Vikings close to signing Randy Moss
Michael
I wonder if they can pull this off before the Monday night game ???
MZ
> http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/Randy-Moss-trade-New-England-Patriots-Minnesota-Vikings-100510
>
> I wonder if they can pull this off before the Monday night game ???
Very odd. I guess Belichick is earmarking this year to be a rebuilding
year. Considering the Seymour trade last year, he's apparently been
trying to rebuild for a while now.
Michael
> On 10/5/2010 8:57 PM, Michael wrote:
>
>
> > I wonder if they can pull this off before the Monday night game ???
>
> Very odd. I guess Belichick is earmarking this year to be a rebuilding
> year. Considering the Seymour trade last year, he's apparently been
> trying to rebuild for a while now.
looks like Revis will get another 60 minutes with "The Slouch"
somthing else of interest... i have also ready a few boards where fans
have suggested vincent jackson may wind up with pats
John Vamp
>
>
> > I wonder if they can pull this off before the Monday night game ???
>
> Very odd. I guess Belichick is earmarking this year to be a rebuilding
> year. Considering the Seymour trade last year, he's apparently been
> trying to rebuild for a while now.
I just posted this in the Pats newsgroup, but I can't believe they
would trade Moss for a 3rd round pick and that be that. I would love
to think that they'd deal Moss for a 3rd round pick, and then trade a
2nd round pick for Vincent Jackson. In essence, then, they'd deal
Moss and a 2nd for VJax and a 3rd, dropping them down probably about
20-25 spots in the draft, but not losing a pick, but picking up a stud
receiver that's a lot younger than Moss.
I'd be ok with that plan, but I wouldn't be very happy if they just
dealt Moss for a 3rd round pick and relied on their WR corps that's
left over.
Michael
i think vj might be a better bet for them right now...
MZ
I'm not a big Vincent Jackson fan. With the money he's looking for, I'd
pass. I sure wouldn't give up a substantial draft pick for him.
Demetrios
> http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/Randy-Moss-trade-New-England-Patri...
>
> I wonder if they can pull this off before the Monday night game ???
I'd love to see them pull this off, with not quite enough time for him
to suit up for them effectively on Monday. Frankly, I think it might
even hurt the Vikings if he is traded this week and plays on Monday.
With Favre already an interception prone machine, Moss not known for
trying to break up interceptions, and not quite knowing their playbook
(regardless of how similar it may be to a system he played in before),
it could lead to lots of turnovers if he isn't playing the routes
right.
But I'd LOVE to see this happen after Monday's game...and then it'll
be an interesting homecoming when the Vikings go to Foxboro on
Halloween.
Tough stretch for Minnesota coming up...Jets, Cowboys, Packers,
Patriots. Moss'd be a good acquisition once they got him into sync.
D.
Ray O'Hara
"Michael" <mjd...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:a9764e04-f412-4b1f...@k13g2000vbq.googlegroups.com...
> http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/Randy-Moss-trade-New-England-Patriots-Minnesota-Vikings-100510
>
> I wonder if they can pull this off before the Monday night game ???
the Boston TV stations are reporting the rumour too.
I don't like it.
Moss is a threat. remove him and the enemy can really pack it in close.
also trading him would seem to signal BB isn't worried about this season.
draft picks are so iffy I'd rather keep Moss for the year. if he walks he
walks.
frndt...@aol.com
AJ Smith would not be trading Jackson to another AFC team, especially
the P*ts.
Not one whisper of interest in Jackson has been from an AFC team.
John C TX
Mark, I am with you. He certainly isn't a a Randy Moss or Andre
Johnson in term of athleticism but hey, he looks like a TE.
Tutor
> http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/Randy-Moss-trade-New-England-Patri...
>
It's done. Moss will be in uniform on Monday night.
