zook Posted January 25, 2005 Posted January 25, 2005 No way - Fletcher is a tackling machine and extremely underrated in the league
GG Posted January 25, 2005 Posted January 25, 2005 you're forgetting - pp-era has to fulfill his quota of at least one absolutely drop-dead ridiculous post per day. remember yesterday's? that tom brady isn't very good? 218009[/snapback] But he isn't very good. He's better than very good.
stevestojan Posted January 25, 2005 Posted January 25, 2005 Man, and to think a guy name "Bloxboro Tike" is gone...
Snorom Posted January 25, 2005 Posted January 25, 2005 Fletcher would save us 1.6 mil if released. Set to make 3.8 and would have a 1.6 hit if cut. The 1.6 mil we would save by cutting Fletcher would not benefit us at all financially based upon the fact it would take probably at least that to sign Bell. then there is the whole chemistry thing, and knowing the system. Not to mention the fact the Fletcher is a great MLB Last time I checked our D wasn't broken, so why would you want to fix it ?
Bill from NYC Posted January 25, 2005 Posted January 25, 2005 I think it is a bad idea, but I am not going to jump all over you like a smug, pseudo-intellectual a-hole because you made a suggestion on a message board.
Sen. John Blutarsky Posted January 25, 2005 Posted January 25, 2005 IF he's recovered from his groin injury Kendrell Bell is a MUCH better football player than London Fletcher. Fletcher has some serious liabilities. He can't cover at all, how many times did someone either complete a long pass up the seam or have Fletcher get PI? He's a leader in negative plays. How many times did Fletcher rough the QB and extend drives this season? The answer to both those questions is many. I would guess that he led the team in BOTH those categories this year. The problem with this thread is, while the Steelers MAY let him walk, it won't be because they don't like him as a football player, it will be because he's too expensive to keep and they also have Larry Foote as an RFA they can plug in. I would rather spend our cap money on other places this off-season. We focus on cap "savings" if a player is cut. Well it isn't savings if you sign a player that makes more than you saved, it's extra. Fletcher counts 1.6 if cut, Bell would make at least 3, thats 4.6 mil for the MLB position. I'd rather have an OT.
Ramius Posted January 25, 2005 Posted January 25, 2005 I think it is a bad idea, but I am not going to jump all over you like a smug, pseudo-intellectual a-hole because you made a suggestion on a message board. 218284[/snapback] thats because you made a suggestion that was just as, if not more retarded than this one yesterday... for the record, no way in hell with i ditch fletch for bell...this is football with team chemistry, not madden on your playstation...
Alaska Darin Posted January 25, 2005 Posted January 25, 2005 for the record, no way in hell with i ditch fletch for bell...this is football with team chemistry, not madden on your playstation... 218341[/snapback] Good call.
Snorom Posted January 25, 2005 Posted January 25, 2005 Fletcher has some serious liabilities. He can't cover at all, how many times did someone either complete a long pass up the seam or have Fletcher get PI? He's a leader in negative plays. How many times did Fletcher rough the QB and extend drives this season? The answer to both those questions is many. I would guess that he led the team in BOTH those categories this year. 218332[/snapback] I disagree somewhat. 1st when a LB is covering a pass play downfield he is covering for a screw up in the secondary. I don't know of any LB who is the primary Defender responsible for downfield recievers. Although Fletcher did have some bad timed penalties, at least 1/2 of then were very questionable. I remember more then once watching Fletcher barely scrape a QB and get flagged. I like London, and personally believe he does not need ot be even considered for replacement.
DeeRay Posted January 25, 2005 Posted January 25, 2005 Do we go with youth and a better chance for a sack? or a vet who gets lots of tackles even solo? the basic question should be do we go with production over bull sh--? ps... kendrell bell is not even worthy enough to be mentioned in the same sentence as London Fletcher (oops... i did it anyway) London has had some stupid penalties at inopportune times, but this guy is a leader, a ST standout, a playmaker, covers backs, TEs, WRs..... why would you even consider replacing him with kendrell bell? In fact, in terms of the number of plays he's on the field and the number of plays he makes calculated with his salary, and there's only two names that can be mentioned along side his as a possible replacement... that would be Ray Lewis or Teddy Bruschi.... and please, name me a MLB that has played and started every game for his team over the past 3 seasons (not those two).... I can't think of any... at least not of Fletcher's quality. Fletcher = Value, PLUS!!!
Alaska Darin Posted January 25, 2005 Posted January 25, 2005 the basic question should be do we go with production over bull sh--? ps... kendrell bell is not even worthy enough to be mentioned in the same sentence as London Fletcher (oops... i did it anyway) London has had some stupid penalties at inopportune times, but this guy is a leader, a ST standout, a playmaker, covers backs, TEs, WRs..... why would you even consider replacing him with kendrell bell? In fact, in terms of the number of plays he's on the field and the number of plays he makes calculated with his salary, and there's only two names that can be mentioned along side his as a possible replacement... that would be Ray Lewis or Teddy Bruschi.... and please, name me a MLB that has played and started every game for his team over the past 3 seasons (not those two).... I can't think of any... at least not of Fletcher's quality. Fletcher = Value, PLUS!!! 218360[/snapback] Because sacks are sexy to people who don't actually know much about football.
bills_fan Posted January 25, 2005 Posted January 25, 2005 Because sacks are sexy to people who don't actually know much about football. Hence the reason people want us to drop all of our available cap $$ on John Abraham or another DE, when Schobel/Kelsey will be very good this year. Watch for Kelsey to have a breakout year.
Doza Posted January 25, 2005 Posted January 25, 2005 Fleacher would be picked up so fast by Belichick.... BB loves the guy. I dunno why the lot of you hate him so much.
Bill from NYC Posted January 25, 2005 Posted January 25, 2005 thats because you made a suggestion that was just as, if not more retarded than this one yesterday... for the record, no way in hell with i ditch fletch for bell...this is football with team chemistry, not madden on your playstation... 218341[/snapback] Take a timeout from being a judgemental dope, and consider that just because you, in your eternal wisdom, do not agree with a suggestion on a message board, it may not be a "retarded" suggestion. Is that too much to ponder? OK, I will dumb it down for you! Neither you nor I are GMs of an NFL team. There are reasons for this. With me so far? Your views, however much esteem you hold them in, are as likely to be wrong as are mine. You can sit there smirking, and type away with a smug and all knowing attitude, but trust me, you and I are just fans on a message board. It would suit you well to stop playing expert and accept this truth. OK Coach Parcells? :I starred in Brokeback Mountain:
Sen. John Blutarsky Posted January 25, 2005 Posted January 25, 2005 Fleacher would be picked up so fast by Belichick.... BB loves the guy. I dunno why the lot of you hate him so much. 218379[/snapback] Well...if Belicheck loves him he must be the best we can do then.... BTW, Fletcher would drive BB insane, he plays all over the place, he guesses alot, and jumps into holes, sometimes it's good sometimes it makes 10 yard runs or worse. BB wants a guy who will play where he's supposed to play all the time...a system guy. Fletcher is a lot of things but "system guy" is not one of them.
Doza Posted January 25, 2005 Posted January 25, 2005 Well...if Belicheck loves him he must be the best we can do then.... BTW, Fletcher would drive BB insane, he plays all over the place, he guesses alot, and jumps into holes, sometimes it's good sometimes it makes 10 yard runs or worse. BB wants a guy who will play where he's supposed to play all the time...a system guy. Fletcher is a lot of things but "system guy" is not one of them. 218399[/snapback] Pats already have a guy like that. His name is Teddy Bruschi.
Arkady Renko Posted January 25, 2005 Posted January 25, 2005 I hear Jason Gildon might be available...
Sen. John Blutarsky Posted January 25, 2005 Posted January 25, 2005 I disagree somewhat. 1st when a LB is covering a pass play downfield he is covering for a screw up in the secondary. I don't know of any LB who is the primary Defender responsible for downfield recievers. Although Fletcher did have some bad timed penalties, at least 1/2 of then were very questionable. I remember more then once watching Fletcher barely scrape a QB and get flagged. I like London, and personally believe he does not need ot be even considered for replacement. 218347[/snapback] LBs can be responsible for coverage downfield, if it's a zone it can be the MLBs job to get as deep as possible to cover that area, also, he can be in man coverage with a TE or slot WR down the field, those are the plays I am referring to. Also, it doesn't matter if the penalties were questionable or not, they still happened and they happened more than once. Each time it was because he came at the QB out of control and that will CONTINUE to be flagged whether we like it or not. Unfortunately this isn't just a talent conversation. Fletcher is good for the $$ he makes. It will cost us more to get someone better and we have other priorities at this point.
Recommended Posts