2013 FA Thread (Updates on OP) New: Merling, Brace, Pashos, Trueblood, EJBig, Tapp, White, Williams, MATTHEWS; Re-up: Rex, Hall, Davis, Paulsen, DY, RJax, Lich, Sundberg, Baker, Sav, Golston, Kehl, Polumbus; Paycuts: Carriker, Moss, BMeri, J. Wilson

[RWJ]

Walterfootball.com is reporting in the 2013 Senior Bowl Section the Redskins have met with the following (i.e., I bunched them up together).

Washington - Clemson running back Andre Ellington, Tennessee-Martin defensive tackle Montori Hughes,
Tennessee tight end Mychal Rivera and Harding University linebacker Ty Powell

[bfmcvs1]

Does everyone agree that there is no DB available in FA with the talent Mathieu has? And if there was, we couldn't afford them.

Not in FA - But I'll take Revis for a 2nd rounder.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/blog/ja...darrelle-revis

[darrelgreenie]

I'm assuming you included Fred Davis as a WR there in your first statement... which isn't really fair to my argument.

Well that would be a false assumption, especially since I never mentioned Fred Davis at all in my post.

And without Pierre on the field, only Moss managed to really be
consistent. I mean, I really thought that went without saying.

You're gonna have to define some terms here because I don't know what context you're using consistent? The offense as whole was productive. Some factors to consider:

o it was basically year 1 of an brand new offense, with a rookie QB and 2 new WRs

o the team ran the ball more then they passed the ball

o the team rotated targets throughout the WR group therefore no 1 WR had big numbers
Morgan and Hankerson basically split time, Moss got a decent number of targets (how many teams have 4 WRs with over 500 receiving yards?)

o Morgan was actually playing hurt towards the end of the season btw, (an injury that requires surgery this offseason)

o last year was almost a rookie year for Hankerson because he was injured early during his rookie season and it often takes WRs especially non 1st/2nd round WRs 3 years to develop

I just don't see how you can consider us "stable" at that position
without Hank and Robinson developing to a point where they can, at the very
least, be a no. 2 and no. 3 WR (when I said starting WRs I was thinking of
three, including one in the slot... probably should've said that as it goes
against the traditional view of two starting wide receivers, but oh well). I
don't know how you look at it differently if you view it like that.

I don't understand what your rationale justifying WR as a draft priority?
What about our WRs unit unstable? Garcon, Morgan, Moss, Hankerson, Robinson

I'm happy with where our WRs are at right now

The what on earth would be the justification of drafting another WR in the second round?

so I'm not saying we need to make any major changes presently

Then again, what would be the rationale or justification for drafting a WR in the second round?

All that would do is pass over a WR we currently have, create a logjam at a position group where there are already more WRs then there are targets/receptions available. Drafting a WR over another position like DB, DL, OL is nothing more then amassing talent its not building a team.

....you saying we're stable there with us being unsure about both Moss and Morgan's
future here is a bit much.

I'm saying that WR isn't on my draft board in the second round. And you can question/nit-pick any WR group in the NFL, uncertainty abounds.

It needs to be qualified with improved play from Hank and Robinson in my
mind. Let's say we lose Morgan to Free Agency and Moss slows down a lot next
year.

I'm not into hypotheticals. Anyone can saw anything in a hypothetical lets say that next year we stop running the ball as much as did this year and go spread pass heavy and Morgan has a 80 catch season and Moss has a 60 catch season?

Who will be the guys to replace those two and don't you think it's
going to take some considerable resources if Hank and Robinson are just what
they are right now? Doesn't that make the position "unstable" unless we're sure those two can
replace them with ease?

Even in your hypothetical how can we assume a rookie 2nd round draft pick is going to contribute at all? Much less match the production of Hankerson and Aldrick in their 3rd year on the team and 2nd year in the offense?

With that said, and in regards to your last statement, that's kind of the
point of drafting BPA. You're getting the guy most likely to contribute. A WR in
the first round can technically be an unsure commodity and you don't know
whether or not they'll contribute as much as Hankerson/Robinson, so I'm not sure
why that matters, really.

It matters because that's your whole point. And we're not talking about a 1st round WR we're talking about a 2nd round WR. And if you drafting a 2nd round WR because you don't think Hankerson and Aldrick can step up then the player you draft needs to be able at a minimum to match if not surpass there production. Because for all intents and purposes if you draft a WR you are drafting them over Hankerson and Aldrick which amounts to giving up on them as draft picks. Essentially throwing out a 3rd round pick.

My point is simple. We went into this past year's draft thinking we're pretty
deep at RB and that we shouldn't use any resources there, right?

No. Not right. Mike Shanahan and Bobby Turner draft a middle to late round RB every year and I'm sure they'll draft another this year. Just as I'm sure they'll draft a WR in the middle to late rounds as well.

I think you go BPA period.

I'm all for BPA geared towards team building not amassing talent. A team that has a few draft picks and a top 4 in scoring and top 5 in offense in yards. Should not draft a WR in the 2nd round when their defense and specifically secondary are near league worst. If a WR is the BPA they should use the value and trade down or hope that WR is the second coming of Julio Jones.

Unless, of course, we're so stacked at that one position it's
disgusting which is why I think the FO needs to be 100% certain Hankerson and
Robinson can become effective starters if, say, Pierre were to get hurt and we
don't have Moss or Morgan.

Well then why not draft a QB in the 2nd round? What if Griffin and Cousins get hurt? Why not draft a RB in the 2nd round? What if Morris, Royster and Helu get hurt? etc...etc...etc...

[DogofWar1]

Does everyone agree that there is no DB available in FA with the talent Mathieu has? And if there was, we couldn't afford them.

I'd definitely say there are people with more talent in FA. Mathieu could be good, but I doubt he's on the same level as Byrd, Goldson, or Moore as far as being a safety. And I'm not certain, as far as CBs go, I would trust Mathieu on the outside in the NFL, maybe in the slot, but not on the outside. There's a bunch of possible talent entering FA.

Now, we might not be able to afford the top guys, but with some restructures and cuts we should be able to get some very good FAs who could come in and play better than Mathieu. Safeties are relatively cheap, the franchise number is under 7M, which is very doable with the right cap maneuvering. Keenan Lewis reportedly wants 35m/5y, which is also doable.

Not to mention, there are guys I would trust over Mathieu as a DB in the draft that we should have a crack at.

And all this is likely moot anyway, Shanahan almost never drafts juniors, he drafts seniors and team captains. Mathieu is neither, I heavily suspect that by the time he'd feel comfortable taking Mathieu he'll be long gone to some team willing to take the risk.

[thesubmittedone]

I really don't want to get into a back and forth with you, dg. I know I'll be permanently scarred!

You have an awful habit of nit picking and focusing on semantics to the point where the purpose is completely lost, and I'm too lazy to keep up.

And I say that without any anger, it's just your style and I get that. Please, read all of my responses first (I know that sounds awful, lol) because you may actually be missing my points since some of your responses seem to indicate a misunderstand as to my stance. But here goes...

Well that would be a false assumption, especially since I never mentioned Fred Davis at all in my post.

If you're not talking about Fred, then I'm sorry to say that made your argument even more unfair and borderline deceitful. You said our "WR unit was productive despite injuries to our no. 1 and no. 2 WRs". I know Pierre was hurt, but who else? We only lost Pierre for a while there... I have no idea who the heck you're talking about unless it's Fred Davis. That means you're talking about Morgan, which is silly since he never was injured and the most you can say was he was playing hurt.

Who are you talking about here, then?

