouldn't we just SIGN a guy who is of equal talent to the others and keep the first round pick?

giantsfan420
02-21-2012, 04:51 PM
If you go by what MS says, we wouldn't have 3 quality DE's...

whoever slip should go work for, im glad MS don't work for the Giants. Keep him as far away from the facility as possible.

we have our most success from the trio de, and trio wr...MM goes, we need to get another WR imho. I personally wouldn't want Wallace bc it'd cost too much, but to act like your some authority on the matter is hilarious given ur past player assessments

slipknottin
02-21-2012, 04:53 PM
Or why not just SIGN a Vincent Jackson or Wes Welker???

If we had the money to give Wallace a deal, why wouldn't we just SIGN a guy who is of equal talent to the others and keep the first round pick?


Because Wallace is 5 years younger, fits the giants offense much better, and is the best deep threat in the league.

MattMeyerBud
02-21-2012, 04:56 PM
Or why not just SIGN a Vincent Jackson or Wes Welker???

If we had the money to give Wallace a deal, why wouldn't we just SIGN a guy who is of equal talent to the others and keep the first round pick?


Because Wallace is 5 years younger, fits the giants offense much better, and is the best deep threat in the league.

who cares? I'm sure Bowe, Welker, VJack would all fit just as well - especially if we got to keep a first rounder

slipknottin
02-21-2012, 05:00 PM
who cares? I'm sure Bowe, Welker, VJack would all fit just as well - especially if we got to keep a first rounder


everyone cares.

None of the other FA WRs fit the giants system anywhere near as well as Wallace, as he is essentially a better Manningham, with better vertical speed and experience playing in the giants type offense.

And if you really dont think Wallace being 5 years younger (3 months older than Cruz) is a significant upside to him.... well, i dont have anything else to say.

Morehead State
02-21-2012, 05:03 PM
If you go by what MS says, we wouldn't have 3 quality DE's... whoever slip should go work for, im glad MS don't work for the Giants. Keep him as far away from the facility as possible. we have our most success from the trio de, and trio wr...MM goes, we need to get another WR imho. I personally wouldn't want Wallace bc it'd cost too much, but to act like your some authority on the matter is hilarious given ur past player assessments</P>


The reason we have 3 quality DE's is precisly what I said. You fill holes with free agency and you build with the draft. We <U>drafted</U> all three of our top DE's. Not to mention Kiwi who may return to DE this season if we trade Osi. Kiwi and JPP both over the whining of fans that we didn't have a need.</P>


To argue that we should give up our #1 draft choice to sign a high priced WR where we already have two top 10 WR's on the roster is absolutely nuts, even if we were way under the cap. You are saying that I should stay away from the facility. You belong in a facility with straight jackets if you think that signing Wallace and giving up a precious draft pick would be a good move, with or without cap space.</P>


the only agreement with you would be Slip and Daniel Snyder.</P>


</P>

slipknottin
02-21-2012, 05:07 PM
the only agreement with you would be Slip and Daniel Snyder.</P>


*</P>

Theres nothing wrong with high priced FAs, assuming they fill a hole and fit the system.

Wallace would do both. The #3 receiver is an essential position on the giants offense.

Synder spent his millions on guys who didnt fit the system or werent even good players.

bandwgn86
02-21-2012, 05:07 PM
what are everyones thoughts? our first is last anyways, so no biggie. steelers cant keep wallace cause of cap issues. imagine wallace nicks and cruz???
Eli doesnt have the arm strength to lead Wallace</P>


</P>


</P>


</P>


</P>


</P>


red font</P>

giantsfan420
02-21-2012, 05:08 PM
If you go by what MS says, we wouldn't have 3 quality DE's... whoever slip should go work for, im glad MS don't work for the Giants. Keep him as far away from the facility as possible. we have our most success from the trio de, and trio wr...MM goes, we need to get another WR imho. I personally wouldn't want Wallace bc it'd cost too much, but to act like your some authority on the matter is hilarious given ur past player assessments</P>


The reason we have 3 quality DE's is precisly what I said.* You fill holes with free agency and you build with the draft.* We <U>drafted</U> all three of our top DE's.* Not to mention Kiwi who may return to DE this season if we trade Osi. Kiwi and JPP both over the whining of fans that we didn't have a need.</P>


To argue that we should give up our #1 draft choice to sign a high priced WR where we already have two top 10 WR's on the roster is absolutely nuts, even if we were way under the cap.* You are saying that I should stay away from the facility.* You belong in a facility with straight jackets if you think that signing Wallace and giving up a precious draft pick would be a good move, with or without cap space.</P>


*</P>

notice how i said i wouldn't sign him bc he'd be too expensive. we'd still need another wr imho as i dont think jerrigan will be ready, i've about given up on barden, and i dunno if thomas can be that guy all season.

and your point wasn't as much as draft as it was signing as i understood it. u seemed to be against adding a wr thru FA or draft.

but like i said, whatever, your no authority on what the giants should or shouldnt do with their roster, if you were, the team would look completely different and we'd prob have some scrub at qb

edit-lol, took u 5 min of looking at ur screen to come up with that quip...lmfao...pathetic.

giantsfan420
02-21-2012, 05:17 PM
further, at the 32nd pick, virtually any position could be targeted.

the BPA could very well be a wr with this draft class.
what would be better? draft a guy, hope he can make it in the nfl, and hope he can pick up the playbook (something virtually impossible for rookie wr's on the giants sans nicks)
or
sign a guy who has already proven to be a viable, legitimate target with better speed than any of the top talent wr's in the draft?

i mean, if we were to draft a wr at 32, why not just sign a guy like wallace which is virtually just drafting wallace at our pick?
again, i'd rather not bc wallace will be far more expensive than a MM, but to act like anyone who feels that way is "a snyder or should work with philly" is just being a pretentious, egocentric, stuck up duchebag...no i wasn't trying to describe you MS although it could certainly be understood that way

Morehead State
02-21-2012, 05:21 PM
If you go by what MS says, we wouldn't have 3 quality DE's... whoever slip should go work for, im glad MS don't work for the Giants. Keep him as far away from the facility as possible. we have our most success from the trio de, and trio wr...MM goes, we need to get another WR imho. I personally wouldn't want Wallace bc it'd cost too much, but to act like your some authority on the matter is hilarious given ur past player assessments</P>


The reason we have 3 quality DE's is precisly what I said. You fill holes with free agency and you build with the draft. We <U>drafted</U> all three of our top DE's. Not to mention Kiwi who may return to DE this season if we trade Osi. Kiwi and JPP both over the whining of fans that we didn't have a need.</P>


To argue that we should give up our #1 draft choice to sign a high priced WR where we already have two top 10 WR's on the roster is absolutely nuts, even if we were way under the cap. You are saying that I should stay away from the facility. You belong in a facility with straight jackets if you think that signing Wallace and giving up a precious draft pick would be a good move, with or without cap space.</P>


</P>


notice how i said i wouldn't sign him bc he'd be too expensive. we'd still need another wr imho as i dont think jerrigan will be ready, i've about given up on barden, and i dunno if thomas can be that guy all season. and your point wasn't as much as draft as it was signing as i understood it. u seemed to be against adding a wr thru FA or draft. but like i said, whatever, your no authority on what the giants should or shouldnt do with their roster, if you were, the team would look completely different and we'd prob have some scrub at qb edit-lol, took u 5 min of looking at ur screen to come up with that quip...lmfao...pathetic.</P>


Then you can't read.</P>


I'm saying that draft choices are precious. You don't give them up for high price free agents for a position where we are already strong. I also said you don't sign high price free agents anyway for positions where we are strong, EVEN IF WE CAN "AFFORD" IT. Which is a moot point in the salary cap era, especially after the new CBA.</P>


If Mike Wallace is signed by another team, (which I doubt) it will be by a team that has a glairing need for a WR, like the Pats or Seattle or a number of other teams who don't have two WR's that combined for 2700 yards.</P>


As to the other comments in your post, they amount to nothing higher than drunken ranting, and I dismiss them out of hand.</P>


When you want to make a well thought out point about what the Giants should do in both free agency and the draft, I'm all ears. Until then shut the hell up.</P>


</P>

giantman8493
02-21-2012, 05:23 PM
further, at the 32nd pick, virtually any position could be targeted.

the BPA could very well be a wr with this draft class.
what would be better? draft a guy, hope he can make it in the nfl, and hope he can pick up the playbook (something virtually impossible for rookie wr's on the giants sans nicks)
or
sign a guy who has already proven to be a viable, legitimate target with better speed than any of the top talent wr's in the draft?

i mean, if we were to draft a wr at 32, why not just sign a guy like wallace which is virtually just drafting wallace at our pick?
again, i'd rather not bc wallace will be far more expensive than a MM, but to act like anyone who feels that way is "a snyder or should work with philly" is just being a pretentious, egocentric, stuck up duchebag...no i wasn't trying to describe you MS although it could certainly be understood that waywho says were going to draft a wr first round? I like Joe adams in the latter rounds.

slipknottin
02-21-2012, 05:29 PM
You don't give them up for high price free agents for a position where we are already strong.*

How are they strong at #3 receiver?

Barden, Jernigan, Hixon, Thomas? Thats what you are calling 'strong'?

giantsfan420
02-21-2012, 05:29 PM
If you go by what MS says, we wouldn't have 3 quality DE's... whoever slip should go work for, im glad MS don't work for the Giants. Keep him as far away from the facility as possible. we have our most success from the trio de, and trio wr...MM goes, we need to get another WR imho. I personally wouldn't want Wallace bc it'd cost too much, but to act like your some authority on the matter is hilarious given ur past player assessments</P>


The reason we have 3 quality DE's is precisly what I said.* You fill holes with free agency and you build with the draft.* We <U>drafted</U> all three of our top DE's.* Not to mention Kiwi who may return to DE this season if we trade Osi. Kiwi and JPP both over the whining of fans that we didn't have a need.</P>


To argue that we should give up our #1 draft choice to sign a high priced WR where we already have two top 10 WR's on the roster is absolutely nuts, even if we were way under the cap.* You are saying that I should stay away from the facility.* You belong in a facility with straight jackets if you think that signing Wallace and giving up a precious draft pick would be a good move, with or without cap space.</P>


*</P>


notice how i said i wouldn't sign him bc he'd be too expensive. we'd still need another wr imho as i dont think jerrigan will be ready, i've about given up on barden, and i dunno if thomas can be that guy all season. and your point wasn't as much as draft as it was signing as i understood it. u seemed to be against adding a wr thru FA or draft. but like i said, whatever, your no authority on what the giants should or shouldnt do with their roster, if you were, the team would look completely different and we'd prob have some scrub at qb edit-lol, took u 5 min of looking at ur screen to come up with that quip...lmfao...pathetic.</P>


Then you can't read.*</P>


*I'm saying that draft choices are precious.* You don't give them up for high price free agents for a position where we are already strong.** I also said you don't sign high price free agents anyway for positions where we are strong, EVEN IF WE CAN "AFFORD" IT.* Which is a moot point in the salary cap era, especially after the new CBA.</P>


If Mike Wallace is signed by another team, (which I doubt) it will be by a team that has a glairing need for a WR, like the Pats or Seattle or a number of other teams who don't have two WR's that combined for 2700 yards.</P>


As to the other comments in your post, they amount to nothing higher than drunken ranting, and I dismiss them out of hand.</P>


When you want to make a well thought out point about what the Giants should do in both free agency and the draft, I'm all ears.* Until then shut the hell up.</P>


*</P>

huh? i've read in other threads where some one brings up the idea of taking wr at 32 and u shoot it down

and what don't u get? MM LEAVING MEANS WE HAVE A HOLE. our success was based on the TRIO of wr's.

"Make MM beat us, stay on Nicks and Cruz"-BB...do we win the SB if BB is saying "make Barden beat us?"

and its odd u bring up reading issues as u thought i disagreed that wallace wouldn't be worth it. i happen to agree with u on wallace, but ur going around saying a poster should work with philly or snyder bc he feels differently than u...ie...ur typical behavior of "im smarter than u, i'll mock u bc u dont think the way i do"...

and honestly, we all know ur track record on player evaluation...and lets just say, it ain't exactly stellar.

but again, losing MM means we would have a hole we need to address, whether it be by draft or FA...and its weird too how u act like theirs a discrepancy between signing wallace and drafting a wr...WE WOULD VIRTUALLY BE DRAFTING WALLACE. instead of drafting a collegiate wr with the 1rst pick, we'd be getting wallace with our first pick...

not sure why u feel so superior when ur reasoning is faulty as ****

Morehead State
02-21-2012, 05:31 PM
the only agreement with you would be Slip and Daniel Snyder.


</P>


</P>


Theres nothing wrong with high priced FAs, assuming they fill a hole and fit the system. Wallace would do both. The #3 receiver is an essential position on the giants offense. Synder spent his millions on guys who didnt fit the system or werent even good players.</P>


So lets say that magically we had plenty of room under the cap. Its you position that we should sign a high priced free agent WR, give up our first round pick to suplement an already strong position? </P>


All instead of expending that valuable cap space to address positions of real need like the O line, LB etc...</P>


Your little friend 420 can call me whatever names he wants to, but thats still extreemly poor team management.</P>

slipknottin
02-21-2012, 05:33 PM
So lets say that magically we had plenty of room under the cap.* Its you position that we should sign a high priced free agent WR, give up our first round pick to suplement an already strong position?*

I believe that WR is more of a priority than LB, so yes. That #3 WR spot is critical to this teams success. Moreso than most other positions.

Morehead State
02-21-2012, 05:36 PM
If you go by what MS says, we wouldn't have 3 quality DE's... whoever slip should go work for, im glad MS don't work for the Giants. Keep him as far away from the facility as possible. we have our most success from the trio de, and trio wr...MM goes, we need to get another WR imho. I personally wouldn't want Wallace bc it'd cost too much, but to act like your some authority on the matter is hilarious given ur past player assessments</P>


The reason we have 3 quality DE's is precisly what I said. You fill holes with free agency and you build with the draft. We <U>drafted</U> all three of our top DE's. Not to mention Kiwi who may return to DE this season if we trade Osi. Kiwi and JPP both over the whining of fans that we didn't have a need.</P>


To argue that we should give up our #1 draft choice to sign a high priced WR where we already have two top 10 WR's on the roster is absolutely nuts, even if we were way under the cap. You are saying that I should stay away from the facility. You belong in a facility with straight jackets if you think that signing Wallace and giving up a precious draft pick would be a good move, with or without cap space.</P>


</P>


notice how i said i wouldn't sign him bc he'd be too expensive. we'd still need another wr imho as i dont think jerrigan will be ready, i've about given up on barden, and i dunno if thomas can be that guy all season. and your point wasn't as much as draft as it was signing as i understood it. u seemed to be against adding a wr thru FA or draft. but like i said, whatever, your no authority on what the giants should or shouldnt do with their roster, if you were, the team would look completely different and we'd prob have some scrub at qb edit-lol, took u 5 min of looking at ur screen to come up with that quip...lmfao...pathetic.</P>


Then you can't read.</P>


I'm saying that draft choices are precious. You don't give them up for high price free agents for a position where we are already strong. I also said you don't sign high price free agents anyway for positions where we are strong, EVEN IF WE CAN "AFFORD" IT. Which is a moot point in the salary cap era, especially after the new CBA.</P>


If Mike Wallace is signed by another team, (which I doubt) it will be by a team that has a glairing need for a WR, like the Pats or Seattle or a number of other teams who don't have two WR's that combined for 2700 yards.</P>


As to the other comments in your post, they amount to nothing higher than drunken ranting, and I dismiss them out of hand.</P>


When you want to make a well thought out point about what the Giants should do in both free agency and the draft, I'm all ears. Until then shut the hell up.</P>


</P>


huh? i've read in other threads where some one brings up the idea of taking wr at 32 and u shoot it down and what don't u get? MM LEAVING MEANS WE HAVE A HOLE. our success was based on the TRIO of wr's. "Make MM beat us, stay on Nicks and Cruz"-BB...do we win the SB if BB is saying "make Barden beat us?" and its odd u bring up reading issues as u thought i disagreed that wallace wouldn't be worth it. i happen to agree with u on wallace, but ur going around saying a poster should work with philly or snyder bc he feels differently than u...ie...ur typical behavior of "im smarter than u, i'll mock u bc u dont think the way i do"... and honestly, we all know ur track record on player evaluation...and lets just say, it ain't exactly stellar. but again, losing MM means we would have a hole we need to address, whether it be by draft or FA...and its weird too how u act like theirs a discrepancy between signing wallace and drafting a wr...WE WOULD VIRTUALLY BE DRAFTING WALLACE. instead of drafting a collegiate wr with the 1rst pick, we'd be getting wallace with our first pick... not sure why u feel so superior when ur reasoning is faulty as ****</P>


I never said anything about taking or not taking a WR at 32. He would have to be the next Jerry Rice as far as I'm concerned but i have not said word one about it.</P>


Make something else up....this is fun.</P>


If we need to fill a #3 WR position we certainly aren't going to pay $10+ MM and blow a #1 pick for it. Thats completely nuts. </P>


In the salary cap era you have to win with young players along with vets. No one can fit a lot of high priced vets under the cap. I see us picking up possibly a vet O tackle and maybe a vet CB, both on the cheap. I don't see us doing what you guys seem to be suggesting. And I promise you, neither is JR.</P>

Morehead State
02-21-2012, 05:39 PM
So lets say that magically we had plenty of room under the cap. Its you position that we should sign a high priced free agent WR, give up our first round pick to suplement an already strong position? I believe that WR is more of a priority than LB, so yes. That #3 WR spot is critical to this teams success. Moreso than most other positions.


Fine. Thats not an unreasonable argument. But if you want to get a third WR, you don't blow a crapload of lute and a first round pick on it.


It would be much better to try to resign MM (which we probably can't) or get a cheap vet to fill that roll. Plenty out there. Or actually continue to cultivate our young players. that worked out pretty well with Cruz. We drafted JJ and Barden over the last few years.


NFL teams simply can't use the strategy you are advocating and win.</P>

giantsfan420
02-21-2012, 05:42 PM
If you go by what MS says, we wouldn't have 3 quality DE's... whoever slip should go work for, im glad MS don't work for the Giants. Keep him as far away from the facility as possible. we have our most success from the trio de, and trio wr...MM goes, we need to get another WR imho. I personally wouldn't want Wallace bc it'd cost too much, but to act like your some authority on the matter is hilarious given ur past player assessments</P>


The reason we have 3 quality DE's is precisly what I said.* You fill holes with free agency and you build with the draft.* We <U>drafted</U> all three of our top DE's.* Not to mention Kiwi who may return to DE this season if we trade Osi. Kiwi and JPP both over the whining of fans that we didn't have a need.</P>


To argue that we should give up our #1 draft choice to sign a high priced WR where we already have two top 10 WR's on the roster is absolutely nuts, even if we were way under the cap.* You are saying that I should stay away from the facility.* You belong in a facility with straight jackets if you think that signing Wallace and giving up a precious draft pick would be a good move, with or without cap space.</P>


*</P>


notice how i said i wouldn't sign him bc he'd be too expensive. we'd still need another wr imho as i dont think jerrigan will be ready, i've about given up on barden, and i dunno if thomas can be that guy all season. and your point wasn't as much as draft as it was signing as i understood it. u seemed to be against adding a wr thru FA or draft. but like i said, whatever, your no authority on what the giants should or shouldnt do with their roster, if you were, the team would look completely different and we'd prob have some scrub at qb edit-lol, took u 5 min of looking at ur screen to come up with that quip...lmfao...pathetic.</P>


Then you can't read.*</P>


*I'm saying that draft choices are precious.* You don't give them up for high price free agents for a position where we are already strong.** I also said you don't sign high price free agents anyway for positions where we are strong, EVEN IF WE CAN "AFFORD" IT.* Which is a moot point in the salary cap era, especially after the new CBA.</P>


If Mike Wallace is signed by another team, (which I doubt) it will be by a team that has a glairing need for a WR, like the Pats or Seattle or a number of other teams who don't have two WR's that combined for 2700 yards.</P>


As to the other comments in your post, they amount to nothing higher than drunken ranting, and I dismiss them out of hand.</P>


When you want to make a well thought out point about what the Giants should do in both free agency and the draft, I'm all ears.* Until then shut the hell up.</P>


*</P>


huh? i've read in other threads where some one brings up the idea of taking wr at 32 and u shoot it down and what don't u get? MM LEAVING MEANS WE HAVE A HOLE. our success was based on the TRIO of wr's. "Make MM beat us, stay on Nicks and Cruz"-BB...do we win the SB if BB is saying "make Barden beat us?" and its odd u bring up reading issues as u thought i disagreed that wallace wouldn't be worth it. i happen to agree with u on wallace, but ur going around saying a poster should work with philly or snyder bc he feels differently than u...ie...ur typical behavior of "im smarter than u, i'll mock u bc u dont think the way i do"... and honestly, we all know ur track record on player evaluation...and lets just say, it ain't exactly stellar. but again, losing MM means we would have a hole we need to address, whether it be by draft or FA...and its weird too how u act like theirs a discrepancy between signing wallace and drafting a wr...WE WOULD VIRTUALLY BE DRAFTING WALLACE. instead of drafting a collegiate wr with the 1rst pick, we'd be getting wallace with our first pick... not sure why u feel so superior when ur reasoning is faulty as ****</P>


I never said anything about taking or not taking a WR at 32.* He would have to be the next Jerry Rice as far as I'm concerned but i have not said word one about it.</P>


Make something else up....this is fun.</P>


If we need to fill a #3 WR position we certainly aren't going to pay $10+ MM and blow a #1 pick for it.* Thats completely nuts.* </P>


In the salary cap era you have to win with young players along with vets. No one can fit a lot of high priced vets under the cap.* I see us picking up possibly a vet O tackle and maybe a vet CB, both on the cheap.* I don't see us doing what you guys seem to be suggesting.* And I promise you, neither is JR.</P>

oh, sorry. could have swore u responded in another thread about not needing a wr at the 32 pick bc its a strong area.

and if we re-sign MM why would we want wallace? i dont understand the 10+MM claim ur trying to make.

again, for the last time, i dont want wallace personally bc i feel he'd be too expensive. i'd rather re-sign MM or even SS12.

with that said, i certainly won't go around saying some one who feels differently is philly eagles moronic, or even worse, dan snyder moronic...well, bc i'm not a pretentious, egocentric, stuck up duche bag. not saying u are, i'm just saying i'm not.

while i disagree with the notion of going after wallace, i certainly can at least see where that person is coming from.

Morehead State
02-21-2012, 05:50 PM
If you go by what MS says, we wouldn't have 3 quality DE's... whoever slip should go work for, im glad MS don't work for the Giants. Keep him as far away from the facility as possible. we have our most success from the trio de, and trio wr...MM goes, we need to get another WR imho. I personally wouldn't want Wallace bc it'd cost too much, but to act like your some authority on the matter is hilarious given ur past player assessments</P>


The reason we have 3 quality DE's is precisly what I said. You fill holes with free agency and you build with the draft. We <U>drafted</U> all three of our top DE's. Not to mention Kiwi who may return to DE this season if we trade Osi. Kiwi and JPP both over the whining of fans that we didn't have a need.</P>


To argue that we should give up our #1 draft choice to sign a high priced WR where we already have two top 10 WR's on the roster is absolutely nuts, even if we were way under the cap. You are saying that I should stay away from the facility. You belong in a facility with straight jackets if you think that signing Wallace and giving up a precious draft pick would be a good move, with or without cap space.</P>


</P>


notice how i said i wouldn't sign him bc he'd be too expensive. we'd still need another wr imho as i dont think jerrigan will be ready, i've about given up on barden, and i dunno if thomas can be that guy all season. and your point wasn't as much as draft as it was signing as i understood it. u seemed to be against adding a wr thru FA or draft. but like i said, whatever, your no authority on what the giants should or shouldnt do with their roster, if you were, the team would look completely different and we'd prob have some scrub at qb edit-lol, took u 5 min of looking at ur screen to come up with that quip...lmfao...pathetic.</P>


Then you can't read.</P>


I'm saying that draft choices are precious. You don't give them up for high price free agents for a position where we are already strong. I also said you don't sign high price free agents anyway for positions where we are strong, EVEN IF WE CAN "AFFORD" IT. Which is a moot point in the salary cap era, especially after the new CBA.</P>


If Mike Wallace is signed by another team, (which I doubt) it will be by a team that has a glairing need for a WR, like the Pats or Seattle or a number of other teams who don't have two WR's that combined for 2700 yards.</P>


As to the other comments in your post, they amount to nothing higher than drunken ranting, and I dismiss them out of hand.</P>


When you want to make a well thought out point about what the Giants should do in both free agency and the draft, I'm all ears. Until then shut the hell up.</P>


</P>


huh? i've read in other threads where some one brings up the idea of taking wr at 32 and u shoot it down and what don't u get? MM LEAVING MEANS WE HAVE A HOLE. our success was based on the TRIO of wr's. "Make MM beat us, stay on Nicks and Cruz"-BB...do we win the SB if BB is saying "make Barden beat us?" and its odd u bring up reading issues as u thought i disagreed that wallace wouldn't be worth it. i happen to agree with u on wallace, but ur going around saying a poster should work with philly or snyder bc he feels differently than u...ie...ur typical behavior of "im smarter than u, i'll mock u bc u dont think the way i do"... and honestly, we all know ur track record on player evaluation...and lets just say, it ain't exactly stellar. but again, losing MM means we would have a hole we need to address, whether it be by draft or FA...and its weird too how u act like theirs a discrepancy between signing wallace and drafting a wr...WE WOULD VIRTUALLY BE DRAFTING WALLACE. instead of drafting a collegiate wr with the 1rst pick, we'd be getting wallace with our first pick... not sure why u feel so superior when ur reasoning is faulty as ****</P>


I never said anything about taking or not taking a WR at 32. He would have to be the next Jerry Rice as far as I'm concerned but i have not said word one about it.</P>


Make something else up....this is fun.</P>


If we need to fill a #3 WR position we certainly aren't going to pay $10+ MM and blow a #1 pick for it. Thats completely nuts. </P>


