Terry Donahues comments

WhoDat205 · 11-19-2007, 01:31 PM

Originally Posted by BooBirdSaint

I'm sure I'll get boo'd for this but the Saints could have had Randy Moss next to Colston this year. Think about that. I think he signed for 3mil with NE and he is a UNFA in 2008. I'm guessing Payton still thinks character(style) over talent(substance). Why not take a chance on someone with a greater upside talentwise...

I may be wrong, but didn't Randy want to play for the Pats? Isn't that why he took so little $$$? I'm not sure we could have signed him.

BooBirdSaint · 11-19-2007, 01:53 PM

Originally Posted by WhoDat205

I may be wrong, but didn't Randy want to play for the Pats? Isn't that why he took so little $$$? I'm not sure we could have signed him.

Who wouldn't want to play for the Pats!!! Hello SB contender for the last decade. The Pats weren't in love with Randy as they only offered a one year contract (I think Brady restructred his deal to freeup the money) so he will be URFA in 08. Plus Moss was stuck with Aaron Brooks as his QB in Raiderland!!! Thats not a hard choice to make. Mmm Bradey vs who ever the QB of the month is in La La land... All I'm saying is that going into the season with Colston and a group of nothings we should have been looking at all our options at reciever, Moss included. But as usual the driver for this team is character guys(funny for the most part these guys are cheaper...) over impact talent. Funny how things worked out. Pats are undefeated with Moss leading the NFL recevers and were stuck in reverse... See the Pats know how to run a winning franchise.

WhoDat205 · 11-19-2007, 02:14 PM

Originally Posted by BooBirdSaint

Who wouldn't want to play for the Pats!!! Hello SB contender for the last decade. The Pats weren't in love with Randy as they only offered a one year contract (I think Brady restructred his deal to freeup the money) so he will be URFA in 08. Plus Moss was stuck with Aaron Brooks as his QB in Raiderland!!! Thats not a hard choice to make. Mmm Bradey vs who ever the QB of the month is in La La land... All I'm saying is that going into the season with Colston and a group of nothings we should have been looking at all our options at reciever, Moss included. But as usual the driver for this team is character guys(funny for the most part these guys are cheaper...) over impact talent. Funny how things worked out. Pats are undefeated with Moss leading the NFL recevers and were stuck in reverse... See the Pats know how to run a winning franchise.

I'm not disagreeing with your points, all I'm sayin' is that Moss may not have come to play in NO even if they did court him. Plus, they did at least make an effort to address WR in the Draft, regardless of you feelings on the pick.

BooBirdSaint · 11-20-2007, 08:05 AM

Originally Posted by WhoDat205

I'm not disagreeing with your points, all I'm sayin' is that Moss may not have come to play in NO even if they did court him. Plus, they did at least make an effort to address WR in the Draft, regardless of you feelings on the pick.

That could very well be the case. But last year this team was the leading offense in the NFL and what reciever would not have licked his chops to come in a play for a passing first team what was lighting it up. We also were viewed as a contender for the SB (preseason) so our sunshine value would have outweighed our negitives (40 years of losing -small market ect). Not saying that we would have payed to get Moss but we could have. In the end its moot as we wouldn't be able to touch him now (think 16-0 & SB vs. maybe 8-8 & no preseason)...

11-19-2007, 01:31 PM	#1
WhoDat205 Prediction Pain Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Birmingham, AL Posts: 1,082 Blog Entries: 2	Re: Terry Donahues comments Originally Posted by BooBirdSaint I'm sure I'll get boo'd for this but the Saints could have had Randy Moss next to Colston this year. Think about that. I think he signed for 3mil with NE and he is a UNFA in 2008. I'm guessing Payton still thinks character(style) over talent(substance). Why not take a chance on someone with a greater upside talentwise... I may be wrong, but didn't Randy want to play for the Pats? Isn't that why he took so little $$$? I'm not sure we could have signed him.

11-19-2007, 01:53 PM	#2
BooBirdSaint 100th Post Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Houston Posts: 273	Re: Terry Donahues comments Originally Posted by WhoDat205 I may be wrong, but didn't Randy want to play for the Pats? Isn't that why he took so little $$$? I'm not sure we could have signed him. Who wouldn't want to play for the Pats!!! Hello SB contender for the last decade. The Pats weren't in love with Randy as they only offered a one year contract (I think Brady restructred his deal to freeup the money) so he will be URFA in 08. Plus Moss was stuck with Aaron Brooks as his QB in Raiderland!!! Thats not a hard choice to make. Mmm Bradey vs who ever the QB of the month is in La La land... All I'm saying is that going into the season with Colston and a group of nothings we should have been looking at all our options at reciever, Moss included. But as usual the driver for this team is character guys(funny for the most part these guys are cheaper...) over impact talent. Funny how things worked out. Pats are undefeated with Moss leading the NFL recevers and were stuck in reverse... See the Pats know how to run a winning franchise.
	Last edited by BooBirdSaint; 11-19-2007 at 01:56 PM.. Reason: Meachem fan club

11-19-2007, 02:14 PM	#3
WhoDat205 Prediction Pain Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Birmingham, AL Posts: 1,082 Blog Entries: 2	Re: Terry Donahues comments Originally Posted by BooBirdSaint Who wouldn't want to play for the Pats!!! Hello SB contender for the last decade. The Pats weren't in love with Randy as they only offered a one year contract (I think Brady restructred his deal to freeup the money) so he will be URFA in 08. Plus Moss was stuck with Aaron Brooks as his QB in Raiderland!!! Thats not a hard choice to make. Mmm Bradey vs who ever the QB of the month is in La La land... All I'm saying is that going into the season with Colston and a group of nothings we should have been looking at all our options at reciever, Moss included. But as usual the driver for this team is character guys(funny for the most part these guys are cheaper...) over impact talent. Funny how things worked out. Pats are undefeated with Moss leading the NFL recevers and were stuck in reverse... See the Pats know how to run a winning franchise. I'm not disagreeing with your points, all I'm sayin' is that Moss may not have come to play in NO even if they did court him. Plus, they did at least make an effort to address WR in the Draft, regardless of you feelings on the pick.

11-20-2007, 08:05 AM	#4
BooBirdSaint 100th Post Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Houston Posts: 273	Re: Terry Donahues comments Originally Posted by WhoDat205 I'm not disagreeing with your points, all I'm sayin' is that Moss may not have come to play in NO even if they did court him. Plus, they did at least make an effort to address WR in the Draft, regardless of you feelings on the pick. That could very well be the case. But last year this team was the leading offense in the NFL and what reciever would not have licked his chops to come in a play for a passing first team what was lighting it up. We also were viewed as a contender for the SB (preseason) so our sunshine value would have outweighed our negitives (40 years of losing -small market ect). Not saying that we would have payed to get Moss but we could have. In the end its moot as we wouldn't be able to touch him now (think 16-0 & SB vs. maybe 8-8 & no preseason)...

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode