HoosierCat Posted February 1, 2007 Report Share Posted February 1, 2007 From askthecommish.com...Franchise:http://www.askthecommish.com/articles/page.asp?pid=30Transition:http://www.askthecommish.com/articles/page.asp?pid=31Notably, Justin would be expensive to franchise or transition ($8.6m or $7.7m). Steinbach, tho, has a significantly lower transition number ($6.4m) than franchise ($9.6m). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jditty47 Posted February 1, 2007 Report Share Posted February 1, 2007 get rid of them both, neither are game changers. we need to use that money on players at positions of need to our team. DE is a need for our team but G is not. we have andrews, kooistra, and whitworth so no need to keep steinbach. honestly ill be i lil upset if justin resigns quite frankly. he might be big and strong and pretty good vs the run, BUT OUR RUN NUMBERS ARE STILL TERRIBLE. so even with him in there its not making a drastic change. get rid of him, start geathers and robinson at DE's, sign briggs or thomas in FA and we are better vs the run rather than signing smith. i dont see a way where smith or steinbach resigning helps the team significantly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kazkal Posted February 1, 2007 Report Share Posted February 1, 2007 they diden't do anything about poison pills yet have they? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted February 1, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 1, 2007 they diden't do anything about poison pills yet have they?I don't think so...don't think there's anything that they (the owners) can do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairOnFire Posted February 1, 2007 Report Share Posted February 1, 2007 I thought the new CBA included language that prevented teams from including poison pills of the type that the Vikings used. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stripes Posted February 1, 2007 Report Share Posted February 1, 2007 I thought the new CBA included language that prevented teams from including poison pills of the type that the Vikings used.Yeah I seem to remember this issue being at least partly resolved with the new CBA.I'm not a fan of tagging either player, especially Steinbach with Whitworth seemingly ready to handle the guard duties. As most others have already stated here, get them signed long term or let them go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted February 1, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 1, 2007 Per Clayton, as of last October, the league gave up on trying to kill the pill. Somone copied the note here:http://www.network54.com/Forum/208566/mess...n+Pills,+No+Fix Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
schroomytunes Posted February 2, 2007 Report Share Posted February 2, 2007 From those numbers if we choose to resign those guys were looking at roughly 14 million for them both. IMHO wayyyy to much. We can use that $ to lure other game changers on the defensive side of the ball.We simply must upgrade the defense to have a shot to go deep in the playoffs, use the later rounds of the draft to land offensive depth but the first 3 rounds must be defense. We simply must get younger in the front 7, to me thats why our secondary suffers, we have virtually no push into the opposing offenses backfield. My offseason goals:First the Draft:1) Laron Landry(S), Jamaal Anderson(DE) or Patrick Willis(LB)2) Rufus Alexander(LB), Quinn Pitcock(DT) or Marcus McCauley(CB)We need this draft to be good to fill our defensive shortfalls.Second Free Agency:1)Michael Myers(Dt)-will be a force in the middle2)Asante Samuel or Nate Clements(Cb)-we need a young corner to shut down the passing game3)London Fletcher(MLB)-still productive at 32 and would be an excellent mentor to a young defense(Sam Mills)Potential Cap Cuts:1)John Thornton2)Bryan RobinsonI dunno but I think all this IS possible Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairOnFire Posted February 2, 2007 Report Share Posted February 2, 2007 I stand corrected. The Clayton thingie implies strongly that attempts to eliminate poison pill contract language failed....quite the opposite of what I read immediately after the new collective bargaining agreement. Just more proof that the owners crumbled, I guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted February 2, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2007 Well, there remains the possibility that it all goes to hell in a handbasket real soon. Caught this comment from NFLPA bigwig Gene Upshaw today...Upshaw addressed rumblings that owners might void the new collective bargaining agreement in 2008, possibly to restructure the way they and the union do business in the salary-cap era. Upshaw favored the move because it would bring about an uncapped year in 2010. The possibility of an uncapped 2007 season helped the sides hammer out a collective bargaining agreement last March."If the owners believe it's in their best interest to go into an uncapped year in 2010, so be it," Upshaw said. "We never wanted the cap in the first place." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spain Posted February 2, 2007 Report Share Posted February 2, 2007 Keep them both if we can. I would move J smith to Athletic defensive Takle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.