In the salary cap era you have to win with young players along with vets. No one can fit a lot of high priced vets under the cap. I see us picking up possibly a vet O tackle and maybe a vet CB, both on the cheap. I don't see us doing what you guys seem to be suggesting. And I promise you, neither is JR.</P>


oh, sorry. could have swore u responded in another thread about not needing a wr at the 32 pick bc its a strong area. and if we re-sign MM why would we want wallace? i dont understand the 10+MM claim ur trying to make. again, for the last time, i dont want wallace personally bc i feel he'd be too expensive. i'd rather re-sign MM or even SS12. with that said, i certainly won't go around saying some one who feels differently is philly eagles moronic, or even worse, dan snyder moronic...well, bc i'm not a pretentious, egocentric, stuck up duche bag. not saying u are, i'm just saying i'm not. while i disagree with the notion of going after wallace, i certainly can at least see where that person is coming from.</P>


What I suggested in that special Morehead smartass style was that what was being suggested is exactly what the Eagles were guilty of last season. Spending too much in areas where there was little need, and ignoring the areas where they had great need. All (in their case) to make some stupid splash in the FA market. That is exactly what Slip was suggesting. And if you know Slip you wopuld know that belittling posters is his favorite pasttime.</P>


JR himself said last season that he refused to go after the "sexy picks", which was a definate reference to the Eagles. Do you honestly think he would change his phylosophy now when we've seen our results vs. Philly's?</P>


But your name calling rants were akin to a 6 year old girl when she didn't get what she wanted. The only thing missing was the holding of your breath and stomping your feet. (which you actually may have been doing..the romantic in me wants to believe it)</P>


Go read them.</P>


</P>

NYGRealityCheck
02-21-2012, 05:59 PM
Mike Wallace is the rising star WR for the Steelers. Hines Ward is contemplating retirement. Steelers will be prepared to keep him. Wallace would fit nicely with the Giants no doubt.
The Giants are also in a worse cap situation than the Steelers ($114 mil vs. $118 mil 2012 salary cap expenditure) for the moment. So the chances of the Giants outbidding the Steelers to a point where the Steelers won't match the offer to keep him (Restricted Free Agent) is slime to none...
In addition, Mike Wallace may end up commanding a bigger contract than Manningham too. Giants were so close to getting Wallace via 3rd round draft, but I can't quite dwell on that fact because the "butterfly effect" would have caused us to never see Cruz several seasons later...

slipknottin
02-21-2012, 06:09 PM
* But if you want to get a third WR, you don't blow a crapload of lute and a first round pick on it.

It is when you can get arguably the best deep threat in the league.

Morehead State
02-21-2012, 06:15 PM
But if you want to get a third WR, you don't blow a crapload of lute and a first round pick on it. It is when you can get arguably the best deep threat in the league.</P>


There are far better ways to spend the kind of money he would command, along with better ways to use our first pick than on a FA WR. As a matter of fact I see no position on our team where a high priced FA and all that that would take away from our ability to build our team would be prudent to bring in.</P>


Not to mention that you would probably have to lose either Cruz or Nicks next year because you blew all the cash on Wallace. Then we are right back in the same spot, only much worse.</P>

jomo
02-21-2012, 06:15 PM
But if you want to get a third WR, you don't blow a crapload of lute and a first round pick on it. It is when you can get arguably the best deep threat in the league.Too much doughsky on wide receivers. It is not like DE or OLB where another stud will change the game. At the end of the day, money will always be limited and we've got some serious work to do on the OL so signing Wallace may simply be a dream.

slipknottin
02-21-2012, 06:17 PM
There are far better ways to spend the kind of money he would command, along with better ways to use our first pick than on a FA WR.** As a matter of fact I see no position on our team where a high priced FA and all that that would take away from our ability to build our team would be prudent to bring in.<=

Ive stated all throughout the thread that they dont have the cap room to do it. You gave me the hypothetical of if they did have the cap room should they do it... I said yes.

But they dont have the cap room, so they cant.

Morehead State
02-21-2012, 06:21 PM
There are far better ways to spend the kind of money he would command, along with better ways to use our first pick than on a FA WR. As a matter of fact I see no position on our team where a high priced FA and all that that would take away from our ability to build our team would be prudent to bring in.&lt;= Ive stated all throughout the thread that they dont have the cap room to do it. You gave me the hypothetical of if they did have the cap room should they do it... I said yes. But they dont have the cap room, so they cant.</P>


My point is true for any team with any cap situation that would have the same WR strength that we have. Its poorly spent money and resources. Every team has a cap. No GM worth his salt would bring in a high priced WR when we are so strong there.</P>


But if you are discribing a bizaaro world where there is no cap and a team can spend $200MM if they want. Why not.</P>


Unfortunately, thats not the world NFL teams live in.</P>

slipknottin
02-21-2012, 06:22 PM
My point is true for any team with any cap situation that would have the same WR strength that we have.

As I said, I dont think the giants #3 WR position is a strength, and its a position vital for the offense they run.

Morehead State
02-21-2012, 06:25 PM
My point is true for any team with any cap situation that would have the same WR strength that we have. As I said, I dont think the giants #3 WR position is a strength, and its a position vital for the offense they run.</P>


So your view is that we should drop a boatload of cash and lose a first round pick to have a third WR?</P>


Again..on a team that has cap room? Just trying to be clear here.</P>

slipknottin
02-21-2012, 06:27 PM
So your view is that we should drop a boatload of cash and lose a first round pick to have a third WR?</P>


Again..on a team that has cap room?* Just trying to be clear here.</P>

If its a team that runs 3 WR sets the majority of the time, absolutely.

