nfoligno

One point to make. PFT talked about it. While they would be charged w/ about $8m hit, I do not believe it would be quite as high as that. One, I don't believe the $8m factors money saved. By cutting him, they do not have to pay his base, which I thought I read to be maybe $3m. So the cap hit effectively drops to around $5m. Two, you can now cut a player prior to June 1st, and allocate the cap hit over two years. So this year could effectively be a wash, while they would have a $2.5 - $3m (or something like that) next year. That is far more doable. Also, what price do you place on getting rid of a player that is a total cancer, who does not want to play for you. I mean, he is going around telling everyone who wants to listen he would play for anyone.

Read an interesting piece on his situation. Might have been PFT, but for those PFT haters, they are often excellent on contract discussion, as opposed to rumors. Anyway, while I do not recall the exact details, there is actually a short period of time between when he becomes a FA and when they are able to actually sign him to a new deal. I think it has to do w/ being traded, and not being able to re-sign w/ his new team until a certain date, which is a short period after the start of FA. Anyway, they talked about possibly having to tag him just so they could re-sign him, but doing so w/ agreements already in place. I don't know. He may well look to break the bank, but I think there is a decent chance he doesn't. He had more success in NE than anytime in his career. He was in the SB, and sticking w/ NE may be his greatest chance to return. W/ Brady, Welker and Co., he knows he is likely to again have a great season. Maybe he has learned nothing, and will simply go for the coin, but he has earned a ton of money already and NE will give him plenty. I think he may at this point in his career realize that most teams that might offer him more money also offer a far lesser chance of gaining a ring, not to mention the opportunity for those records. So I would not be shocked, despite his history, if Moss "gets it" and signs w/ NE for less than market value (though not for chump change by any means) looking at the potential for records and rings.

While I agree the Mandarich analogy is a stretch, I think his point refers to the idea of players who have big jumps in the offseason. I don't know much about Flacco, but I too question many of the players who, after actually play is done, begin exploding up the draft boards. Again, this is not in reference to Flacco, as I said I don't know as much about him, but I always question the workout warriors. So often you see a guy who is considered maybe a late 2nd round pick (for example) who drops eye popping numbers on track surfaces, and shoots well into the 1st round. A RB who never showed great explosion on the field, but then puts up a 4.3 40 on a track becomes a mid 1st rounder. An OT who leads all players in bench reps explodes up the charts. A QB, who in drills, does things rarely seen from him when under pressure. These are players I prefer to avoid. Players I like are the ones who have more questionable workouts after solid college careers. I remember Kevin Jones was considered a huge speed/home run threat. Anyone who watched him in college knew he was fast. Then he runs average at best 40s on a track, and suddenly he isn't a speed back, and falls in the draft. That is the "sort" of player I like to draft, as I consider them great values, while avoiding the John Thierry workout warriors.

I understand what you are saying, and agree it may be a chicken/egg situation. But two points I would make. 1. WR is one of the few positions that a 3rd, non starter, can play a big role. So if he isn't a starter, he may in fact still be in a position to get plenty of reps. It may not be 20+, but can be plenty more than the 2 or 3 gimick plays he has been getting per game. Similar to a backup RB, you can get him in for 10 or so plays, where he can develop and make an impact. 2. While there is no substitute for actual game experience, I am one of those who believe you need to prove you are capable of playing before you are simply thrown into the fire. Qb is the only exception, as it is a totally different scenario. He needs to show in practices that he knows the offense, knows where to lineup and can run his route. If he does not show that in practice, I am not sure playing in a game really benefits him that much. He needs to show far more development in practice before he should be getting 20+ reps in the offense.

Sorry, but I have to disagree all around. I am not certain if you are saying we did run two TE sets, but one had to block so we were unable to utilize the two TEs as receivers at the same time, or if you are arguing we could not lineup two TEs at the same time because defenses would play a bigger package. Since I am not sure which is your point, I'll address both. 1. If we were to lineup two TEs, likely one, or sometimes both, would have to stay back to block. But I would argue that we simply didn't use this lineup often at all. It isn't simply a matter of not utilizing both TEs as receivers at the same time, but simply not even having them on the field together. So whether both run a route, one runs a route, or neither, it doesn't matter as we rarely used the package at all. 2. I REALLY disagree w/ the thinking that when you OL is weak, you avoid two TE sets because a D would "play a bigger package". I would argue (a) this does not often happen. If a team has two TEs, you most often simply counter it w/ your base package. You still use your LBs and SS to matchup w/ the two TEs. Likely your SS takes on and your SLB take the other, unless your WLB is big enough or your MLB is fast enough. How do you think the D would play bigger. Do you think they would add a 4th LB to their package, or add another DL? I can think of rare occasions I have seen this, and even then, it was to counter a run game and not a two TE package. ( if a D did try and add a bigger defender to their package to counter two TEs, you likely would be in a better position to take advantage. You would then force a team to take a starter out of the lineup and insert a backup, who our TEs would be more likely to expose. Further, if they did this, they did this, they are more likely putting their CBs on an island against our WRs, thus creating yet another mis-match for us to exploit. No, I would argue that if you have a situation where you have a weak OL, two TEs can be a great scheme. You simply have more options for blocking and route running. The D would not know if both TEs were going to block, run a route, seperate w/ 1 blocking and 1 running a route (and they would not know which would run the route), of if the TEs would chip block then run a route. I felt all year as I watched our OL fail that using two TEs would greatly help out, but we simply rarely used it. I simply question whether the two TE set is something Turner really is on board w/. It may be a set he uses some, but not a set he would base his offense around, and if he isn't going to use it enough, then there is simply no point in having two very good TEs. Finally, I go back to the point of what is the point in re-signing Clark early. To me, you sign players early when you, like you said, try to get them before their market value goes up. Assuming Olsen gets more and more reps, it is more likely than not going to take away from Clarks numbers. So I simply do not see Clark's value going up. That means we should be able to sign him a year from now just a easily as we could sign him today, if not easier. At the same time, I would point out that anytime you lockup a player, you are taking a risk. What if Clark has a bad year. What if he has an injury. You always take that risk when you lockup a player, which is why I simply do not see the point in locking up a player early when you really are not getting anything out of it. I just see far more potential downside than I see the upside. So to summarize, (a) I think Turner is more of a single TE guy, which questions the need to have Clark longterm w/ Olsen on the roster and ( simply do not see the reason to re-sign Clark a year early when we are unlikely to get much out of the deal. We can sign him just as easy and cheap in a year as we could now, so why take on the risk?

Agreed w/ Bradjock. Minny has to look like an absolutely great opportunity for a QB. 1. Maybe the best OL in the NFL, and far from old. Even mediocre QBs can look good when they have all the time in the world to sit in the pocket. 2. A freaking awesome run game. Two years ago, Rex had a decent run game to take some heat away. That year, behind TJ and Benson, we ran for 1918 yards and 14 TDs. Those are respectable rushing numbers. The downside was the 3.8 ypc avg., but still quality enough numbers to ease life somewhat for a QB. But compare that to what Minny did this year. 2,634 yards and 22 TDs, w/ a 5.3 ypc avg. When defenses play both Chicago and Minny, you stack the box. But in Minny, you stack the box to stop the run, while in Chicago, you stack the box to attack the QB. Big difference. In Chicago, Rex has faced massive amounts of blitzing. In Minny, Rex would face minimal. If you blitz Rex in Minny, AP may take it to the house. Rex would be viewed as the lesser threat. 3. Minny does not have much by way of WRs, but then again, they have youth w/ potential (sound familiar?). In Troy Williamson and Sidney Rice they have a pair of high picks (both were drafted higher than Berrian, Bradley, Hester) and TW was a top 10 pick. In addition, they are expected to make a run at a WR in the offseason. I would add that both of their RBs can catch the ball. 4. They have a solid defense, which is also young and improving. Rex has enjoyed a great defense most of his time in Chicago, and understands how one side of the ball affects the other. If Rex had a choice between Chicago and Minny, I have to think he would jump to Minny in a heartbeat.

One. I do not know how legit it is to say those two WRs are available. Everything I have read has indicated Moss will not be available. NE may slap the tag on him, or just workout a deal, but there have been no indications he will be testing FA. As for CJ, he has talked about wanting out (didn't McNabb do the same a year ago) but his coach has said he has no intention of trading him. Two. Getting away from that, I do not agree that in order to have a great WR, you have to take the baggage to go w/ it. While there are definitely some (CJ, TO & Moss) many other top WRs do not seem to carry the same baggage. Looking over the top 10... Reggie Wayne/Harrison Fitz/Boldin Brandon Marshall Braylon Edwards Roddy White (new to the list, but he was a stud) Colston Holt In the next 10 (non-TEs) Welker Engram Housh Cotchery Curtis Mason Driver So in the top 20 at WR, only 3 are what I would label prima dona. There are others, sure. Javon Walker comes to mind. But my point is, not all upper tier WRs are prima donas. I think it is more a matter of the ones that are pretty much steal all the press. Three. Regarding our WRs, there can definitely be the argument that our WRs have suffered from poor surrounding talent. At the same time, it would be just as easy to argue the WRs were part of the problem. Might our QBs have looked better if not for all the dropped balls. How about all the questionable route running we have seen. And plenty often I watched our WRs stuggle to get off the LOS clean, or gain much separation. Berrian does have talent and plenty of potential. I would have no issue keeping him. The problem is, the liklihood is his market value will be way over-priced due to the weak crop of FA WRs. Moose - Frankly, his entire career has been up and down, w/ more down than up. He had a career year, and we signed him, and he has never looked nearly as good. He was supposed to help our QB, not depend on him. He definitely looks like a player past his prime and heading the wrong way. Bradley - He is always either injured or in the coaches dog house. While he was our highest pick among WRs, he simply has shown little to cause much optimism, especially when you listen to the staff talk about him. Hester - All the skill in the world, by light years behind in development. Expectations are likely too high, at least for now, for a WR that didn't even know where to lineup this year. Davis - "nice" slant WR and depth chart guy, but seriously. On a team w/ good WR talent, where would he really rank? Would he even be on the field? We can argue day and night whether it is our WRs defeciences that cause our QB woes, or the other way around. Likely, it is a combo, but I find it hard to argue that we have a great group of WRs that have simply been held back.

Agree and disagree w/ points. I agree w/ the idea of signing Bryant Johnson, though I would like to see what his market value will be. If his market value is based on his proven performance and stats, his value should be very reasonable. On the other hand, if he is viewed as a WR w/ a ton of upside, held back only by a pair of elite WRs, his value could be inflated. Then factor the flat out weak FA class, and add in a mediocre at best rookie pool, and I am simply not sure where BJ's market value ends up. If the cost starts to soar, I would take a pass. I disagree w/ the idea of re-signing Clark. I totally understand what you are saying, and while I might agree in theory, I disagre because I have yet to see Turner really utilize the two TE system. We had a solid veteran and a stud rookie this year, while also having a weak group of WRs and a weaker OL. In otherwords, we were totally setup to run a 2 TE set. How often did we? I like the idea, but unless we actually utilize 2 TEs, what is the point. I actually think we may be better of simply trying a system more like KC or SD centered around a single TE. Further, do you think Clark's market value will be "that" high a year from now? We can just as easily not resign him, avoid committing to him long term, and let things play out as they will.

I understand what you are saying. At the same time, I would say the chance of it happened are greater than slim. My point isn't so much it will happen, but that it easily can. If Minny were to target both players, why not? Obviously, if we tag Berrian, there is no chance, but w/ a tag price of $8m (approx) do you really think that will happen? That is a steep amount. If we do not tag him, and he does leave via FA, I would say Minny has as great of a chance to get him as any. I would also point out that Minny would likely love to steal a player from us, as it would both improve their team and hurt ours. Sort of two birds thing. As for Rex, I think if they want him, they can fairly easily get him. If any team in the league really wants Rex, I think they can get him. While I think, particularly w/ the weak FA QB class (and the draft class not so great either) there will be significant interest in Rex. At the same time, i do not think anyone is going to be looking to throw much money, or many years, at him. So if a team really does like him, they can get him. So I guess my point is this. If the question is, "will it happen", I might agree the odds are not great. If the question is, "can it happen" I would say the odds are good. At this point, we do not even know if Minny likes either player, but "if" they do like, want and target, both, I think it very well could happen.

I'll be honest. I guess I simply question how great he will ever be. Look, there is no argument he was born w/ skills few others have. At the same time, many athletes never make it at a leve as great as the NFL. As I understand it, he was tried at WR at Miami, and just didn't take. The reports, at least those I read, talked about how he simply could not pickup the system and routes, and many have questioned whether he has the "head" to become an everydown position player. Many talk about how he could never develop at any one position at Miami because he was moved around so much, but few talk about why Miami moved him around so much. Was it because he simply couldn't learn? We have all seen what he can do w/ the ball in his hands, but as a WR, he has to be able to know the offense and run the routes in order to get the ball. I can't help but think about that one game where, on several plays, Moose was pushing Hester around trying to line him up before the snap, because Hester simply didn't know what he was doing. I want him to develop as a WR. I want him to be an every down player, and if that happens, I think he can be elite. What I question is whether or not he can become an every down WR. It is easy to simply say we need to have him out there for 20+ snaps a game, but if he doesn't know the offense enough to know where to lineup, how can we do that? I do agree w/ your point though. If he does develop as a WR, we may not be looking at a Steve Smith or a Wes Welker, but at Devon Hester. I do not think he will ever be the route runner Welker is, but at the same time, he can be so much more. First though, he needs to develop (and learn) enough to be an every down WR, and one the QB can rely on to be where he is supposed to be.

Why do you think the odds are slim of getting both, at least if they wanted them that is. Berrian will not be cheap to whoever goes after him, but while his contract will be pretty high, his first year cap hit likely won't. Most teams sign a player w/ a minimal 1st year base, thus creating a lower cap hit that first year. As for Rex, as you said, if they want him, he is there's. The reality is, while I personally think there will in fact be a market for Rex, few believe he will command big bucks, and fewere believe he will be offered a starting job. Minny can easily put forward an offer that would entice Rex. Point is, if they want both, I think they could easily have both. Also, if they want Rex, it may make more sense to press harder for Berrian. Many teams may view Rex as a question mark, but if you bring him in w/ his favorite receiver, it may help.

Who are you responding too? Who said we should not get the ball into the hands of Hester? The point being made, as I see it, is you want to use Hester like NE uses Welker, while Bradjock and I are making the point that Hester is a VERY different WR. That doesn't mean we do not want to get the ball into the hands of Hester, but feel like if we look at Hester and try to make him into Welker, we would not develop him well, nor help our offense. How many WRs can you think of that come into the league and develop into elite route runners? I honestly can not think of a signle one. Most WRs like Welker, who are known for running such great routes, were known for such back in their college days as well. You also try to teach and work on route running, but IMHO, there are simply some WRs that are going to excel in this area, while most others will never be more than average. Same thing w/ many attributes. By the time you reach the NFL level, rarely do you turn a negative into a huge positive. You may well do enough so the negative is no longer a negative, or even a slight positive, but I do not think you often see it become a huge positive. Does that make sense. A guy w/ poor hands in college may become a decent hands guy, but likely will never be considered a sticky fingers guy. Hester has some tremendous attributes, but I think it unrealistic to believe he will ever develop the route running abilities of Welker. Regardless of that, he can still become a damn good weapon, but simply a different one.

Nice idea, but not even close. Sure, Hester has great potential, but I do not see him being remotely close to Welker. Most of the things that make Welker great are also precisely what Hester lacks. He doesn't simply run "good" routes, but near perfect routes. He has awesome hands. I also think he shows great on-field intelligence. Finally, despite his size, ever see Welker block? He makes Moose look like a pussy. Hester has great speed. Does that mean he is the best in the 40? No. He has great football speed. And more than speed, he has incredible quickness, acceleration and awareness. These are great attritutes for a WR, but he does not excel in the areas Welker does. Steve Smith might be the better comparison. I don't think he runs precise routes, but he can go deep and get past the coverage, and can hurt the defense after the catch. I just think it is a mistake to think of using Hester like Welker. That simply isn't the sort of WR Hester is.

I would actually argue the Giants and Bears are very different. While I agree that both the Giants and Bears are strong up front, I would point out how aggressive the Giants were on defense. The Giants have the blitz happy scheme brought over from Johnson in Phily. They are a dominating DL, but also blitz the hell out of their LBs and safeties. Not only do they blitz, but they do it from all over. I would also point out they are good at it. Most often, when we blitzed, we were easily picked up as it appeared obvious. When NY blitzed, often you saw the blitzer w/ a free path to the QB. How often did you see that from us. So while we may have the talent to be similar, I would argue are scheme is VERY different. Also, their DBs were on or near the LOS, and played very physical. I do not care what the scheme or our coaches say, most downs I saw our DBs (even when healthy) playing 8+ yards off the LOS. So again, while we may have the talent to be similar, our playcalling is not anywhere close to as aggressive as NY's. Final point, and prime example, can be seen at the end of the game. W/ 29 seconds left, and 3 timeouts, Brady took the field. NY sent the house after him and attacked. What do you want to be we would be in some form of a prevent in that situation.

