Tipster19 Posted April 11, 2007 Share Posted April 11, 2007 With another need on their team it'll be difficult for the Titans to mortgage their future. Losing their starting RB, WR and now their CB should make the Titans look more to FAs, June 1st cuts and the draft to fill out their roster. I'm still expecting Green Bay to enter into this scenario but having Tennessee taking a step back can't hurt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvermike Posted April 11, 2007 Share Posted April 11, 2007 Yeah, down three key players at key positions (four if you count Robaire Smith, , but you don't see anyone talking about how terrible the Titans offseason was, h ow they're probably just getting ready to sell the team, how they're going to compete for the number one overall pick. Blah blah blah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted April 11, 2007 Share Posted April 11, 2007 With another need on their team it'll be difficult for the Titans to mortgage their future. Losing their starting RB, WR and now their CB should make the Titans look more to FAs, June 1st cuts and the draft to fill out their roster. I'm still expecting Green Bay to enter into this scenario but having Tennessee taking a step back can't hurt. I think this is being discussed in a thread or two (tsk, tsk, Tippy ), but I'll play in your sandbox. I agree. Not sure it will totally remove Tenny from the conversation, but it can't HELP their chances. Likely the Bills are in the passenger's seat now (the Chargers are driving this rig). I'm thinking even if Green Bay enters the conversation, Marv's already called, "Shotgun". That's how it works...right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvermike Posted April 11, 2007 Share Posted April 11, 2007 You have to figure the Chargers will look bad if they have Turner on the roster next season - he'll leave to a big FA deal in 2008, and the fans will be angry that they let him go 'for nothing' when they could have had even a 2nd round pick. The price goes down when demand drops, and there's not a 'keep him' option, really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted April 11, 2007 Share Posted April 11, 2007 You have to figure the Chargers will look bad if they have Turner on the roster next season - he'll leave to a big FA deal in 2008, and the fans will be angry that they let him go 'for nothing' when they could have had even a 2nd round pick. The price goes down when demand drops, and there's not a 'keep him' option, really. Or, they keep him, LT goes down and they ride their stud backup RB deep into the playoffs. They wouldn't look too bad, then. Do you really think AJ Smith cares how it "looks"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDH Posted April 11, 2007 Share Posted April 11, 2007 You have to figure the Chargers will look bad if they have Turner on the roster next season - he'll leave to a big FA deal in 2008, and the fans will be angry that they let him go 'for nothing' when they could have had even a 2nd round pick. The price goes down when demand drops, and there's not a 'keep him' option, really. Sure there is. If they think they are a legitimate Super Bowl contender (which they are) then keeping Turner isn't a bad move. Turner is an insurance policy for the most important player on the Charger team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordio Posted April 11, 2007 Share Posted April 11, 2007 Sure there is. If they think they are a legitimate Super Bowl contender (which they are) then keeping Turner isn't a bad move. Turner is an insurance policy for the most important player on the Charger team. Remember they have Norv Turner as a coach now. IMO, that takes them right out of any superbowl discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tipster19 Posted April 11, 2007 Author Share Posted April 11, 2007 I think this is being discussed in a thread or two (tsk, tsk, Tippy ), but I'll play in your sandbox. I agree. Not sure it will totally remove Tenny from the conversation, but it can't HELP their chances. Likely the Bills are in the passenger's seat now (the Chargers are driving this rig). I'm thinking even if Green Bay enters the conversation, Marv's already called, "Shotgun". That's how it works...right? Aw, that hurts Dino! I just thought the new developement of Jones getting suspended changes the complexion on the Turner scenario. Of course it always comes back to the compensation that AJ is looking for, reguardless of what teams are in the race. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nichebiche Posted April 11, 2007 Share Posted April 11, 2007 You have to figure the Chargers will look bad if they have Turner on the roster next season - he'll leave to a big FA deal in 2008, and the fans will be angry that they let him go 'for nothing' when they could have had even a 2nd round pick. The price goes down when demand drops, and there's not a 'keep him' option, really. you have to remember that this is the same GM who drafted Phillip Rivers despite already having Drew Brees on the team, having put up an excellent season at QB prior to said draft. then AJ put the franchise tag on Brees for a year with both QB's on the roster. it was pretty clear that Rivers wasn't drafted to sit on the bench. but was Brees traded with the knowledge that they couldn't keep both QB's on the team forever? no. instead of receiving some compensation for Brees, no trade was made and he walked the next year. he went on to lead the Saints to the NFC Championship game and the Chargers got nothing for him. the only compensation the Chargers received was having an insurance policy for 2 years with 2 excellent QB's on the team while Rivers got to learn the system free of the pressure to succeed right away. i believe AJ will be just as likely to keep Michael Turner as insurance to LT before he will trade Turner for what he deems to be less than value, solely for the sake of receiving "something" for him before he hits the unrestricted FA market after next season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted April 11, 2007 Share Posted April 11, 2007 you have to remember that this is the same GM who drafted Phillip Rivers despite already having Drew Brees on the team, having put up an excellent season at QB prior to said draft. then AJ put the franchise tag on Brees for a year with both QB's on the roster. it was pretty clear that Rivers wasn't drafted to sit on the bench. but was Brees traded with the knowledge that they couldn't keep both QB's on the team forever? no. instead of receiving some compensation for Brees, no trade was made and he walked the next year. he went on to lead the Saints to the NFC Championship game and the Chargers got nothing for him. the only compensation the Chargers received was having an insurance policy for 2 years with 2 excellent QB's on the team while Rivers got to learn the system free of the pressure to succeed right away. i believe AJ will be just as likely to keep Michael Turner as insurance to LT before he will trade Turner for what he deems to be less than value, solely for the sake of receiving "something" for him before he hits the unrestricted FA market after next season. They didn't keep both QBs as insurance, they kept both because they didn't know which one was better, and who they wanted to keep. They drafted Rivers because they didn't think Brees was going to amount to anything big. The year Rivers came in he was supposed to fight for the starting job, but I believe he was hurt so Brees started and was great. They had a bit of a delema now because they didn't know who should start since they had a highly drafted QB in Rivers, and another QB who was showing what he could do in Brees. They kept Brees around for another year, he played really well but had a serious injury at the end of the year so they decided to let him go (because they weren't 100% sure he would come back at the same level he was at). By that time they figured They had to make a choice between what was becoming a very expensive backup with little NFL experience and loads of potential, or the QB that was becoming a great player but had a serious injury to end the year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nichebiche Posted April 11, 2007 Share Posted April 11, 2007 They didn't keep both QBs as insurance, they kept both because they didn't know which one was better, and who they wanted to keep. They drafted Rivers because they didn't think Brees was going to amount to anything big. The year Rivers came in he was supposed to fight for the starting job, but I believe he was hurt so Brees started and was great. They had a bit of a delema now because they didn't know who should start since they had a highly drafted QB in Rivers, and another QB who was showing what he could do in Brees. They kept Brees around for another year, he played really well but had a serious injury at the end of the year so they decided to let him go (because they weren't 100% sure he would come back at the same level he was at). By that time they figured They had to make a choice between what was becoming a very expensive backup with little NFL experience and loads of potential, or the QB that was becoming a great player but had a serious injury to end the year call it what you want. insurance or not. although having 2 QB's of that caliber on the same team at once is insurance, whether that is the intention or not. you don't invest a #4 overall draft pick in a QB unless you think he was special with a proven QB already on the roster. Brees was an impending FA the following year. they put the tag on Brees after Rivers 1st year to give him more time to develop. the window of opportunity for the Chargers to get value for one or the other (whichever brought more value in return) was in the year they franchised Brees. after Brees injured his shoulder, their decision was made for them. perhaps they would have put the tag on Brees once again if the injury didn't happen, hoping to strike a trade for one or the other. the uncertainty caused by the injury negated that option. the point is not whether having the 2 QB's was insurance or not. the point was that AJ had an opportunity to trade one or the other but chose to hold both and risked not receiving any compensation when Brees became a FA the following year. AJ took that risk knowing it gave his team a better chance to win in Rivers 2nd year with him on the bench as opposed to having him start while making a below market value trade in order to receive compensation for Brees. with this in mind, it is not a given that the Chargers will trade Turner just for the sake of getting something for him now, as opposed to letting him go for nothing after next season, unless they receive what they want. AJ is not afraid to keep him as insurance otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tipster19 Posted April 11, 2007 Author Share Posted April 11, 2007 I might want to retract my statement about Green Bay. They had alot of cap room but now with the resigning of LB Nick Barnett they are about $14 million under the cap. While this is comparable to Buffalo's, I find it strange that if they were to become interested in Turner that they would burn up so much of their cap room. In other news the Titans may be getting over $5 million in cap relief because of the Pacman suspension. Ah, it's never ending is it? It looks like we'll be tortured right up to the draft with this Turner situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MRW Posted April 11, 2007 Share Posted April 11, 2007 you have to remember that this is the same GM who drafted Phillip Rivers despite already having Drew Brees on the team, having put up an excellent season at QB prior to said draft. then AJ put the franchise tag on Brees for a year with both QB's on the roster. it was pretty clear that Rivers wasn't drafted to sit on the bench. Brees had an excellent season after Rivers was drafted, not before. If Brees had shown himself then to be the kind of performer he is now, I don't think Rivers would've been drafted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nichebiche Posted April 11, 2007 Share Posted April 11, 2007 Brees had an excellent season after Rivers was drafted, not before. If Brees had shown himself then to be the kind of performer he is now, I don't think Rivers would've been drafted. YEAR TEAM G CMP ATT PCT YDS AVG TD LNG INT RAT 2003 SDG 11 205 356 57.6 2108 5.9 11 68 15 67.5 2004 SDG 15 262 400 65.5 3159 7.9 27 79 7 104.8 ok, you got me on the timing of when Brees had his 1st big year vs. when Rivers was drafted. my bad. this still does not change my argument that AJ had an opportunity to trade Brees or Rivers after 2004 after tagging Brees, instead choosing to keep both and risk losing Brees after 2005 without compensation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts