TreasurecoastPhinsfan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ken Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Come on guys...the following were good moves.
> >
> > Drafting Thomas and Pouncey and adding Dansby.
> >
> >
>
> YES on Pouncy.
> Negative on Thomas , no matter how good he is ,
> when you desperately need a QB.


RE: A GM's primary job is to get good players...Thomas is just that, so far. Mallet for all of his promise still has a way to go in proving that.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/13/2011 03:36AM by Ken.

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I wanted us to trade for Orton. I wanted us to do
> anything to upgrade the QB position, and based on
> his play last year, Orton looked like an upgrade
> at the right price. Now I want to go all in for
> Luck and finish this QB issue once and for all.
> The fact that Orton is having a crappy year means
> what exactly? Never want the team to upgrade the
> QB positon b/c the player targeted could end up
> sucking? Sorry I don't subscribe to
> that---especially when it comes to a once in a
> generation QB like Luck (don't think ANYONE who
> wanted Orton wanted him b/c they though he was a
> Pro Bowler or anything, just better than Henne).
>
> Not sure I get your point.


Right, but Henne played much better then Orton did this year... And you all bashed Ireland for not making a move that would have crippled our franchise and actually been a downgrade at the position... I can pull up the post, you are just spinning away becasue your hindisght was much different then your in the moment argument for Orton and against Ireland.

dolphaholic Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Should of stopped at Brees Ken


RE: Maybe so, but we have needed a QB for a very long time (as evidenced by some of the names on my list) and in each draft you have to pick someone. I subscribe to the philosophy of taking a QB in every draft until you have a good one. And even if you do have a good one, you keep taking them until you have a backup that pushes your starter to be better.

Berk- lets play out a funny possible scenario, we could have put ourselves in had we followed what you wanted us to do this offseason.

We give up a 1st rd pick and sign Orton to a deal like Kolb. SO we have put 5o million on the cap over the next 4-5 years. And we get stuck with one of our major cash positons being filled by a guy like Orton who's career is now in serious jeaopardy due to his perfromance in the first 4 games. We finish last, wind up getting the first pick in the draft, to only give it right back to Denver and they draft your man crush in Luck.....
I think you would be fired in moments and have destroyed our franchise worst then any past GM has done to this point.... Scary...
What I dont get, is all of these people are so obsessed with a guy they have maybe seen play 4 full games tops, due to Stanfords national TV schedule.
And that so much of what I hear from people is really emotional decisions based on being upset and frustrated with the team... I dont know about you guys but from my experience, making decision in any matter of life from the position and emotions of being upset and frustrated is always a horrible idea that normally just exasperates the problems at hand... but people love to do it, because it makes them feel better in the moment becasue one can vent the feelings and get them off the chest...

Crowder, I don't know what you're talking about. I totally am owning up to having wanted to trade for Orton. You don't need to hunt for my posts to that effect.

But I never said we should trade a 1st rounder for him and give him Kevin Kolb money. I was on board with trading a 3d for him and letting him duke it out with Henne. No one here ever said to give a 1st or even more than a 3d (I don't think) for Orton. If we make the deal I wanted (a 3d round pick, and a reasonable contract), we are certainly not foreclosed from taking Luck or another QB in the first this year. So this is totally a straw man argument. Obviously we weren't going to give up out first rounder for Orton.

Fact is, Orton did very well under McDaniel's offense and obviously not so well under other offenses, including the current one. He may not have fit our scheme either---or maybe he would have, since I think Daboll's schemes are related to McD's (both Pats tree), and he'd have passed for about 4k yards and many more TDs than ints, as he did last year. Whatever, we didn't make the move, and now there are no excuses for not taking Luck or another top QB (assuming we aren't #1 overall), when we pick in the first.

dolphaholic Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Aqua&Orange Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I would definately put Rivers in that....lol,
> but
> > it should stop there. HAHAHA.
>
>
> I agree about Rivers, but he wen't 4th and we
> drafted 18th (I think) that year. I was under the
> assumption this list was of guys we had a shot at
> getting.






---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"