As I said, I am talking in general, as I said I do not see it happening. Yes, you take the good w/ the bad, but when you sign a WR like CJ, you expect the bad to be minimalized. I do not believe you sign these premier WRs expecting them to display their antics, but to "change". Like I said, I simply believe that while it is a good idea for some teams, I question it being a good idea for us. I think, even if we added a WR like him, we would struggle, and these WRs do not do well when their teams struggle.

Don't be too shocked if Moose is kept around, regardless of what we do w/ Berrian. Even w/ Berrian, we do not have much by way of a WR corp. If we cut Moose, who becomes our 2nd starter? Hester has all the potential and talent in the world, but last year showed just how far he has to go before becoming a starter. For a starting job, he needs to show he can develop mentally as well as physically. Bradley? Always injured, and when he isn't injured, seems to be in the coaches dog house. Davis? He is not a starter. We could draft a WR, but should we really expect a rookie to start? We could sign a FA, but the class is weak, and I am not sure there are many starting tier WRs available. So while many (if not most) would love to cut Moose, I simply am not sure that happens this year. Not only that, but it is unfortunately it might not happen a year from now. Berrian is most likely gone by 2009. Even if we tag him this year, he is likely gone the following year. While I want to be optimistic, if Hester/Bradley do not develop into a starter role, it is all too possible we are in a situation not that much better a year from now, and the staff may decide to keep his veteran presence until a pair of younger players do step up. I think one other aspect to this would be the belief that so much of our offensive issues were due to OL's failure to protect the QB, and the QB inconsistencies. To the staff, that may give Moose a pass, at least for a year.

From PFT, Johnson also was on WSCR in Chicago, during which he said he'd make quarterbacks Rex Grossman or Kyle Orton into superstars. Johnson also said, "I've worked myself to a point to where I make the quarterback look good regardless of what he does or where he puts the ball." Not really that much to read into this as he has supposedly be pulling the same thing all over the place, trying to tie himself w/ any team that will listen. While I do not think this is actually a possibility, what do you all think about the idea. Frankly, it is similar to when there was talk of TO being moved. Trading for, or simply acquiring these prima dona WRs works out some of the time, but also blows up in the face of teams other times. Success: Moss in NE Failure: Moss in Oakland Success: TO in Phily (1st year) and TO in Dallas Failure: TO in Phily after 1st year. Success: Javon Walker in Denver (1st year) Failure: Javon Walker in Denver this past year I do not believe we can only look at choir boys, and actually do not mind a bit of attitude. Further, most of Chad Johnson's "antics" have been in the form of fun, like over-celebrating. At the same time, I think it take a certain make-up to appease players like these. We do not have a stable QB, or offense in general. I am not sure we can rely on Turner to create a game plan to make CJ happy. I think the biggest rule of thumb is, when things are going great, these WRs are happy. When they do not, these WRs not only become an issue, but can flat out tear a team apart. I am not confident, and not by a long shot, our offense would be a sure fire explosive one w/ CJ, and if not, I think it would not be long before CJ began complaining. While I think CJ is an awesome WR, I do not think we have a team fit to accomodate him.

I voted Bears #1 and Bulls #2. Also key was making sure to vote the '72 phins last. Not deserved, but man do I hate that team.

Before the next season starts? You better get your @#$% together before that. There are many solid posters and debate style individuals on this board, but you are my arch-nemisis. We have FA set to begin in a few weeks, and the draft shortly after that, then another round of FA, followed by mini-camps, and before you know it, the real thing will begin. So get your #$% together, and get your priorities right And as far as the slapping around comment goes, be careful. If you keep it up, I might have to move over to your blog and dole out some political B-slaps to compliment the Bears B-slaps I give you here

Where have you been? The number of my average daily posts seems to dip (dramatically) when you take a leave of absense.

Before the draft, there is always a level of spin. But let me ask this. Which is more likely to be spin. Angelo flat out telling the press, and then talking to people at the senior bowl about how offense is our plan, or a reporter citing a source? To me, the more likely spin is the info the GM "knows" is being put in print, rather than the info an inside source tips off a reporter on. There is always spin, and prior to the draft, you have to take everything w/ a grain of salt. But to me, Angelo telling the world our plan and focus is offense seems far more likely to be spin.

Agreed. Most sites/publications have multiple editors, and they often contradict each others, especially when it comes to mock drafts. Also agree that, while I am NOT a Hub fan, at the same time, I do not think it is a great idea to simply write off anything he says, and wish more often we would focus on the issue and not the man.

I would also throw this one out. In 2006, it appeared we were in a position where a draft stength matched one of our biggest needs. TE. So many had us projected to take a TE that is was more an issue of which, rather than if. Well, we ended up passing on TE in the 1st, as we traded down for Daniel Manning. Then we skipped TE w/ our picks after that point as well. Now looking back, I don't think any of those TEs have really exploded onto the scene, and we did get Olsen this year, but it does make you wonder. Will OT be this years TE? Do we have needs greater than DL. I would think absolutely. At the same time, we all know Angelo's feelings on DL, particularly DT, and I can see how he would make an argument for a DT. Like CB, we use 3 DTs, and really only one is proven, and that one has had injury issues, as well as being due to hit FA soon. Similar to how we went OLB a couple times looking at the potential departure of Briggs, it simply would not shock me if we took a DT. W/ that said, there does not appear to be a DT that would be close to good value w/ our pick, and like you, I do not think this will be our 1st pick, but I think we could end up taking a DT higher than most fans would expect.

Listening to Hub on the Score. I know, I know. Hub is FAR from a liked individual on this board, but is it unreasonable to believe he has connections w/in the Bears? Anyway, he is saying that, according to his sources inside the bears, management sees DT as one of, if not the biggest need. I would love to say Hub is full of it, but I can't. Angelo has said from day one that DT is maybe the most important position in his scheme. At DT, we currently have: Harris - One of the best DTs in the game, but (a) is health a concern, ( he has one year left on his deal and Harris has already indicated he believes he should be among the highest paid defensive players in the league, which means he will likely be seeking Freeny money. Is there a chance Angelo thinks we may lose Harris? If so, and if DT is the most important position in our defense, is DT than a greater need than we believe? Dusty - Hey, I love what i saw too. I went to the Chi-Houston pre-season game last year, and posted after the game that I was most impressed w/ Dusty, and that was well prior to the hype he received soon after. Like no other player on the team, his motor never stopped. I loved what I saw. At the same time, he is two years into the league, and proven what? Injuries have killed him twice, and we have learned the hard way that you can only red shirt a player so often. Even if he does stay healthy and develop, if we lose Harris, is Dusty #1 DT material, or is he more of a great compliment. The rest offer anywhere from nice rotation guys to good depth to some potential, but do we have a guy behind Dusty that could be considered a replacement for Harris? Look, I am 100% against the idea of drafting a DT in the 1st. At the same time, I said some weeks ago I could see Angelo doing this as it fits his MO, and Hub talking about "his sources" makes me wonder that much more.

Please excuse me for being blunt, but what does that matter. After losing their 1st, maybe NE would drop down in the 1st round, but that would still leave Dallas well short in the McFadden sweepstakes, and Dallas would have far less ammo to work w/ to continue to move up. W/ Dallas, anything is possible. Jerry Jones supposedly loved McFadden, not only due to his talent but also due to Jones' past ties w/ Arkansas. Dallas supposedly is looking to deal a pair of 1st round picks that have not done much (Carpenter & Spears). Could a package of Carpenter, Spears, two #1s, and maybe another pick thrown in be enough for Miami. Who knows. That have so many needs, anything is possible. Then again, it was under Parcells and Spagnola that Carpenter and Spears failed, so I am not sure why they would want them in Miami. Like I said, when it comes to Jerry Jones, anything is possible, but I just do not see it. PFT is also reporting that Dallas could be looking to package Barber w/ their picks to move up w/ Miami. I still question this though. Even if Dallas were willing, why would Miami do it. They have a very good RB now in Brown, and need to upgrade in other areas. I think Miami would like to trade down, but only so far as they could still get one of those stud DL, or Jake Long, or maybe Ryan w/o using the #1 pick. Great rumor board talk, and it is fun this time of the year, but I simply do not see the logic in the move.