Now that the Pats have like a pair of picks in every round of next
year's draft, it remains to be seen who they will acquire form another
team to replace Moss in the lineup. They sure do have the picks to
make the deal. In some ways, this is a smart move by belichick to get
some value for Moss now, before he walks. But in no way do I believe
he is relegating 2010 as a rebuilding year. For pete's sake, the Pats
are 3-1 and tied for 1st in the division. You have to beleive that
there is a follow up deal with another team on the horizon that will
bring a quality WR to NE. Unless you really believe that the starters
for the remainder of 2010 will be Tate and Welker, to go along with
the rookie TEs and Green-Ellis. Come on they have to bring in
something.
John C TX
Maybe, but maybe they know the strike is inevitable & Kraft, & to a
lesser extent BB if you believe my theory that he a s profitability
bonus, pockets $5 MM he just saved in Moss' salary. By the way these
are their picks:
Two first round picks, including the Raiders’ pick from the Richard
Seymour trade.
Two second round picks, including the Panthers’ pick received in
exchange for pick #89 in 2010.
Two third round picks, including the Vikings in the Moss trade.
Two fourth round picks, including the Broncos’ pick from today’s
trade.
One fifth round pick.
One sixth round pick gained from the Saints in exchange for David
Thomas.
One seventh round pick.
MZ
> On Oct 5, 8:57 pm, Michael<mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/Randy-Moss-trade-New-England-Patri...
>>
>> I wonder if they can pull this off before the Monday night game ???
>
> It's done. Moss will be in uniform on Monday night.
>
> Now that the Pats have like a pair of picks in every round of next
> year's draft, it remains to be seen who they will acquire form another
> team to replace Moss in the lineup. They sure do have the picks to
> make the deal. In some ways, this is a smart move by belichick to get
> some value for Moss now, before he walks.
That's the rationale, but it's worth pointing out that if they let him
walk via free agency they would have received a 5th round compensatory
pick. So, basically, they traded Moss + a late 5th rounder for a
mid-to-late 3rd rounder.
Obviously there must have been locker room issues that the team's
leadership and coaches couldn't solve. Another black mark for
Belichick, IMO.
> But in no way do I believe
> he is relegating 2010 as a rebuilding year. For pete's sake, the Pats
> are 3-1 and tied for 1st in the division. You have to beleive that
> there is a follow up deal with another team on the horizon that will
> bring a quality WR to NE. Unless you really believe that the starters
> for the remainder of 2010 will be Tate and Welker, to go along with
> the rookie TEs and Green-Ellis. Come on they have to bring in
> something.
Betcha a dollar they don't follow it up with anything. :)
Glenn Greenstein
You're not going to be happy then. I don't think there is any way in
Hell that V-Jax becomes a Pat. He has two DUI's and is one away from a
year suspension. That would be a huge gamble to throw a 2nd and 3rd to
SD for him. Also V-Jax is holding out for more money and he has
stellar numbers in SD with Rivers throwing to him. His numbers are not
likely to improve in NE and SD did something NE did not last season,
advanced in the playoffs so it isn't exactly a better situation.
Lastly, they didn't pay Moss, what's going to make V-Jax think they
are going to pay him?
Glenn Greenstein
> "Michael" <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote in message
>
> news:a9764e04-f412-4b1f...@k13g2000vbq.googlegroups.com...
>
> >http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/Randy-Moss-trade-New-England-Patri...
>
> > I wonder if they can pull this off before the Monday night game ???
>
> the Boston TV stations are reporting the rumour too.
> I don't like it.
> Moss is a threat. remove him and the enemy can really pack it in close.
> also trading him would seem to signal BB isn't worried about this season.
> draft picks are so iffy I'd rather keep Moss for the year. if he walks he
> walks.
IMO this changes the dynamic of defending NE greatly and leaves the
Pats with a lot of receiving yards and TD's to replace.
Glenn Greenstein
I agree, I think they take the picks to the draft and trade down for
more.
BB has been doing this the last few years.
Harlan Lachman
<0bdf2bf8-c3d7-494d...@f6g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>,
John C TX <johnc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 6, 8:17 am, Tutor <dcat4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Oct 5, 8:57 pm, Michael <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >
> > >http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/Randy-Moss-trade-New-England-Patri...
> >
> > > I wonder if they can pull this off before the Monday night game ???
> >
> > It's done. Moss will be in uniform on Monday night.
> >
> > Now that the Pats have like a pair of picks in every round of next
> > year's draft, it remains to be seen who they will acquire form another
> > team to replace Moss in the lineup. They sure do have the picks to
> > make the deal. In some ways, this is a smart move by belichick to get
> > some value for Moss now, before he walks. But in no way do I believe
> > he is relegating 2010 as a rebuilding year. For pete's sake, the Pats
> > are 3-1 and tied for 1st in the division. You have to beleive that
> > there is a follow up deal with another team on the horizon that will
> > bring a quality WR to NE. Unless you really believe that the starters
> > for the remainder of 2010 will be Tate and Welker, to go along with
> > the rookie TEs and Green-Ellis. Come on they have to bring in
> > something.
>
> Maybe, but maybe they know the strike is inevitable & Kraft, & to a
> lesser extent BB if you believe my theory that he a s profitability
> bonus, pockets $5 MM he just saved in Moss' salary. By the way these
> are their picks:
>
> Two first round picks, including the Raidersą pick from the Richard
> Seymour trade.
>
> Two second round picks, including the Panthersą pick received in
> exchange for pick #89 in 2010.
>
> Two third round picks, including the Vikings in the Moss trade.
>
> Two fourth round picks, including the Broncosą pick from todayąs
> trade.
>
> One fifth round pick.
>
> One sixth round pick gained from the Saints in exchange for David
> Thomas.
>
> One seventh round pick.
John, one way to look at this situation is that the Pats should get no
less than four starters out of the first three rounds (especially
considering the early picks in the first two rounds) if they don't trade
up and if one adds the fourth round, at least two more eventual starters
(due to injury or growth).
A question for Mark is can they add four to six new starters to the
talent they have. I would think that they could (OL, DL, OLB, maybe even
a DB or WR). This makes them younger and better for the next five years
(our likely window).
An alternate scenario in a year when there are three potential number 1
Qbs is whether they package some picks to get Brady's replacement. They
could get someone good and let him learn from a master on the bench. If
Brady gets hurt, bored, or too expensive, they can ensure the health of
their franchise for another decade with the right Qb pick.
harlan
Harlan Lachman
<fa7d6fcf-2cad-4206...@30g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>,
John Vamp <jvamp...@gmail.com> wrote:
Question for John, Mark or Ray (and kudos to all of you for being
quality trolls who enhance this group tremendously).
Some experts are saying that the absence of Moss and his deep threat
(whether used or not) will make it easier for teams to tighten up their
DBs and make it harder for Welker and Edelman and even Hernandez to
dominate. Others state that with Hernandez' Tate's deep speed and
Edelman and Welker's ability, there will be no drop off or stupid drops
and some potential picks will be eliminated because the WR will fight
for every ball.
What do you think this trade does this year in terms of WR dominance?
harlan
Harlan Lachman
MZ <ma...@nospam.void> wrote:
More importantly, if he plays the last six years, the Pats or anyone can
sign him to the deal he wants with no cost (other than losing
compensatory picks).
harlan
MZ
> A question for Mark is can they add four to six new starters to the
> talent they have. I would think that they could (OL, DL, OLB, maybe even
> a DB or WR). This makes them younger and better for the next five years
> (our likely window).
The number of players they need depends on how many more starters they
jettison between now and then. :)
I think, in order of importance they need:
* 1 DLman (Seymour type that can play DE in the base defense and
interior pass rush on third downs) ... this is what I hope they spend
Oakland's 1st pick on. I wouldn't mind if they even traded up into the
top five if it means getting the best guy in the draft at this position.
* 1 OLB (3-4 OLB/4-3 DE) ... this should also be a playmaker.
* 1 RB (maybe two...there could be a lot of turnover at this position
next year)
* 1 WR (outside guy...they have enough slot guys already)
* 1 C/G (to take Mankins and Neal's place... Connolly's been playing
well at LG)
Beyond that, it's more a matter of just depth. The only positions they
don't need depth at is OT (unless Light leaves) and maybe S, depending
on what they do with Meriweather, who has been benched.
It will be an issue to see how they can fit 8 new guys from the first
four rounds next year. My bet is that they'll move some of these picks
into 2012.
> An alternate scenario in a year when there are three potential number 1
> Qbs is whether they package some picks to get Brady's replacement. They
> could get someone good and let him learn from a master on the bench. If
> Brady gets hurt, bored, or too expensive, they can ensure the health of
> their franchise for another decade with the right Qb pick.
It's possible, but they just gave him a long-term contract a few weeks
ago, so I don't think they'll spend a high pick on a QB. They
apparently also like Hoyer as his backup.
MZ
It makes the Pats considerably weaker on the field. Tate has shown very
little so far, and Hernandez, although fast, is still just a TE. They
need to be able to stretch the field to let these underneath guys do
their thing after the catch. With too much congestion in short range,
guys like Welker, Edelman, and Hernandez who are very elusive just won't
have the space to get it done.
papa.carl44
"MZ" <ma...@nospam.void> wrote in message
news:mrWdnaviy8nTVjHR...@giganews.com...
I think Mark is right and that the real issue is the fact the offense has
two huge egos to please in Brady and Moss...and while Brady is the more
important and acts the more appropriate to the public, I think he may have
some issues with Moss. I think Randy can still play, and stretch the field
as good as the best, but I don't see things being done to make it happen for
him somehow. A team oriented QB can find a way to make a guy like him
happy. Can this be a part of the story here?
Copp
"papa.carl44" <papad...@nospamverizon.net> wrote:
>
> I think Mark is right and that the real issue is the fact the offense has
> two huge egos to please in Brady and Moss...and while Brady is the more
> important and acts the more appropriate to the public, I think he may have
> some issues with Moss. I think Randy can still play, and stretch the field
> as good as the best, but I don't see things being done to make it happen for
> him somehow. A team oriented QB can find a way to make a guy like him
> happy. Can this be a part of the story here?
If there were issues with Brady, it was with having to console Moss and
massage him after every game and failed play. I've never heard any
players complaining about Brady's ego. They were tired of Moss's act,
and he pulled some shit this last game, like gathering players around
him to pump them up during the national anthem(!), and having a shouting
match with the offensive coordinator at half time. But he was probably
history after his crazy speech after the Cincy game, I heard they had
been talking to Minn about him for the last week.
I think the offense is better off without him. He put up big numbers
but no rings, and the Pats offense won 3 SB's without any big name
receivers. They won by spreading the ball around and with surprise
in the play calling. I think one of the reasons they lost to the Jets
was because they were forcing the ball to Moss. This last game was
*much* more in the Patriots style, and Green-Ellis had no negative
yardage, in fact I think his smallest gain was 3 yds. I think
you are going to be surprised by how good they are. Obviously a
totally-dedicated-to-winning Moss would be a huge asset, but he's
not that kind of guy.
Now the defense...well, that's another ball of wax....
MZ
> I think the offense is better off without him. He put up big numbers
> but no rings, and the Pats offense won 3 SB's without any big name
> receivers. They won by spreading the ball around and with surprise
> in the play calling. I think one of the reasons they lost to the Jets
> was because they were forcing the ball to Moss.
Using that logic, I guess they should get rid of Welker too.
papa.carl44
"MZ" <ma...@nospam.void> wrote in message
Mark, Some people just don't realize how much the game has changed in the
last couple of years. I think you are right...you hve to have some very
high profile receivers today.
Copp
playoff capable offenses spread the ball around.
Last year NO had a 1074 yd guy, an 804yd guy and
a 722 yd guy. Try this:
MZ
I read this yesterday. That article suggests that they should get rid
of Wes Welker. Every piece of logic in there can equally be applied to
Welker.
Obviously, it's a stupid article.
Ray O'Hara
"papa.carl44" <papad...@nospamverizon.net> wrote in message
news:_7Odnc9IHc6gGzDR...@giganews.com...
with all the bullshit PI they call.
these days that is true.
a WR jumps into a db and out comes a flagg and the excuse , the DB didn't
look back at the ball.
that is the dumbest saying and reason.
a WR does not have the right to jump through a DB.
MZ
Wilfork: "We never had problems with Randy. Our locker room is our
locker room. We never had an issue. I can’t remember an issue we had.
That was business. It’s all business. It happens. You have to move
forward from it. That’s something we’ll do around here."
This move makes very little sense. The only theory that seems plausible
at this point is John's. $$$
papa.carl44
"Copp" <cr7...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4ce38b904fbb690b...@rip.ax.lt...
So you are suggesting the Saints do not have any big time receivers?
MZ
The reason it became a two-man show (Moss, Welker) in New England in '09
was that they didn't have a 3rd WR worth a damn! This was a major
problem. Everyone knew it, but apparently not Copp. They brought in
Galloway and Greg Lewis, who both sucked, and didn't have anyone else.
Why this is being blamed on Moss or on Brady is anyone's guess. Who
else, aside from Moss and Welker, was Brady supposed to throw to? Ben
Watson? Well, he did, because Watson had 400 yards, despite being held
in to block for about half the passing snaps last season (per Mike
Reiss). Kevin Faulk? Well, he did that too, because Faulk had 300
yards and caught about the same number of passes he used to catch before
Moss. So who else was Brady supposed to throw to? Edelman? Well he
did, because Edelman caught 37 balls despite very limited playtime last
year.
The idea that Brady doesn't spread the ball around anymore is a MYTH.
He spreads the ball to good receivers. Bad receivers naturally don't
have very many catches. This is why they're bad receivers.
The whole argument doesn't make sense. Supposedly Brady has been
forcing the ball to Moss, and this has led to a lot of incompletions.
Interesting. Then why was Brady's completion percentage last year the
2nd highest in his career (the highest was in '07, after Moss was added)?
This addition by subtraction nonsense is some of the craziest stuff I've
ever heard. I think it's the result of Pats fans being unable to come
to grips with the fact that the team just took a major hit.
papa.carl44
"MZ" <ma...@nospam.void> wrote in message
Mark, Fans don't want to accept the fact this is "just a business" in the
end. And sometimes harsh decisions are made that may not always benefit the
team on the field, but work out financially for them. OMHO, Papa Carl
finsfan
That's BS. You expect Wilfork to SAY Randy was a problem? Nope, not
gonna happen and it shouldn't happen- period. Randy was not getting an
extension, Randy was not happy, Randy served his NE purpose. Bu-bye.
BTW looking forward to Monday night- Revis-Moss-Cromartie. All fun to
watch. 8))
MZ
No, I don't expect anyone to say he was a problem. But the opposite
viewpoint was shared by many of his teammates, including Wilfork, and
they were overwhelmingly pro-Randy.
Does this really sound like someone who the players felt was a nuisance?
Welker:
“I think we were somewhat surprised,” Welker said. “Obviously, Randy is
a great player and a great talent. In the end, Coach is going to do
what’s best for the team. This is what he thought was best for the team
and we fully support that.”
Asked about losing a presence like Moss in the locker room, Welker said,
“I think Randy brought a lot to this team and did a lot of great things.
He really brought this organization to a great standard. We hope to keep
that standard around here.”
Welker was asked about reports that Moss had wanted out, asking to be
traded.
“I think that was kind of the difficult thing, just because he was the
guy giving the pep talks before games and halftime, and after the game,”
Welker said. “Not knowing he wanted to be traded the whole time was a
little bit disappointing. At the same time, he’s doing what’s best for
him. It’s a business. You just have to roll with it.”
---
Banta-Cain:
“We understand the business. We understand his situation. He’s moving
on, we move on,” Banta-Cain said.
“We all personally love him, love him to death. A business decision had
to be made and we have no control. We just move on and go about our
business.”
---
Crumpler:
“You still have to show up to work and come in and be a professional,”
he said. “A guy like myself [tries to] keep the guys in the locker room
together, so we go out there and continue to play. We still have 12
games to play. It’s important for us to go out as a team and make things
happen.
“We all, in this locker room, love Randy,” he continued. “He’s a Hall of
Fame player. I probably haven’t played with two or three Hall of Fame
players in my career,” he said. “I studied him, I watched him, I learned
a lot from him. Like coach said ‘I wish him well, we all wish him well,
except for when they come in here.’”
---
Brady:
“Randy really knows how I feel about him," said Brady. "I love him, as a
guy, as a person, as a player. He did a lot of great things for this
team. At the same time I think coach Belichick feels that’s what he
thinks he needs to do for the team.
“We as players, we deal with it and we move on. I think I’ve been around
long enough to realize nothing really surprises me and the best thing
that I can do is be the best quarterback that I can be for the team.”
---
Wilfork:
“It’s a business. That’s how you have to look at it. I mean, I was very
fortunate to play with a guy like Randy and have a chance to know him as
a person, not just an athlete. Great person, great athlete, but probably
one of the greatest guys you’ll ever meet. The game. His personality.
How he approaches the game. Business. It’s a classic case of business.
It happens all the time," he said in hushed tones at his locker.
"We’re going to keep rolling. I’m pretty sure Randy is going to do what
he has to do in Minnesota. One thing is for sure – we’re friends
forever. So I’ll talk to him, he’ll talk to me. Just because we’re on
the other side doesn’t mean a thing. I want to beat him when we face
him. I do want to beat him. From a personal standpoint, good guy. That’s
business.”
Asked if he's disappointed that Moss is no longer on the team, Wilfork
responded "of course."
“Any time you lose someone that you’re close to and you’ve been playing
with for a while [who] taught you a lot and actually seen a guy like
that work on the practice field, and seen him put up a record in the NFL
... Those are memories. He has a place in Florida. I have a place in
Florida. I’m pretty sure we’ll hook up at the end of the season and fish
and golf like we always do.”
Asked about any issues with Moss in the locker room, Wilfork said: "We
never had problems with Randy. Our locker room is our locker room. We
never had an issue. I can’t remember an issue we had. That was business.
It’s all business. It happens. You have to move forward from it. That’s
something we’ll do around here.”
Copp
Forcing means trying to throw to a covered receiver. Passing the
ball and making completions to Welker is not forcing the ball
and has nothing to do with Moss.
finsfan
I think Randy deserves all that is said and more. He seemed to be a
good team mate this time around and no drama. But it was reported, by
PFT, he had a heated exchange with the QB coach (who calls the O plays)
at halftime and that was it. NE now has double picks in the first four
rounds. Since this our Thanksgiving weekend it's too bad the
Jets/Vikings game is not on Sunday night. Game of the week for me.
You, too, I'm sure. Enjoy.
MZ
Yeah, I read the report, and Belichick denied it vehemently.
MZ
It's really amazing how many more touchdowns they scored "forcing the ball".
papa.carl44
Understand football? If you wait for all uncovered receivers you will do
one thing....LOSE. A good QB and receiver tandem is the one where forcing
it works.
John C TX
like a broken clock....
:)
I was talking w/ a buddy who is a Pats fan and I really wonder is BB
such a freak that he loves these challenges?