You're gonna have to define some terms here because I don't know what context you're using consistent? The offense as whole was productive. Some factors to consider:

o it was basically year 1 of an brand new offense, with a rookie QB and 2 new WRs

o the team ran the ball more then they passed the ball

o the team rotated targets throughout the WR group therefore no 1 WR had big numbers
Morgan and Hankerson basically split time, Moss got a decent number of targets (how many teams have 4 WRs with over 500 receiving yards?)

o Morgan was actually playing hurt towards the end of the season btw, (an injury that requires surgery this offseason)

o last year was almost a rookie year for Hankerson because he was injured early during his rookie season and it often takes WRs especially non 1st/2nd round WRs 3 years to develop

Ahh, so it is Morgan. And at the end of the season at that. I think it's you who needs to define some terms, namely "injured".

I don't think anyone would say Morgan was "injured" this season and you did just that with your first statement to make an argument against me. And even if we were to agree that you can use the term "injured" here for Morgan and it wouldn't be sensationalism to boost your argument; we all saw that towards the end of the season the WR play dropped off significantly (Hank did very little and Robinson was virtually non-existent) so I don't think that strengthens your argument at all.

The sad part is, I'm basically with you on all of these points, too.

I agree pretty much. You are simply glossing over my main point. The present isn't all there is and it's not what I'm focused on here. I like our WR corps PRESENTLY. We're going to keep on going in circles here because you are debating with a different set of parameters. For instance, another term YOU need to define is "stable". Do you consider a WR corps that may lose out on one starter as well as the main slot player within a year as "stable"? What's your time table for such stability? If you were asking me if I view our WR situation going into this upcoming season as stable, I'd agree, but moving forward? Different question and one that DOES rely on Robinson and Hank developing into at least a no. 2 and a no. 3.

I would say a stable WR corps is one that we have absolutely NOTHING to worry about for 3-4 years. Can you say that with our guys? My point was that you can't unless you believe Aldrick and Hank will be able to replace guys like Moss and Morgan if need be. You are staying in the present whereas my point about BPA is about the future.

I never even said I think Hank and Robinson wouldn't be able to, lol. I certainly hope so. You should know me by now... I'm always optimistic about Skins players, it's more enjoyable and less stressful to be that way.

I don't understand what your rationale justifying WR as a draft priority?
What about our WRs unit unstable? Garcon, Morgan, Moss, Hankerson, Robinson
The what on earth would be the justification of drafting another WR in the second round?
Then again, what would be the rationale or justification for drafting a WR in the second round?

Come on, dg, that's a straw man. I never EVER said WR should be a draft priority. I said if we address our secondary needs through Free Agency, at what point is BPA the philosophy we should stick to no matter what, even if it means WR. If you can't see the difference, let's just agree to disagree.

All that would do is pass over a WR we currently have, create a logjam at a position group where there are already more WRs then there are targets/receptions available. Drafting a WR over another position like DB, DL, OL is nothing more then amassing talent its not building a team.

I'm saying that WR isn't on my draft board in the second round. And you can question/nit-pick any WR group in the NFL, uncertainty abounds.

Wrong, we have Brandon Banks and Dezmond Briscoe on the roster, two guys you didn't even mention in your straw man rhetorical questioning up there. Have they created this supposed "logjam" by being on the roster? And can I ASSUME you're lack of mentioning their names was for a reason?

I'm not into hypotheticals. Anyone can saw anything in a hypothetical lets say that next year we stop running the ball as much as did this year and go spread pass heavy and Morgan has a 80 catch season and Moss has a 60 catch season?
Even in your hypothetical how can we assume a rookie 2nd round draft pick is going to contribute at all? Much less match the production of Hankerson and Aldrick in their 3rd year on the team and 2nd year in the offense?

dg, you were the one who got into hypotheticals, my friend. You were the one who speculated that the WR we may take in the 2nd round wouldn't produce more than Hank or Aldrick. You can't possibly know that. That's essentially the point of BPA. No one knows the future and so picking players who will most likely contribute for a long time no matter what position is safer than taking risks on players at positions of need you don't trust as much to contribute.

