Top ten from Yahoo!

ndanger

Active Member
Messages
2,298
Reaction score
13
We got fleeced ? What say you ?


10-pack: The worst moves (and non-moves) of the NFL offseason

By Mike Florio - SportingNews May 13, 6:36 pm EDT

*
Buzz Up
*
Print

With the offseason moving past the halfway point, it makes sense to take this opportunity to take a look at 10 of the moves (or non-moves) that stand out as the least prudent of the year to date. (Translation: I couldn’t think of anything better to write about.)

1. Who is the Bears’ quarterback?

Chicago Bears G.M. Jerry Angelo reminds us of the guy at the end of Animal House who was saying, “All is well,” while all heck was breaking loose at the parade that Bluto and company crashed.

On offense, the Bears are a mess, specifically at the quarterback position, where they are sticking with Rex Grossman and Kyle Orton.

Um. Why? Grossman and Orton have been awful. And yet the Bears didn’t sign an established player at the position and didn’t draft a rookie to groom for the job once Grossman and Orton are gone (i.e. next year).

It makes no sense, and it speaks to a level of arrogance on Angelo’s part that reminds us of the cake with the nasty message that was the Delta boys’ float in that ill-fated parade.

SN’s NFL offseason coverage
Brown: Let’s put Spygate to rest
Goodell meets with Walsh
Breakout players: AFC | NFC
Florio: 10-pack: bad offseason moves
Five non-first-round rookies to know
2. McNair waited too long to quit.

It came as a surprise to many when Baltimore Ravens quarterback Steve McNair announced his retirement in the days leading up to the draft. And presuming the announcement also came as news to the Ravens, it would have been much nicer if McNair had made his intentions known weeks earlier. That would have allowed the Ravens to explore options on the free-agent market, such as Todd Collins, the Commanders’ backup who played well down the stretch and who could have been a potential bridge at the position while a draft pick got ready to play.

As it played out, the Ravens were forced to target a quarterback in Round 1. They reportedly wanted to trade up for a crack at Matt Ryan; instead they traded down and then up (taking a bath on the points chart in the process) to get Delaware’s Joe Flacco.

In the end, all will be forgotten if Flacco flourishes in his first season or two. But if Flacco flounders initially, Ravens fans can thank McNair for not retiring early enough.

3. The Cowboys get fleeced.

Because news of the trade between the Dallas Cowboys and Miami Dolphins came on the eve of the draft, it made the deal a bit less noticeable—but no less remarkable.

The Cowboys sent linebacker Akin Ayodele and tight end Anthony Fasano to the Dolphins for a fourth-round draft pick. Total. Seriously.

Ayodele signed with the Cowboys as a free agent in 2006, and Fasano was a second-round pick that same year. Although Ayodele would have been bumped to the bench by free-agent pickup Zach Thomas, it’s highly risky, at best, for Dallas to count on the veteran linebacker with the history of head trauma to stay on the field. Meanwhile, after dealing away Fasano, the Cowboys had to burn a second-round pick on a new tight end (Texas A&M’s Martellus Bennett) to work behind Jason Witten.

4. The Jags roll the dice with Harvey.

When the Minnesota Vikings gave up a first-round pick and two third-rounders (and swapped sixth-rounders with KC) to get one of the best defensive players in the game from the Chiefs, the media went loco talking about the risk the Vikes had taken.

When the Jaguars gave up a first-round pick, two third-round picks and a fourth-round pick to get an unproven rookie who plays the same position, the reaction wasn’t nearly as extreme.

Although Derrick Harvey might eventually be as good as Jared Allen, the Vikings definitely got the player who already has reached that level. If the Vikings are right about Allen having exorcised his off-field demons, the Jags are the ones who took the real risk.

5. The Eagles should have shopped Sheppard sooner.

When rumors initially swirled regarding the possibility the Philadelphia Eagles would trade cornerback Lito Sheppard, the team vehemently denied them. But as soon as cornerback Asante Samuel was on the roster, Sheppard was on the block.

By then it was too late, though. With Samuel on board, the Eagles lost any leverage they would have had if they had tried to shop Sheppard before the start of free agency.

The Eagles’ apparent goal was to use the presence of Sheppard to keep other potential suitors for Sheppard from thinking Philly would make a run at the former Patriot. It worked; Samuel was holding up a green jersey before the dinner bell rang on the first day of the annual shopping spree.

However, it was well known in league circles that the Eagles were targeting Samuel, and few believed denials regarding Sheppard’s status. The Eagles should have worked out a deal with one of the other teams targeting Sheppard and pulled the trigger at the same time they signed Samuel.

6. The Rams should have taken Dorsey.

Once the Miami Dolphins reached terms on a contract with offensive tackle Jake Long at the top of the draft, the St. Louis Rams had a decision to make. And it was widely believed the coaching staff and scouting department had LSU defensive tackle Glenn Dorsey ranked significantly higher than Virginia defensive end Chris Long.

But on the Thursday before the draft, the gap suddenly narrowed, and Long eventually ended up being the name on the card the Rams submitted.

The rumors/reports are that Rams team president John Shaw decided Long would be the pick, regardless of the supposed wishes of the coaches or the scouts. If that’s the case, it’s a potential no-win situation for the Rams, especially with Dorsey landing in the same state, as a member of the Chiefs.

Unless Long clearly emerges as the better player, the decision not to draft Dorsey will constantly nag members of the organization—and be a constant source of frustration for those who lobbied for the man who was rated as the better player.

7. The Falcons should have taken Dorsey.

So when the Dolphins and the Rams passed on the guy whom many teams had rated as the top player in the draft pool, the Falcons fumbled a prime opportunity to shore up a so-so defense.

And they can thank Michael Vick for it.

The Falcons believed they desperately needed a quarterback who would make the locals forget about Mr. Vick, and likewise fill the spot at the top of the depth chart that otherwise might have been unsettled if and when Vick is authorized to return to the NFL.

So Atlanta took a huge risk by selecting Matt Ryan. As history tells us, the odds of success when taking a quarterback that high are the equivalent of flipping a coin.

Everything might work out for the Falcons. But the chances of that happening would have been better if they had taken Dorsey at No. 3 and a quarterback in Round 2.

8. The Raiders should have spent less money.

The Oakland Raiders have been as aggressive as any franchise ever has been in trying to improve its team. The thinking is that owner Al Davis recognizes he doesn’t have many football seasons left at the helm of the organization, and he’s doing everything he can to get the team back to the Super Bowl—as soon as possible.

Still, by overpaying guys like Tommy Kelly (Who? Exactly.) and Javon Walker, the team’s sudden sense of urgency could cause real cap problems in the not-too-distant future. It’s already been reported that the draft-weekend trade of cornerback Fabian Washington triggered a cap hit that forced the release of running back Dominic Rhodes.

Rhodes could be the first of many recognizable names who will be run out of town as the team tries its best to fit all of its high-priced players under the annual spending limit per team. Although the process of cutting players who formed the nucleus of a bad team might not be a bad thing, it’s better to rely on mediocre veterans than street free agents who are earning the rookie minimum.

9. The Steelers should have franchised Faneca.

Let’s get this one straight: The contracts of Pittsburgh Steelers offensive linemen Alan Faneca and Max Starks expired after the 2007 season. The Steelers could have used the franchise tag (which provides two first-round draft picks as compensation if the player signs with a new team) or the transition tag (which costs less but carries with it no compensation) on one of them.

So they chose to use the transition tag on Starks. Once he signed his tender, Starks was guaranteed to receive nearly $7 million in salary for 2008. Not bad for a guy who was on the bench at the start of 2007.

For only $500,000 more, the Steelers could have kept Alan Faneca, a perennial Pro Bowl left guard, for one more year. Sure, Faneca didn’t want to remain in Pittsburgh. But he didn’t want to remain in Pittsburgh last year, either. He eventually removed the stick from his rear end and had another solid season.

For a one-year haul of $7.5 million, Faneca likely would have done the same thing in 2008.

Now the Steelers are without Faneca, they got no compensation when he signed with another AFC team (the Jets) and they are paying almost $7 million to a guy who doesn’t deserve it.

10. Chad should have kept his mouth shut.

The mouth that roared for much of the offseason has fallen eerily silent since the Washington Commanders selected two wide receivers on the first day of the draft. So with the ‘Skins out of the Chad Johnson business and with the Cincinnati Bengals not budging on their refusal to trade him, Johnson presumably is hoping everyone will forget about everything he said from January through April regarding his desire to get out of Cincinnati.

Why else would Johnson no longer be whining for a trade? The reality is, he knows he has no leverage, and that his only option is to make good on a promise not to play again for the Bengals. And pay back $5 million in signing bonus money.

If Johnson had merely put a sock in the place where he hangs that golden grill on game days, he wouldn’t be in a position to look so silly when he shows up for training camp and acts like he didn’t act like a complete fool.

Mike Florio writes and edits ProFootballTalk.com and is a regular contributor to Sporting News.
 
OOPS........The Sporting News, I guess. I was on Yahoo when I found it. Sorry.:eek::
 
I tend to agree with the writer. A fourth rounder for a starter and a solid backup who could potentially be a starter is not near enough. I'm anticipating the arguments that Ayodele wasn't a playmaker and that Fasano is dumb, but the fact is that Ayodele was a starter for the Cowboys and probably will be a starter for the Phins, and Fasano is a potential starter.

I would have thought they could have at least squeezed a third rounder out the Phins. Tuna must have some incriminating photos of Jerrah.
 
EndGame;2083371 said:
I tend to agree with the writer. A fourth rounder for a starter and a solid backup who could potentially be a starter is not near enough. I'm anticipating the arguments that Ayodele wasn't a playmaker and that Fasano is dumb, but the fact is that Ayodele was a starter for the Cowboys and probably will be a starter for the Phins, and Fasano is a potential starter.

I would have thought they could have at least squeezed a third rounder out the Phins. Tuna must have some incriminating photos of Jerrah.

I can see trading Ayodele, Thomas is coming in and has Bobby Carpenter ( a 1st round pick) behind him, and they were willing to let Ayodele go.... I got that part.

What I really don't get is trading away a 2nd round backup TE, so you could draft another 2nd round backup TE.... Bennett seems like a good player, but still it doesn't make much sense to me at the moment. Maybe when the season gets under way I'll see the light, but right now I agree, it was just a weird move.
 
adamknite;2083380 said:
I can see trading Ayodele, Thomas is coming in and has Bobby Carpenter ( a 1st round pick) behind him, and they were willing to let Ayodele go.... I got that part.

What I really don't get is trading away a 2nd round backup TE, so you could draft another 2nd round backup TE.... Bennett seems like a good player, but still it doesn't make much sense to me at the moment. Maybe when the season gets under way I'll see the light, but right now I agree, it was just a weird move.

Totally agree not quite sure about the trade but I'll give them the benefit of the doubt til I see Zach and Bennett on the field.
 
ENGCowboy;2083399 said:
Totally agree not quite sure about the trade but I'll give them the benefit of the doubt til I see Zach and Bennett on the field.

That's exactly it. They clearly believe that Bennett is the vastly superior player. I think we will all support this decision after we see the difference between Thomas and Bennett vs Ayodele and Fasano.

Overall, think of it a different way. Ayodele was going to be cut when we added Thomas. Bennett was a player they targeted as a potential superstar, thus willing to cut their losses with Fasano- who wasn't a good pick. We were looking to get rid of both, and we got something rather than nothing for it.
 
the only the trade makes sense is if you think fasano is as developed as he is going to be.

i think JJ gave up on him way too early.

i don't question the trade, but just a 4th was not enough.

rd
 
It's funny, Al Johnson and Julius Jones were second rounders who left and we got NOTHING for them. But you trade another second rounder who's been less productive than those two and actually get something of value, and it's as if you got robbed.

But then we knew this was coming. Parcells = Genius. Jerry = Rube.
 
Chocolate Lab;2083452 said:
It's funny, Al Johnson and Julius Jones were second rounders who left and we got NOTHING for them. But you trade another second rounder who's been less productive than those two and actually get something of value, and it's as if you got robbed.

But then we knew this was coming. Parcells = Genius. Jerry = Rube.

Not a bad way to look at it.
 
We upgraded both positions, so no complaints by me. Bennett can do things on the field that Fasano can't. IMO, your going to see Bennett everywhere on the field...not just as a TE or FB (sometimes) like Fasano.

Thomas/Carp >>>>> Akin

Bennett >>>>> Fasano
 
adamknite;2083380 said:
What I really don't get is trading away a 2nd round backup TE, so you could draft another 2nd round backup TE.... Bennett seems like a good player, but still it doesn't make much sense to me at the moment. Maybe when the season gets under way I'll see the light, but right now I agree, it was just a weird move.

