PDA

View Full Version : Grady Jackson to visit faiders


Mr. Laz
06-27-2006, 12:53 PM
Raiders | G. Jackson will visit with team
Mon, 26 Jun 2006 17:41:21 -0700

Len Pasquarelli, of ESPN.com, reports free agent DL Grady Jackson (Packers) will visit with the Oakland Raiders later in the week. Jackson has received interest from a number of franchises, including the Raiders earlier in the spring. The St. Louis Rams were likely the closest to signing Jackson, but decided to sign DL Jason Fisk instead. Some teams have had questions about Jackson's weight problems. It is not known if Jackson has a physical exam scheduled with the team.

DaKCMan AP
06-27-2006, 01:04 PM
I wouldn't mind if we signed the fatass.

MOhillbilly
06-27-2006, 01:05 PM
ive wanted him since the end of last season.

CupidStunt
06-27-2006, 01:09 PM
Uh, no. Overweight piece of crap is good to show up for 5-10 plays per game, and that's at a stretch.

DaKCMan AP
06-27-2006, 01:11 PM
that's more than what we've been getting out of Sims/Siavii

RockChalk
06-27-2006, 01:14 PM
Uh, no. Overweight piece of crap is good to show up for 5-10 plays per game, and that's at a stretch.

Which equals 4-9 more plays per game than our current fat ass shows up for

Rain Man
06-27-2006, 01:44 PM
I thought he visited the Raiders a few years ago.

ChiefsfaninPA
06-27-2006, 02:09 PM
I wouldn't mind if we signed the fatass.

Because that is what we need, ANOTHER fatarse.

Ari Chi3fs
06-27-2006, 02:10 PM
dude had 72 tackles last year... more than Browning 34, Dalton 18, Sims 8, and Siavii 6.

DaKCMan AP
06-27-2006, 02:15 PM
Because that is what we need, ANOTHER fatarse.

but he's a wide-stuff-the-hole-fatass. we have the lazy-play-possum fatass.

ChiefsfaninPA
06-27-2006, 02:16 PM
dude had 72 tackles last year... more than Browning 34, Dalton 18, Sims 8, and Siavii 6.

So I guess the reason that he isn't signed is because he wants too much money? It has nothing to do with performance or conditioning problems?

jspchief
06-27-2006, 02:18 PM
Uh, no. Overweight piece of crap is good to show up for 5-10 plays per game, and that's at a stretch. How many DTs on our current roster are any better?

None.

It would be different if we had a bunch of young upcoming guys, but the only young guy we have is Siavii, and Grady Jackson would run circles around him.

MOhillbilly
06-27-2006, 02:18 PM
So I guess the reason that he isn't signed is because he wants too much money? It has nothing to do with performance or conditioning problems?

dont know for sure but id say old as he is he wants stability in the form of lots of cash up front or 4 years w/ clauses that are in his favor.

CupidStunt
06-27-2006, 02:47 PM
How many DTs on our current roster are any better?

None.

Unless, of course, you completely forget James Reed, who is most certainly a better player.

Then again, a lot of Chiefs fans seem happy enough with replacing a piece of shit with a can of trash. That makes no sense to me. If we are indeed going to an attack style of cover 2 where the DTs need to penetrate, i'd rather have that piece of shit than Grady Jackson.

He's also going to want more money than he's worth. He won't sign for the hundreds of thousands he'll make at vet min.

Like I said, pass.

CupidStunt
06-27-2006, 02:49 PM
dude had 72 tackles last year... more than Browning 34, Dalton 18, Sims 8, and Siavii 6.

Um, no.

http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/3680

Try 54; 38 solo.

Any if tackles were any measure of a player, James Reed has him easily beat, AND added some penetration with 2 sacks.

Brock
06-27-2006, 02:50 PM
Unless, of course, you completely forget James Reed, who is most certainly a better player.

Sure, based on Reed's overwhelming stats and many pro bowls.

CupidStunt
06-27-2006, 02:50 PM
that's more than what we've been getting out of Sims/Siavii

Siavii will be lucky to make the Roster and Sims is a borderline starter.

People make out like those two are the entrenched starters. They're not.

Dalton, Browning and James Reed are all better players and should be mentioned before the other two dog craps.

And, even given Sims' lackluster performance so far in his career, i'd still take him and the potential he might give us over the proven McDonalds Jackson.

CupidStunt
06-27-2006, 02:51 PM
Sure, based on Reed's overwhelming stats and many pro bowls.

Pro Bowls? Get the hell outta here.

Stats? Yeah. A lot better than McDonalds Jackson's.

MOhillbilly
06-27-2006, 02:53 PM
[QUOTE=|




WTF???

jspchief
06-27-2006, 02:54 PM
<DIV>[QUOTE=|

jspchief
06-27-2006, 02:55 PM
A mod needs to change Queen's ****ing name so quoting him isn't a constant cluster****.

the Talking Can
06-27-2006, 02:56 PM
I thought he visited the Raiders a few years ago.

yeah...he just arrived

Brock
06-27-2006, 02:56 PM
Pro Bowls? Get the hell outta here.

Stats? Yeah. A lot better than McDonalds Jackson's.

Uh, yeah. Maybe you ought to look again.

jspchief
06-27-2006, 03:02 PM
So now James Reed is better than Grady Jackson?

I guess that explains why he signed a one year contract for minimum to get off the mid-June scrapheap.

Ari Chi3fs
06-27-2006, 03:10 PM
Um, no.

http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/3680

Try 54; 38 solo.

Any if tackles were any measure of a player, James Reed has him easily beat, AND added some penetration with 2 sacks.


heh. these were the stats given on 610 this morning, i just regurgitated them... I seeked no validity of said stats.

CupidStunt
06-27-2006, 03:18 PM
Uh, yeah. Maybe you ought to look again.

No, maybe YOU ought to look again, and then take a walk to the local opticians.

As for contracts determining a players' worth - good call. James Reed must suck.

Get back to me when Grady Jackson's rolling in any kind of signing bonus.

ct
06-27-2006, 03:19 PM
A mod needs to change Queen's ****ing name so quoting him isn't a constant cluster****.

Just change the | < to K

K[/i]ing]No, maybe YOU ought to look again, and then take a walk to the local opticians.

As for contracts determining a players' worth - good call. James Reed must suck.

Get back to me when Grady Jackson's rolling in any kind of signing bonus.

Like so

Brock
06-27-2006, 03:22 PM
No, maybe YOU ought to look again, and then take a walk to the local opticians.

As for contracts determining a players' worth - good call. James Reed must suck.

Get back to me when Grady Jackson's rolling in any kind of signing bonus.


Wow, Reed had 6 more tackles than Jackson, and a whopping 1 more sack. You're right, Reed's a god compared to Jackson.

CupidStunt
06-27-2006, 03:28 PM
Wow, Reed had 6 more tackles than Jackson, and a whopping 1 more sack.

Good. I'm glad you finally caught up to speed.

You're right, Reed's a god compared to Jackson.

No need to spin shit.

I never said anything CLOSE to that.

Reed's just a better player. No need to go overboard, though.

jspchief
06-27-2006, 03:29 PM
<DIV>[QUOTE=|

CupidStunt
06-27-2006, 03:29 PM
Just change the | < to K



Like so

Yeah.

As for a username change, I have no idea who the powers that be are, but -- IF YOU'RE READING THIS -- please do. King, Queen, whatever.

KQW. That'll do.

Brock
06-27-2006, 03:31 PM
Good. I'm glad you finally caught up to speed.



No need to spin shit.

I never said anything CLOSE to that.

Reed's just a better player. No need to go overboard, though.

Nothing like comparing 1 year of stats and calling it a trend. ****ing moron.

jspchief
06-27-2006, 03:33 PM
As for contracts determining a players' worth - good call. James Reed must suck.

Get back to me when Grady Jackson's rolling in any kind of signing bonus.So Reed has a career year, and sits unsigned until mid june before he has to settle for a 1 year minimum deal. Why is that? You don't think that it's reasonable to question whether he's NFL starter material, when 31 NFL teams passed on him at that price?

I'm not claiming Jackson is a stud, or will ever be a pro bowler again. But it's not like the bums we have at DT are so valuable that we can't continue to try and upgrade at the position.

The fact that you're content with Reed, Dalton, and Browning as our potential starters says enough.

CupidStunt
06-27-2006, 03:37 PM
So Reed has a career year, and sits unsigned until mid june before he has to settle for a 1 year minimum deal. Why is that? You don't think that it's reasonable to question whether he's NFL starter material, when 31 NFL teams passed on him at that price?


It's not an indictment of how good he is. Has Randle El proven worthy of $30-something million?

I'm not claiming Jackson is a stud, or will ever be a pro bowler again. But it's not like the bums we have at DT are so valuable that we can't continue to try and upgrade at the position.


I agree. And i'm not claiming that Jackson wouldn't make our roster or some shit. I just don't think he'd our best DT and I don't think he's worth shelling out much for at all.

The fact that you're content with Reed, Dalton, and Browning as our potential starters says enough.

I'm not content with them. That assumption is a stretch given how I said above that i'd rather not replace shit with trash -- but I definitely DO want to replace the shit.

Brodrick Bunkley was my top guy in the draft. Claude Wroten was high on the list. And i'd even have liked to sign a guy like Ryan Pickett or, god forbid, a more established player like Kemoatu (gotta be a spelling error).

I just don't want to make the near-lateral moves like signing Jackson would be.

ct
06-27-2006, 03:37 PM
So Reed has a career year, and sits unsigned until mid june before he has to settle for a 1 year minimum deal. Why is that? You don't think that it's reasonable to question whether he's NFL starter material, when 31 NFL teams passed on him at that price?

I'm not claiming Jackson is a stud, or will ever be a pro bowler again. But it's not like the bums we have at DT are so valuable that we can't continue to try and upgrade at the position.

The fact that you're content with Reed, Dalton, and Browning as our potential starters says enough.

I don't recall anyone saying they were content with Reed, Dalton, and Browning.

CupidStunt
06-27-2006, 03:39 PM
Nothing like comparing 1 year of stats and calling it a trend.

If you'd look at Jackson's stats before 2005 (23 tackles, 48 tackles, 42 tackles), you'd thank me for not using more than a year.

BTW, you should go tell the Larry Johnson homers that one year does not make a trend.

****ing moron.

Classic sign of a losing argument.

What's next, my mom's a fat ho-bag? ROFL

jspchief
06-27-2006, 03:42 PM
It's not an indictment of how good he is.It's a pretty god damn strong indicator when 31 NFL teams pass on him at basement prices. Could those other teams be wrong? Sure. But it's sure as hell isn't enough of a likelihood that I'd go around claiming Reed is better than Grady Jackson.

jspchief
06-27-2006, 03:44 PM
I don't recall anyone saying they were content with Reed, Dalton, and Browning.Wanting to pass on Jackson with those guys on the roster pretty much says as much. If you're not trying to find something better, that sounds an aweful lot like you're content with what you have.

CupidStunt
06-27-2006, 03:46 PM
Well, I would. Sue me.

I saw a few games of Reed and a similar amount of Jackson (likely no more or less than you saw them both, i'd guess) and I was more impressed with the younger, quicker Reed than the older, fatter and much less motivated Jackson.

The stats back that up, but it's not even about that.

We all moan about Siavii and Sims for being lazy-arse bitches. Jackson is the PROTOTYPE for this behavior from an oversized turd.

What's not to like about Reed? He's got his best years ahead of him and is a penetrator.

I would be surprised if Jackson matches what he did last year, let alone surpass it. I would be even more surprised if James Reed doesn't match what he did last year. That alone is enough for me.

The rest of our roster? I agree with you, unless Dalton finds his 2004 form.

jspchief
06-27-2006, 03:53 PM
<DIV>[QUOTE=king]

jspchief
06-27-2006, 03:53 PM
arrrghhh. **** it

DaKCMan AP
06-27-2006, 04:24 PM
If you'd look at Jackson's stats before 2005 (23 tackles, 48 tackles, 42 tackles), you'd thank me for not using more than a year.

BTW, you should go tell the Larry Johnson homers that one year does not make a trend.

LJ averaged 4.3ypc in 2003 and 4.8ypc in 2004.

He also had 11 TD's in the last 6 games of 2004 before going off like he did last year.

CupidStunt
06-28-2006, 04:00 AM
Yeah, solid averages. Hardly put together All-Pro type seasons like Tomlinson, however.

FWIW, the Raiders signed an even WORSE former Packers DT in Donnell Washington. Please don't tell me how he's better than every DT on our roster, too.

Mecca
06-28-2006, 04:48 AM
You know a guy like Grady Jackson has 0 place in a cover 2 defense right........it's about small quick penetrating DT's. Not big fat run stuffing DT's. Let's get that in our minds before we decide what kind of DT's we want.