My response was an effect of your hypothetical cause. I think this part of the entire debate here is useless and we should both drop it.

It matters because that's your whole point. And we're not talking about a 1st round WR we're talking about a 2nd round WR. And if you drafting a 2nd round WR because you don't think Hankerson and Aldrick can step up then the player you draft needs to be able at a minimum to match if not surpass there production. Because for all intents and purposes if you draft a WR you are drafting them over Hankerson and Aldrick which amounts to giving up on them as draft picks. Essentially throwing out a 3rd round pick.

lol, no not my point. You made it my point! I don't think I even mentioned the 2nd round, but even if I did, it was in the context of arguing BPA, period. And I didn't even say I thought our team was at that point where we could do that yet, but maybe so. I trust the FO on it.

No. Not right. Mike Shanahan and Bobby Turner draft a middle to late round RB every year and I'm sure they'll draft another this year. Just as I'm sure they'll draft a WR in the middle to late rounds as well.

Again, you're basing your position off of a straw man you created here. I don't care where we take a WR or even if we do. My point in bringing up the Morris pick still stands no matter what Shanahan has done before. We go BPA more in the later rounds since it's more of a crap shoot anyway, and Morris was the best player on our board at the time. My question is, do we start out picking BPA no matter who it is if we address our secondary fully in Free Agency? Of course, what "address fully" means can be debated as well.

I'm all for BPA geared towards team building not amassing talent. A team that has a few draft picks and a top 4 in scoring and top 5 in offense in yards. Should not draft a WR in the 2nd round when their defense and specifically secondary are near league worst. If a WR is the BPA they should use the value and trade down or hope that WR is the second coming of Julio Jones.

Ahhh, now we're on my point, thanks.

If a WR is the BPA on board in the 2nd round, I'm thinking he's going to be a stud in order to pass all those Linemen, LBs, RBs, DBs, etc... still on the board.

I disagree, though. There is no telling what the future holds at any position. My thought was that if we address the secondary well enough in Free Agency that makes drafting BPA a legitimate option for us.

My entire point was and still is that at what point do we say we have enough depth to simply draft BPA and give ourselves the highest likelihood of having good to great players no matter the position?

Well then why not draft a QB in the 2nd round? What if Griffin and Cousins get hurt? Why not draft a RB in the 2nd round? What if Morris, Royster and Helu get hurt? etc...etc...etc...

I agree on QB, positions with only few roster spots available anyway are tough to simply draft BPA especially when you have the guys there. I'd add PK, P, FB and TE to that list as well. However, I can't agree with you on RB. If the BPA on the board is at RB and we've addressed our secondary through Free Agency, then why not? Why not add a back that can complement Morris? We're not sure about Royster and Helu, are we? Isn't that my point, anyway? That if the FO isn't certain (or is) about certain depth players developing further then they should (or shouldn't) draft BPA at that position.

So, for example and since we're on the topic of RBs now, my point is that if the FO feels totally confident that Helu can be that complement to Morris and/or fill in for Morris if he were to get hurt and Royster is someone who can fill in if both go down to at least a serviceable level, then RB is a "stable" enough position to not warrant any draft picks (except the latest rounds) to be spent on it.

So, to go back to what started this all, if the FO views Hank and Robinson as guys who can effectively replace Moss and Morgan next year since there is the chance of losing both of them, then WR is a "stable" position that does not warrant any draft picks (except the latest rounds) to be spent on it. However, if they are at all unsure about that, they shouldn't hesitate to nab a guy they believe has a high chance of doing so in the draft no matter what pick it is.

That being said, that remains within the context of having addressed the biggest need we have in the secondary during Free Agency. If we go into the draft without addressing both Safety and CB during Free Agency, then I think we are almost forced to use at least one of our first two picks at DB.

Ok, have at me. You can have the last word, lol.

[skinsfan4128]

Well that would be a false assumption, especially since I never mentioned Fred Davis at all in my post.

No offense, but shouldn't you have, DG? Davis is very much an option.


