JavaScript must be enabled to use this chat software. Is qb really our biggest need? - Page 3

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 32 of 32
  1. #31
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Rep Power

    Re: Is qb really our biggest need?

    Quote Originally Posted by RebelYell View Post
    This QB failed with Bruce and Holt as his receivers.
    You mean when he made the Pro Bowl... twice?

    You can get a WR in free agency. Many teams get by with 1 better than average WR and 3-4 average to below average WRs. With Burton / Robinson on one side as the possession receiver, Avery in the slot and that free agent on the other side, they could be an average type of WR corp.
    Truth is, most teams don't acquire top WRs through FA. Sure, you can pick up a decent guy, but the true great ones (apart from the problem child TOs of the world) are not typically allowed to depart via FA.

  2. #32
    PeoriaRam's Avatar
    PeoriaRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Rep Power

    Re: Is qb really our biggest need?

    Quote Originally Posted by bigredman View Post
    Really? Elway came to a team that sucked. Joe Montana came to a team that sucked. Marino came to a team that sucked. Jets weren't all that, and they are progressing with a rookie. Falcons were in flux...not exactly rock solid...but they are improving with a rookie. Minus one point for you.
    Montana, Marino, and Elway came into the league more than 25 years ago. The Jets would have made the playoffs last year if they had the brains to acknowledge Favre's injury and bench him; this is hardly a bad situation to throw a young QB into. The Falcons had a very good supporting cast with a strong running game. Meanwhile how many other failed rookie QBs have there been where teams went QB first, then build everything else?

    Did you hit your head and lose your short term memory? The Patriots have made a dynasty from trading and they did again this year. By the way, trade means not only draft picks, but getting experienced players as well. Didn't the Eagles just do that with us? Minus two more points for you. Most of the significant moves in the last two years have been trades, not free agency.
    Why should we load up on late round picks? We need better talent than that. Additionally, no vet in their right mind is going to want to come to Alcatraz, Missouri, in a trade.

    Spags had a hand in recommending to the front office to pick up Long? Really? Devaney was not in charge of the 2008 draft. Minus three additional points for you.

    Billy Devaney was the Vice President in charge of Pro Personnel at the time of the draft, and said 2008 Draft was his direct responsibility. So yeah, Long was his call. As was Avery, and King, and Burton, and steroids dude. Why are we giving this guy more picks?

    Who said stockpiling first round picks? Upgrade positions of need with veteran talent or promising young talent, and get later round picks with these trades. That's minus 10 point there fella. Get back to me when you're solvent.
    See above.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Similar Threads

  1. What Is Your Biggest Pet Peeve?
    By AlphaRam in forum LOUNGE
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: -11-05-2009, 01:34 PM
  2. Replies: 6
    Last Post: -08-27-2009, 01:03 PM
  3. Replies: 4
    Last Post: -08-26-2007, 10:13 AM
  4. Biggest off-season Loss?
    By Ram4Life83 in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: -08-08-2007, 03:28 PM
  5. Replies: 3
    Last Post: -11-22-2006, 11:41 AM


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts