Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

2017 Free Agents Thread 2
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> San Francisco 49ers
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
J-ALL-DAY


Joined: 17 Oct 2007
Posts: 44613
PostPosted: Tue Apr 18, 2017 10:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

rudyZ wrote:
That's a "meh" signing. Swing tackle, hopefully. Maybe that shows that Kylo is content with Trent Brown at RT, and ends the rumors that we're interested in Cam Robinson. If we had been interested in Robinson, then no need for a back-up tackle, since Brown would still be on the roster on a very cheap 7th round rookie contract. Anyways.. OT was never a priority for me this offseason. Even though they fared poorly last year, I never thought OL was our biggest issue on offense.


Does Brown fit the new scheme though? And even in the other scheme he was a terrible run no blocker. Tackle is a need, especially when you take into consideration that Staley has been on the decline. Robinson or Lamp likely are legit options if we move back.
_________________

El ramster on the sig
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Forge


Joined: 19 Feb 2010
Posts: 18906
Location: Las Vegas
PostPosted: Tue Apr 18, 2017 11:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

J-ALL-DAY wrote:
rudyZ wrote:
That's a "meh" signing. Swing tackle, hopefully. Maybe that shows that Kylo is content with Trent Brown at RT, and ends the rumors that we're interested in Cam Robinson. If we had been interested in Robinson, then no need for a back-up tackle, since Brown would still be on the roster on a very cheap 7th round rookie contract. Anyways.. OT was never a priority for me this offseason. Even though they fared poorly last year, I never thought OL was our biggest issue on offense.


Does Brown fit the new scheme though? And even in the other scheme he was a terrible run no blocker. Tackle is a need, especially when you take into consideration that Staley has been on the decline. Robinson or Lamp likely are legit options if we move back.


Lamp shouldn't be unless he's playing guard. No way he's a tackle at the next level. Will be a great guard or center though.

Personally don't think Cam is a tackle at the next level either - I think his final position will be right guard, but I suppose that he could be an Andre Smith type right tackle at his best.

I think the late round guy I'd like us to take at the tackle position is Levon Myers from NIU. Should go somewhere around the 5-7 range, and in the right scheme, he can stick at tackle. That scheme should be ours - he's light on his feet, can move around well which should work very well with an outside zone blocking scheme.
_________________


Stupid NFL coaches and their need to reach for quarterbacks....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pandomonium


Joined: 16 Dec 2006
Posts: 3130
PostPosted: Tue Apr 18, 2017 11:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ok I'm hearing reports that the seahawks have waived the 5-day window to match the offer sheet from the niners signed by Gilliam

they are basically saying "nah you can have him"

so.... this doesn't raise any red flags for any of you that they are willing to dump him so easy?
_________________
I DON'T BANDWAGON...

RED, BLACK AND GOLD..TIL I'M DEAD BURIED AND COLD
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Forge


Joined: 19 Feb 2010
Posts: 18906
Location: Las Vegas
PostPosted: Tue Apr 18, 2017 11:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pandomonium wrote:
ok I'm hearing reports that the seahawks have waived the 5-day window to match the offer sheet from the niners signed by Gilliam

they are basically saying "nah you can have him"

so.... this doesn't raise any red flags for any of you that they are willing to dump him so easy?


No...I mean, he's not good. He's a depth offensive lineman and that's pretty much it. How good do we think he is when he signs for 2 million? He's young, and has a lot of starts, which is nice to have in a back up.
_________________


Stupid NFL coaches and their need to reach for quarterbacks....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pandomonium


Joined: 16 Dec 2006
Posts: 3130
PostPosted: Tue Apr 18, 2017 12:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Forge wrote:
Pandomonium wrote:
ok I'm hearing reports that the seahawks have waived the 5-day window to match the offer sheet from the niners signed by Gilliam

they are basically saying "nah you can have him"

so.... this doesn't raise any red flags for any of you that they are willing to dump him so easy?


No...I mean, he's not good. He's a depth offensive lineman and that's pretty much it. How good do we think he is when he signs for 2 million? He's young, and has a lot of starts, which is nice to have in a back up.


I can dig it.
_________________
I DON'T BANDWAGON...

RED, BLACK AND GOLD..TIL I'M DEAD BURIED AND COLD
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
757-NINER


Joined: 08 Jan 2013
Posts: 1905
PostPosted: Tue Apr 18, 2017 2:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Its official, Gilliam is a Niner. Hawks declined to match the offer. Solid signing for a back-up swing tackle. But I wouldn't be surprised if he's moved to RG and will look to compete there for a starting spot.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rudyZ


Joined: 12 Mar 2007
Posts: 17002
Location: Québec
PostPosted: Tue Apr 18, 2017 2:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pandomonium wrote:
ok I'm hearing reports that the seahawks have waived the 5-day window to match the offer sheet from the niners signed by Gilliam

they are basically saying "nah you can have him"

so.... this doesn't raise any red flags for any of you that they are willing to dump him so easy?



If he had been that bad (as to warrant red flags), the Seahawks wouldn't even have tendered him. I mean, we didn't tender Michael Wilhoite (and he signed with seattle, by the way. So we dumped him a lot more than they dumped Gilliam). They tendered him, they thought he was valuable enough to bring into camp. The reason they're not matching it is because they have something like 9m in cap space left. They were going to replace him anyway as a starter, but now they also have to replace him as a back-up, so they will probably draft an OL early and at least one late. They didn't exactly get better. Especially considering that, as mentioned earlier, they did sign Michael Wilhoite. That would indicate that they're likely to draft OLs and not draft LBs so much. That's great, because I'd love to draft a LB, and don't mind if we don't draft OL early and/or often.
_________________


RudyZ's Power Rankings Power Ranking

1) RudyZ's Power Rankings Power Ranking
2) y2's pie Power Rankings (3.1416 rules!)
3) N4L's Poster Power Rankings
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pandomonium


Joined: 16 Dec 2006
Posts: 3130
PostPosted: Tue Apr 18, 2017 3:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

rudyZ wrote:
Pandomonium wrote:
ok I'm hearing reports that the seahawks have waived the 5-day window to match the offer sheet from the niners signed by Gilliam

they are basically saying "nah you can have him"

so.... this doesn't raise any red flags for any of you that they are willing to dump him so easy?



If he had been that bad (as to warrant red flags), the Seahawks wouldn't even have tendered him. I mean, we didn't tender Michael Wilhoite (and he signed with seattle, by the way. So we dumped him a lot more than they dumped Gilliam). They tendered him, they thought he was valuable enough to bring into camp. The reason they're not matching it is because they have something like 9m in cap space left. They were going to replace him anyway as a starter, but now they also have to replace him as a back-up, so they will probably draft an OL early and at least one late. They didn't exactly get better. Especially considering that, as mentioned earlier, they did sign Michael Wilhoite. That would indicate that they're likely to draft OLs and not draft LBs so much. That's great, because I'd love to draft a LB, and don't mind if we don't draft OL early and/or often.


I agree Wilhoite was a hot mess.
as much as i was rooting for the guy (underdog small school guy) he kept letting me down smh.
so can we agree that although Gilliam isn't as bad as Wilhoite, he's not exactly anything to write home about?
_________________
I DON'T BANDWAGON...

RED, BLACK AND GOLD..TIL I'M DEAD BURIED AND COLD
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tatupu_64


Moderator
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 26251
Location: Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die.
PostPosted: Tue Apr 18, 2017 3:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

757-NINER wrote:
Its official, Gilliam is a Niner. Hawks declined to match the offer. Solid signing for a back-up swing tackle. But I wouldn't be surprised if he's moved to RG and will look to compete there for a starting spot.
That wont be happening. He lacks physicality, it is probably the biggest reason he wasn't as successful as he could be
_________________
<Rammy

#1 ET Supporter
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rudyZ


Joined: 12 Mar 2007
Posts: 17002
Location: Québec
PostPosted: Tue Apr 18, 2017 4:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pandomonium wrote:
rudyZ wrote:
Pandomonium wrote:
ok I'm hearing reports that the seahawks have waived the 5-day window to match the offer sheet from the niners signed by Gilliam

they are basically saying "nah you can have him"

so.... this doesn't raise any red flags for any of you that they are willing to dump him so easy?



If he had been that bad (as to warrant red flags), the Seahawks wouldn't even have tendered him. I mean, we didn't tender Michael Wilhoite (and he signed with seattle, by the way. So we dumped him a lot more than they dumped Gilliam). They tendered him, they thought he was valuable enough to bring into camp. The reason they're not matching it is because they have something like 9m in cap space left. They were going to replace him anyway as a starter, but now they also have to replace him as a back-up, so they will probably draft an OL early and at least one late. They didn't exactly get better. Especially considering that, as mentioned earlier, they did sign Michael Wilhoite. That would indicate that they're likely to draft OLs and not draft LBs so much. That's great, because I'd love to draft a LB, and don't mind if we don't draft OL early and/or often.


I agree Wilhoite was a hot mess.
as much as i was rooting for the guy (underdog small school guy) he kept letting me down smh.
so can we agree that although Gilliam isn't as bad as Wilhoite, he's not exactly anything to write home about?



I rarely write home about back-up tackles, so yeah, I agree.
_________________


RudyZ's Power Rankings Power Ranking

1) RudyZ's Power Rankings Power Ranking
2) y2's pie Power Rankings (3.1416 rules!)
3) N4L's Poster Power Rankings
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
48 1/2ers


Joined: 01 Aug 2011
Posts: 3615
Location: Northern California
PostPosted: Tue Apr 18, 2017 9:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Raiders just released NT Dan Williams to make room for beast mode, doesnt have a huge impact in passing downs but in a rotation he could fill a big hole for us. Started and played all 16 games the last 3 years.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Forge


Joined: 19 Feb 2010
Posts: 18906
Location: Las Vegas
PostPosted: Tue Apr 18, 2017 9:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

48 1/2ers wrote:
Raiders just released NT Dan Williams to make room for beast mode, doesnt have a huge impact in passing downs but in a rotation he could fill a big hole for us. Started and played all 16 games the last 3 years.


I'd be very surprised if we did that after just signing Mitchell to a 4 year deal. I agree that he'll be a nice rotational run plugger for whoever signs him for a year or two, though.
_________________


Stupid NFL coaches and their need to reach for quarterbacks....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
48 1/2ers


Joined: 01 Aug 2011
Posts: 3615
Location: Northern California
PostPosted: Tue Apr 18, 2017 9:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Forge wrote:
48 1/2ers wrote:
Raiders just released NT Dan Williams to make room for beast mode, doesnt have a huge impact in passing downs but in a rotation he could fill a big hole for us. Started and played all 16 games the last 3 years.


I'd be very surprised if we did that after just signing Mitchell to a 4 year deal. I agree that he'll be a nice rotational run plugger for whoever signs him for a year or two, though.

It'd be competition for Purcell unless we look to the draft for a 1-technique.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
757-NINER


Joined: 08 Jan 2013
Posts: 1905
PostPosted: Wed Apr 19, 2017 7:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

48 1/2ers wrote:
Forge wrote:
48 1/2ers wrote:
Raiders just released NT Dan Williams to make room for beast mode, doesnt have a huge impact in passing downs but in a rotation he could fill a big hole for us. Started and played all 16 games the last 3 years.


I'd be very surprised if we did that after just signing Mitchell to a 4 year deal. I agree that he'll be a nice rotational run plugger for whoever signs him for a year or two, though.

It'd be competition for Purcell unless we look to the draft for a 1-technique.


I seriously doubt Purcell makes the roster. Between Dial, Mitchell, and Armstead in certain looks manning NT, I don't see how Purcell fits in the grand scheme of things. Plus, he's a JAG...its not like he provides anything the rest don't.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> San Francisco 49ers All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
Page 8 of 8

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group