plenzmd1 Posted October 11, 2010 Posted October 11, 2010 (edited) I mean what the difference if we lose games by 24 instead of 18 as our new kicker misses two chippies???? I say the Saints would give us a 5th or 6th of Lindell..who by the way was lacking on his kickoffs yesterday. http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/10/11/saints-could-already-be-facing-kicker-question-again/ Edited October 11, 2010 by plenzmd1
Phil Hansen Forever Posted October 11, 2010 Posted October 11, 2010 Great idea, why don't we get rid the punter, QB, Offensive Line, Defensive Line and just keep a running back or two?
plenzmd1 Posted October 11, 2010 Author Posted October 11, 2010 Great idea, why don't we get rid the punter, QB, Offensive Line, Defensive Line and just keep a running back or two? Guess you missed the sarcasm in the title?
Koufax Posted October 11, 2010 Posted October 11, 2010 I mean what the difference if we lose games by 24 instead of 18 as our new kicker misses two chippies???? I say the Saints would give us a 5th or 6th of Lindell..who by the way was lacking on his kickoffs yesterday. http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/10/11/saints-could-already-be-facing-kicker-question-again/ Not sure on the level of sarcasm, but we will need a kicker in 2011, 2012, 2013, etc. I don't see Lindell on the verge of retirement, so I think he can contribute in those years more than the value we would get back. No player is worth it to us for his 2010 value, but there are pieces of our roster that have 2011 and beyond value (contrary to the popular opinion that we are 53 worthless guys and should just blow up everything), and keeping useful pieces while casting off the useless stuff is the way to go.
Phil Hansen Forever Posted October 11, 2010 Posted October 11, 2010 Guess you missed the sarcasm in the title? Must have, figured it was another bonehead comment on this illustrious board.
Recommended Posts