Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

MightyJNC

NFL.Com Team-by-Team Free Agency List

45 posts in this topic

*List won't become "official" until March 12th due to potential resignings/player tags*

http://www.nfl.com/f...gn=Twitter_news

While I don't want to see the Birds go :wacko: in FA again, they will have considerable CAP $ available and would like to see them target a couple of younger, up-and-coming players at positions of need.

Offense:

RT Ryan Harris (Hou) 6'5", 300, 27

TE Delanie Walker (SF) 6'0", 242, 28

(TE Jared Cook would be my first choice to pair with Celek in 2 TE sets but don't think Tenn lets him hit the open market)

Defense:

ILB Brad Jones (GB) 6'3" 242, 26, or

ILB Rey Mauluga (Cinn) 6'2", 265, 26

(Either could be paired with Ryans in the 3-4 allowing Kendricks to stay outside)

SS William Moore (Atl) 6'0", 221, 27

(Don't think either Byrd or Goldston hit the market)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait...Didn't we sign Ryan Harris last year, and then cut him? I think we did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait...Didn't we sign Ryan Harris last year, and then cut him? I think we did.

Yeah, kid came in off an injury, couldn't get healthy (needed back surgery) and never had a chance to show what he could really do, but seemed to put that all behind him last season with the texans and has a lot of talent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Texans do have a lot of talent as that kid hopefully will improve and maybe the back injury had a lot to do with it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Texans do have a lot of talent as that kid hopefully will improve and maybe the back injury had a lot to do with it!

After we released him on an injury settlement he basically spent the entire 2011 season rehabing from the back surgery, but started and played well for the Texans last year and in his first 2 seasons with denver was charged with only allowing 1.5 sacks so the kid definitely has the talent that caught our eye the first time around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*List won't become "official" until March 12th due to potential resignings/player tags*

Defense:

ILB Brad Jones (GB) 6'3" 242, 26, or

ILB Rey Mauluga (Cinn) 6'2", 265, 26

(Either could be paired with Ryans in the 3-4 allowing Kendricks to stay on the outside

Kendrick's isn't going to be put on the outside. He is an ILB in the 3-4.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kendrick's isn't going to be put on the outside. He is an ILB in the 3-4.

If we play a hybrid 4-3/3-4 as expected he can continue to play WILL in the 4-3 looks and as a rush OLB (something he did very effectively at Cal) in certain 3 - 4 packages. The guy's got to much speed/athleticism not to ever let him play in space.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we play a hybrid 4-3/3-4 as expected he can continue to play WILL in the 4-3 looks and as a rush OLB (something he did very effectively at Cal) in certain 3 - 4 packages. The guy's got to much speed/athleticism not to ever let him play in space.

I'm just telling you, Kendrick's will be a ILB this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just telling you, Kendrick's will be a ILB this year.

Stop. JNC is NEVER wrong..he'll go out of his way destroying threads just to tell you...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just telling you, Kendrick's will be a ILB this year.

And by "telling me" that, then you're also telling me that you know for a fact that they'll never line up in a 4 - 3 look (with him at WILL/OLB) or have him line up at O (Rush) LB in any 3-4 or hybrid looks.

My bad, I didn't realize I was discussing the point with someone who obviously already has detailed inside information on exactly what Chip/Davis plan to do on D this year. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stop. JNC is NEVER wrong..he'll go out of his way destroying threads just to tell you...

:sleep:

Then again I suppose I could just go the little ricky route and "NEVER be right, thereby saving everyone the trouble of reading my posts except for comedic/ridiculing purposes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And by "telling me" that, then you're also telling me that you know for a fact that they'll never line up in a 4 - 3 look (with him at WILL/OLB) or have him line up at O (Rush) LB in any 3-4 or hybrid looks.

My bad, I didn't realize I was discussing the point with someone who obviously already has detailed inside information on exactly what Chip/Davis plan to do on D this year. :rolleyes:

So playing OLB in 4-3 looks next year means he won't be able to take 3 steps inside to be an ILB in the 3-4 You honestly just made Rich look like a genius because he hit the nail right on the head. Yeah he might line up as a rusher sometimes, but that's not his position.

I'm telling he will be an ILB in a 3-4 because he IS an ILB in a 3-4. I can honestly guarantee you that will be his position next year. Don't talk big when you have no clue what you are talking about dude. Like do you honestly have nothing better to do than start stupid fights on an online message board?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

William Moore may hit the market, but I think he'll resign at a favorable deal. He's said he just loves football and he and Thomas DeCoud are great friends, I think they stick together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:sleep:

Then again I suppose I could just go the little ricky route and "NEVER be right, thereby saving everyone the trouble of reading my posts except for comedic/ridiculing purposes.

Never?

I seem to remember saying the E's were going to suck this year back in August..I seem to remember saying the Giants were winning the SB last year after they beat GB..I also remember you saying in 2009 that the Minnesota Twins would be better then the Yanks in 2009, who later embarrassed your Phils en rounte to #27...

