| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Billy Spikes
Joined: 12 Jul 2008
Posts: 26228
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
FourThreeMafia
Joined: 28 Sep 2006
Posts: 40048
Location: East of Sixburgh
|
 Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2013 5:35 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
|
| Tzimisce wrote: | | FourThreeMafia wrote: | | Medula Amendola wrote: | Confirmed: Sanders has an offer sheet from the #Patriots, meetings concluded for the day
https://twitter.com/_ErikaLeigh
They've given him an offer sheet, doesn't mention if he's actually signed it yet... |
He will sign it.
I have pretty much no doubt.
He is a good fit for the Pats offense. Not sure he will progress to much, but he will have every chance there.
Damn. |
He brings nothing to this offense that this team doesn't already have. He's like Lloyd with worse hands. Don't like the idea of signing him at all. |
He isnt like Lloyd at all. Not saying he is better, but they are two different players.
Im not saying you dont have anything like him....just saying he is a solid fit for your offense.
_________________
| cluelessororke wrote: | | I am going to laugh in your face when they don't even sniff WR until day three of the draft |
Still waiting for your laugh.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rygar
Joined: 23 Dec 2012
Posts: 218
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2013 6:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| GFalcon wrote: | | steelers are having a HORRIBLE offseason |
Actually, I'm happy with the off-season so far. The Steelers might actually give Ben Roethlisberger some high-quality offensive weapons for a change. And the only part of the defense that still needs a youth infusion is the secondary, particularly at the S positions, which this draft is stacked with.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HootersPatrol
Joined: 06 Sep 2009
Posts: 300
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2013 6:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Not sure why the Pats want Sanders...I don't like the front loaded contract, and giving up a third for a guy who probably won't play much for them but hey, I could be wrong, maybe BB sees something I don't. This deal would also cripple the Patriots ability to sign other players in much more needed areas. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nextsuperstar
Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Posts: 1641
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2013 6:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| HootersPatrol wrote: | | Not sure why the Pats want Sanders...I don't like the front loaded contract, and giving up a third for a guy who probably won't play much for them but hey, I could be wrong, maybe BB sees something I don't. This deal would also cripple the Patriots ability to sign other players in much more needed areas. |
They have tons of cap room. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FourThreeMafia
Joined: 28 Sep 2006
Posts: 40048
Location: East of Sixburgh
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2013 6:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Rygar wrote: | | GFalcon wrote: | | steelers are having a HORRIBLE offseason |
Actually, I'm happy with the off-season so far. The Steelers might actually give Ben Roethlisberger some high-quality offensive weapons for a change. And the only part of the defense that still needs a youth infusion is the secondary, particularly at the S positions, which this draft is stacked with. |
Im sorry, but I dont get this.
Ben has had some very nice weapons. More than alot of other teams have had.
He hasnt had any Calvin Johnson or Adrian Peterson type talents around him, but its not like he has been playing with scrubs. Hines Ward, Santonio Holmes, Heath Miller, Mike Wallace and Antonio Brown....all good/very good targets....and guys like Plax, Rashard Mendenhall and Willie Parker werent bad either.
In fact...this year he may very well have less weapons than he ever has in his career.
_________________
| cluelessororke wrote: | | I am going to laugh in your face when they don't even sniff WR until day three of the draft |
Still waiting for your laugh.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ukdolfan
Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Posts: 8848
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2013 6:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| HootersPatrol wrote: | | Not sure why the Pats want Sanders...I don't like the front loaded contract, and giving up a third for a guy who probably won't play much for them but hey, I could be wrong, maybe BB sees something I don't. This deal would also cripple the Patriots ability to sign other players in much more needed areas. |
I haven't seen the terms of the offer but because the Steelers have little cap space (and the Pats a lot) frontloading the deal with a high cap number in the first year should prevent PIT matching.
_________________
^ Jamison on the sig. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FourThreeMafia
Joined: 28 Sep 2006
Posts: 40048
Location: East of Sixburgh
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2013 6:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| ukdolfan wrote: | | HootersPatrol wrote: | | Not sure why the Pats want Sanders...I don't like the front loaded contract, and giving up a third for a guy who probably won't play much for them but hey, I could be wrong, maybe BB sees something I don't. This deal would also cripple the Patriots ability to sign other players in much more needed areas. |
I haven't seen the terms of the offer but because the Steelers have little cap space (and the Pats a lot) frontloading the deal with a high cap number in the first year should prevent PIT matching. |
Not sure the Steelers would either way.
If our FO was sold on him, they wouldve put a higher tender on him.
I like Sanders....he still has room to grow...but he isnt exactly a proven commodity.
_________________
| cluelessororke wrote: | | I am going to laugh in your face when they don't even sniff WR until day three of the draft |
Still waiting for your laugh.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bobikus
Joined: 07 Jun 2009
Posts: 6292
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2013 6:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Yeah I don't really care either way on this. Sanders has some nice potential and is part of our currently declining depth at the position, but he's not proven much and another 3rd round pick would be nice.
_________________
Geno Smith, Tavon Austin, Stedman Bailey, and Bruce Irvin will all have at least 1 pro bowl season each by the end of the decade.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vikingsrule
Joined: 15 Nov 2005
Posts: 39503
Location: Land of 10,000 Lakes!
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2013 6:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
The Steelers roster is quickly crumbling.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bobikus
Joined: 07 Jun 2009
Posts: 6292
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2013 7:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| vikingsrule wrote: | | The Steelers roster is quickly crumbling. |
Wallace is the only big loss imo and I wouldn't want to see the Steelers pay him what Miami did anyway.
_________________
Geno Smith, Tavon Austin, Stedman Bailey, and Bruce Irvin will all have at least 1 pro bowl season each by the end of the decade.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BP
Joined: 14 Feb 2011
Posts: 2206
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NextBigThing
Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 15886
Location: Tuck Rule FTW
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BP
Joined: 14 Feb 2011
Posts: 2206
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2013 7:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
way to steel but just a moment too late amigo  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
patman
Joined: 02 Jan 2006
Posts: 934
Location: Tiverton RI
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2013 7:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| ukdolfan wrote: | | HootersPatrol wrote: | | Not sure why the Pats want Sanders...I don't like the front loaded contract, and giving up a third for a guy who probably won't play much for them but hey, I could be wrong, maybe BB sees something I don't. This deal would also cripple the Patriots ability to sign other players in much more needed areas. |
I haven't seen the terms of the offer but because the Steelers have little cap space (and the Pats a lot) frontloading the deal with a high cap number in the first year should prevent PIT matching. |
My understanding is that in the last CBA it makes it easier for the original team to match.
Say the pats gave him a 3 year 10 mill deal with a 1 mill sb and 3 years at 5,2,2. for a first year cap hit of 6mill which is hard for pitt to match.
Pitt deal could be a 6mill bonus and and salaries of .5 , 1.5 and 2. for a cap hit of 2.5mill. Sanders gets the same money the first year and the union would be ok with it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
