OL Moves
 

Can someone explain to me why we haven't re-signed OL Todd Wade? He filled in very well for Jansen when he went down at one point last season, he knows the system, and isn't likely to break the bank. He got more PT than Pucillo (who we did re-sign) and, at a minimum, should be solid insurance.

Reactions?

Re: OL Moves
 

He's looking for a starting job at right tackle and has generated some interest from a few teams.

Re: OL Moves
 

I'd honestly be weary of signing him to a lengthy extension with very limited experience with him as a player. Sure, he filled in admirably for Jansen that one game, but that's all we've seen of him.

Not only that, he wants to start. Say we do this: we give him a contract, start him at guard or tackle and he blows. Then we have to suck it up and have a malcontent sitting on the bench OR we take the inevitable huge cap hit because no one wants to trade for a crappy player.

If we could maybe sign him for a three year deal that would be reasonable.

Re: OL Moves
 

He wants to start, and I think he wants to start at tackle. We have an opening at guard, but that's probably not his first preference. It's not that we're not interested in retaining him, it's that he doesn't want to play behind Samuels and Jansen.

"It's not you, it's me."

Re: OL Moves
 

Supposedly the defensive players rave about his play in practice. Of course everyone raved about Taylor Jacobs' play in practice to. How'd that go?

Re: OL Moves
 

I agree, I guess they are waitng til the last minute to pull the plug. Seems like O-lineman are getting cut everyday. Getting him at a low cost would be nice because you know something is brewing with all the late restructuring of contracts.......Welcome Mr. Bly.....................

Re: OL Moves
 

I like the fact the market is getting totally saturated with seemingly decent stop-gap replacements at guard.

Re: OL Moves
 

I'm really hoping we can land Mulitalo

Re: OL Moves
 

Lazy right now. How old is he? I also like the fact he's played next to Rabach before.

Re: OL Moves
 

[quote=TheMalcolmConnection;285960]Lazy right now. How old is he? I also like the fact he's played next to Rabach before.[/quote]

32 years and 350 punds.

Re: OL Moves
 

I am not suggesting a lengthy or lucrative contract or naming him a starter (although in view of your comment, perhaps not doing those things would make negotiations a non-starter). But he was insurance when we picked him up last year and I see no harm in seeing whether we can replicate that going into '07. In all of the stuff about FA signings, I just hadn't seen any mention of this guy at all.

Re: OL Moves
 

[quote=calia;285963]I am not suggesting a lengthy or lucrative contract or naming him a starter[/quote]

Well, in all likelihood that's exactly what he's looking for.

Re: OL Moves
 

I had proposed in another earlier post the idea of resigning Todd Wade with the thought of moving him to guard. Don't know if he can even play the position, but since he's in-house and obviously a pretty good player, I thought maybe the team would consider it, and he would be receptive to the idea. He has extended experience at the tackle position, but there's not a lot of openings for starting tackles right now.

Re: OL Moves
 

I'm wary of some of the vets that we might be able to sign. I'm not opposed to signing 1 or 2 for competition, so long as we draft somebody after we draft a D lineman. Guard is one spot a good rookie can come in & help. We need a guy that is hungry & wants to fit in & be molded by the other guys & the system. With many vets, they'll be coming here for a job to retire on. That's ok, so long as we have stiff competition in camp.

Basically, I think we can't count too much on any of the vets out there.

Re: OL Moves
 

[quote=freddyg12;286071]I'm wary of some of the vets that we might be able to sign. I'm not opposed to signing 1 or 2 for competition, so long as we draft somebody after we draft a D lineman. Guard is one spot a good rookie can come in & help. We need a guy that is hungry & wants to fit in & be molded by the other guys & the system. With many vets, they'll be coming here for a job to retire on. That's ok, so long as we have stiff competition in camp.

Basically, I think we can't count too much on any of the vets out there.[/quote]

Obviously at this point we aren't gonna make a big splash in free agency at the guard position. Giving a guy like Mulitalo a moderate contract and bringing in guys like this Ross Tucker fella is the right way to proceed. That being said, I still think we are going to use the draft in part for O-line regardless of what the rest of free agency brings.

I think we CAN count on vets for 1-2 seasons, but our entire line, including starters, is gonna start aging sooner rather than later, so the future is paramount, and the draft is certainly the best way to build. I think our FO may be finally realizing this now.

Re: OL Moves
 

[QUOTE=GMScud;286073]Obviously at this point we aren't gonna make a big splash in free agency at the guard position. Giving a guy like Mulitalo a moderate contract and bringing in guys like this Ross Tucker fella is the right way to proceed. That being said, I still think we are going to use the draft in part for O-line regardless of what the rest of free agency brings.

I think we CAN count on vets for 1-2 seasons, but our entire line, including starters, is gonna start aging sooner rather than later, so the future is paramount, and the draft is certainly the best way to build. I think our FO may be finally realizing this now.[/QUOTE]

I agree with bringing in Mulitalo and one or two others but in our current situation it looks like our only 1st day pick is going to D-line, apart from that we probably won't get anything else, other than depth or practice squad/Europa players. Although with Bugel here there is always hope for a diamond in the rough.

We do need to build for the future and we do have an old o-line, what are the chances if we pick up a couple more good draft picks this year that we use them on the o-line?

Re: OL Moves
 

the good news on the line is that samuels and thomas look like they'll be useful forever, so you can start on 3 positions that can be found in rounds 2-4 and hope to find one good enough to be a LT starter while breaking in new blood.

Re: OL Moves
 

I want to know why they didn't sign Jordan Black. He started for Kansas City (the last time I checked, they know how to run) and signed a 2 year deal for 3.5 million.

WTF? Not big enough of a name?

Re: OL Moves
 

yeah, under 2mill a year seems pretty reasonable. and the mulitalo thing's been going real slow (as in, he hasn't been to the park and no strong interest has been expressed).

Todd Wade
 

I really think that we need to sign todd wade after seeing him replace jon jansen in that game last year he looked like a starter and he fit in the line very well.

Re: Todd Wade
 

[quote=skins#1;286648]I really think that we need to sign todd wade after seeing him replace jon jansen in that game last year he looked like a starter and he fit in the line very well.[/quote]

1 game isn't really enough, but he did play well. he could start for some teams, so he's not a bad option.

Re: OL Moves
 

If Wade wants a chance to start, why not let him compete for a job here? The roofs not going to fall in if Jansen gets beat out and has to accept a different role. I think it would be clearer if we said, "Todd Wade wants to [I]get paid[/I] like a starter". That does present a problem.

Based on the one game he played and the fact that teams look at so much film, I can't believe someone won't write him a check that we will be unable or unwilling to match just based on that. We ran all over N.O. that day and good OL are not easy to come by.

Re: OL Moves
 

[B]OT[/B] Todd Wade? He will be valuable depth to our OL but he could start for a number of teams. We need a starting [B]OG[/B] and Wade doesn't fit.