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

Deadline passed: Cruz will play for Giants, Alexander for SD
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL News
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
raq11


Joined: 24 Feb 2011
Posts: 686
PostPosted: Sat Apr 20, 2013 10:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

JammerHammer21 wrote:
TT with that quick 700k cap savings.


until Ted Thompson retires after finally realizing free agency starts in March and not June, can we please refrain from calling Tom Telesco "TT"

How bout Tommy T?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JammerHammer21


Joined: 27 Dec 2009
Posts: 24432
Location: Anywhere
PostPosted: Sat Apr 20, 2013 11:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

raq11 wrote:
JammerHammer21 wrote:
TT with that quick 700k cap savings.


until Ted Thompson retires after finally realizing free agency starts in March and not June, can we please refrain from calling Tom Telesco "TT"

How bout Tommy T?


Tommy Telescope. Fine.
_________________

Bohlmann20 (On The 95 Cleveland Browns Staff) wrote:
Lombardi - Isn't that the guy the trophy is named after? If so, top 3 coach of all time.

#JDI
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
aceinthehouse


Joined: 23 Dec 2010
Posts: 2826
PostPosted: Sun Apr 21, 2013 7:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Cruz would have been an excellent move for Seattle, imo.

A)Would have cost less in draft picks. (only a 1st rd, instead of 1st, 7th & 3rd rd pick in 2014 for Harvin) http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9044913/percy-harvin-officially-traded-seattle-seahawks Not to mention, the contract numbers wouldn't have been too far apart either in numbers, if not cheaper than Harvin.
B)Cruz is a proto-type #1 WR that can stretch the field. Harvin is a younger version of Josh Cribbs. Both are great players and play makers, no doubt. But Cruz is the less riskier trade because he's not had any injury concerns like Harvin has & the character concerns like Harvin has with both Frazier & Childress.
C)One of Harvin's best attributes is his return abilities. Are you going to pay that man all that money, only to risk injury on returns? It's a catch-22. if you do, you risk losing him during the season, if you don't...you take away what makes him a versatile and great player & play maker in the first place.

Getting a player like Harvin is not a bad move, but paying the contract you did & trading what resources to get him was a bad move.

Think about this for a minute?
Seattle could have added Victor Cruz & Josh Cribbs to the team, for less in draft picks & perhaps contract salary as well combined.

That is all I need to know, in judging this trade.

Why get 1 threat with moderate red flags, when i can get 2 with fewer/none red flags, that cost less in resources.

Sorry Seattle, you lose on this one. This was a bad move.
It just doesn't make any since.

Not to mention, I think Cruz is a better player anyway.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
patman


Joined: 02 Jan 2006
Posts: 978
Location: Tiverton RI
PostPosted: Sun Apr 21, 2013 8:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

aceinthehouse wrote:
Cruz would have been an excellent move for Seattle, imo.

A)Would have cost less in draft picks. (only a 1st rd, instead of 1st, 7th & 3rd rd pick in 2014 for Harvin) http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9044913/percy-harvin-officially-traded-seattle-seahawks Not to mention, the contract numbers wouldn't have been too far apart either in numbers, if not cheaper than Harvin.
B)Cruz is a proto-type #1 WR that can stretch the field. Harvin is a younger version of Josh Cribbs. Both are great players and play makers, no doubt. But Cruz is the less riskier trade because he's not had any injury concerns like Harvin has & the character concerns like Harvin has with both Frazier & Childress.
C)One of Harvin's best attributes is his return abilities. Are you going to pay that man all that money, only to risk injury on returns? It's a catch-22. if you do, you risk losing him during the season, if you don't...you take away what makes him a versatile and great player & play maker in the first place.

Getting a player like Harvin is not a bad move, but paying the contract you did & trading what resources to get him was a bad move.

Think about this for a minute?
Seattle could have added Victor Cruz & Josh Cribbs to the team, for less in draft picks & perhaps contract salary as well combined.

That is all I need to know, in judging this trade.

Why get 1 threat with moderate red flags, when i can get 2 with fewer/none red flags, that cost less in resources.

Sorry Seattle, you lose on this one. This was a bad move.
It just doesn't make any since.

Not to mention, I think Cruz is a better player anyway.


Cruz does not give a team the position flexibility of Harvin.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
reckless123


Joined: 02 Jun 2011
Posts: 11261
PostPosted: Sun Apr 21, 2013 8:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

patman wrote:
aceinthehouse wrote:
Cruz would have been an excellent move for Seattle, imo.

A)Would have cost less in draft picks. (only a 1st rd, instead of 1st, 7th & 3rd rd pick in 2014 for Harvin) http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9044913/percy-harvin-officially-traded-seattle-seahawks Not to mention, the contract numbers wouldn't have been too far apart either in numbers, if not cheaper than Harvin.
B)Cruz is a proto-type #1 WR that can stretch the field. Harvin is a younger version of Josh Cribbs. Both are great players and play makers, no doubt. But Cruz is the less riskier trade because he's not had any injury concerns like Harvin has & the character concerns like Harvin has with both Frazier & Childress.
C)One of Harvin's best attributes is his return abilities. Are you going to pay that man all that money, only to risk injury on returns? It's a catch-22. if you do, you risk losing him during the season, if you don't...you take away what makes him a versatile and great player & play maker in the first place.

Getting a player like Harvin is not a bad move, but paying the contract you did & trading what resources to get him was a bad move.

Think about this for a minute?
Seattle could have added Victor Cruz & Josh Cribbs to the team, for less in draft picks & perhaps contract salary as well combined.

That is all I need to know, in judging this trade.

Why get 1 threat with moderate red flags, when i can get 2 with fewer/none red flags, that cost less in resources.

Sorry Seattle, you lose on this one. This was a bad move.
It just doesn't make any since.

Not to mention, I think Cruz is a better player anyway.


Cruz does not give a team the position flexibility of Harvin.


But Cruz is easily the better receiver.
_________________


"Champagne"..."Mountain Range"..."Hugs".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tooki


Joined: 28 Apr 2009
Posts: 10730
PostPosted: Sun Apr 21, 2013 8:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

aceinthehouse wrote:
Cruz would have been an excellent move for Seattle, imo.

A)Would have cost less in draft picks. (only a 1st rd, instead of 1st, 7th & 3rd rd pick in 2014 for Harvin) http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9044913/percy-harvin-officially-traded-seattle-seahawks Not to mention, the contract numbers wouldn't have been too far apart either in numbers, if not cheaper than Harvin.
B)Cruz is a proto-type #1 WR that can stretch the field. Harvin is a younger version of Josh Cribbs. Both are great players and play makers, no doubt. But Cruz is the less riskier trade because he's not had any injury concerns like Harvin has & the character concerns like Harvin has with both Frazier & Childress.
C)One of Harvin's best attributes is his return abilities. Are you going to pay that man all that money, only to risk injury on returns? It's a catch-22. if you do, you risk losing him during the season, if you don't...you take away what makes him a versatile and great player & play maker in the first place.

Getting a player like Harvin is not a bad move, but paying the contract you did & trading what resources to get him was a bad move.

Think about this for a minute?
Seattle could have added Victor Cruz & Josh Cribbs to the team, for less in draft picks & perhaps contract salary as well combined.

That is all I need to know, in judging this trade.

Why get 1 threat with moderate red flags, when i can get 2 with fewer/none red flags, that cost less in resources.

Sorry Seattle, you lose on this one. This was a bad move.
It just doesn't make any since.

Not to mention, I think Cruz is a better player anyway.


No

Harvin was traded for because Seattle needed a homerun threat. Percy is easily a Top-5 homerun threat in the entire league. Victor Cruz is not the homerun threat that Percy Harvin is. Also, Percy can operate within the read-option and a backfield of Percy Harvin - Russell Wilson - Marshawn Lynch will be difficult to gameplan for.

We don't know what the contract numbers would have been like for Victor Cruz. The Percy Harvin contract looks a lot worse than it really is because a fair majority of it is incentive based. If Percy actually hits those incentives, the money will result in beneficial production for the team. His salary also fits within what John Schneider wants to do. If he thinks that he can make Percy's salary work within the teams needs, I trust the man.

Why was giving up a 1st round pick such a bad idea? Nobody who is as good at what Percy does would be available at #25. Tavon Austin is the only player who is worth talking about and there is no guarantee that he will be available at #25. The Hawks FO did well enough in FA that there are no 1st round needs for this team.

Josh Cribbs would not bring what Percy can do as a returner at this point. Josh Cribbs would not even contribute to the team outside of the return game. As far as we are aware, Percy will return kicks and somebody else will return punts.

And finally, what red flags are you talking about? Percy Harvin got paid so $$$ won't be an issue and he is reunited with former OC Darrell Bevell (who has only good things to say about Harvin) and former teammate Sidney Rice. Tell me where the red flags are please?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tooki


Joined: 28 Apr 2009
Posts: 10730
PostPosted: Sun Apr 21, 2013 8:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

reckless123 wrote:
patman wrote:
aceinthehouse wrote:
Cruz would have been an excellent move for Seattle, imo.

A)Would have cost less in draft picks. (only a 1st rd, instead of 1st, 7th & 3rd rd pick in 2014 for Harvin) http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9044913/percy-harvin-officially-traded-seattle-seahawks Not to mention, the contract numbers wouldn't have been too far apart either in numbers, if not cheaper than Harvin.
B)Cruz is a proto-type #1 WR that can stretch the field. Harvin is a younger version of Josh Cribbs. Both are great players and play makers, no doubt. But Cruz is the less riskier trade because he's not had any injury concerns like Harvin has & the character concerns like Harvin has with both Frazier & Childress.
C)One of Harvin's best attributes is his return abilities. Are you going to pay that man all that money, only to risk injury on returns? It's a catch-22. if you do, you risk losing him during the season, if you don't...you take away what makes him a versatile and great player & play maker in the first place.

Getting a player like Harvin is not a bad move, but paying the contract you did & trading what resources to get him was a bad move.

Think about this for a minute?
Seattle could have added Victor Cruz & Josh Cribbs to the team, for less in draft picks & perhaps contract salary as well combined.

That is all I need to know, in judging this trade.

Why get 1 threat with moderate red flags, when i can get 2 with fewer/none red flags, that cost less in resources.

Sorry Seattle, you lose on this one. This was a bad move.
It just doesn't make any since.

Not to mention, I think Cruz is a better player anyway.


Cruz does not give a team the position flexibility of Harvin.


But Cruz is easily the better receiver.


He is, but Seattle wanted a playmaker, not a prototypical WR.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
titwio


Joined: 09 Jan 2011
Posts: 6256
Location: Bronx NY *Sio Moore mofo's
PostPosted: Sun Apr 21, 2013 11:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tooki wrote:
reckless123 wrote:
patman wrote:
aceinthehouse wrote:
Cruz would have been an excellent move for Seattle, imo.

A)Would have cost less in draft picks. (only a 1st rd, instead of 1st, 7th & 3rd rd pick in 2014 for Harvin) http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9044913/percy-harvin-officially-traded-seattle-seahawks Not to mention, the contract numbers wouldn't have been too far apart either in numbers, if not cheaper than Harvin.
B)Cruz is a proto-type #1 WR that can stretch the field. Harvin is a younger version of Josh Cribbs. Both are great players and play makers, no doubt. But Cruz is the less riskier trade because he's not had any injury concerns like Harvin has & the character concerns like Harvin has with both Frazier & Childress.
C)One of Harvin's best attributes is his return abilities. Are you going to pay that man all that money, only to risk injury on returns? It's a catch-22. if you do, you risk losing him during the season, if you don't...you take away what makes him a versatile and great player & play maker in the first place.

Getting a player like Harvin is not a bad move, but paying the contract you did & trading what resources to get him was a bad move.

Think about this for a minute?
Seattle could have added Victor Cruz & Josh Cribbs to the team, for less in draft picks & perhaps contract salary as well combined.

That is all I need to know, in judging this trade.

Why get 1 threat with moderate red flags, when i can get 2 with fewer/none red flags, that cost less in resources.

Sorry Seattle, you lose on this one. This was a bad move.
It just doesn't make any since.

Not to mention, I think Cruz is a better player anyway.


Cruz does not give a team the position flexibility of Harvin.


But Cruz is easily the better receiver.


He is, but Seattle wanted a playmaker, not a prototypical WR.


What gives you the impression that Cruz is not a playmaker or a homerun theat?
_________________
44 and 21 Once a Giant, always a Giant
bRONX bRIXX
2013 Welcome's you to the "David Wilson Show".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gmen


Joined: 20 Jul 2007
Posts: 15642
Location: Myyyyy precioussss
PostPosted: Sun Apr 21, 2013 12:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

titwio wrote:
What gives you the impression that Cruz is not a playmaker or a homerun theat?

I think what he's getting at is that you can give Percy the ball in more situations than Cruz. Harvin returns kicks, and can carry the ball out of the backfield. You don't necessarily need a a good QB to get the ball to him. Cruz makes some great plays on his own, but often times if Eli doesn't put the ball in the right place, that play isn't happening.

We don't really know how Cruz would look in a different offensive system and with a different QB throwing the ball to him. Cruz runs a lot of routes across the middle of the field for the Giants. I imagine a lot of Russell Wilson's passes would get batted down because of his lack of height.
_________________


"Has courage and poise. In my opinion, most of all, he has that quality you can't define. Call it magic."

- Ernie Accorsi scouting report of Eli
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
titwio


Joined: 09 Jan 2011
Posts: 6256
Location: Bronx NY *Sio Moore mofo's
PostPosted: Sun Apr 21, 2013 12:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gmen wrote:
titwio wrote:
What gives you the impression that Cruz is not a playmaker or a homerun theat?

I think what he's getting at is that you can give Percy the ball in more situations than Cruz. Harvin returns kicks, and can carry the ball out of the backfield. You don't necessarily need a a good QB to get the ball to him. Cruz makes some great plays on his own, but often times if Eli doesn't put the ball in the right place, that play isn't happening.

We don't really know how Cruz would look in a different offensive system and with a different QB throwing the ball to him. Cruz runs a lot of routes across the middle of the field for the Giants. I imagine a lot of Russell Wilson's passes would get batted down because of his lack of height.


I have to disagree. Yeah Cruz plays well in the Giants system but he's a BIG reason for the success he's had. He's taken little dump-offs and taken them the distance....not to mention plays he's made down the field in double coverage. Eli has had great chemistry with him and it does go both ways but people can't say he's not playmaker or a homerun threat. I've heard this argument for Harvin being better than Cruz for way too long.

Other than the return game like you mentioned, Cruz offers great versatility to his offense....Much which goes unnoticed to some who just label him a "slot receiver". He has the versatility to play out-wide or the slot, can go up and get the ball at it's highest peak (like a #1), win against #1 corners (not just nickel), run great routes, can beat you deep, VERY reliable on 3rd downs, moves the chains and makes ridiculous plays after the catch. Not only that but he's durable and his production blows Harvin's out of the water....it's not even close.


Examples of him making plays on his own regardless of QB play:

2:21- 7 yard pass taken 74 yards
2:54 - Went up in double coverage 28 yard TD
3:29 -1 handed catch with double coverage for 68 yard TD
6:45 - 10 yard pass for 99 yard TD
7:30 - 6 yard pass for 74 yards TD

I'm sorry but where are all the plays with Percy doing that with little dump-offs and taking them the distance? I only see one or two plays over 40 yards a season for him not including KR's.
_________________
44 and 21 Once a Giant, always a Giant
bRONX bRIXX
2013 Welcome's you to the "David Wilson Show".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tooki


Joined: 28 Apr 2009
Posts: 10730
PostPosted: Sun Apr 21, 2013 8:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gmen wrote:
titwio wrote:
What gives you the impression that Cruz is not a playmaker or a homerun theat?

I think what he's getting at is that you can give Percy the ball in more situations than Cruz. Harvin returns kicks, and can carry the ball out of the backfield. You don't necessarily need a a good QB to get the ball to him. Cruz makes some great plays on his own, but often times if Eli doesn't put the ball in the right place, that play isn't happening.

We don't really know how Cruz would look in a different offensive system and with a different QB throwing the ball to him. Cruz runs a lot of routes across the middle of the field for the Giants. I imagine a lot of Russell Wilson's passes would get batted down because of his lack of height.


Pretty much, thanks for saying what I was thinking.