The thing is, Fasano was about to lose his #2 job to Tony Curtis. And has been nothing short of a huge disappointment. Just look at how often he was on the field (almost 50% of the snaps) and how much he did. We remember him more for the dropped passes than anything good he did on the field.
 
EndGame;2083371 said:
I tend to agree with the writer. A fourth rounder for a starter and a solid backup who could potentially be a starter is not near enough. I'm anticipating the arguments that Ayodele wasn't a playmaker and that Fasano is dumb, but the fact is that Ayodele was a starter for the Cowboys and probably will be a starter for the Phins, and Fasano is a potential starter.

I would have thought they could have at least squeezed a third rounder out the Phins. Tuna must have some incriminating photos of Jerrah.

Yes Ayodele was a start for us last year, but his play was poor at best, and he was not worth what he was getting paid. Don't think for a second that a big reason why we got rid of Ayodele wasn't to free up money and a big reason we got so little for him was because of his salary.
 
If this the worst anyone can say about the Cowboys is that we got fleeced(which I don't agree with) for trading 'Butterhands' Fasano and '40 tackles' Ayodele, then I'll take it.
 
Chocolate Lab;2083452 said:
It's funny, Al Johnson and Julius Jones were second rounders who left and we got NOTHING for them. But you trade another second rounder who's been less productive than those two and actually get something of value, and it's as if you got robbed.

But then we knew this was coming. Parcells = Genius. Jerry = Rube.

Well said!

:bow:

What did Akin Ayodele do in the two years he was here anyway?

It's not like he was even an above average starter!

He was a throw-in in that deal. And he had already been replaced by Zach Thomas.

I hope Parcells will get his fair share of criticism if Zach Thomas has a great season in Dallas.

I mean that's only fair, right?

As for the Bennett/Fasano swap. I think it speaks more to Fasano being a mistake of a draft pick two years ago than what they ultimately got for him.

If Bennett is as good as advertised, all the better.

That's the one unknown here.

But the two players who were traded were proven as average.
 
Chocolate Lab;2083452 said:
It's funny, Al Johnson and Julius Jones were second rounders who left and we got NOTHING for them. But you trade another second rounder who's been less productive than those two and actually get something of value, and it's as if you got robbed.

But then we knew this was coming. Parcells = Genius. Jerry = Rube.

Forget Ayodele. He was on his way out anyway. The problem is that they traded a second rounder two years later for a 4th. That's like getting 50 cents on the dollar. Then they had to burn another high pick to atone for the earlier screwup at that position. Not good. What's their plan? To keep drafting backup TEs high until they get it right? For their sake, I hope Bennett can play.
 
bbgun;2083606 said:
Forget Ayodele. He was on his way out anyway. The problem is that they traded a second rounder two years later for a 4th. That's like getting 50 cents on the dollar.
So to continue with this analogy, it's better to keep the mistake until you eventually get zero on the dollar?

Then they had to burn another high pick to atone for the earlier screwup at that position. Not good. What's their plan? To keep drafting backup TEs high until they get it right? For their sake, I hope Bennett can play.
That's not true, though. We didn't specifically target a TE. If Sweed had been there, we'd have taken him. Bennett just happened to be the best player on our board at that spot.
 
EndGame;2083371 said:
I tend to agree with the writer. A fourth rounder for a starter and a solid backup who could potentially be a starter is not near enough. I'm anticipating the arguments that Ayodele wasn't a playmaker and that Fasano is dumb, but the fact is that Ayodele was a starter for the Cowboys and probably will be a starter for the Phins, and Fasano is a potential starter.

Please... Ayodele had less tackles in his 16 game season than Zach had in five last year. And the position AYodele had was where the LB needs to flourish in terms of tackle. Couple this with his absolute 'suck' in pass coverage, the position has already upgraded itself a million times.
 
I don't think Ayodele played poor, I think he was JAG. I really think we did him a favor by trading him to Miami because it allowed him to keep his current contract in place. If he would have been cut, he probably wouldn't be making as much. Fasano, I honestly don't know he was a good guy but honestly, he was JAG. We have a chance to get another potential playmaker behind witten and we took it. Plus Curtis did catch several TD's last year.
 

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
474,003
Messages
14,505,678
Members
24,207
Latest member
TomGiantsfan
Back
Top