Look at the saints, had Colston, Henderson, and a couple other talented receivers, and still spent a 1st round pick on Meachem.

Morehead State
02-21-2012, 06:32 PM
So your view is that we should drop a boatload of cash and lose a first round pick to have a third WR?


</P>


Again..on a team that has cap room? Just trying to be clear here.</P>


If its a team that runs 3 WR sets the majority of the time, absolutely. Look at the saints, had Colston, Henderson, and a couple other talented receivers, and still spent a 1st round pick on Meachem.</P>


There are plenty of players available, including possibly guys on our roster who can come in and be the third WR. Its crazy to spend that much on a guy when you already have one of the top 1-2 WR's in the NFL.</P>


Wallace will command SOME attention. But only from tyeams wioth a glairing need at WR. But even to those teams, the money AND the loss of a first round pick with be far too expensive for a GM to make that move.</P>


There is a far better than 50-50 chance he'll still be a Steeler next season. Thats why reports are already out there today that they will let him test the market. They believe that he'll see that teams are not as desperate as you seem to be.</P>

slipknottin
02-21-2012, 06:41 PM
But even to those teams, the money AND the loss of a first round pick with be far too expensive for a GM to make that move.

We will see.

Flip Empty
02-21-2012, 06:47 PM
What use is three great receivers when the quarterback can't even stay upright long enough to get the ball to them? The Giants will likely lose two pieces of the o-line and they will need replacing far more than the third option on the pass attack.

I don't know why this is even an argument as there's no way a guy like Wallace will be brought in. You can't use Madden tactics in real life. Josh McDaniels tried it in Denver and look where it got him.

Also, no draft pick is "useless".

NYGRealityCheck
02-21-2012, 06:49 PM
But even to those teams, the money AND the loss of a first round pick with be far too expensive for a GM to make that move.

We will see.

A 32nd pick along with some money from a hypothetical decent cap room for Mike Wallace is definitely not a bad idea... unless Wallace commands a contract worth $7 mil+ per year. This dude is up there with D. Jackson in terms of speed and can make big plays (legitimate i-dare-you-to-pull-your-safeties-in deep threat). I have to go with Skip here. Of course, in reality, the Giants don't have the cap to pull it off even if they wanted to.

Morehead State
02-21-2012, 06:49 PM
But even to those teams, the money AND the loss of a first round pick with be far too expensive for a GM to make that move. We will see.</P>


I'm sorry, the philosophy that you are suggesting flies in the face of established practice in the NFL.</P>


Only desperate teams do what you are suggesting in the cap era. Under the cap or not.</P>


Its as simple as that.</P>

Zoboomafoo
02-21-2012, 07:00 PM
If there were no cap and the owners pockets were bottomless, a lower first round pick would be well worth parlaying into a Mike Wallace. It would be better to get a proven young talent that will see the field on day one over taking the risk that you will be able to develop a drafted player.

That said, this scenario has nothing to do with the NFL as it is.

bandwgn86
02-21-2012, 07:10 PM
But even to those teams, the money AND the loss of a first round pick with be far too expensive for a GM to make that move. We will see.</P>


I'm sorry, the philosophy that you are suggesting flies in the face of established practice in the NFL.</P>


Only desperate teams do what you are suggesting in the cap era.* Under the cap or not.</P>


Its as simple as that.</P>nobody can take a simple yes/no answer and turn it into 6 pages of debate like you sir lol

Morehead State
02-21-2012, 07:10 PM
If there were no cap and the owners pockets were bottomless, a lower first round pick would be well worth parlaying into a Mike Wallace. It would be better to get a proven young talent that will see the field on day one over taking the risk that you will be able to develop a drafted player. That said, this scenario has nothing to do with the NFL as it is.</P>


Which is exactly my point. Managing the cap is a balancing act. Paying Wallace and losing a 1st round pick at a position of strength is foolish.</P>

Morehead State
02-21-2012, 07:11 PM
But even to those teams, the money AND the loss of a first round pick with be far too expensive for a GM to make that move. We will see.</P>


I'm sorry, the philosophy that you are suggesting flies in the face of established practice in the NFL.</P>


Only desperate teams do what you are suggesting in the cap era. Under the cap or not.</P>


Its as simple as that.</P>


nobody can take a simple yes/no answer and turn it into 6 pages of debate like you sir lol</P>


Thanks Bandy. That means a lot.</P>

NYGRealityCheck
02-21-2012, 07:39 PM
But even to those teams, the money AND the loss of a first round pick with be far too expensive for a GM to make that move. We will see.</P>


I'm sorry, the philosophy that you are suggesting flies in the face of established practice in the NFL.</P>


Only desperate teams do what you are suggesting in the cap era.* Under the cap or not.</P>


Its as simple as that.</P>

There are desperate teams. I can totally see your side of the argument with the cheap rookie contracts.

