What if we lose Colston or Nicks?
 

Do we promote from within or do we go shopping? I know there's the draft but if you wait till the draft to see what you get you risk missing out in FA. Plus I always believed that you fill holes with free agency and pick BPA in the draft.

Most people feel that Nicks is a bigger priority than Colston because he's probably the best guard in the league while Colston, while very good, isn't quite up to that standard. But if you look at the free agents available and what their asking price is likely to be that might be as accurate as it seems.

There are some very good free agent OLinemen available who aren't as good as Nicks but who would certainly be solid replacements at a much lower price. On the other hand the available talent at WR, while excellent, doesn't include anyone comparable to Colston that is likely to come at a lower price.

Hopefully we won't have to choose but I think losing Colston would be more difficult to recover from.

Of course there's the first option I mentioned which is to go with what we have. From that standpoint we're in much better shape at WR. We've got some pretty good talent waiting in the wings with Robert Meachem being the most obvious guy to take on Colston's duties. Moore could definitely see his numbers go up and Adrian Arrington and Joe Morgan have a lot of potential. Losing both Meachem and Colston would suck big time.

On the line the picture, as far as I can see, isn't nearly so rosy. Or am i missing something here? Are there any sleepers on the roster?

Brother, I hear ya. Just like everyone else here, hear's ya.

First thing that needs to happen is Drew. Once he is resigned, then we can focu on those two. IMO we will lose one or the other.

If we lose either or even both(not going to happen), we'll survive. While the level of individual productivity will level off, I don't see a big drop off in our offensive production. There's always someone else chomping at the chance to prove their worth.

I know most people are saying they would rather lose colston instead of nicks and i understand their reasoning when they say this.
But if colston went, its not like Adrian Arrington is going to wake up one morning with skill set that matches that of a 6 year pro with nearly 7000 yards and 50 TDs. He won't turn into colston over night and we'd need to find a special player if he left.
Week 3 vs Atlanta - Colston had about 6 catches on the second to final drive which let us get the game winning score, just before ATL failed on 4th down. He always comes through i hope mickey can work some magic

It would kill me to Colston in another teams jersey.

What if we lose Colston or Nicks?


Answer: Move on, win the SB, and send pictures from the after party to them.

If we lose either, we're left with a significant amount of money to sign someone else, hopefully on defense.

Colston is awesome, period. But the fact is that there isn't as much drop off from Colston to the next WR as there would be with Nicks and the next option.
WR's are interchangeable; all-pro guards, not so much

Question: What would you rather have if forced to choose

An 8 million/yr WR?

Or

An 8 million/yr DE/OLB/DT?

Don't even have to think about that.

Agreed. Plus, there are some really good options at WR in free agency & via the draft this year. Not so much when it comes to All Pro guards.

Wide Receivers score Touchdowns...

yeah... and Colston scored 8 touchdowns, at the new rate of $1 million per TD?

and we scored 60+ tds last year. 60 mill seems like a lot on just skill players

How many drives has Colston extended with clutch catches?

Don't just fire off an answer, really think about how many drives he extended with tough, clutch catches - now look what happens when he's not there doing that for us...

...we've got Roman Harper and Malcolm Jenkins who can come in and make a stop/turnover and get the ball back...

Vote Colston 2012

If we lose Colston we can to with an in-house solution. If we lose Nicks, which I think is unlikely because I see him getting tagged, then we have to bring in a quality replacement.

To add a twist to Danno's question

What would you rather have?

1. 16 Million a year WR/OT (not including what Drew will make this year) Have a great offense that sets record after record; as in years past....

2. Keep Colston; that has been a dream of a player and a future HoF'er. But by doing this we lose the player that protects Drew (Potentially raising the odds for Drew to get injured. Which, if Drew gets injured the season likely goes into a nose dive and B&G.com is flooded with "Doom-Sayers")

3. Keep Nicks; He protects Drew and the offense still runs smooth with the absence of a WR that doesn't make a play every offensive down.