Percy can be given the ball in more situations. As I said in my other post, he can take a handoff under centre or run withinthe read option. Also, Seattle will still run the ball a lot and Victor wouldn't see as many reps as Percy in this case. He also has the ability to return kicks at an elite level. The Seahawks return unit is pretty good and Leon Washington missed a few return TD's because he has lost his 5th gear.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GoPackGo


Joined: 12 Oct 2008
Posts: 3203
Location: Chicago
PostPosted: Sun Apr 21, 2013 9:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Cruz has the best TD dance in the game. That alone makes him marketable. Cool
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CriminalMind


Joined: 25 Aug 2011
Posts: 4754
Location: Toronto, CA
PostPosted: Mon Apr 22, 2013 8:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Harvin is going to be a beast in SEA.
Noone is going to question what they gave up for him come mid-season.
MIN didnt really have the existing offensive personel (outside of AP), where Harvins talents could maximize (QB, other WRs).

Whenever Harvin touches the ball, SEA fans will feel he could take it to the house.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
reckless123


Joined: 02 Jun 2011
Posts: 11261
PostPosted: Mon Apr 22, 2013 11:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

titwio wrote:
Gmen wrote:
titwio wrote:
What gives you the impression that Cruz is not a playmaker or a homerun theat?

I think what he's getting at is that you can give Percy the ball in more situations than Cruz. Harvin returns kicks, and can carry the ball out of the backfield. You don't necessarily need a a good QB to get the ball to him. Cruz makes some great plays on his own, but often times if Eli doesn't put the ball in the right place, that play isn't happening.

We don't really know how Cruz would look in a different offensive system and with a different QB throwing the ball to him. Cruz runs a lot of routes across the middle of the field for the Giants. I imagine a lot of Russell Wilson's passes would get batted down because of his lack of height.


I have to disagree. Yeah Cruz plays well in the Giants system but he's a BIG reason for the success he's had. He's taken little dump-offs and taken them the distance....not to mention plays he's made down the field in double coverage. Eli has had great chemistry with him and it does go both ways but people can't say he's not playmaker or a homerun threat. I've heard this argument for Harvin being better than Cruz for way too long.

Other than the return game like you mentioned, Cruz offers great versatility to his offense....Much which goes unnoticed to some who just label him a "slot receiver". He has the versatility to play out-wide or the slot, can go up and get the ball at it's highest peak (like a #1), win against #1 corners (not just nickel), run great routes, can beat you deep, VERY reliable on 3rd downs, moves the chains and makes ridiculous plays after the catch. Not only that but he's durable and his production blows Harvin's out of the water....it's not even close.


Examples of him making plays on his own regardless of QB play:

2:21- 7 yard pass taken 74 yards
2:54 - Went up in double coverage 28 yard TD
3:29 -1 handed catch with double coverage for 68 yard TD
6:45 - 10 yard pass for 99 yard TD
7:30 - 6 yard pass for 74 yards TD

I'm sorry but where are all the plays with Percy doing that with little dump-offs and taking them the distance? I only see one or two plays over 40 yards a season for him not including KR's.


Cruz is not really effective outside. If you give him a free release he'd do damage but press man to man, he is ineffective. Percy is more versatile but cruz is easily the better receiver. As a playmaker you could say theyre about equal but Percy is more versatile.

Hes a slot receiver and he would be almost useless or ineffective outside.
_________________


"Champagne"..."Mountain Range"..."Hugs".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
w4rrior723


Joined: 27 Dec 2006
Posts: 5030
PostPosted: Mon Apr 22, 2013 12:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

reckless123 wrote:

Cruz is not really effective outside. If you give him a free release he'd do damage but press man to man, he is ineffective. Percy is more versatile but cruz is easily the better receiver. As a playmaker you could say theyre about equal but Percy is more versatile.

Hes a slot receiver and he would be almost useless or ineffective outside.


Huh? You do realize he had a bulk of his stats last year playing outside while Nicks was out and hobbled? Same with the year before. Both of his TD's against Nnamdi, and the TD against Seattle just off the top of my head.

This "Cruz is a slot receiver" stuff is nonsense. Cruz isn't the physical presence as a #1 that Nicks is, but that is more to how outstanding of a player Nicks is, not a knock on Victor. Cruz has made just as many plays on the outside as he has inside. The Giants just love putting him inside because it's such a match-up problem when he goes against a slot corner with Nicks taking the #1.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL News All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 2 of 4

 
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