I think it was a clever tactic with CBA negotiations as the NFL veterans who had to vote on the new CBA for it to go through, would get a bigger share of a team's salary cap over time, and the new rookies who can't vote on the new CBA because they're not even in the NFL yet get stuck with cheap 4-5 year contracts. lol

bandwgn86
02-21-2012, 07:40 PM
But even to those teams, the money AND the loss of a first round pick with be far too expensive for a GM to make that move. We will see.</P>


I'm sorry, the philosophy that you are suggesting flies in the face of established practice in the NFL.</P>


Only desperate teams do what you are suggesting in the cap era. Under the cap or not.</P>


Its as simple as that.</P>


nobody can take a simple yes/no answer and turn it into 6 pages of debate like you sir lol</P>


Thanks Bandy. That means a lot.</P>fight the good fight MH

jomo
02-21-2012, 07:44 PM
It is tempting to want the best player at every position whenever they become available but the only positions you sell your soul for and mortgage the franchise are a top QB, pass rusher or leftOT and QB's almost never come onto the market.</P>


Everything else needs to be built primarily through the draft.</P>

giantyankee1976
02-21-2012, 08:07 PM
Personally, I would rather use the 1st round on an OL.

this

the Line is the foundation from which everything is based. I rather a stout beastly O-Line than a speedy WR

Voldamort
02-21-2012, 08:33 PM
he want's to much money

giantsfan420
02-21-2012, 09:20 PM
i'd rather r.randle from lsu only if we couldn't get kendall wright from baylor.

both these guys remind me a lot of MM...potentially better

Morehead State
02-21-2012, 09:43 PM
i'd rather r.randle from lsu only if we couldn't get kendall wright from baylor. both these guys remind me a lot of MS...potentially better</P>


Thank you. I am fast.</P>

gmen0820
02-21-2012, 09:51 PM
Why trade for a free agent? Uh..

Edit: didn't realize he is restricted. Bummer. Can't afford him anyway.

giantsfan420
02-21-2012, 11:02 PM
i'd rather r.randle from lsu only if we couldn't get kendall wright from baylor. both these guys remind me a lot of MS...potentially better</P>


Thank you.* I am fast.</P>

what?? i said from the start i don't want wallace. i was just commenting on how insane it was for you to mock another poster who felt it could be a valid move. i like to be objective and try to understand both sides of an argument before i just dismiss an idea bc it doesn't match mine.

giantman8493
02-21-2012, 11:12 PM
i'd rather r.randle from lsu only if we couldn't get kendall wright from baylor.

both these guys remind me a lot of MM...potentially betterjoe adams = awasome

Zoboomafoo
02-22-2012, 07:33 AM
Adrian Awasom?

Morehead State
02-22-2012, 08:52 AM
i'd rather r.randle from lsu only if we couldn't get kendall wright from baylor. both these guys remind me a lot of MS...potentially better</P>


Thank you. I am fast.</P>


what?? i said from the start i don't want wallace. i was just commenting on how insane it was for you to mock another poster who felt it could be a valid move. i like to be objective and try to understand both sides of an argument before i just dismiss an idea bc it doesn't match mine.</P>


Thats why your posts are boring. The only time you get interesting is when you go on your name calling rants like yesterday.</P>

bandwgn86
02-23-2012, 04:41 PM
NFL Network talkin heads think Wallace will go to the Pats.. scary </P>

titwio
02-23-2012, 04:50 PM
NFL Network talkin heads think Wallace will go to the Pats.. scary </P>

Wallace is exactly what the Patriots are missing. (Offensively at least) The move would make so much sense.

bandwgn86
02-23-2012, 04:54 PM
NFL Network talkin heads think Wallace will go to the Pats.. scary </P> Wallace is exactly what the Patriots are missing. (Offensively at least) The move would make so much sense.was thinking the same thing.. better than 07 offensively anyways

pica01
02-23-2012, 05:00 PM
We're probably gonna lose MM because of cap issues and you say get Wallace?Hell,let's get Fitzgerald or C. johnson.We have cap issues too.Replacing MM will have to be a low cost option like Steve Smith or a current reciever.Comeon now,let's be serious.All Reese needs to do is find an undrafted FA like Cruz.How hard is that?What a find.To think he almost didn't make the team.Hey,the Steelers cut Unitas.

bandwgn86
02-23-2012, 05:06 PM
We're probably gonna lose MM because of cap issues and you say get Wallace?Hell,let's get Fitzgerald or C. johnson.We have cap issues too.Replacing MM will have to be a low cost option like Steve Smith or a current reciever.Comeon now,let's be serious.All Reese needs to do is find an undrafted FA like Cruz.How hard is that?What a find.To think he almost didn't make the team.Hey,the Steelers cut Unitas.really hate to saythis and agree with othersbut maybe the answer is Plax to replace Mario Ochodos [+o(]</P>


the one positive is Plax was an animal when he had to run block</P>

Morehead State
02-23-2012, 05:12 PM
NFL Network talkin heads think Wallace will go to the Pats.. scary </P>


</P>


I think Brandon Lloyd is a much better possibility. Loves Joshie's system. Look for Wallace to stay a Steeler. The only other possibility is SF.</P>

Morehead State
02-23-2012, 05:12 PM
NFL Network talkin heads think Wallace will go to the Pats.. scary </P>


</P>


I think Brandon Lloyd is a much better possibility. Loves Joshie's system. Look for Wallace to stay a Steeler. The only other possibility is SF.</P>

bandwgn86
02-23-2012, 05:21 PM
NFL Network talkin heads think Wallace will go to the Pats.. scary </P>


</P>


I think Brandon Lloyd is a much better possibility. Loves Joshie's system. Look for Wallace to stay a Steeler. The only other possibility is SF.</P>


maybe even Robert Meachem? </P>


hard time seeing BB giving up possible a first round pick for a player but Brady to Wallace is scary</P>

rebelfan1966
02-23-2012, 06:00 PM
Mike Wallace?

I would be down for two Ole Miss boys playing a little pitch and catch.... but I don't see it happening.