Trade a DT Now!

[Guiness]

It'll be tough to trade any - cause everybody knows someone's going to be waived, and they're pretty content to sit and wait for that.

I can't see us keeping 10 - there's talk of an extra WR or OL because we're thin on talent there. And we have to keep an extra FB due to Henderson's injury, etc. 10 DL just isn't going to happen.

3 QBs
9 OL
9 DL
3 HB
2 FB
5 WR
9 DB (10 is possible)
6 LB
3 TE
LS
P
K
=52

[retailguy]

Has Kenny Peterson ever made a play? I say cut him.

I disagree, to a point. When he's in at DT, he's got some good pressures and a sack or two I think. He's INVISIBLE as a DE which is where they've played him the most.

[retailguy]

9 DB (10 is possible)

=52

10 db's? - No way. 9 maybe.

Roster is 53, not 52. There is my 10th DT.

[SD GB fan]

i bet TT is looking for a trade right now. but teams are vry cautious when it comes to trading valuable players.

[Bretsky]

Maybe I'm the DL grinch, but I don't see many of these lineman that we'd be willing to trade having much value. Maybe a 7th or somebody soon to be cut, but that's about it. Most of these guys are currently developing but average backups..rotation guys.

When I look at the ideal example of somebody so stockpiled with talent they can get good value for a player who could really help some other team...............I look at Philadelphia and Al Harris being the #3 there and us trading a 2nd round pick for him.

We don't have quality to trade away; just roster fill ins.

B

[retailguy]

Maybe I'm the DL grinch,
B

Nah, you're the OL grinch. You got a point with the DL. No trade value there, but overall they are not too bad a group.

[Bretsky]

Maybe I'm the DL grinch,
B

Nah, you're the OL grinch. You got a point with the DL. No trade value there, but overall they are not too bad a group.

I agree; they are not bad overall. They REALLY need a star on this line; than all those average role players would look better as well.

[retailguy]

I agree; they are not bad overall. They REALLY need a star on this line; than all those average role players would look better as well.

I wonder if Pickett can get some pressure. If we can get a DT that can command a double team, the DE's can get "around" the corner.

thats why kampy looked so good last year.

I think you could build a case that the DL will determine the success of the the D. The rest of the D is not bad. Solid, not spectacular, but good enough. the DL just has to create pressure or we're screwed...

[Bretsky]

I agree; they are not bad overall. They REALLY need a star on this line; than all those average role players would look better as well.

I wonder if Pickett can get some pressure. If we can get a DT that can command a double team, the DE's can get "around" the corner.

thats why kampy looked so good last year.

I think you could build a case that the DL will determine the success of the the D. The rest of the D is not bad. Solid, not spectacular, but good enough. the DL just has to create pressure or we're screwed...

Back to those lines again

I think you are right though.

Same thing with OL; they need to develop or the season is screwed as well.

[retailguy]

Back to those lines again

Lines.... What lines? Where... Oh, back to football....

I think the lack of experience on the lines is what really worries me this year. It makes the skill of the position players on both O & D less important. they can't do their job if the lines don't do theirs.

DL has to create pressure or the secondary & linebackers cannot cover the receivers or backs.

OL has to give Favre time, and the receivers time to get open.

Otherwise, we're in for more 4-12.... and a LONG season.

[woodbuck27]

Back to those lines again

Lines.... What lines? Where... Oh, back to football....

I think the lack of experience on the lines is what really worries me this year. It makes the skill of the position players on both O & D less important. they can't do their job if the lines don't do theirs.

DL has to create pressure or the secondary & linebackers cannot cover the receivers or backs.

OL has to give Favre time, and the receivers time to get open.

Otherwise, we're in for more 4-12.... and a LONG season.

A good TEST coming up on Monday. After that game... we'll have a better idea of how OUR lines are.

The Bengals are a decent Team and that's good for us. I hope the Bengals play very well. OUR best Vs. their's for at least the first half.

GO PACK GO ! FAITH !!

[Bretsky]

Yes, it will be another good test. I noted the week before the Falcon game that Atlanta's DL was weak versus the run so if we struggled there we knew that was a huge sign of trouble.

We passed that test and now we're facing an upgrade from the Falcons Monday

[Terry]

To get them onto the practice squad you have to waive them. Then they have to sit something like 8 days and then you can sign them to the p squad. I think that's how it works.

One day, I think. One full day - two nights. You cut them sunday night and you can sign them to the practice squad on Tuesday.

[swede]

It'll be tough to trade any - cause everybody knows someone's going to be waived, and they're pretty content to sit and wait for that.

I was formulating this exact response Mr. Dark Fermented Beverage!

If you play the role of GM from another team wanting DL help, you understand GB's predicament quite well. GB can't keep them all and is unlikely to find trading partners.

And Bretsky's point follows the same line of reason. No one will trade any pick of significant value for guys that hit the waiver wire in a week or two anyway.

Keep the very best three and hold on to one with versatility or best potential.

Most trades this time of year are like the Fontenot/Brewster trade: "This guy is too nice to cut. We can't bear to do it. Send us a guy who won't make your team for a guy that's not going to make our team."

[Lurker64]

It'll be tough to trade any - cause everybody knows someone's going to be waived, and they're pretty content to sit and wait for that.

...

If you play the role of GM from another team wanting DL help, you understand GB's predicament quite well. GB can't keep them all and is unlikely to find trading partners.

And Bretsky's point follows the same line of reason. No one will trade any pick of significant value for guys that hit the waiver wire in a week or two anyway.

Keep the very best three and hold on to one with versatility or best potential.

Most trades this time of year are like the Fontenot/Brewster trade: "This guy is too nice to cut. We can't bear to do it. Send us a guy who won't make your team for a guy that's not going to make our team."

Don't teams with the worst record in the same conference as the player cut have first priority on any cut player, followed by teams in the other conference in ascending order of record?

If so, you might be able to get something from, say, an AFC team who has a lack of depth at DT. Probably nothing more than a late round draft pick, but we have a general manager who appears to cherish those. That being said though, I'm sure that if we have to cut someone rather than trade him, it's not because TT wasn't trying.