Anyone Open to Signing a Vet WR as Cuts come in ?

[biggame1190]

Key word - Open

Curious? .... Put your kool-aid glass and homerism aside and be rational. No team to my knowledge has had great success with such a young inexperienced WR core. Now dont misread me, I am NOT saying we cant be the first or the few exceptions. Understand that right now, but just saying...

I for one am open to the possibility.

While I too have been drinking the kool-aid and am excited about some of the young guys fighting for the the last (or final two) WR spot(s), I think a vet backup WR could do wonders for the team on and off the field. We are VERY young at the position of course and I think having a good seasoned backup such as a Jericho Cotchery type player (just an example) would help the kids and Sam.

With in a couple weeks we will be seeing some decent veteran WRs cut because of contract issues and heavy camp battles. Depending on who is out there it may peak my interest, and I am sure Fisher will have a look either way, whether he signs someone or not.

With that said I am VERY excited to hear Andrew Helmick is back on the field! Hope to see some good things from that possible gem the rest of the preseason!

Go Rams

 

[A55VA6]

I'm good with what we have. I think if Bailey gets a shot to be the #2, he'll drive away with it.. I don't really think we need to add to the group we already have. But I suppose if a quality vet gets cut, we could maybe take a look at him.. but I'm not so sure about it.

 

[albefree69]

Not interested.

I'm not just drinking the kool-aid either. We have experienced guys and I'm not seeing a Quick in Tavon or Bailey. Quick seems to have improved too. I think we're fine with what we have. Especially considering Cook and Kendricks. Look at the Whiners, all the have is Davis and our two TEs (together) are superior to him.

 

[Rabid Ram]

If a vet gets cut at this point do we really want him. I mean yes he could be a leader but your more likely to get his bad habits then his good

 

[bluecoconuts]

Personally, if Helmick or whoever wins the 6th spot, I'd say keep it how it is.

If we get a veteran guy he's likely not going to unseat any of the top 5, so why bother? So he can maybe get a few games in? We can keep one of the young guys and continue to develop him instead of spending money on a veteran.

 

[DR RAM]

If I didn't like the top 5, I'd be open, but I do like them, so no.

 

[rdlkgliders]

Possibly A 3rd down specialist that gritty over the middle guy that catches the ball (Amendola) in traffic. The closest thing we have is Pettis and our Tight ends.

 

[Angry Ram]

Nope...rather see them sign a backup QB (perhaps Nick Foles maybe?) and veteran OL depth.

 

[rdlkgliders]

Nope...rather see them sign a backup QB (perhaps Nick Foles maybe?) and veteran OL depth.

I love Foles, I Don't think he has any chance of hitting the market Kelly knows what he has, He went up against him in college and he was a beast.
450 in 2010
400 in 2011

 

[albefree69]

Foles is competing for the starters job. At worst he'll be #2 to an injury prone #1. No chance he hits the market.

 

[Angry Ram]

You think they keep 3 QBs on the roster? I got a gut feeling one of them will be cut. Either Nick Foles or Michael Vick. But if they keep 3 QBs...

 

[DR RAM]

T.J. Yates may be available at cut time.

 

[albefree69]

Angry Ram not believing it:
You think they keep 3 QBs on the roster? I got a gut feeling one of them will be cut. Either Nick Foles or Michael Vick.

I think there is zero chance of that but I'm interested in hearing why you do.

 

[DR RAM]

Angry Ram not believing it:
You think they keep 3 QBs on the roster? I got a gut feeling one of them will be cut. Either Nick Foles or Michael Vick.

I think there is zero chance of that but I'm interested in hearing why you do.

I can give you a theory. It's called the Steven Jackson theory.

 

[biggame1190]

I'm good with what we have. I think if Bailey gets a shot to be the #2, he'll drive away with it.

Definitely possible. Word is he has been really standing out in practice lately. IMO he is already better than Quick. And Pettis may only have an edge on him right now just because of his experience with Sam. I hope Fisher gives Bailey some time with the 1st strings soon to test the waters.

 

[A55VA6]

I'm good with what we have. I think if Bailey gets a shot to be the #2, he'll drive away with it.

Definitely possible. Word is he has been really standing out in practice lately. IMO he is already better than Quick. And Pettis may only have an edge on him right now just because of his experience with Sam. I hope Fisher gives Bailey some time with the 1st strings soon to test the waters.

Agree 100% man.

 

[bluecoconuts]

Foles is competing for the starters job. At worst he'll be #2 to an injury prone #1. No chance he hits the market.

Do you think the Eagles keep 3 QB's on the 52? They're not going to risk putting Matt Barkley on the PS, he'll get picked up easily.

I mean he's not that good, but he's good enough that he wouldn't last. Although he's still unsigned it seems.

 

[RamFan503]

Um... and pay him WHAT exactly? If we were to make a move, it would require some cap space. If we are to make moves to clear cap space, I think I'd be more interested in an O-lineman.

 

[albefree69]

bluecoconuts solving the mystery:
Do you think the Eagles keep 3 QB's on the 52? They're not going to risk putting Matt Barkley on the PS, he'll get picked up easily.

I mean he's not that good, but he's good enough that he wouldn't last. Although he's still unsigned it seems.

Finally the light comes on. I forgot about Barkley. I think they're gonna keep all three because Vick is injury prone.


RamFan503 thinking about the cap:
2013
Nick Foles
Cap Value 635,880
Base Salary 500,000
Proration 135,880
Dead Money if cut 407,640
Kellen Clemens
Cap Value 870,000
Base Salary 840,000
Signing Bonus 30,000
Dead Money 30,000

We would save 175,000 if we cut Clemens and signed Foles if I did the math correctly.

 

[-X-]

Foles wouldn't make that far down the waiver wire anyway.


.


Sent via Tapatalk2.