You're gonna have to define some terms here because I don't know what context you're using consistent? The offense as whole was productive. Some factors to consider:

o it was basically year 1 of an brand new offense, with a rookie QB and 2 new WRs

o the team ran the ball more then they passed the ball

o the team rotated targets throughout the WR group therefore no 1 WR had big numbers
Morgan and Hankerson basically split time, Moss got a decent number of targets (how many teams have 4 WRs with over 500 receiving yards?)

Truth be told, I can see your logic here. However, its clear Garcon was the number 1 even with his injury situation. Seems to me you are looking for some "big name" receiver to blow up much like TO, Ocho Cinco, etc. to be with this team. I like what we have with the receivers we have. And keep in mind, other than Moss, we have a pretty gud corp of young receivers in our midst. Hank might be a bust, but I'd like to see what he doesa this season.

o Morgan was actually playing hurt towards the end of the season btw, (an injury that requires surgery this offseason) Where you'd get this from? Yes, he had too get a minor scope done, but he didn't have to have major surgery done. So, this is wrong.

o last year was almost a rookie year for Hankerson because he was injured early during his rookie season and it often takes WRs especially non 1st/2nd round WRs 3 years to develop

Not necessarily. Though Hank was injured last year, we saw some of the same probs out of him this year. Dropped passes and lack of concentration. We are being more than prudent with Hank, let's not get carried away.


I don't understand what your rationale justifying WR as a draft priority?
What about our WRs unit unstable? Garcon, Morgan, Moss, Hankerson, Robinson
The what on earth would be the justification of drafting another WR in the second round?
Then again, what would be the rationale or justification for drafting a WR in the second round?

If we're able to draft a capable receiver (or BPA) in the 2nd round, why would we not? Should we address our concernws in the areas we have holes in FA, why wouldn't we take BPA in round 2? Even if that was in the 2nd round of the draft. I'd take a 2nd round receiver if perhaps we addressed our main holes in the roster through FA for the simple fact our WR corp is not exactly star-studded.

All that would do is pass over a WR we currently have, create a logjam at a position group where there are already more WRs then there are targets/receptions available. Drafting a WR over another position like DB, DL, OL is nothing more then amassing talent its not building a team. BS, you can never have enough talent at a position, particularly at WR. We have found that Banks, Briscoe, and potentially Robinson are expendable. That's 3 WRs off the roster that are gone this offseason. Please tell me again which WR is getting passed over again?

I'm saying that WR isn't on my draft board in the second round. And you can question/nit-pick any WR group in the NFL, uncertainty abounds. No offense, and I'm certainly enjoying discussing your analysis, but thank God you aren't running this proud franchise.

I'm not into hypotheticals. Anyone can saw anything in a hypothetical lets say that next year we stop running the ball as much as did this year and go spread pass heavy and Morgan has a 80 catch season and Moss has a 60 catch season?
Even in your hypothetical how can we assume a rookie 2nd round draft pick is going to contribute at all? Much less match the production of Hankerson and Aldrick in their 3rd year on the team and 2nd year in the offense? That's a hell of alot of speculation. We don't have the luxury of that kinda foresight. This is nothing more than pure speculation, and you can't make a valid argument in taking a 2nd round pick for WR on the basis of speculation.


It matters because that's your whole point. And we're not talking about a 1st round WR we're talking about a 2nd round WR. And if you drafting a 2nd round WR because you don't think Hankerson and Aldrick can step up then the player you draft needs to be able at a minimum to match if not surpass there production. Because for all intents and purposes if you draft a WR you are drafting them over Hankerson and Aldrick which amounts to giving up on them as draft picks. Essentially throwing out a 3rd round pick. Lol! This happens all the time. Are you really serious? Teams give up on players all the time when they don't feel they A) like they fit the system, B) achieve they standards they were hyped up when drafted, C) refuse to conform to NFL standards, D) refuse to work hard as the NFLs demands are much harder than collegiate football, E) All of the above.

No. Not right. Mike Shanahan and Bobby Turner draft a middle to late round RB every year and I'm sure they'll draft another this year. Just as I'm sure they'll draft a WR in the middle to late rounds as well.

I'm all for BPA geared towards team building not amassing talent. A team that has a few draft picks and a top 4 in scoring and top 5 in offense in yards. Should not draft a WR in the 2nd round when their defense and specifically secondary are near league worst. If a WR is the BPA they should use the value and trade down or hope that WR is the second coming of Julio Jones.

Well then why not draft a QB in the 2nd round? What if Griffin and Cousins get hurt? Why not draft a RB in the 2nd round? What if Morris, Royster and Helu get hurt? etc...etc...etc...

Dependent on FA, you can say for certain who would take and at what position. Why so angry?

[darrelgreenie]

And I say that without any anger, it's just your style and I get that. Please, read all of my responses first (I know that sounds awful, lol) because you may actually be missing my points since some of your responses seem to indicate a misunderstand as to my stance

I'm just trying to talk football, have a discussion in an attempt to understand your view. Nothing personal. If my posting style is awful, nit-picking and semantical to you that is not my intent.

We can agree to disagree and just end the discussion here. If hugh want to draft detriot lions style, then by all means we should draft a WR in the 2nd round rather then addressing areas of the team that would benefit far more by the talent infusion.

I think it was Bill Walsh that said there is a difference between building a team and amassing talent.

---------- Post added January-24th-2013 at 12:39 AM ----------

Dependent on FA, you can say for certain who would take and at what position. Why so angry?

Not angry at all.

---------- Post added January-24th-2013 at 12:47 AM ----------

My question is, with the depth assembled on our roster and our ability to win the NFC East even with some of the holes we have, does it afford us the ability to go completely BPA in the draft now?

Imo, No.

[Chump Bailey]

Walterfootball.com is reporting in the 2013 Senior Bowl Section the Redskins have met with the following (i.e., I bunched them up together).

Washington - Clemson running back Andre Ellington, Tennessee-Martin defensive tackle Montori Hughes,
Tennessee tight end Mychal Rivera and Harding University linebacker Ty Powell

I like all of these prospects and am glad we're talking to them. Montori Hughes in particular is on my radar and could be a great sleeper pick for us.

[Skinsinparadise]

Good article about Keenan Lewis, Steelers are over the cap and need to pick and choose who they can or can't resign

http://www.steeleraddicts.com/2013/0...eady-to-start/

[bobbi3stix]

I may be in the minority, but I think there is a lot to be said for "cohesion" and time spent together as a unit in the same scheme. Our team as a whole grew A LOT as time went by, yes there were at times blown coverages or dropped passed and missed blocks. But overall I really would like to make keeping the same group as a priority and letting this team develop more.

Unless there is serious doubt with the recovery of certain players, I would like to see our field getting addressed before bringing in new "victims". Not knowing if our cap is actually going to get fixed I would hate to go grabbing new debt so to speak. '

We could have EASILY been 11-5 or better, with dumb mistakes/bad calls heavily weighing in our a few of our losses... like leg whip, illegal shift, no calls in the Cincy game, Morgan being sucked into that penalty.. etc.. Then we have that whole Cundiff period....

[jschlesi]

I may be in the minority, but I think there is a lot to be said for "cohesion" and time spent together as a unit in the same scheme. Our team as a whole grew A LOT as time went by, yes there were at times blown coverages or dropped passed and missed blocks. But overall I really would like to make keeping the same group as a priority and letting this team develop more.

Unless there is serious doubt with the recovery of certain players, I would like to see our field getting addressed before bringing in new "victims". Not knowing if our cap is actually going to get fixed I would hate to go grabbing new debt so to speak. '

We could have EASILY been 11-5 or better, with dumb mistakes/bad calls heavily weighing in our a few of our losses... like leg whip, illegal shift, no calls in the Cincy game, Morgan being sucked into that penalty.. etc.. Then we have that whole Cundiff period....

We could have easily have been 8-8 also. This was a good year but we did a bit lucky at the end. Hopefully, we get those hurt back healthy and add some help. I like the progress and am hopeful. I think we need to build a team for 2014-- Anything good that happens in 2013 would be a bonus.

[RWJ]

I like all of these prospects and am glad we're talking to them. Montori Hughes in particular is on my radar and could be a great sleeper pick for us.

Ellington would be a good change of pace back for Morris. Hughes has tons of talent but is a headcase.

[bobbi3stix]

We could have easily have been 8-8 also. This was a good year but we did a bit lucky at the end. Hopefully, we get those hurt back healthy and add some help. I like the progress and am hopeful. I think we need to build a team for 2014-- Anything good that happens in 2013 would be a bonus.

NO!

The glass is half full!!! But you're right..

[DC9]

from rotoworld this morning:

Bengals beat writer Joe Reedy expects the team to either re-sign or franchise impending free agent RT Andre Smith.
It took a while for Smith to arrive on the scene after being the No. 6 overall pick in the 2009 draft, but he has turned into one of the best run-blocking tackles in the NFL. The tentative franchise tag number for offensive linemen is $9.660 million. It's a steep price for a right tackle, but the Bengals will have plenty of cap space this offseason. Smith likely won't see the open market.


EDIT:

Better news for the Dustin Keller fans out there:

Sources with "knowledge of the situation" tell CBS' Jason La Canfora, the Jets will be "hard-pressed" to re-sign impending free agents Dustin Keller and Shonn Greene.
The same is reportedly true of DE Mike DeVito. Former GM Mike Tannenbaum left the Jets in salary cap hell, so the news is hardly surprising. Retaining Keller is likely of far greater concern than Greene, but ESPN New York agrees with La Canfora's sources that he's likely on the way out. It's going to be a lean year for the Jets in 2013. Even though he's coming off an injury-prone and ineffective season, interest in the 28-year-old Keller should be strong on the open market.

Kyle Arrington News:

The Patriots have not engaged in formal contract negotiations with impending free agent CB Kyle Arrington yet.
Per the Boston Herald, Arrington's "top priority" involves remaining in New England. But after an up-and-down season that saw him get benched at times and moved to the slot at others, it's unclear how much the Patriots are willing to spend. Fellow free agents Aqib Talib and Wes Welker will be addressed first.

Dwight Freeney - DL - Colts

Impending free agent DE/OLB Dwight Freeney is not expected to re-sign with the Colts.

[thesubmittedone]

I'm just trying to talk football, have a discussion in an attempt to understand your view. Nothing personal. If my posting style is awful, nit-picking and semantical to you that is not my intent.

We can agree to disagree and just end the discussion here. If hugh want to draft detriot lions style, then by all means we should draft a WR in the 2nd round rather then addressing areas of the team that would benefit far more by the talent infusion.

Sorry to offend you, dg, I certainly didn't mean to. I enjoy your posting, so there's no way I can call it "awful". I said you have an awful habit of nit picking to the point where the purpose gets lost and I've seen that many times from you. That doesn't mean you are generally awful, and I shouldn't have worded it as harshly as I did.

I also stated pretty clearly I'm not trying to simply draft BPA for the sake of it. That wasn't my argument. It's only with the condition of having addressed our major needs in the secondary via Free Agency and I only posed it as a question as to what point do we say we have the type of depth where we can afford to go BPA?

Also, if you don't mind me saying, I think you'd be served well if you'd use the smilies a bit more (I don't think you use them at all) because some times the tone of your posts come off as bitter and condescending. I'm sure it's not your intent, but it does, hence the "why so angry" post from skinsfan4128. I know you a little bit since I enjoy a lot of what you post and, thus, I don't get as offended, but others read your text and it comes off as dry. Just some advice.