But you keep thinking you're the better/more respected poster around these parts...all you are is the most loathed dooosh around...congrats!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So playing OLB in 4-3 looks next year means he won't be able to take 3 steps inside to be an ILB in the 3-4 You honestly just made Rich look like a genius because he hit the nail right on the head. Yeah he might line up as a rusher sometimes, but that's not his position.

I'm telling he will be an ILB in a 3-4 because he IS an ILB in a 3-4. I can honestly guarantee you that will be his position next year. Don't talk big when you have no clue what you are talking about dude. Like do you honestly have nothing better to do than start stupid fights on an online message board?

:huh:

OK, now I see what the problem is, regardless of how many different "positions" with completely different responsibilities a player may line up at, for some reason you have an unyielding need to pigeonhole them into 1 and only 1 "position" classification and if anyone dares to disagree with you they are doing "nothing but starting a stupid fight and have no clue what they're talking about" because it upsets your orderly little way of thinking.

No problem, so in Kendrick's case no matter how may times he plays OLB in certain 4-3 packages or ILB is certain 3-4 packages or at OLB in other 3-4 packages going forward, I promise to only and forever refer to him as an inside linebacker here.

Fell better now? <_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

William Moore may hit the market, but I think he'll resign at a favorable deal. He's said he just loves football and he and Thomas DeCoud are great friends, I think they stick together.

Without knowing who will or won't eventually hit the open market all any of us can do is speculate right now, but I would just be really shocked if either of the 2 "consensus" best UFA safeties (Goldston or Byrd) were allowed to get there, so I was looking at Moore (who IMO is a young, somewhat underrated player with a lot of upside) as a possibly more realistic plan B although it would be completely understandable if the Falcons made a strong push to keep him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:huh:

OK, now I see what the problem is, regardless of how many different "positions" with completely different responsibilities a player may line up at, for some reason you have an unyielding need to pigeonhole them into 1 and only 1 "position" classification and if anyone dares to disagree with you they are doing "nothing but starting a stupid fight and have no clue what they're talking about" because it upsets your orderly little way of thinking.

No problem, so in Kendrick's case no matter how may times he plays OLB in certain 4-3 packages or ILB is certain 3-4 packages or at OLB in other 3-4 packages going forward, I promise to only and forever refer to him as an inside linebacker here.

Fell better now? <_<

You stated in your first post that you wanted the eagles to get a new ILB so Kendrick's could move outside. Now, you are basically retracting your statement to say you want Kendrick's to to move around in certain packages. I don't know if your just trying to save your butt or what, but my posts are regarding your false assement that Kendrick's will be an OLB in an eagles 3-4 system, that's all. I agree that Kendrick's can move around/rush and whatnot, but your first posts assement is wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You stated in your first post that you wanted the eagles to get a new ILB so Kendrick's could move outside. Now, you are basically retracting your statement to say you want Kendrick's to to move around in certain packages. I don't know if your just trying to save your butt or what, but my posts are regarding your false assement that Kendrick's will be an OLB in an eagles 3-4 system, that's all. I agree that Kendrick's can move around/rush and whatnot, but your first posts assement is wrong.

So if the Birds were to acquire a prototypical 3-4 ILB to pair with Ryans (typically a player that brings more girth to the position than Kendricks does), that would relagate Kendricks to the bench the majority of the time they're in that alignment (as opposed to actually putting him outside where he could use his speed/athleticism and ensuring that their best players are on the field as often as possible) or should they just not even consider adding such a player because you've difinitively "told" everyone that "he's an ILB in the 3-4,end of story"?

Nope, you're right, and despite Chip's and Davis' public statements about wanting to stock the roster with "versatile players" Kendricks will be an ILB in the 3-4 and that's it, and all suggestions to the contrary are just wrong. Got it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Time to get some young players in green like a new safety

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Time to get some young players in green like a new safety

While it would be great if they could somehow land Byrd (will be 27 in Oct), all indications are that Buffalo is going to do whatever it takes to retain him, even if they have to use a tag, and with almost $16M in available CAP they obviously can afford it.

I also doubt that SF lets Goldston test the waters since they were already willing to use the franchise tag on him last year.

That's why I think Moore would be a solid fall-back option, he's still relatively young (28 in May) and with only approximately $3M in available CAP, and other priority UFA (Grimes, Baker) to deal with, the Birds realisticly could structure a deal Atl probably couldn't match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So if the Birds were to acquire a prototypical 3-4 ILB to pair with Ryans (typically a player that brings more girth to the position than Kendricks does), that would relagate Kendricks to the bench the majority of the time they're in that alignment (as opposed to actually putting him outside where he could use his speed/athleticism and ensuring that their best players are on the field as often as possible) or should they just not even consider adding such a player because you've difinitively "told" everyone that "he's an ILB in the 3-4,end of story"?

Nope, you're right, and despite Chip's and Davis' public statements about wanting to stock the roster with "versatile players" Kendricks will be an ILB in the 3-4 and that's it, and all suggestions to the contrary are just wrong. Got it.

We have multiple needs at CB, S, OL, DL, and OLB and you want to bolster a position that is already set.

Do you see what I'm trying to get at here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have multiple needs at CB, S, OL, DL, and OLB and you want to bolster a position that is already set.

Do you see what I'm trying to get at here?

Only "set" according to some guy on the EMB who knows absolutely nothing more or less about the new coaching staff's plans for the roster and offensive or defensive alignments/player groupings than anyone else who is not privy to those plans.

So while I completely agree that they have needs at OL (most likely RT), CB, S, and DL (prototypical NT for the 3-4, perhaps another 4 - 3 DT if they want to move on from Jenkins and his $4.5M 2013" salary).

However, as far as the "LB" positions go, the team has needed a legit SLB since Emmons left and they still do for if/when the line up in a 4 - 3. However if/when the line up in a 3-4 you have no way of knowing if they even plan to keep Ryans to man 1 of the ILB spots, if they view Graham, Cole, Curry or anyone else currently on the roster as the answer at either OLB spot or at what position(s) they intend to play Kendricks

So yes I totally "see what you're trying to get at here", you have definitively "told" everyone that "Kendricks is only an ILB in the 3- 4", obstinately refused to even consider other options/opinions and apparently are not going to give up your crusade until your "opinion" is blindly and completely accepted by anyone who dared to question it.

So if you don't mind I'm just going to wait to see what the coachings staff's plans are for the LB position(s) because your opinion, regardless of how many times you repeat it or how vehemently you defend it means squat and frankly you really need to get over yourself already. <_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only "set" according to some guy on the EMB who knows absolutely nothing more or less about the new coaching staff's plans for the roster and offensive or defensive alignments/player groupings than anyone else who is not privy to those plans.

So while I completely agree that they have needs at OL (most likely RT), CB, S, and DL (prototypical NT for the 3-4, perhaps another 4 - 3 DT if they want to move on from Jenkins and his $4.5M 2013" salary).

However, as far as the "LB" positions go, the team has needed a legit SLB since Emmons left and they still do for if/when the line up in a 4 - 3. However if/when the line up in a 3-4 you have no way of knowing if they even plan to keep Ryans to man 1 of the ILB spots, if they view Graham, Cole, Curry or anyone else currently on the roster as the answer at either OLB spot or at what position(s) they intend to play Kendricks

So yes I totally "see what you're trying to get at here", you have definitively "told" everyone that "Kendricks is only an ILB in the 3- 4", obstinately refused to even consider other options/opinions and apparently are not going to give up your crusade until your "opinion" is blindly and completely accepted by anyone who dared to question it.

So if you don't mind I'm just going to wait to see what the coachings staff's plans are for the LB position(s) because your opinion, regardless of how many times you repeat it or how vehemently you defend it means squat and frankly you really need to get over yourself already. <_<

:roll:

Anyone else see the hypocrisy in this statement from this guy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:roll:

Anyone else see the hypocrisy in this statement from this guy?

This guy is the biggest clown on this message board. I hope I'm not the only one laughing my arse off at what he thinks is an argument. He still doesn't even understand my side!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only "set" according to some guy on the EMB who knows absolutely nothing more or less about the new coaching staff's plans for the roster and offensive or defensive alignments/player groupings than anyone else who is not privy to those plans.

So while I completely agree that they have needs at OL (most likely RT), CB, S, and DL (prototypical NT for the 3-4, perhaps another 4 - 3 DT if they want to move on from Jenkins and his $4.5M 2013" salary).

However, as far as the "LB" positions go, the team has needed a legit SLB since Emmons left and they still do for if/when the line up in a 4 - 3. However if/when the line up in a 3-4 you have no way of knowing if they even plan to keep Ryans to man 1 of the ILB spots, if they view Graham, Cole, Curry or anyone else currently on the roster as the answer at either OLB spot or at what position(s) they intend to play Kendricks

So yes I totally "see what you're trying to get at here", you have definitively "told" everyone that "Kendricks is only an ILB in the 3- 4", obstinately refused to even consider other options/opinions and apparently are not going to give up your crusade until your "opinion" is blindly and completely accepted by anyone who dared to question it.

So if you don't mind I'm just going to wait to see what the coachings staff's plans are for the LB position(s) because your opinion, regardless of how many times you repeat it or how vehemently you defend it means squat and frankly you really need to get over yourself already. <_<

So let me get this straight, you have no idea if Ryan's is going to play ILB and you don't want Kendrick's to play their either?

You still have no idea what I'm trying to say either and it's hilarious to watch you defend yourself. Until you man up and admit you said you want the eagles to bolster a position that is set on this defense when we have much bigger areas of need, I am going to keep laughing at you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites