Dibs

I've had a look through all the teams RB situations. Considering that many teams have just signed up RBs to multi-year mega-million dollar contracts (ala Texans & Jags) I can see only 3 teams in need of starting RBs & another 3 that might be interested. The 3 definitely in need are Bills, Titans & Packers. The 3 maybes are Browns, Panthers & Cowboys. The Browns just signed Jamal Lewis to a 1yr deal. This gives them the flexibility to draft a QB at the #3 position. Panthers & 'Boys have Foster & Jones respectively which both might be looking for upgrades. Why not..... Bucs....Williams was great, then decent....too early to give up on such a high pick. Vikings....Taylor in 2nd year of big long term deal & produced 1200yds at 4.0 with 6tds.....needs in too many other areas. Falcons....Led league in rushing...Dunn is very good 1140yds at 4.0 with 4tds....&....Noorwood 633yds at 6.4 with 2tds.....RB by comittee is working well here. Texans.....just signed Green to 4 year 23mil deal.....not gonna spend on another RB. Basically, if the Browns go for a QB at #3......who gets AP??? Does he fall to #12.......if not, who trades up to get him? It's one thing to say "no way will he drop outside the top 6(10?)" but a team has to consider him worth taking over their other needs.....or worth the expense of trading up to get him. Which teams would justify this? After the draft, if 2 of the 3 teams in need draft 1st round RBs.......who apart from the 3rd team in need will be vying for Turner??? Am I mistaken, or is there an absolute glut of RBs in the league at the moment?

I do know. "Nikker Brown" was the name of a shade of Brown outside of the USA. It's difficult to find things to back up my knowledge since the term is an old one(my 60+ year old parents from UK remember using it) but here is a Link backing the information.

Actually, yes I have. "N*^%$#" brown was a common name for a shade of brown outside the USA for a long long time. Used commonly in the UK. Obviously the Chinese company obtained this & ran with the colour without understanding the ramifications.

Do people here understand the term haggle? 15 shekels you must be joking. If this source is correct, then a 2nd this year & a 2nd/3rd next is what SD are willing to take. It is their asking price now. Just as when you go to a used car dealer there is an asking price on their cars. Nobody pays the asking price unless they have no time to haggle. After a good haggle I wouldn't be surprised with swapping 2nds & a 3rd next year......or simply 3rd & 3rd. We may not have been endeared to WM but the media/league still considered him a top talent......hence his deal. Turner IMO will not eclipse the WM trade. NYJ(Jones) & Ravens(WM) did not wait to see how the Turner situation panned out. Why? The Jets are paying Jones 5mil a year & the Ravens close to 6mil(top 5 RB numbers). Turner is still unproven & therefore will garner a lower trade than Jones & WM. At worst it will be on par with those 2 trades. BTW, swapping 1sts is worth (according to the value chart) the equivalent of the #1 pick in the second round.

But will Turner be aware of this sort of information? Seems to me that outside of the informed Bills fan there is very little talk of those points.

This is extraordinarily upbeat. Is Crowell potentially that good?

I'm feeling Bashful.......shy girl that she is.

The concept that he is substituting for one of the greatest of all time might also be a factor......

Here is the thing though.......EVERY single NFL team & analyst is looking at AP being selected within the top 5(certainly top 10).........Lynch is generally considered worthy of using a 1st round pick on.........Turner looks like he should command around a second round pick. What does that tell us? It tells us that Turner is not as valuable a commodity as Peterson or Lynch........that a vast majority of experts believe that Peterson & Lynch would have more chance of becoming a top NFL RB than Turner. This is not saying he won't/can't be good.......but it does contradict the premise of this thread.

This is why I think it would be waaaaay to premature to trade for Turner before the draft. If there is little competition left for him(which it appears there isn't), we can simply wait till after day 1.....SD will be desperate to offload him(they want something for him).....& we could offer our 2nd rounder(?) for next year......assuming we didn't get a RB on day 1. Swapping 1sts is ridiculous. It would be the equivalent of giving up the #1 pick in the second round.....not going to happen IMO.

I totally agree with RBs failing due to the team they are on not being good enough for them to shine through.......but that is the same with a lot of positions. Bettis & Williams did not provide their teams with a long term solution at RB which was my point. Williams in particular would have to be considered a bust....not only for the Saints but for Miami as well. They both lost waaaay too much for what they spent on the guy. I feel you think I'm implying things that I am not. I am not judging the RBs careers, nor am I judging the intelligence of picking them. The crux of my point is that those who think drafting a RB(or MLB, or any position really) will provide the answer.....particularly since it's the #12 pick & a "can't miss" prospect......are simply not looking realistically at the situation. Based on the past top 12 RBs, there is a 1 in 4 chance that any RB we select at #12 will not be with the team for more than 4 seasons producing at a high level......for whatever reason.

Absolutely.......I was thinking the same thing. Can we call BS on this one? I guess not because he is a 'professional' writer......they never make things up.

No. This was my criteria.....as I stated. "which premium picks do not pan out for the teams selecting them" I asked that specific question because that is the only real one that relates to us drafting a RB in round 1. Everyone assumes it will be the answer when in fact the odds of getting a successful RB for the team are very slim. The only question mark on the list was Dunn.......when he wasn't injured he was productive. Gone after 5 years(2 1000 yards seasons) Hearst was a bust at Arizona.......no question. Thomas Jones was a bust at Arizona......no question. Bo Jackson never played more than 11 games in his 4 years at the Raiders. He certainly wasn't a long term solution for them. I don't care if we draft a RB that will be gone in 4 years & produce for the next team......ala(potentially) WM......or get injured due to the transition to the pro level......I want us to have a RB that can produce for us for a good decade.

alrite then here is what is acktually going to happen.. i'll read a post that i thought was always one of the ones i would read and then read a diferent one the next day.. thats the same post and by the same poster.. i never realized like i said it wasnt a different topic so i'll continue.. that post the first one not the second i ignored due to no punctuation.. incorect use of capitals.. bad spelling.. and a bunch of things that i cant quite think of at the moment but am sure to think of them by the same time i read the second post of the same thing in the second thread.. the second thread realised that id seen it earlier and ignored what i thought i should read.. when i did read it i found others moking which i cant give personal upon.. please tell me im wrong!!! GGO BLLLS!!

You forgot about Reggie Wayne.....Dallas Clarke was 1st round as well. I'd say from what billybob originally wrote, Manning, Harrison & Wayne would fit. Your problem is not that a 'big three' isn't desirable, it is that billybob generalized in his initial post by saying.... Since this generalization is obviously wrong(many teams have succeeded without 3 premiere skills players), it is open to justified contradiction.

How much exactly are we giving up for him?

I don't know if anybody's mentioned it.......but........Beebe was a high motor white guy. Just saying.

I agree with the basic concept of what you are saying. Just look around the league & add up the number of good starters at RB drafted in the 1st first round. It's by far the majority of them. This last point however I disagree with.....or at least I think it should be looked at in a more realistic sense. i.e. the question should not be "which premium picks become total washouts"......it should perhaps be "which premium picks do not pan out for the teams selecting them". I put it this way so as to directly correlate it to the situation we are in.....that is.....we can draft a premium RB in the 1st, is that likely to solve our RB problems? From 1986-2005.....bold = non success for team selecting RBs in top 12 LaDainian Tomlinson, Jamal Lewis, Thomas Jones, Ron Dayne, Edgerrin James, Ricky Williams, Curtis Enis, Fred Taylor, Warrick Dunn(????), Lawrence Phillips, Tim Biakabutuka, Ki-Jana Carter, Marshall Faulk, Garrison Hearst, Jerome Bettis, Tommy Vardell, Blair Thomas, Barry Sanders, Tim Worley, Sammie Smith, Alonzo Highsmith, Brent Fullwood, Bo Jackson That's 23 RBs. Only 6 of them panned out for the team selecting them. What does this mean? It means that I agree that the best place to find a premium long term answer at RB is early in the 1st round......but......if we use our #12 on a RB we should realize that there is a 1 in 4 chance that the RB will not attain the level expected from us.

I did. I'm bored.

I'm bored.

AHA!!!!! Isn't Brad Cieslak our starting FB at the moment????? I think he is & he is only signed for 2007. BWAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHA Your entire feel good logic is obviously totally countered by that small bit of information. WE ARE DOOMED!!!

I guess it's not that interesting to most.

Owners approve expanded revenue sharing Assuming we are one of the teams to share in the $100mil for 2006 & $110mil for this year, I can't help but wonder if our self imposed cash-to-cap situation will be modified to include the monies from previous signing bonuses that have apparently not been included in the cash-to-cap calculations. Simply put......will we have another $20mil to spend or not? I tend to be a 'give the benefit of doubt' type guy but if we remain a 'too poor to spend' team I think there will be no more benefits left to doubt. Since there are pretty much no more FAs available......except maybe RB Turner.....I'm am fully expecting JPL & Evans to be re-signed to long term deals sooner rather than later. Does anybody know more details of the new revenue sharing in relation to us?