Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 47

Thread: Kovacevic: Time to end the Woodley mistake

  1. #21
    Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,518
    Quote Originally Posted by squidkid View Post
    and if woodley refuses?
    That would be the issue. If we couldn't, we cut him and bite the bullet with Worilds.

  2. #22
    Pro Bowler
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,582
    Quote Originally Posted by Shoe View Post
    That would be the issue. If we couldn't, we cut him and bite the bullet with Worilds.
    that's my point. why not give worilds woodley reduced salary and know that you are gonna get a guy that at least tries and puts up better numbers. and younger. and it sends a message.
    biting the bullet would be keeping the fatass lazy POS woodley and his huge salary
    1) CB D Dennard
    2) OLB R Shazier
    3) DE J Ellis
    4) WR M Bryant
    5a) OG D Yankey
    5b) OLB J Tripp
    6a) RB D Archer
    6b) NT D McCullers
    7) WR J Janis

  3. #23
    Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,518
    Quote Originally Posted by squidkid View Post
    that's my point. why not give worilds woodley reduced salary and know that you are gonna get a guy that at least tries and puts up better numbers. and younger. and it sends a message.
    biting the bullet would be keeping the fatass lazy POS woodley and his huge salary
    I'm hesitant because of Worilds' own injury history. If we ink him and say he continues to get hurt like he has the first three seasons, we are now paying (a premium) for a guy like Woodley who is injured all the time, along with the dead money from then cutting Woodley. Keep in mind: I'm not advocating keeping Woodley at his full, current price. He has to take a cut, to remain. But I think keeping him (at a reduced price), and drafting his soon replacement, is the cheapest and best choice. Because let's be honest: fatso still can play... just not for 16 games.

    Worilds is not a slam-dunk, guaranteed star going forward.
    Last edited by Shoe; 01-11-2014 at 12:39 PM.

  4. #24
    Hall of Famer DukieBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    3,087
    I get the concern over Worilds' injuries. I don't think his injuries have the same history of recurrence compared to Woodley's, and i have the thought that he may not be as comparatively injury-prone as Woodley has been. If Woodley could stay in top linebacker shape and stay on the field, then he could be the beast. Past is not predicting that future for Woodley, in my view.

  5. #25
    Pro Bowler
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    N.Y.
    Posts
    1,997
    Quote Originally Posted by Shoe View Post
    I'm hesitant because of Worilds' own injury history. If we ink him and say he continues to get hurt like he has the first three seasons, we are now paying (a premium) for a guy like Woodley who is injured all the time, along with the dead money from then cutting Woodley. Keep in mind: I'm not advocating keeping Woodley at his full, current price. He has to take a cut, to remain. But I think keeping him (at a reduced price), and drafting his soon replacement, is the cheapest and best choice. Because let's be honest: fatso still can play... just not for 16 games.

    Worilds is not a slam-dunk, guaranteed star going forward.
    Shoe, my sentiments exactly.
    Woodley walks and Worilds injury history rears it's ugly head spells doom.

  6. #26
    Starter
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    788
    I saw on one of the forums where Worilds was ranked #2 in the NFL of all of the OLB Free Agents going into the off season. It's unlikely we will be able to sign if even if we wanted to.

    Looks like we are stuck with Woodley.

  7. #27
    Backup
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Just West of the Baltimore Browns
    Posts
    301
    Not sure how dumb of a question this is, but could Woodley play DE opposite Heyward?

    Clearly he would have to add 20 pounds. But if we get to the draft and, say, Barr or Mack were sitting there at 15, could we pull the trigger on one of those guys.

    I feel like having Woodley opposite Heyward with Mclendon at NT could be an interesting dynamic combined with Jarvis and Barr/Mack at the OLB spots(because Worilds would probably be gone). Maybe get Keisel back at a vet min. to be a back up. Or let Keisel go to free up some cap space.



    Then address a CB/S in Rnd. 2.

  8. #28
    Pro Bowler
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,582
    Quote Originally Posted by Shoe View Post
    I'm hesitant because of Worilds' own injury history. If we ink him and say he continues to get hurt like he has the first three seasons, we are now paying (a premium) for a guy like Woodley who is injured all the time, along with the dead money from then cutting Woodley. Keep in mind: I'm not advocating keeping Woodley at his full, current price. He has to take a cut, to remain. But I think keeping him (at a reduced price), and drafting his soon replacement, is the cheapest and best choice. Because let's be honest: fatso still can play... just not for 16 games.

    Worilds is not a slam-dunk, guaranteed star going forward.
    i cant figure out why you want to pay a guy that you know will get hurt and miss part of the season.
    im not sure i said anything close to worilds being a slam dunk star.
    woodley playing 1/2 to 2/3 of a season, a bad jarvis jones and a rookie that wont be any good or see the field for a couple years will without a doubt be the cheaper way to go but it sure wont be the best.
    1) CB D Dennard
    2) OLB R Shazier
    3) DE J Ellis
    4) WR M Bryant
    5a) OG D Yankey
    5b) OLB J Tripp
    6a) RB D Archer
    6b) NT D McCullers
    7) WR J Janis

  9. #29
    Starter
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    788
    Quote Originally Posted by squidkid View Post
    i cant figure out why you want to pay a guy that you know will get hurt and miss part of the season.
    im not sure i said anything close to worilds being a slam dunk star.
    woodley playing 1/2 to 2/3 of a season, a bad jarvis jones and a rookie that wont be any good or see the field for a couple years will without a doubt be the cheaper way to go but it sure wont be the best.
    Like Troy you mean?

  10. #30
    Legend
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    12,904
    Its football.... reat players on D always have a higher chance of getting injured because they are always in the mix. We dont pay Woodley and Troy for their injuries, we paid them for their talents when healthy. It would be great if we could see the future and pay based on our crystal ball.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •