thundercleetz

Getting CLOSE!!!

Just Tweeted by Peter King:

I would much rather have Mason than Walter. Walter would probably require a five-year deal for at least $5 million a year whereas Mason would only require a two-year deal. Then take into consideration that Mason already has a good rap with Flacco and it is a no brainer, Mason would be the best #2 receiver in the league being teams could no longer focus exclusively on him with Q on the other side. I CANNOT WAIT until we get a receiver that can do this (especially at :44): http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/09000d5d814c59c2/WK-13-Anquan-Boldin-highlights This would also allow us to put Clayton in the slot, where I think he could give defenses mismatches with his quickness.

I'll very much take a WR corp of: 1. Boldin 2. Mason/Walter 3a. Stallworth 3b. Clayton

Aaron Wilson is saying the same thing now and that it is between us and KC. Maybe if KC gets him we can get Bowe? This is exciting! GO GET Q OZZIE!!!

Posted 20 minutes ago from Schefter: But Aaron Wilson covers the Ravens, so he might have more insight than Schefter. The Pats also have three second rounders to offer. Lets see what happens.

Bryant has had an up-and-down career, but the talent is certainly there and he is a legitimate downfield threat (15.3 YPC on his career). In 2002 he had 44 receptions for 733 yards and 6 TDs, 2004 he had 58 receptions for 812 yards and 4 TDs, in 2005 he had 69 receptions for 1,009 yards and 4 TD, and in 2008 he had 83 receptions for 1,248 yards and 7 TD. This season he had 39 receptions for 600 yards and 4 TDs in an injury pleagued 13 games (still more than Mark Clayton in 14 games). The problem with Bryant is that he has never had any type of stability in his career (partially his fault), nor has he ever been paired with a legit starting QB. He would be a great match for us I believe, but I am hesistent to give him a long-term deal because of his attitude and inconsistency. But the potential is great with Bryant. Here is what Scouts, Inc. said about Bryant going into this past season: I think him and Joe would be able to make some big plays.

Marshall is visiting Seattle tomorrow, they have not signed him yet. Marshall should be visiting us...

SI is speculating that we made an offer for Walter, we are competing against Cincy, KC, and Houston for Walter. FoxSports mentioned we are in the mix for Bryant as well. Ozzie is certainly trying to get a receiver.

That is possible, but with this being an uncapped year and Bisciotti in his end-of-the-season press conference saying he would spend whatever it takes to win, I would hope this wouldn't be the case. In my opinion, paying a guy like Bryant to a Burleson-deal (or more) is a bigger risk than paying top dollar for Marshall for the simple fact that Bryant's production is inconsistent. Heck, would you give Walter that type of deal to be a #2 receiver? Seems like a little much to me when you don't have a #1 on your roster. If we want to win, we simply have to pony up. There should be no excuses. We gave $65 million so Suggs can get us 4 sacks, why not give Marshall top dollar to get us 100 catches?

I realize that, but this goes back to my last point: with the outragous contract Burleson got, you might as well go all in if you are going to spend money on a receiver. Bryant is a good talent, assuming he can get back to his 2008 numbers. There is a risk right there, what Bryant are you going to get? Teams need receivers, and Bryant and Walter are going to be on the radar of the Seahawks, Bengals, Texans, and Dolphins. Bryant is going to get at least what Burleson got. With Marshall you know he is going to get you 100 catches and 8+ TDs. Look at it this way, if we get Marshall it is a lot like the Eagles getting TO back in 2004. You know the guy is a nutcase and will screw you at some point, but if you know he is going to give you a great chance of putting you in the Super Bowl the next year, you take him. I'll one or two years of elite production from Marshall even knowing he is going to screw up somewhere down the line if it gets me to the Super Bowl in one of those two years. Obviously a lot of people would disagree with that, but that is just how I feel.

I like Bryant's talent a lot, but if we are not going to give a contract to Marshall because we are unsure how he will react after getting paid, why the heck would we give a long-term deal to Bryant? Talk about a guy who likes to run his mouth to the coaches and not give full effort...

Weaver and McClain are both very similar players. Both guys were in the Pro Bowl this year for their respective conference, both guys have an All-Pro honor under their belts, and both guys are big (6' 250-260), powerful, blocking backs that are shifty enough to run the ball and agile enough to catch the ball. The stats this past season were similar as well: Weaver: 70 ATT 323 YDS 4.6 YPA 2 TD 15 REC 140 YDS 9.3 YPC 2 TD McClain: 46 ATT 180 YDS 3.9 YPA 2 TD 21 REC 141 YDS 6.7 YPC 0 TD McClain is two-years younger than Weaver and has a more credentials (Le'Ron's 2008 season), so he might command a little more. But if I am Ozzie, I top this offer that the Eagles gave Weaver and make Le'Ron the highest paid FB in NFL history. How about 4-years, $16 million, roughly $8 million guaranteed? It is an uncapped year, so we might as well take care of our own guys being we do not have to worry about allocation of where we spend our money.

Aaron Wilson wrote a typo, the Seahawks are looking at Dwan Edwards, not Dawan Landry.

What is Walter viewed as then? He has been a solid #2 receiver the past three seasons. He has averaged roughly 59 catches for 770 yards and 5 TDs over the last three seasons. That is very #2-like numbers. Do you see him as having #1 potential or as a solid #3 receiver? Whatever it is, he is a better player than Burleson and is going to cost more. I understand the risk with Marshall, but risks are neccessary sometimes. The way I see it is 80% effort from Brandon Marshall is still a top 10 receiver in this league. We have had a good track record of getting the best out of our players, I would take the risk. Harbaugh whipped McGahee into shape awfully quickly, he'd do the same with Marshall.

Heck, Nate Burleson got 5-years, $25 million with $11 million guaranteed. What is that going to entitle Kevin Walter, who is a better player than Burleson, to? You might as well go all the way and pay big money to Boldin or Marshall than overpay for a #2 receiver in Walter.

I understand that. Edwards is good, but if he receives a big pay day we might have to let him walk as well. But on that same token, Bannan is a good backup like you state, he could receive starter's money somewhere else. If that is the case, I would let him walk. I would rather pay Edwards above-average starter money to start for us than Bannan starter money to be our backup. Either way, I hope Kruger is getting bigger in the weight room and getting some toughness. We will probably need him along that front line.

Yeah, I heard that. Even with all of his off-the-field baggage, the guy is one of the best receivers in the league easily. Pay him the money. If they are not going to pay Marshall, how are they going to justify paying a 29-year old, often injured, Anquan Boldin? The bottom line is that we need a #1 receiver, and if Ozzie is not going to pay either Marshall or Boldin, we will be in big trouble.

Edwards was a fulltime starter last season, Pryce is broken down and is not likely to return. We lose Bannan we are in the market for a backup DT, we lose Edwards and we are in the market for a solid starting 3-4 DE.

Like I said, if the Boldin and Marshall moves fall through, TO could be a desparate signing for us.

Bannan would not be a big loss but Edwards would. Come on Ozzie, we don't have a cap, at least open up the books for our own guys!

Like I said, just rumors. Teams are allowed to talk, nothing can become official until midnight.

Here are the latest rumors: - The Dolphins are making a hard push for Mason - We are out on Marshall as it looks like he is headed to Seattle (did they offer their first for him?)

I said talent-wise Willis is a top ten guy. That is different than actually being a top ten runningback. You could say the same about Cromartie talent-wise at corner, but he is not a top ten corner. Nevertheless, I am happy with keeping McGahee. I do agree, I would like the see McClain some more on the goal-line, but Willis is a good goal-line back in his own right. He can hit holes that McClain can't.

Free agency starts at midnight, lets see if a team makes a move on Marshall. It should be very exciting.