Jason Taylor Released

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

Willis started games but so did Heyer and so did Jansen. Starting games doesnt mean anything. Theres tons of players in this league who have "started games."

Nothing i have seen or read about Willis gives even the slightest inkling he would be an upgrade over what we have. We don't need depth at OT. We need a starter. We can only carry so many OTs on our roster and if we add someone, it needs to be someone who provides a clear upgrade at the position. Willis is just another teams Stephon Heyer. Nothing more, nothing less. We don't need another backup.

Seeing as how Jason Fabini started three games at RT, I would say depth should be a priority.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Seeing as how Jason Fabini started three games at RT, I would say depth should be a priority.

Heyer and Jansen ARE the depth.

How many tackles do you think a team can carry on a 53 man roster? Unless your answer is 5, we only have room for one more OT. And unless you wholeheartedly beleive that Jansen or Heyer will be solid at RT all year, then we have no reason to bring in any "depth." We need to bring in a starter.

[The Goat]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Seeing as how Jason Fabini started three games at RT, I would say depth should be a priority.

Truer words...

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by The Goat

Truer words...

A team can only afford to carry 4 OTs. Last year, Samuels and Jansen were our starters, so Fabini and Heyer were our depth.

This year, we know Jansen cannot start, so at this point, he IS our depth. We've "upgraded" our depth already by replacing Fabini with Jansen as a backup OT. Heyer is our other backup OT and there is no one available in free agency who is a noticable upgrade over Heyer... so anyone we bring in would just be another backup. Do you want 3 backup-caliber OTs and only one starting-caliber OT on our roster?

We need to bring in a starter, not more depth. I dont understand why some people just cant seem to grasp this concept. Am I not explaining it clearly or is there some huge hole in my logic that I dont see?

[The Goat]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

A team can only afford to carry 4 OTs. Last year, Samuels and Jansen were our starters, so Fabini and Heyer were our depth.

This year, we know Jansen cannot start, so at this point, he IS our depth. We've "upgraded" our depth already by replacing Fabini with Jansen as a backup OT. Heyer is our other backup OT and there is no one available in free agency who is a noticable upgrade over Heyer... so anyone we bring in would just be another backup. Do you want 3 backup-caliber OTs and only one starting-caliber OT on our roster?

We need to bring in a starter, not more depth. I dont understand why some people just cant seem to grasp this concept.

I thing there's room for honest disagreement on this point. Yes Heyer has started in the past but has always struggled, especially in run-blocking. Willis out of Seattle started 10 games last year and played in all 16 but only gave up 1.5 sacks. I believe that's fewer than each of our o-lineman surrendured. Willis is also said to be a mauler in the running game. I don't even know whether the FO is looking at him but it wouldn't surprise me... personally i think he'll be an upgrade over our RT situation for the past 2 years.

... btw even if we grab Willis i'm still onboard for taking Oher, Smith @ 13. We do need to get another legit starter @ LB too.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by The Goat

I thing there's room for honest disagreement on this point. Yes Heyer has started in the past but has always struggled, especially in run-blocking. Willis out of Seattle started 10 games last year and played in all 16 but only gave up 1.5 sacks. I believe that's fewer than each of our o-lineman surrendured. Willis is also said to be a mauler in the running game. I don't even know whether the FO is looking at him but it wouldn't surprise me... personally i think he'll be an upgrade over our RT situation for the past 2 years.

... btw even if we grab Willis i'm still onboard for taking Oher, Smith @ 13. We do need to get another legit starter @ LB too.

I think some people are overvaluing Willis. He's the best OT on the market right now and no one is showing much - if any - interest inhim... that should tell everyone something.

So in your scenario, if we grabbed Willis and took Oher or Smith at 13, you are cutting Heyer? Heyer has only played two years and improved dramatically each year. IMO it would be foolish to give up on him now.

Currently, we need a starting DE, RT, and LB. The only scenario where it makes sense to go after Willis is if we plan to take a LB or DE with the 13th pick. However, LB and DE are much easier to fill in free agency. Bringing back Evans solves our DE problem. Cato June, Derrick Brooks, and Crowell are all better LBs than Willis is an OT, if that makes sense. LB is also going to be pretty deep in the 2nd and 3rd round, so we can always pick up another LB there.

I respect people can have different opinions, but it just doesnt make sense to get Willis if were serious about "upgrading" the RT position.

[vallin21]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

I think some people are overvaluing Willis. He's the best OT on the market right now and no one is showing much - if any - interest inhim... that should tell everyone something.

So in your scenario, if we grabbed Willis and took Oher or Smith at 13, you are cutting Heyer? Heyer has only played two years and improved dramatically each year. IMO it would be foolish to give up on him now.

Currently, we need a starting DE, RT, and LB. The only scenario where it makes sense to go after Willis is if we plan to take a LB or DE with the 13th pick. However, LB and DE are much easier to fill in free agency. Bringing back Evans solves our DE problem. Cato June, Derrick Brooks, and Crowell are all better LBs than Willis is an OT, if that makes sense. LB is also going to be pretty deep in the 2nd and 3rd round, so we can always pick up another LB there.

I respect people can have different opinions, but it just doesnt make sense to get Willis if were serious about "upgrading" the RT position.

Whose to say Willis wouldn't be an upgrade? He's never had the chance to be a full 16 game starter, and who knows he could be this year's surprise player. We wouldn't be paying him dollar and he could fill a need at RT.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by vallin21

Whose to say Willis wouldn't be an upgrade? He's never had the chance to be a full 16 game starter, and who knows he could be this year's surprise player. We wouldn't be paying him dollar and he could fill a need at RT.

He could be, but if he had the same potential that Heyer has, Seattle would be pushing to resign him.

[Skinny Tee]

Originally Posted by The Goat

I thing there's room for honest disagreement on this point. Yes Heyer has started in the past but has always struggled, especially in run-blocking. Willis out of Seattle started 10 games last year and played in all 16 but only gave up 1.5 sacks. I believe that's fewer than each of our o-lineman surrendured. Willis is also said to be a mauler in the running game. I don't even know whether the FO is looking at him but it wouldn't surprise me... personally i think he'll be an upgrade over our RT situation for the past 2 years.

... btw even if we grab Willis i'm still onboard for taking Oher, Smith @ 13. We do need to get another legit starter @ LB too.

Completely agree...we have to add an impactful player to our OL this offseason. Offense was our weakness last year and we haven't added that huge talent to the offense where we most need it.

I'm for signing Willis and drafting OL with our 13th overall pick.

...Like Sir Mix-A-Lot says "Huh!...Double-Up!...Huh!-HUH!"...with those wise words you can't go wrong.