How about Eric Decker? Signs with Titans

[Ram65]

You can get him for two years, or you can cut him at any time after you trade for him (with no dead money).

My problem with trying to sign him is that you likely have to offer guaranteed money at that point (if he's cut).

That's the point. Give him guaranteed money for lower cost. If he all that and a bag of chips sign him for three years with a 4th year option. That way he is more a part of the Goff growth than an expensive rental.

 

[DCH]

Decker just turned 30 and has been durable throughout his career. We wouldn't be able to get a premier WR, even an aging one, for next to nothing.

Whitworth was brought in for veteran leadership, to stabilize a young OL, and to give Goff needed help. Decker offers the same benefits.

Trading for Decker if we have to give up next to nothing is a low risk/high reward move.

I don't see the high reward. I have a fairly low (obviously) opinion of Decker. 30 is a bad age for WRs and RBs, especially when they're coming off hip and shoulder surgeries.

Austin isn't playing the slot. You can't fathom that we couldn't find two guys better than a WR who averaged 1000+ yards and 10+ TDs from 2012 to 2015 (before missing last year with injuries)? Those are some high expectations.

Past performance isn't necessarily indicative of future performance, and Decker, to me, is a guy who should unquestionably not be expected to perform like he did in his prime post-30 and post-surgeries.

Again, the Rams young WRs do need to be the ones who step up, but Goff is hung out to dry if they don't. I don't want a situation where Goff's development hinges on everything going right.

That's what Woods was for. You needed a guy who has good hands and is a good route-runner, consistent when on the field, with enough experience under his belt at the NFL level to be plug-and-play.

We're going to have passing game issues if we don't have two WRs better than one of the best #2 WRs in the NFL? That's a nutty notion.

Decker has never been the man. In Denver, he was generally behind Thomas, Welker and Sanders (at various times) on the depth chart. In New York, he was paired up with Brandon Marshall. And even then, with the opposing defense not focused on him as the primary weapon, he put up good, not great, numbers.

If you don't have two guys who can match the production of a 30-year-old WR coming off hip and shoulder surgeries who has spent his career as a good-not-great #2 (sometimes #3) option, then yes, I would be concerned for the future of your passing game.

Eric Decker is a name. That's all. He's not good enough or young enough to be worth taking reps away from your core of young wideouts.

 

[Prime Time]

http://www.sportingnews.com/nfl/new...9ers-cowboys-bears/19j24ru77wlaq1f6d2v8kwgejr

Jets done with Eric Decker: Ranking WR's 10 possible new team fits
Vinnie Iyer

(Getty Images)

The New York Jets' busy offseason of cleaning house has its latest casualty: Eric Decker. General manager Mike Maccagnan on Tuesday confirmed reports that the team has decided to move on from the 30-year-old wide receiver.

"If we can't facilitate a trade, we'll move on with Eric," Maccagnan told reporters. "There's never a good time for this. I've talked to Eric. We have advised Eric that if a trade doesn't happen, we'll move forward."

That news should pique the interest of many wideout-seeking teams around the NFL. Although Decker has slowed down and is coming off a season lost to hip and shoulder injuries, he still has plenty of value as one of the league's best red-zone receivers.

As many as 10 teams stand out as clubs that make the most sense for Decker, but here's the ranking the reality of them trading for or signing him before training camp.

1. Ravens
Sure, recently-released former Chiefs wide receiver Jeremy Maclin also once played in Marty Mornhinweg's offense, but Decker did it more recently in New York. Baltimore could use a big body in scoring position now that tight end Dennis Pitta is out of the equation. Decker would also have a chance to start or see extensive work with Breshad Perriman and Mike Wallace as the team's current top wideouts.

2. 49ers
GM John Lynch showed with the signing of former Redskins wide receiver Pierre Garcon that he doesn't mind adding an older, reliable presence to his rebuilding passing game. He also was fine making a move for another aging player and former Bronco, pass rusher Elvis Dumervil. Garcon is a trusty route runner all over the field, but Decker has been the much better scorer of late.

3. Titans
Hand it to Decker's wife, Jessie James Decker. She had a bad feeling that the Jets' roster turbulence would eventually lead to them jettisoning Eric. As a next destination, Nashville is not only attractive to the Deckers because of Jessie's country music presence. The Titans have prided themselves on a strong red-zone passing attack with Marcus Mariota. Behind Rishard Matthews and rookie first-rounder Corey Davis, they should consider making room for Decker.

4. Vikings
Minnesota took a flyer on Michael Floyd, but there are lot of big ifs involved with what he can give the team at wideout back in his hometown. Decker is from Cold Spring, Minn., and a proud former Golden Gopher. The Vikings have plenty of speed and quickness with top returning receivers Stefon Diggs and Adam Thielen, but they could use Decker's size and hands in key situations.

5. Chiefs
They just got rid of Maclin because they have plenty of speed and quickness with Chris Conley and Tyreek Hill. But even with tight end Travis Kelce, quarterback Alex Smith could use a proven red-zone option. Andy Reid's offense is a good fit, and it would give Decker a chance to burn his former team, Denver, twice in 2017.

6. Cardinals
Without Floyd, there's a lot of expectations for John Brown and J.J. Nelson to have bigger seasons playing off Larry Fitzgerald. But Decker's size, experience and overall receiving makeup should put him on the radar for Bruce Arians.

7. Chargers
Los Angeles used a first-round draft pick on former Clemson star Mike Williams because of concerns over injuries at wide receiver. It was just the Chargers' luck, then, to see Williams hurt his back, an injury that will keep him out until at least the beginning of training camp. Decker providing further "big receiver" insurance can't be ruled out.

8. Colts
When Decker on was the market as a free agent three years ago, Indianapolis was a suitor, thinking about the pairing with Andrew Luck. The Colts now have T.Y. Hilton, Donte Moncrief and Phillip Dorsett as the top three, but taking a page from the Giants with a former Jets wide receiver, Decker could be to Hilton and Moncrief what Brandon Marshall is trying to be for Odell Beckham Jr and Sterling Shepard — a strong veteran finisher among gamebreakers.

9. Cowboys
It's a sneaky-good fit, even with the team committing a lot more money to Terrance Williams as a default No. 2 this season. Decker would be a greater short-to-intermediate receiving complement to Dez Bryant and slot ace Cole Beasley. A Bryant-Decker team-up has the same feel of Marshall-Decker in their best scoring year together in New York, and it would make Dallas very hard to stop in the red zone with Dak Prescott.

10. Bears
They'll be on all these lists, because after 2016 surprise breakout Cameron Meredith and 2015 first-rounder Kevin White, wideout doesn't look all that goodin Chicago. But beyond his position, Decker doesn't make sense in their scheme on a rebuilding team.

 

[nanotech]

Another reason to sign him.

 

[Rams43]

It would help the young WRs to have a vet who can show them how to work and prepare. It would help Goff to have a vet as well. I want to see Goff have a good year. He needs the confidence boost.

Letting the young WRs take their lumps could hang Goff out to dry if they struggle.

As for wins and losses, I'm not throwing in the towel on the season before it starts.



Yea, that isn't ideal, but none of it is guaranteed.

All due respect, jrry32, but Goff already has at least one quality dependable vet in Woods. And, while I'm not a big Tavon fan, at least he is a vet of 4 years.

Look, McVay will only be deploying 2 WR's most of the time, right? So do we really need a 3rd vet WR for Goff?

And how do we develop the youngsters without snaps? Particularly youngsters like Kupp and Reynolds, 2 kids that you yourself were pounding the table for via mocks.

Besides, I think the likes of Kupp and Spruce will give Goff all the confidence in the world. Hell, all he has to do is get the ball anywhere close to either one of them and it's a completion. Lol.

 

[DCH]

View attachment 20156

Another reason to sign him.

A professional athlete with a hot wife? What a revelation!

 

[dieterbrock]

He's participating at OTAs and will undoubtedly have no limitations come training camp. You made it seem like he's much further away than he is.

Because I hear local reports that say the opposite of what is in print?

 

[Memento]

I'd rather have Maclin, to be honest.

 

[RamFan503]

Relying on a receiver coming off two surgeries doesn't give me the warm and fuzzies. He was decent but not game changing IMO. I'm not really sure he gives Goff anything we don't already have beyond someone who has proven he can be good if healthy.

Do you know @jrry32 that he can be had for a friendly contract? If so, I could see considering it. But if not, I'd rather keep TA as I'm not sure we could keep both without sacrificing our cap flexibility.

 

[bwdenverram]

I'd venture to say yes.

Not sure we can afford but I'm all for adding talent and competition.

 

[jrry32]

I don't see the high reward. I have a fairly low (obviously) opinion of Decker. 30 is a bad age for WRs and RBs, especially when they're coming off hip and shoulder surgeries.

The high reward is him producing like he has consistently over the past 7 years. 1000+ yards and 10+ TDs is high reward for trading next to nothing and owing a guy $14.75 million with no guarantees over the next two years.

I don't think 30 is that bad of an age for WRs. A lot of guys don't significantly slow down until around 33 years old.

Past performance isn't necessarily indicative of future performance, and Decker, to me, is a guy who should unquestionably not be expected to perform like he did in his prime post-30 and post-surgeries.

That's the risk, but if the surgeries have eroded his athletic gifts, we can cut him. His salary isn't guaranteed. That's why it's a low risk deal.

That's what Woods was for. You needed a guy who has good hands and is a good route-runner, consistent when on the field, with enough experience under his belt at the NFL level to be plug-and-play.

Woods is still young and unproven. But we need more than just Woods.

Decker has never been the man. In Denver, he was generally behind Thomas, Welker and Sanders (at various times) on the depth chart. In New York, he was paired up with Brandon Marshall. And even then, with the opposing defense not focused on him as the primary weapon, he put up good, not great, numbers.

Decker was always the #2 WR in Denver. He was never behind anyone but Thomas on the depth chart. Sanders didn't even sign with Denver until after Decker departed in FA. Welker was the #3 receiving option in the single year he played alongside Decker and Thomas.(Decker outproduced him in every single receiving stat)

In his first year in New York, he put up 74 catches for 962 yards and 5 TDs as the #1 WR with Geno Smith at QB. In his second year, Marshall came over. He produced big numbers as the #2 WR to Marshall.

Decker has proven throughout his career that he's one of the top #2 WRs in the NFL. I don't believe we've got so much talent at WR that a player like that isn't useful here.

If you don't have two guys who can match the production of a 30-year-old WR coming off hip and shoulder surgeries who has spent his career as a good-not-great #2 (sometimes #3) option, then yes, I would be concerned for the future of your passing game.

Decker was never a #3 option after he became a starter. He was Tebow's #1. He was Manning's #2. He was Geno's #1, and he was Fitzpatrick's #2. And he consistently produced year in and year out. He was one of the best #2s in football prior to his injuries last year. His injuries may or may not have an effect on his game. That's the risk. It's not much of a risk because we wouldn't owe him any guaranteed money.

So yes, I am not at all convinced that we have even one guy who can match the production of a WR who consistently put up 1000+ yards and 10+ TDs considering the track record of our WRs. I hope that we do, but I'm certainly not going to convince myself that it's a certainty.

Eric Decker is a name. That's all. He's not good enough or young enough to be worth taking reps away from your core of young wideouts.

Eric Decker is the name of a person who has proved consistently over the past 7 years to be one of the top #2 WRs in football. We don't have Julio Jones, OBJ, and Mike Evans at WR, so I'm not convincing myself that he can't be of use for this team.

All due respect, jrry32, but Goff already has at least one quality dependable vet in Woods. And, while I'm not a big Tavon fan, at least he is a vet of 4 years.

Look, McVay will only be deploying 2 WR's most of the time, right? So do we really need a 3rd vet WR for Goff?

And how do we develop the youngsters without snaps? Particularly youngsters like Kupp and Reynolds, 2 kids that you yourself were pounding the table for via mocks.

Besides, I think the likes of Kupp and Spruce will give Goff all the confidence in the world. Hell, all he has to do is get the ball anywhere close to either one of them and it's a completion. Lol.

We hope Woods is that. The allure of Woods is that he's young and has untapped potential. He hasn't yet proven to be a quality vet in the same vein as a guy like Decker.

I expect McVay will typically be deploying three WRs.

Because I hear local reports that say the opposite of what is in print?

Understandable but we're hearing firsthand that he's going full speed and is without limitations at this point. He is likely just ahead of where he was projected to be. It happens sometimes.

That's the point. Give him guaranteed money for lower cost. If he all that and a bag of chips sign him for three years with a 4th year option. That way he is more a part of the Goff growth than an expensive rental.

The risk is that his injuries have sapped his effectiveness. That's why having him on a deal with no guaranteed money is nice.

 

[jrry32]

Relying on a receiver coming off two surgeries doesn't give me the warm and fuzzies. He was decent but not game changing IMO. I'm not really sure he gives Goff anything we don't already have beyond someone who has proven he can be good if healthy.

Do you know @jrry32 that he can be had for a friendly contract? If so, I could see considering it. But if not, I'd rather keep TA as I'm not sure we could keep both without sacrificing our cap flexibility.

I'd take him on his current deal. It's not guaranteed, so we could cut him if he's not the same player. If he is, he's worth every penny imo.

If he hits FA, my fear would be that he'll demand guaranteed money at only a modest discount in terms of APY.

 

[DCH]

Wes Welker also had a track record of being a tremendous complementary receiver throughout his career when he started getting hurt and declining.

I'm just saying, Decker is a roll of the dice with precious little upside. I would bet $100 he never sniffs a thousand yards again. Or a bunch of ROD bucks.

 

[InnovatedMind]

Wes Welker also had a track record of being a tremendous complementary receiver throughout his career when he started getting hurt and declining.

I'm just saying, Decker is a roll of the dice with precious little upside. I would bet $100 he never sniffs a thousand yards again. Or a bunch of ROD bucks.

He never "SNIFFS" a thousand yards again? So he can't get close? ... I'll take that bet every.single.day.

Why don't I just kick you in the balls right now and get it over with?? Because that's a stupid bet.

I realize you don't like Decker, but reel it in with the blind hatred.

 

[DCH]

He never "SNIFFS" a thousand yards again? So he can't get close? ... I'll take that bet every.single.day.

Why don't I just kick you in the balls right now and get it over with?? Because that's a stupid bet.

I realize you don't like Decker, but reel it in with the blind hatred.

I don't hate Decker, he was a solid receiver for a long time who was fun to watch, especially in that Twin Towers formation across from Marshall in Jersey. I just look at a guy who has broken 1,000 yards three times in his career - and two of those were barely over - who is on the wrong side of 30, coming off of hip and shoulder surgeries, and I don't see him pulling off a year that approaches his best from his prime.

I peg him as a solid 800 yard receiver in an established offense where he can play the sticks mover/red zone attacker role for two or three years. IMO, that's Eric Decker post-surgeries.

 

[jrry32]

Wes Welker also had a track record of being a tremendous complementary receiver throughout his career when he started getting hurt and declining.

I'm just saying, Decker is a roll of the dice with precious little upside. I would bet $100 he never sniffs a thousand yards again. Or a bunch of ROD bucks.

Wes Welker was 32 years old when he started declining. And he was 33 years old before his decline was significant enough that he was no longer a quality WR. Decker is 30 years old and has shown no signs of decline on the field (imo).

 

[InnovatedMind]

I don't hate Decker, he was a solid receiver for a long time who was fun to watch, especially in that Twin Towers formation across from Marshall in Jersey. I just look at a guy who has broken 1,000 yards three times in his career - and two of those were barely over - who is on the wrong side of 30, coming off of hip and shoulder surgeries, and I don't see him pulling off a year that approaches his best from his prime.

I peg him as a solid 800 yard receiver in an established offense where he can play the sticks mover/red zone attacker role for two or three years. IMO, that's Eric Decker post-surgeries.

2012: 85 / 1064 / 13
2013: 87 / 1288 / 11
2014 (new team): 74 / 962 / 5
2015: 80 / 1027 / 12
2016 (injured early): 9 / 194 / 2

He's been over 1,000 three times, one CLEARLY over 1,000... He also had terrible QB situations in New York.

I'm not saying he's ELITE, top 5. I'm just saying he's not a "Barely over 1000" receiver, nor is he a middling WR2/WR3 (7-800 yard receiver). Decker is a productive, high-end WR2 in the right system (high powered, mutliple receiving options). He's the guy who's like Woods and Garcon, a tough SOB with sticky hands that'll make the tough catch in traffic... and has a history of 1,000+ / 10+ TD seasons.

He's an 800 yard receiver? I'd still take that bet.

 

[DCH]

Wes Welker was 32 years old when he started declining. And he was 33 years old before his decline was significant enough that he was no longer a quality WR. Decker is 30 years old and has shown no signs of decline on the field (imo).

Welker's first year in Denver was not impressive. Time will tell what Decker can be, the hip is what worries me most about him.

 

[DCH]

2012: 85 / 1064 / 13
2013: 87 / 1288 / 11
2014 (new team): 74 / 962 / 5
2015: 80 / 1027 / 12
2016 (injured early): 9 / 194 / 2

He's been over 1,000 three times, one CLEARLY over 1,000... He also had terrible QB situations in New York.

I'm not saying he's ELITE, top 5. I'm just saying he's not a "Barely over 1000" receiver, nor is he a middling WR2/WR3 (7-800 yard receiver). Decker is a productive, high-end WR2 in the right system (high powered, mutliple receiving options). He's the guy who's like Woods and Garcon, a tough SOB with sticky hands that'll make the tough catch in traffic... and has a history of 1,000+ / 10+ TD seasons.

He's an 800 yard receiver? I'd still take that bet.

Fitzpatrick was pretty damned good in 2015. I'll stick with my expectations that he's an 800 yard receiver going forward in a good situation.

 

[Rams43]

@jrry32...

'We hope Woods is that. The allure of Woods is that he's young and has untapped potential. He hasn't yet proven to be a quality vet in the same vein as a guy like Decker.

I expect McVay will typically be deploying three WRs".


Yeah, McVay will deploy 3 WR's. Except when he's deploying 2 and even 3 TE's. Lol.

About Woods...

http://www.espn.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/15880/robert-woods

Woods is a 4 year vet. And he's been solid, although not spectacular.

He will know the playbook, recognize the D, hear the audibles, run crisp routes, be exactly where Goff expects him to be, will get open, will catch the danged ball, and will block like a mofo, all while remaining healthy.

IOW, exactly what the doctor ordered for Goff and McVay. He'll be our vet example setter and QB safety net. Decker would be redundant in that role.

Let's let the youngsters get their snaps, I say!