HMMM

mighty12 · 02-13-2007, 06:46 AM

We've heard the case for and against Moss, and I personally think Moss is done, but what about another cheaper Raiders reciever who might be on the block? Jerry Porter has decent size and speed good hands, and he is about to make 1 mil. in salary for the 2007 season. As a number two Reciever next to Colston and Henderson I think we would have a complete corps of recievers, and if Hon is out

then we MUST get a sure handed WR for Brees. I also still like Dwayne Bowe because he showed after eye surgery he can now catch.

hagan714 · 02-13-2007, 06:52 AM

I think most of us who are down on Moss would not want Porter either. It is not his skills, it is his head. Though he might be a recyled option that could work. Low pick and we get some cash to take him off their hands.

mighty12 · 02-13-2007, 07:13 AM

I think in a Payton system he won't have time to mess up off the field. He will be working too hard.

hagan714 · 02-13-2007, 07:19 AM

Moss for 3 then Porter for a 5th? sounds okay
If they kick in 250,000/year for the remainder of his contract (3 years) I might bump it to a 4th.
2009 1000000.00
2008 1000000.00
2007 1000000.00

mighty12 · 02-13-2007, 07:22 AM

Exactly......Very cheap 2nd tier WR, if it doesn't work out no big loss. If we do try for him I would like to see Payton go after strong sure handed TE.

hagan714 · 02-13-2007, 09:05 AM

Porter, the other Raiders receiver, presents a different set of problems. He's scheduled to make $1 million in salary in 2007, which is appealing to a number of teams. But his potential accelerations add up to $4.3 million and that means if the Raiders trade him, they will actually take a salary-cap hit of $3.3 million. With $6 million of space they could handle the trade, but from a business sense they might be better off trading both receivers if the compensation was fair. Moss creates $7.7 millions of cap space and Porter costs $3.3 millions, so in the end Oakland could realize $4.4 million of space and a couple of decent draft picks or players.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/9988414

4.3 in potential accelerations there is the loop hole

SaintPauly · 02-13-2007, 02:49 PM

I just think that Randy likes being a Raider. He doesn't like losing, but being a Raider is who he is supposed to be. His personallity fits their profile for the most part. Not to mention their fans. Talk about over the top.

CheramieIII · 02-13-2007, 05:24 PM

Isn't this guy a troublemaker too or am I just imaging that. The Raiders over the last several years have tried to put together a team of troublemakers to mirror the teams of of the past but what they don't realize is that the old troublemakers played football balls out and they did it all the time and for not much money, for them it wasn't about the money or number or catches it was about the game.

Most players don't play for the game anymore, just the money.

fact-o-bake · 02-13-2007, 07:18 PM

Instead of these ego maniac wideouts, how about about Kevin Curtis of the Rams. He's fast as hell, tough, and most of all not a trouble maker. Plus he should be a free agent this year.

Myth · 02-13-2007, 07:45 PM

Originally Posted by hagan714

I think most of us who are down on Moss would not want Porter either. It is not his skills, it is his head. Though he might be a recyled option that could work. Low pick and we get some cash to take him off their hands.

Agreed. If you don't want Moss, you don't want Porter.

02-13-2007, 06:46 AM	#1
mighty12 500th Post Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 980 Blog Entries: 1	HMMM We've heard the case for and against Moss, and I personally think Moss is done, but what about another cheaper Raiders reciever who might be on the block? Jerry Porter has decent size and speed good hands, and he is about to make 1 mil. in salary for the 2007 season. As a number two Reciever next to Colston and Henderson I think we would have a complete corps of recievers, and if Hon is out then we MUST get a sure handed WR for Brees. I also still like Dwayne Bowe because he showed after eye surgery he can now catch.

02-13-2007, 06:52 AM	#2
hagan714 LB Mentallity Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 15,870 Blog Entries: 68	RE: HMMM I think most of us who are down on Moss would not want Porter either. It is not his skills, it is his head. Though he might be a recyled option that could work. Low pick and we get some cash to take him off their hands.

02-13-2007, 07:13 AM	#3
mighty12 500th Post Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 980 Blog Entries: 1	RE: HMMM I think in a Payton system he won't have time to mess up off the field. He will be working too hard.

02-13-2007, 07:19 AM	#4
hagan714 LB Mentallity Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 15,870 Blog Entries: 68	RE: HMMM Moss for 3 then Porter for a 5th? sounds okay If they kick in 250,000/year for the remainder of his contract (3 years) I might bump it to a 4th. 2009 1000000.00 2008 1000000.00 2007 1000000.00

02-13-2007, 07:22 AM	#5
mighty12 500th Post Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 980 Blog Entries: 1	RE: HMMM Exactly......Very cheap 2nd tier WR, if it doesn't work out no big loss. If we do try for him I would like to see Payton go after strong sure handed TE.

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey

02-13-2007, 09:05 AM	#6
hagan714 LB Mentallity Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 15,870 Blog Entries: 68	RE: HMMM Porter, the other Raiders receiver, presents a different set of problems. He's scheduled to make $1 million in salary in 2007, which is appealing to a number of teams. But his potential accelerations add up to $4.3 million and that means if the Raiders trade him, they will actually take a salary-cap hit of $3.3 million. With $6 million of space they could handle the trade, but from a business sense they might be better off trading both receivers if the compensation was fair. Moss creates $7.7 millions of cap space and Porter costs $3.3 millions, so in the end Oakland could realize $4.4 million of space and a couple of decent draft picks or players. http://www.nfl.com/news/story/9988414 4.3 in potential accelerations there is the loop hole
	"We may have lost the game, but you'll be hurting tomorrow." Doug Atkins

02-13-2007, 02:49 PM	#7
SaintPauly Senior Citizen Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Gulfport, MS Posts: 3,180 Blog Entries: 1	RE: HMMM I just think that Randy likes being a Raider. He doesn't like losing, but being a Raider is who he is supposed to be. His personallity fits their profile for the most part. Not to mention their fans. Talk about over the top.

02-13-2007, 05:24 PM	#8
CheramieIII Fan Since 1967 Join Date: May 2004 Location: Nomad Posts: 7,487 Blog Entries: 3	RE: HMMM Isn't this guy a troublemaker too or am I just imaging that. The Raiders over the last several years have tried to put together a team of troublemakers to mirror the teams of of the past but what they don't realize is that the old troublemakers played football balls out and they did it all the time and for not much money, for them it wasn't about the money or number or catches it was about the game. Most players don't play for the game anymore, just the money.

02-13-2007, 07:18 PM	#9
fact-o-bake 100th Post Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 136	RE: HMMM Instead of these ego maniac wideouts, how about about Kevin Curtis of the Rams. He's fast as hell, tough, and most of all not a trouble maker. Plus he should be a free agent this year.
fact-o-bake 100th Post Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 136

02-13-2007, 07:45 PM	#10
Myth Rookie Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 1	Re: RE: HMMM Originally Posted by hagan714 I think most of us who are down on Moss would not want Porter either. It is not his skills, it is his head. Though he might be a recyled option that could work. Low pick and we get some cash to take him off their hands. Agreed. If you don't want Moss, you don't want Porter.
Myth Rookie Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 1