Tamba Hali

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by Saccopoo

I beg to differ. I remember watching Charlie Casserly state that he was the best linebacking prospect that he has seen in the past ten years hands down. Someone else (can't remember who) in the business stated that he was a bigger, faster version of Pat Willis (who I liked a ton and wished the Chiefs drafted). There were a lot of guys who were full on the Curry bandwagon. Guys who were in the business of evaluating players.

And I remember people around here stating that they wouldn't take Adrian Peterson for a number of reasons.

(And I'm not a positional guy. I'd be estatic if the Chiefs actually took a guy like Berry, Mays, Dunlap or Spikes. I just think it's a bit hypocritical to bag on Curry as a top ten guy because he played the strongside backer position in college, but polish up Mays or Berry when they play safety. I mean, seriously. Safety. In terms of positional picking, that's about as low as you can go on the totem pole.)

Top ten isn't top 5, FWIW, and Curry wasn't good enough to supercede the dent that his position has on his value. And Safety is more important that any of the LB positions in a pass happy league.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Saccopoo

Personally, I want to know how the positional draft guys are going to justify Berry or Mays with a top five pick. You know, the same guys who said you couldn't draft Curry, no matter how good he might be, with that pick because he was a strongside LB, not a pass rusher.

Unless either one of these guys are Sean Taylor, minus the bullets, Top 5 is way too high, IMO.

[Mecca]

Eric Berry and Taylor Mays are better prospects than Aaron Curry.

[Mecca]

Doomy.......question, I was wondering..

Did pick you pick up Manningham last week like I suggested in your trade thread?

[doomy3]

Originally Posted by Mecca

Doomy.......question, I was wondering..

Did pick you pick up Manningham last week like I suggested in your trade thread?

Yeah, I had already picked him up in one league, but picked him up in that league you were talking about for Nicks. Dude had a monster game too, unfortunately was on my bench behind Roddy White and Cotchery.

[Mecca]

The teams in the huge markets have an advantage with the money they make. That's why there is a CBA problem the owners can't agree.

[doomy3]

Originally Posted by Mecca

The teams in the huge markets have an advantage with the money they make. That's why there is a CBA problem the owners can't agree.

But I thought the main problem on the owners side with the CBA is more on the large market owners. Aren't those the guys that want the change so they can spend more of that money instead of sharing it?

[Mecca]

Originally Posted by doomy3

But I thought the main problem on the owners side with the CBA is more on the large market owners. Aren't those the guys that want the change so they can spend more of that money instead of sharing it?

It's a mix the small market owners don't like it either because they see the cap getting higher and it's creating have and have nots within the cap. Basically the smaller market owners want the luxury box/suit money to be shared too and the big market owners are telling them to **** off.

Here's where the advantage is..if I turn 80 million and you turn 40 million, I can circumvent the cap by giving out more money in bonuses than you turn and still make a profit.

[doomy3]

Originally Posted by Mecca

It's a mix the small market owners don't like it either because they see the cap getting higher and it's creating have and have nots within the cap. Basically the smaller market owners want the luxury box/suit money to be shared too and the big market owners are telling them to **** off.

Here's where the advantage is..if I turn 80 million and you turn 40 million, I can circumvent the cap by giving out more money in bonuses than you turn and still make a profit.

Is that last part really happening all that often though? I mean, are there a lot of teams doing that because of the suites? I realize a lot of teams pay the huge backloaded contracts with the big signing bonuses, but it certainly doesn't seem exclusive to just large market teams. Seems like everyone does this.

[Mecca]

Originally Posted by doomy3

Is that last part really happening all that often though? I mean, are there a lot of teams doing that because of the suites? I realize a lot of teams pay the huge backloaded contracts with the big signing bonuses, but it certainly doesn't seem exclusive to just large market teams. Seems like everyone does this.

The Giants are doing it..Cowboys, Redskins, several others do it too, NE does it.

All teams give out bonuses but the idea is the big market teams can do it more because they have more money. Basically the Chiefs give Cassel and Jackson their money and have nothing left.

A team like the Giants could pay them and 5 more guys.

[Mecca]

Yea Charlie Casserly also thought Troy Williamson was a great WR prospect.

[Saccopoo]

Originally Posted by Mecca

Yea Charlie Casserly also thought Troy Williamson was a great WR prospect.

Conversely, weren't you a big Mike Williams proponent?

[Mecca]

Originally Posted by Saccopoo

Conversely, weren't you a big Mike Williams proponent?

Ha no, I said I thought he was to slow, I don't like big slow WR's.

[Mecca]

Jerry Jones basically made fun of Minnesota for being to cheap to pay for their stadium.

[Mecca]

Look at teams like the Steelers, Bills or Jacksonville or even the Chiefs then compare those moves to teams like the Cowboys, Giants, Jets, Pats.

You'll see a stark difference in how active the teams are in FA and how much money is going out.