Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 144
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

Why? Woods in a packers uni is 1,000+ WR. Isnt tnag worth a 1st?

 

Very rarely do teams part with a 1st rd pick.

 

Brandon Marshall was just traded for a 5th rd pick. Chicago had to add a 7th

Mike Wallace was traded for a 5th rd pick Mia had to add a 7th

Kenny Stills for a 3rd rd pick

 

All guys on par or better than Woods.

Posted

Very rarely do teams part with a 1st rd pick.

 

Brandon Marshall was just traded for a 5th rd pick. Chicago had to add a 7th

Mike Wallace was traded for a 5th rd pick Mia had to add a 7th

Kenny Stills for a 3rd rd pick

 

All guys on par or better than Woods.

Marshal and wallace damaged goods with declining numbers and big contracts. Stills I don't know much about other than being a 5th round pi k whose numbers are inflated due to playing with brees. I would say if they got a 3rd for him there a chance woods gets a 1st (almost certain a 2nd)
Posted

Why would somebody trade a 1st rounder for a non-physical WR who doesn't have the talent to play at the upper level in the NFL?

Posted

"Serious Conjecture" indeed. WTF JTSP a 1st? A 1st? Just one 1st? You've got to be joking. Woods is worth at LEAST 2 1sts. Whaley would be nuts to do that trade.

 

 

 

 

IMO

Posted

I'm all for exploring what could make our team better in the long term. I'm not saying trade him for nothing but if a team wants a nice number 2 guy who has a low cap hit for two years they might be willing to take a look at woods. We added a ton of talent with clay and shady and if we get an extra first for next years draft we could have the ammo to move and grab a qb maybe or add some talent at a different position.

Posted

I'm all for exploring what could make our team better in the long term. I'm not saying trade him for nothing but if a team wants a nice number 2 guy who has a low cap hit for two years they might be willing to take a look at woods. We added a ton of talent with clay and shady and if we get an extra first for next years draft we could have the ammo to move and grab a qb maybe or add some talent at a different position.

 

not a bad through. I was actually thinking about this yesterday (and was not intoxicated). But, we don't really have a solid #2 after Watkins. On the other hand, perhaps with Harvin and Clay that makes up for it. Then you factor in injuries. But if we get a #1, it makes it hard to pass up because it could be packaged and used to grab a QB if we need one, or if not, could be used on its own to replace Woods if need be. So, yeah, I'm conflicted.

Posted

 

No, no they wont. You are not going to get a first for Robert Woods.

hence the word "may." You probably also thought there was no way you'd get McCoy for Alonso straight up? Strange things happen. If the Packers think they are a WR away from being great now, they could do it.

Why are we even discussing this......Woods is a valuable player to US

 

draft picks are crapshoot

that's why we are discussing it. Why have a discussion where everyone agrees?

Posted

hence the word "may." You probably also thought there was no way you'd get McCoy for Alonso straight up? Strange things happen. If the Packers think they are a WR away from being great now, they could do it.

that's why we are discussing it. Why have a discussion where everyone agrees?

 

Here is how that would go, Packers call about Woods, Bills say give us a first, Packers say no thanks, hang up the phone. Then call 30 other teams about a WR that they can trade a 5th or later for that would put up similar numbers to Woods with Rodgers as their QB.

Posted

I don't agree with that :beer:

M: Oh look, this isn't an argument.

A: Yes it is.

M: No it isn't. It's just contradiction.

A: No it isn't.

M: It is!

A: It is not.

M: Look, you just contradicted me.

A: I did not.

M: Oh you did!!

A: No, no, no.

M: You did just then.

A: Nonsense!

M: Oh, this is futile!

A: No it isn't.

M: I came here for a good argument.

A: No you didn't; no, you came here for an argument.

M: An argument isn't just contradiction.

A: It can be.

M: No it can't. An argument is a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition.

A: No it isn't.

M: Yes it is! It's not just contradiction.

A: Look, if I argue with you, I must take up a contrary position.

M: Yes, but that's not just saying 'No it isn't.'

A: Yes it is!

M: No it isn't!

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...