No more dancing or trying to juke the CBs when running their routes can only make them run crisper routes and increase the timing with the QBs. This is indeed a good thing.
Chambers, Booker Impress
- Thread starter Geforce
- Start date
No more dancing or trying to juke the CBs when running their routes can only make them run crisper routes and increase the timing with the QBs. This is indeed a good thing.
Dolfan32323
Troll Carcass Removal Unit
God Booker was our best WR and most consistent one last year. Why do you all want him gone?!
JT#1
Seasoned Veteran
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2007
- Messages
- 770
- Reaction score
- 0
Chambers is our #1 and Ginn is a rookie, rookie WRs don't usually make much impact in their rookie year so Booker being the #2 receiver at the begining of the year isn't really a big deal.
Huh? There has only been ONE reported DolFan that wants him gone.
PS: Booker was the most consistent WR in one of the worse offenses in team history. The OC and 2/3 of the starting QBs from that team are gone.
Honestly w/ Gates and Neal constantly on the Field along with LT . . . how many multiple WR sets could San Diego have run. If they have 11 people on the field.
5 - OL
1 - FB
1 - RB
1- QB
1 - TE
It leaves 2 WR's . . . . I don't know much about the Chargers offense, but I do know their weakest position on offense was WR, so I doubt they were running more WR sets than an average team would. Wasn't Eric Parker their number 2? Thats says something about your WR's.
I would think having Chambers, Booker, Ginn and Hagan comes as a bonus for Cam, a pleasant change from San Diego . . . tho missing Gates must kill LOL.
Because in obvious passing situations, Neal wasn't always on the field. There were also times when LT wasn't on the field or even when Gates needed a rest. Any of those situations could lead to 3,4 or even 5 WRs sets.
Cali Finfan
Practice Squad
Pretty sad that even a Jets fan gets the fact that Booker has been a solid contributer to our offense. That really makes Elliot 1 look kind of like a nimrod.
I think it's, "intelligence".
We didn't have a best receiver last year. They were all bad. For God's sake, get a clue!!!!!
This claiming Booker is good because he had better stats than Chris, lame a**, Chambers, is about as weak of an argument you could come up with.
Our recieving core last year was an abomination except for the late season play of Hagan, and Welker just doing what all recievers are supposed to do;
catch the ball when open.
Remember this one thing for sure: If we do indeed keep Marty, then one of our young guys that are looking so promising WILL be joining another team.
Campbell is still just 27,then there is Hagan,Ginn,PK Sam,Sutton and Malone.
I don't want to cut Campbell or Sam to keep Booker. He isn't the future or the present.
I don't want to totally release Sutton, even from the PS, to keep space on the roster so we can keep Booker.
I want to spend that three and a half million in free agency next year on a an elite TE or DB.
All I want from Booker is a 6th round draft pick.
With the passing of Carter,McMichael, Culpepper and others, we have a ton of dead cap to eat. Saving a few mil on Marty would help us immensely when it comes to dealing with next years cap.
Too many fans on this site ignore the financial side of building a team. I guess ignorance is bliss, but it doesn't lead to winning football or happy Sunday afternoons in Autumn.
PhinGeneral
King of the Wild Frontier
The point is valid if and only if guys like Sam, Campbell, Malone or Sutton are worth keeping, which is difficult to tell at this time. You don't injure your team by keeping young guys just because they're cheaper. You keep the players that are good enough to help you win ballgames.
Booker's cap hit for next season is fairly irrelevant. If they really need the cap space he can be cut before next season's free agency period even begins.
Trading Booker is viable if Hagan is ready to step up, and they can get at least some solid rookie production out of Ginn. If not, then trading Booker means you're one significant injury away from fielding a pretty inexperienced or mediocre WR crew.
Booker's cap hit for next season is fairly irrelevant. If they really need the cap space he can be cut before next season's free agency period even begins.
Trading Booker is viable if Hagan is ready to step up, and they can get at least some solid rookie production out of Ginn. If not, then trading Booker means you're one significant injury away from fielding a pretty inexperienced or mediocre WR crew.
Aqua4Ever04
Active Roster
I'm not sure why, but this news REALLY excites me. Maybe the fact that we're seeing progress on offense and the fact that we have a new coach who actully knows offense gets me ecstatic. Nothing but PHENEOMENAL news has come from this week and this weekend's mini camp. The new look O from the camps having players move and shift all over the place has me very excited for the offense this year. I'm starting to really anticipate the 2007 season.
SamTodd
Starter
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2006
- Messages
- 542
- Reaction score
- 2
- Age
- 35
You ain't got a clue. you'd rather have campbell than booker? put the crack pipe down. booker would start on probably half of the teams in this league as a #2.
Dolfan32323
Troll Carcass Removal Unit
Regardless, he could actually catch the ball and is a good 3rd down receiver at the very least.
jlfin
old pro
:rolleyes2
He makes a VERY fair salary commensurate with his productivity. He's a consumate pro. I don't understand the obvious dislike you have for the guy. How many times do you have to use the word stupid? Could it be that perhaps others have a more favorable impression of Booker than you do? Why is that stupid? Have you watched the guy play over his entire career? He's always been productive.
popularwar
Perennial All-Pro
You lose all credibility when you come out swinging on semantics. A guy has a typo and you jump on him as if his opinion was less important.
Look up the word 'best' in a dictionary. It places an order and status of something in relation to something else. If indeed all our receivers were awful last year (which they weren't) there would still have to be a better/best receiver, unless they all came down with the same exact amount of catches, yards and TD's. Even then you could argue one would be better if he was the one to bring in a catch when most needed. Your argument... well, it's not even an argument, it doesn't make sense.
Actually, it's a good argument considering what I just said about the definition of the word 'best'.
Hagan only had 21 catches last season and I think the game in which he had most catches was week 7 against Green Bay.
What? What's your reasoning here? If we keep Booker we're going to release Hagan or Ginn? Those are the only promising young receivers currently on the roster. Hakim is aging, and Campbell was released by Minnesota when they realized he was just a fast guy and nothing else. As for the other guys you mention, we have like 10 receivers in training camp every year and most of them don't make any team. PK Sam won't play this year because we'd be forcing him to play a full year of football (Europa then NFL) as well as making him learn a new offense. Sutton might make the practice squad but even that could be a long shot.
You make it sound like we don't have any cap room or something. If the cap hit was really a big deal we would have released him or traded him long ago.
He was on the trading block during the draft. No one bid.
Again, why do you insist our cap situation is so bad? Not to mention releasing him would make us take a cap hit anyway, so the only viable option to getting rid of him would be through a trade, which as I said already isn't going to happen because there are no suitors.
$3 million for Booker is fair, he produces every year and while he may not make sportscenter every week, we get solid plays from him when we need them. That alone is worth the measly $3 million out of our $107 million cap.