Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[QUOTE=EARTHQUAKE2689;277730]you do have a point there i just dont want a mark brunell tpye contract going to fletcher[/QUOTE]

Barrow didn't get a big contract and neither will Fletcher. I would be stunned if Fletcher got more than a $4M-$4.5M signing bonus. Assuming he has one great year left in the tank as a starter, could compete for the starting job in his second year, would be a backup in his 3rd year, and be cut by his 4th year, a $4M signing bonus is definately manageable.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

yeah i hope so vause you know how the redskins get 7 years 35 million i have heard that so much with the redskins

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

The contacts the Redskins ink players to always look worse on paper than they actually are. The things to focus on are the years and signing bonus. The deals are always heavily backloaded so the players rarely see that money.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

i know thatbut i am just tired of seeing redskins overpay free agents

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=#56fanatic;277637]that is real mature calling someone dense. I never questioned the success rate of a 1st round player vs a 6th round player. Obviously 1st rounders,2nd rounders are "predicted" to have better careers, 6th and 7th rounders are lucky to make the roster. My point was, they guys have never played in the NFL and nothing is 100% definate, that this player is going to be a stud. grow up and stop insulting people because they dont agree with you. AGAIN..and AGAIN..and AGAIN... LET ME SAY THIS ONE MORE TIME....I WILL TYPE IT BIG SO MAYBE YOU CAN SEE IT BETTER. I NEVER HAVE SAID ANYTHING ABOUT FLETCHER BEING A BAD PLAYER. IN FACT I HAVE SAID HE IS A GOOD PLAYER. IF WE SIGN HIM GOOD, IF WE DONT GOOD! I AM NOT HATING ON THE GUY. IF THERE IS NO ALTERNATIVE, SIGN HIM. I HAVE NEVER SAID NOT TO. I SAID EXHAUST ALL OTHER RESOURCES, IF THERE ARE NONE, THEN SIGN HIM. HELL I WILL BUY HIS JERSEY IF IT WILL MAKE YOU HAPPY. 2ND, NO I WOULD NOT SIGN LAVAR BACK AND PLAY HIM IN THE MIDDLE. NO I WOULD NOT SIGN LAVAR BACK AT ALL PROBABLY. HE IS NOT GOING TO BE HEALTHY, SO DONT WASTE THE MONEY.

Now, of the old players that have seemed to not work out. Bruce, Sanders, Carrier, George, wright. I am sure there may be a few here and there over the last 8 years I have left off, but again my point : we have not had much luck with signing aging veterans. Hell, not much luck at signing anyone lately. Which, goes back to keeping our picks and develping young players.

OUT!
Dude, seriously. grow up and stop insulting people. it is people like you that make these threads not that enjoyable. people enjoy debating their opinions and philosophies. When people start the name calling and how stupid blah blah blah, it really takes the fun out of it. right or wrong, its an opinion. the mods should take notice of people insulting other and put them on notice or something. it is really not needed here. If any of us here had any capability of running a team, we would be there. so dont put more weight on your ideas than any one elses. Your ideas go as far in the organization as anyone elses.[/quote]

wow, chill. first of all i didn't actually insult you, notice that if in there? it's there for a reason. you called out my post saying that i was wrong and intimating that 6th rounders have an EQUAL chance at success as 1st rounders, which, by the numbers, is completely untrue.

look, right here:
[quote=#56fanatic]In regards to the draft, drafting a guy in the 1st or 2nd round is just as much a crap shoot as drafting a guy in the 6th or 7th.[/quote]

i'm glad you can scold me for replying directly to what you actually posted and then say you never said it in the first place. i'd also like to see where i said my opinions were better than anyone else's.

what really makes these threads unenjoyable is people responding to things that were never said, or getting upset when someone points out a flaw in their arguement instead of rectifying it or re-stating their opinion for clarity.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

"If you're so dense as to not see the difference in success as a whole, I can't help you, and there won't be many that can."


Above is what I responded to. that is the crap that I can't stand. calling people dense or stupid. Grow the f*ck up.

What I said, is that the draft in general is a crap shoot. You can draft a 1st rounder and they turn out to be a bust, just as much as a 6th rounder. How can you interpret anything I said as saying you are wrong. what did I say you are wrong about. Did "you are wrong get typed?" i dont believe so. if it did, put it here so I can see it.

I never started or paid attention to what you wrote until you started the dense thing. dude, I really could give a rats ass what people think out here. there opinions. not truths or matter of facts. If you are a genious on NFL and GM crap, then apply for a job with the skins. People are real f*cking brave on a message board.
Show me where I said you are wrong. show me where i critisized anything you posted, other than giving my opinion. I never did. post it, maybe my memory is going bad.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

Looks like the Lions are also interested in Fletcher. We'll see how this plays out.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

Take this one outside fellas.

That Guy, I believe you meant no harm, but the post did seem unnecessarily harsh.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;277795]Looks like the Lions are also interested in Fletcher. We'll see how this plays out.[/QUOTE]

So, along with the Redskins front office, the Lions are interested in Fletcher too?

Hmm. This can't be good. Red flags anyone?

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;277795]Looks like the Lions are also interested in Fletcher. We'll see how this plays out.[/QUOTE]

If he's not originally from that area, I think he'd have to be crazy to jump aboard the Lions ship. However, should a winning team jump into the race, it might make him tougher to sign.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=FRPLG;277361]Respectfully, you are clueless.

Year Team G Total Tkl Ast Sacks Int Yds Avg Lg TD Pass Def
1998 St. Louis Rams 16 28 25.0 3 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0
1999 St. Louis Rams 16 90 66.0 24 3 0 0 0.0 0 0 2
2000 St. Louis Rams 16 132 105.0 27 5.5 4 33 8.2 12 0 4
2001 St. Louis Rams 16 116 89.0 27 4.5 2 18 9.0 18 0 3
2002 Buffalo Bills 16 147 97.0 50 3 0 0 0.0 0 0 2
2003 Buffalo Bills 16 133 96.0 37 2 0 0 0.0 0 0 4
2004 Buffalo Bills 16 142 92.0 50 3.5 0 0 0.0 0 0 3
2005 Buffalo Bills 16 157 104.0 53 4 1 20 20.0 20 0 2
2006 Buffalo Bills 16 146 104.0 42 2 4 30 7.5 17 1 7


Fletcher had arguably his best season of his career last year.

He was probably the best MLB in the league last year.[/quote]

Do you know who Brian Urlacher is? Even Zack the crack Thomas!!

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[QUOTE=jdlea;277798]If he's not originally from that area, I think he'd have to be crazy to jump aboard the Lions ship. However, should a winning team jump into the race, it might make him tougher to sign.[/QUOTE]

We probably have an advantage over other teams insofar as Fletcher will not have to learn a new system. That tends to be a pretty significant issue for a lot of players. Moreover, not only does Fletcher know the system, he thrives in it.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;277802]We probably have an advantage over other teams insofar as Fletcher will not have to learn a new system. That tends to be a pretty significant issue for a lot of players. Moreover, not only does Fletcher know the system, he thrives in it.[/quote]

This is probably far fetched, but I wonder if the front office was worried that Dale Lindsey's gruff attitude and reputation would make it tough to lure a free agent linebacker. If the Skins are targeting Fletcher and Greg Williams knows that Fletcher hates Lindsey's style of coaching, that could have factored in (obviously not the only reason).

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

flecther or marshall take ur pick cause that is what it looks like just move marshall to weak side where he played before pierce left

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

if we did get London Fletcher, do u think we would start Lemar or Rocky on the weakside????? I say probably Lemar and if either of the other 2 guys gets hurt then Lemar fills in for them and Rocky takes over for Lemar. I say any way it happens this upcoming season is Lemar's last in Washington, unless he plays amazing.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;277649]Guys, once and for all it's not an easy thing to switch an OLB to MLB. They are not interchangeable positions. Sure we have seen guys make the transition, but don't be fooled into thinking it's an easy thing to do and all linebackers can make the switch successfully.

If I had to pick between Fletcher or moving a guy out of position, I'd take Fletcher 100% of the time.[/QUOTE]



That is so true, and it's the reason we're in the market for a MLB because it hasn't been easy for Marshall to make the transition from OLB to the middle.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

yeah hes probably right

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=datdudeallstar7;277830]if we did get London Fletcher, do u think we would start Lemar or Rocky on the weakside????? I say probably Lemar and if either of the other 2 guys gets hurt then Lemar fills in for them and Rocky takes over for Lemar. I say any way it happens this upcoming season is Lemar's last in Washington, unless he plays amazing.[/quote]That's the great part in all of this. Not only does the Fletcher signing upgrade the MLB position, but it also gives us much needed depth at ALL the LB positions. Basically it makes LB (IMO our biggest problem in 2006) a non issue. That will do wonders for the defense. With the Clements signing, I believe we will have fixed the back 7 entirely. The D Line, where it all begins, will still be an issue, but with the back 7 fixed up, it will be much easier to identify the problems on the front 4 and draft players on the DL accordingly.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

No Our Biggest Problem Was Line Play Not Getting Penetration On The Qb Which Caused The Secondary To Play Bad Which Caused The Linebackers To Play Bad It Was A Chain Reaction Which Started With The Defensive Line

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=EARTHQUAKE2689;277834]No Our Biggest Problem Was Line Play Not Getting Penetration On The Qb Which Caused The Secondary To Play Bad Which Caused The Linebackers To Play Bad It Was A Chain Reaction Which Started With The Defensive Line[/quote]Yeah, you're right, our biggest problem last year was on the defensive line. What I meant to say was that the biggest [I]difference between 2005 and 2006[/I] was a significant decrease in the quality of LB play, mostly in coverage. We had no underneath coverage on curl or dig routes, and this is usually the linebackers responsibility. They just weren't playing on the ball.

Our line play also dropped off a bit, but it wasn't exactly a defensive strength in 2005 either.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=GTripp0012;277833]That's the great part in all of this. Not only does the Fletcher signing upgrade the MLB position, but it also gives us much needed depth at ALL the LB positions. Basically it makes LB (IMO our biggest problem in 2006) a non issue. That will do wonders for the defense. With the Clements signing, I believe we will have fixed the back 7 entirely. The D Line, where it all begins, will still be an issue, but with the back 7 fixed up, it will be much easier to identify the problems on the front 4 and draft players on the DL accordingly.[/quote]

Would you be satisfied with signing Fletcher and Smoot rather than Fletcher and Clements? Speaking entirely from a fiscal point of view. Can the money saved (18 million signing bonus?) be used for other areas in need of depth?

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

We need to be thinking about drafting Polunsky.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=724Skinsfan;277837]Would you be satisfied with signing Fletcher and Smoot rather than Fletcher and Clements? Speaking entirely from a fiscal point of view. Can the money saved (18 million signing bonus?) be used for other areas in need of depth?[/quote]I don't think Smoot will be the clear cut No. 1 corner this team needs. I don't think Clements gets anywhere near an 18 million SB from anyone; I think he can be had for about 10-12 million on the bonus. Clements is worth it though, he's the real deal at CB.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=EXoffender;277838]We need to be thinking about drafting Polunsky.[/quote]

I say we draft Pat Willis way ahead of Posluszny. Each could be good, but Pat Willis is a MLB and Posluszny is an OLB, and the transition is not easy which has been mentioned in this thread. I got a feeling that Pat Willis is gonna be a beast. I would be so happy to see the skins trade down and get Pat Willis while picking up other pick(s) also.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

ok to say the skins should draft a lb with the 6th overall pick is just syupid we should be focused on the d line with eirther alan branch or gaines adams i would be happy with either but both those LB'S are a serious reach at number 6. while alan branch may be the safer pick gaines adams is the sexier pick and would provide and excellent pass rush of the edge he is a jason taylor clone and that would lead to more picks from nate clements who is one of the top 7 or 8 corners in the nfl

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=EXoffender;277838]We need to be thinking about drafting Polunsky.[/quote]

yeah...either him or Posluszny :D

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=EXoffender;277838]We need to be thinking about drafting Polunsky.[/quote]

We need to draft D-line, D-line and D-line.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

What would be nice is if someone like Adrian Peterson, Calvin Johnson or even Brady Quinn Drops and the teams between 7-13 covet one of those guys and they trade up with us to get one of them. In this senario we add additional picks and we still could get lucky and get A. Branch, but if he isn't there we could look at Amobi Okoye, I really think this kids is going to be a superstar.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

He Will Be But Branch Or Adams Is Just A Better Fit To The Skins And He Is No Offense To Him

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=#56fanatic;277791]"If you're so dense as to not see the difference in success as a whole, I can't help you, and there won't be many that can."


Above is what I responded to. that is the crap that I can't stand. calling people dense or stupid. Grow the f*ck up.

What I said, is that the draft in general is a crap shoot. You can draft a 1st rounder and they turn out to be a bust, just as much as a 6th rounder. How can you interpret anything I said as saying you are wrong. what did I say you are wrong about. Did "you are wrong get typed?" i dont believe so. if it did, put it here so I can see it.

I never started or paid attention to what you wrote until you started the dense thing. dude, I really could give a rats ass what people think out here. there opinions. not truths or matter of facts. If you are a genious on NFL and GM crap, then apply for a job with the skins. People are real f*cking brave on a message board.
Show me where I said you are wrong. show me where i critisized anything you posted, other than giving my opinion. I never did. post it, maybe my memory is going bad.[/quote]

again, please read. notice that if. if you feel insulted it means that YOU think you're dense, if you don't then it doesn't apply.

[quote=#56fanatic]uh..what are you trying to say? how is drafting a 1st, 2nd, 3rd an exact science. there is no guarantee that a 1st rounder is going to be a hall of famer, or a bust, or at least servicable.[/quote]

^ this is you replying to something i never said. I only said draft a 1st rounder is safer than drafting a 6th rounder for obvious reasons, and you've had at least two posts which literally said it's an equal crap shoot, though now you've clarified to simply say it's merely possible for either to be a bust of HoF'er.

[quote=#56fanatic]If you are a genious on NFL and GM crap, then apply for a job with the skins.[/quote]

^ this is you replying to something i never said (unless you want to show me where i said my opinions are better than anyone else's, which you have yet to do), and you've made this comment at least 3 times now.

I'm sorry if it seemed overly harsh, maybe it was, but i assure you if i'd say it here, i'd say it to your face.

as far as aging veterans, C grif, s springs have been okay. the guys you mentioned like bruce, etc were thought by most to be over the hill when they were signed. we (as fans) really need to get past the 200 offseason - it's about time.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

i think clements is going to get 15-18mill in bonus money. I don't think smoot is nearly as good, and we should really only be looking at DL with the #6 pick, it's deep with real talent this year. you can get good LB's in the late 1st/early second every year, and decent ones yearly in FA. good DL guys are much harder to get.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

ding ding ding we have a winner...... THAT GUY he is exactly right clements will get the bouns he wants for one reason you will be shocked to read this........................... HE HAS EARNED IT PEOPLE HE IS A PRO BOWLER HE SHUT SOWN MARVIN HARRISON ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS DONT BELIEVE ME LOOK UP THE 17 16 GAME BETWEEN THE COLTS AND BILLS IN 06 AND TELL ME WHAT HARRISONS STATS ARE

to the draft gaines adams and alan branch are both monsters and we cant go wrong with either pick but look at the skins championshipp teams from the past they could run the ball which we can do 4th best this year without portis and they could stop the run we couldnt do that and tiki barber has proved that more than once so the BEST THING REDSKINS FANS COULD HEAR COME DRAFT DAY IS...........WITH THE 6TH PICK IN THE 2007 NFL DRAFT THE WASHINGTON REDSKINS SELECT ALAN BRANCH DEFENSICE TACKLE MICHIGAN

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[QUOTE=EARTHQUAKE2689;277880]ding ding ding we have a winner...... THAT GUY he is exactly right clements will get the bouns he wants for one reason you will be shocked to read this........................... HE HAS EARNED IT PEOPLE HE IS A PRO BOWLER HE SHUT SOWN MARVIN HARRISON ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS DONT BELIEVE ME LOOK UP THE 17 16 GAME BETWEEN THE COLTS AND BILLS IN 06 AND TELL ME WHAT HARRISONS STATS ARE

to the draft gaines adams and alan branch are both monsters and we cant go wrong with either pick but look at the skins championshipp teams from the past they could run the ball which we can do 4th best this year without portis and they could stop the run we couldnt do that and tiki barber has proved that more than once so the BEST THING REDSKINS FANS COULD HEAR COME DRAFT DAY IS.........[B]..WITH THE 6TH PICK IN THE 2007 NFL DRAFT THE WASHINGTON REDSKINS SELECT ALAN BRANCH DEFENSICE TACKLE MICHIGAN[/B][/QUOTE]


Alot of people seem to want Branch, but I feel like its contradicting everything we want the Redskins to do. They drafted two defensive tackles last year, who both showed some promise, and oen was pretty damn good. Everyone says how we should develop people and build through the draft...then what the hell sense would drafting another DT make, expecially when we still have another good year or two out of Griffin. I think we should go defensive end, where lets face it, we have nothing in the future. We have one capable DE in Carter, and Daniels is ok, but as much as I love Wynn as a person, he is not a very good player anymore and Evans is a decent change of pace, but probaboly wont be a starter. I really hope we go with Andersen in the draft, or possibly Adams.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

I like Golston and Montgomery but unless one or the other puts on about 30 lbs they wil not be especially effective against the run. We need a road block-type of guy in there.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[QUOTE=Gmanc711;277950]Alot of people seem to want Branch, but I feel like its contradicting everything we want the Redskins to do. They drafted two defensive tackles last year, who both showed some promise, and oen was pretty damn good. Everyone says how we should develop people and build through the draft...then what the hell sense would drafting another DT make, expecially when we still have another good year or two out of Griffin. I think we should go defensive end, where lets face it, we have nothing in the future. We have one capable DE in Carter, and Daniels is ok, but as much as I love Wynn as a person, he is not a very good player anymore and Evans is a decent change of pace, but probaboly wont be a starter. I really hope we go with Andersen in the draft, or possibly Adams.[/QUOTE]

I think a DE would be good, but if they can't get Adams, I think Branch is better than Andersen. I don't know that either Montgomery or Golston will ever be a #1 type defensive tackle and I think they need that now. I disagree that they'll get 2 more years outta Griffin. His time for being injured and playing in 10 games is up with me. I think they need someone who can step in and make a difference now, at either position, I just feel like Branch is the best available D Lineman. But I thought Merriman or Ware were the best available defensive players when we got Rogers and look how wrong I've been about that...oh wait.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=Gmanc711;277950]Alot of people seem to want Branch, but I feel like its contradicting everything we want the Redskins to do. They drafted two defensive tackles last year, who both showed some promise, and oen was pretty damn good. Everyone says how we should develop people and build through the draft...then what the hell sense would drafting another DT make, expecially when we still have another good year or two out of Griffin. I think we should go defensive end, where lets face it, we have nothing in the future. We have one capable DE in Carter, and Daniels is ok, but as much as I love Wynn as a person, he is not a very good player anymore and Evans is a decent change of pace, but probaboly wont be a starter. I really hope we go with Andersen in the draft, or possibly Adams.[/quote]


golston looked good as a backup, he looked pretty forgetable as a starter. Good value pick, but he's not there yet. he'd be a good #3 in the rotation.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[QUOTE=Gmanc711;277950]Alot of people seem to want Branch, but I feel like its contradicting everything we want the Redskins to do. They drafted two defensive tackles last year, who both showed some promise, and oen was pretty damn good. Everyone says how we should develop people and build through the draft...then what the hell sense would drafting another DT make, expecially when we still have another good year or two out of Griffin. I think we should go defensive end, where lets face it, we have nothing in the future. We have one capable DE in Carter, and Daniels is ok, but as much as I love Wynn as a person, he is not a very good player anymore and Evans is a decent change of pace, but probaboly wont be a starter. I really hope we go with Andersen in the draft, or possibly Adams.[/QUOTE]

Let's not overestimate Golston and Montgomery just yet. Golston had some good moments, but he's got his fair share of cleatmarks on his chest too. Let's face it, this line got trampled last year. Golston and Montgomery are backups at best -- they're not 16-game starters. Griffin's only got a season or two left, and Salave'a plays on one foot most of the year.

Make no mistake, defensive tackle [B][I]has[/I][/B] to be addressed this year. Branch is said to be the best player at the #6 spot, assuming nobody's picked him up before us. It all starts up front, and we have NO ONE who can tie up blockers and be a consistent penetrating force at the line of scrimmage.

We can't pass up on Branch anymore than we could have passed up Sean Taylor in '04.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=Gmanc711;277950]Alot of people seem to want Branch, but I feel like its contradicting everything we want the Redskins to do. They drafted two defensive tackles last year, who both showed some promise, and oen was pretty damn good. Everyone says how we should develop people and build through the draft...then what the hell sense would drafting another DT make, expecially when we still have another good year or two out of Griffin. I think we should go defensive end, where lets face it, we have nothing in the future. We have one capable DE in Carter, and Daniels is ok, but as much as I love Wynn as a person, he is not a very good player anymore and Evans is a decent change of pace, but probaboly wont be a starter. I really hope we go with Andersen in the draft, or possibly Adams.[/quote]

I just dont know if we could pass on Branch if we choose to use the pick. Golston played well, Montgomery not so much. Branch may possibly be a starter right away. I am not sold on the DE. He is rather small at 260, would give up on avg 40+lbs in the NFL.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

i want branch to but dont knock a guy cause he is 260 pounds dwight freeney is 6'1" 260 lbs and jason taylor is 260lbs as well BUT WE NEED BRANCH HE WILL DO FOR US WHAT JOHN HENDERSON AND MARCUS STROUD DO FOR THE JAGS

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=EARTHQUAKE2689;277979]i want branch to but dont knock a guy cause he is 260 pounds dwight freeney is 6'1" 260 lbs and jason taylor is 260lbs as well BUT WE NEED BRANCH HE WILL DO FOR US WHAT JOHN HENDERSON AND MARCUS STROUD DO FOR THE JAGS[/quote]

yeah, freeney is 260, he's also pretty worthless against the run.