I love Colston. Let me type that again so everyone understand me fully; I LOVE COLSTON! However, Colston is one of many offensive targets that Drew Brees has to chose from. Lets face it. WR's a plentiful. All Pro OT/G are not.

The O-Line is what gives Drew time to pass, gives our RB's holes to run through. WR's just catch the ball. Yes Colston has made some great plays for us. I think it was against San Fran when COlston caught the ball across the middle of the endzone, got crushed by the CB and SS and still held on to the ball. I thought for sure he had dropped it, but NO...TD Saints. Yes, he makes those plays for us. While the glory of the TD goes to the QB and WR...It is the O-Linemen that make it possible for the ball to be thrown. Right?

I have long since given up my Love for Saints Players. I love the New Orleans Saints TEAM. I want what is best for the team. Has Colston earned his "Big Payday"???? Hell yes he has! Has Nicks???? Hell yes! But my assessment is based on my opinion. The front office makes those calls, not Sapper. If the FO releases Colston/Nicks/yes, even Drew go; while it will suck, they must have done it for the betterment of the team and I will support their choice and wish those guys the best in the future. I know in years past, when we had a player become a Pro-Bowl guy, you might as well clean his locker out because he was traded the next week. Those days are over. This is a "Winning Organization" now. Players want to come to the Saints.

Here's my last questions...

1. Who do you keep.... Colston or Graham? Jimmy is going to be wanting a "Big PayDay" in the near future. Do we sign Colston and let Jimmy go?

2. Do we resign both Nicks and Colston to big contracts; make the playoffs again because of our offense; then lose because the defensive players are the same and can't stop an offensive drive?

We have the best offense in the NFL. One WR can't make or break it. But IMO; if you lose a great O-Lineman, does the offense suffer? Yes. Greatly.

We can argue this till we are blue in the face and hate one another. But in the end, not one of us will be called by Loomis and ask our opinion.

In Loomis I Trust.

I agree to some extent jcp026.

I think that the best long-term solution would be to tag Nicks for 1-year (~$9M) deal and either draft of find an undrafted FA OG who they could groom for a year under Nicks.

Then they could try to replace Nicks with that young OG in 2013 and save a lot of money that will be needed to re-sign other then UFAs.

I would love for the Saints to re-sign Nicks to a long-term contract like they did with Evans, but I'm not sure if they can afford to spend almost $20M/year on a pair of guards and still keep all other aspects of the roster strong enough to compete year-in and year-out.

I mean with Brees' new contract and a long-term contract for Nicks - the Saints would be spending somewhere around $35-40M/year on a QB and two Gs, that's almost a third of the whole salary cap for 2012 spent on three players.

That's what I'm thinking. Look down the road a little bit. Yeah we might be able to work it out so we can keep Nicks but what is that going to do our ability to sign other people in the future?

I posted a question on SR about the feasibility of trading Evans rather than letting Nicks walk and it was pointed out (in the most insulting and antagonistic way) that we can't trade him because the cap hit is prohibitive. So now we're going to have two guys with huge contracts at the guard position that we're stuck with no matter what. Do we have to have the 2 best guards in the NFL. Is the team going fall apart if we have one great guard and one solid guard who plays for a third of money instead? There are some good guards available out there. And I don't mean just barely adequate or mediocre.

We're going to have some players next year that we're going to have pay. And the year after and the year after that etc. Hopefully the cap goes up but we really don't know what it's going to look like in 2 or 3 years.

I agree completely.

I read somewhere that they estimate that the cap will go up quite a bit in the coming seasons - some estimates were in the region of even $140-150M around 2014-16 - because of the increased revenues around the league and with an improved TV broadcasting deal for the NFL.

But that just means that player salaries are going to go up accordingly and there probably won't be any more cap to work with then than there is this year in relative terms. So, it would be wise to save the truly big contracts with large guaranteed salaries to just the few individuals who are absolutely necessary for the success of the Saints.

B&G.com may have folks that tend to be but-holes from time to time but at least we have loveable but-holes!:mrgreen:

You gotta' protect your money maker!:cool:

I think this guy is taking your advice a bit too far...


http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-L9TFqstQBO...picdump_35.jpg