Per Rotoworld/ Roy Williams
 

Per Rotoworld:

Roy Williams-WR-Lions Jan. 13 - 12:16 pm et

MLive.com's Tom Kowalski believes the Lions will dangle Roy Williams in trade talks leading up to April's NFL Draft.
Williams will enter a contract year in 2008 and Kowalski expects him to leave in 2009 if the Lions can't execute a trade. If Williams is dealt, Calvin Johnson would take over as Detroit's "No. 1" receiver. Williams, the No. 7 overall pick in 2004, should at least command a second-round pick as compensation.
Source: MLive.com
Related: Calvin Johnson

Would you trade are second round pick for him ???

Re: Per Rotoworld/ Roy Williams
 

In a heart beat. Just imagine Colston and Williams paired up in our offense... sick.

Re: Per Rotoworld/ Roy Williams
 

I would not want the Saints to trade their 2nd pick for him. Too many needs on defense. The only way I would reconsider is if the Saints could redo his contract first, mainly to extend it for a couple years. Yes, he would be a nice addition.

Re: Per Rotoworld/ Roy Williams
 

Thats a lot of money at WR. He and Colston is a FA in 2009. sounds like we would get in the same jam as the lions did with so many first round picks at WR.
What the heck put the defense rebuilding project on hold for another year.

Re: Per Rotoworld/ Roy Williams
 

Not unless he suddenly turns into a CB or a MLB. Can he play defensive tackle as well as Haynesworth?

I am truly confused as to why there is any discussion around here about anything other than top flight defensive free agents and defensive coaches

Maybe, just maybe a discussion of a stud OT may be woth having. But I really think we need another offensive skill guy as much as I need another hole in my already holey head.

For receivers the formula is simple: try to resign your own free agents for a reasonable price and get Meachem ready to play. Drew Brees has proved nothing over the last two years more than the fact that if you have the same colored jersey that he does that you will get the ball.

Giving away a 2nd round pick for any offensive skill player is a crime against this team. Each and every free agent move and draft move until about the 4th round needs to be on the defensive side of the ball. Period.

Our production on offense is totally out of whack with our defensive production. So our offseason needs to be unbalanced in the opposite direction.

SFIAH

Re: Per Rotoworld/ Roy Williams
 

I still remember prior to the season suggesting we go get Randy Moss and everyone was against it. Looking back it was dumb not to get him as Colston was our only reliable target. There is a need at receiver period. Should we not address that problem somehow this offseason... it would be a crime against our offense not addressing that weakness.

I bet this board would be a riot if we took a receiver with one of our first day picks. You know at the end of the game, the team with the most points win.

Re: Per Rotoworld/ Roy Williams
 

I am with you paz. if WR is the BPA then so be it

Re: Per Rotoworld/ Roy Williams
 

The Saints do not yet have the reputation required to secure free agents such as Moss. Moss took a pay cut to go to the Pats so that he could win his elusive championship. So I think that point is moot.

The Saints passing offense was in the top three in passing yards, completion percentage, and attempts. Unfortunately they were also #2 in on target drops.

If the passing offense were 26th in the league and the defense were #3, maybe we could have a different conversation. But as it stands, very little needs to be done to the receiving corps or to the offense in general.

I'd be totally ticked off even if the receiver were all world. The defense sucks. It needs to be improved at all costs.

Absolutely. However when you defense cannot stop the explosive play (of which the Saints were #1 in the league), cannot get off the field on third down (ditto), and make insurance salesmen and rookies look like Joe Montana (I guess it's Tom Brady now), then guess what? The other team is the one that ends up with the most points.

The Saints are badly unbalanced at this point. They should only do enough work on the offense to keep it stable. I mean we already have a #1 BPA receiver from last year. The guy got a year to get healthy and to learn the system. Next year Meachum should be that solid #2 receiver. And if not, then the other guys certainly did well enough to keep it stable for another year.

But the defense is horrible. Putrid. Abysmal. An embarrassment. And their current state is what generally destabilizes the offense because the offense feels like it must score a TD each and every time they are on the field.

Of the 8 teams that played this weekend, 6 of them were in the top 10 in scoring defense with 3 in the top 5. Only the Giants are out of the top 15. And they have improved their scoring defense by 9 PPG in the playoffs.

You cannot win championships in this league without solid defense, no matter what kind of offense you have. Offensive juggernauts like the 1999 Rams and the 1989 and 1994 49ers each had top 5 scoring defenses the years that they won the championship.

So when it comes to offense this offseason, my answer is absolutely not. No to receivers, no to backs, no to TE, and no to QBs. Stellar linemen are always considered because they improve the foundation of your team.

The Saints need 6 or 7 new defensive starters. More than half of our starting defensive lineup couldn't get a sniff anywhere else in this league. Our #1 corner is going to lose virtually a complete season next year.

We need standout defensive help and we need it badly. So when you've found me 2 new corners, a stud DT to complement big Hollis, 2 new LBs to go with Fujita, a pair of safeties I can trust, and a nickel guy that can prevent the big play downfield, then and only then can you talk to me about a receiver or any other skill position on offense.

SFIAH

Re: Per Rotoworld/ Roy Williams
 

Seeing how we were favorite coming into this season as legitimate Super Bowl contenders... that doesn't make any sense. Prior to the season we had as good as a chance of anyone to make it to the Superbowl.

In bold.

Then you're just fooling yourself. Just because of offense was good, it doesn't mean it can't be better.


Which is understandable given how atrocious our defense is.



I don't disagree at all with what you're saying.

Should isn't good enough... when the likes of a Roy Williams is on the market and could be had for probably a 2nd rounder, you jump on that. It's going to make our offense that much better and allow our defense to be on the sidelines longer. I hope Meachum can be that guy opposite Colston... but we have no idea what he's capable of. Draft picks are a crap shoot... Roy Williams is not.

[/quote]

Pretty much agree with all of that except that last part. Getting a solid #2 WR is a big concern from my point of view... whether it's via free agency, trade, or draft pick... it is as big as a concern as every defensive position on this team. What would happen if Colston got injured?

Re: Per Rotoworld/ Roy Williams
 

I understand what you are saying, but you can see it 2 ways:
The team with the most points at the end of the game had the most because either their offense scored more points than the other team, or their defense didn't allow the other team to score as much points... a couple defensive stops here and there, and not allowing so many 3rd and long conversions, and this season would've gone very differently.

Re: Per Rotoworld/ Roy Williams
 

If we can take care of our big defensive needs in the FA sur why not. Othewise get young stay young.

Re: Per Rotoworld/ Roy Williams
 

But only if our defense improved. It didn't.


Drops were certainly a problem. However the guy we picked to be that complementary #2 receiver wasn't on the field.

I see the receiver issue quite simply: we've already spent a #1 pick on a receiver. Give the guy a chance to be that #2.

I'm not saying that. I'm saying that the offense is quite good enough and that spending resources to make it better isn't going to improve the overall outlook of the team.

Let me flip the question: How much better will our offense be if we get a defense that actually gets them both the ball and the time to do something with it. One of the reasons that the Patriots were putting up 40-burgers this season is that their defense got off the field and gave the offense the ball back.

The offense and defense need to protect one another. The offense is good enough to handle its end of the load. The defense however...

As for being ticked off for drafting offense high in the draft...
At least we agree on something.

Nope. You spend that pick on a defensive starter. Houston's Demico Ryans was a #2 pick a year ago. The guy is a stud a middle linebacker.

The offense blew its high draft pick wad last year on a receiver. Get that guy ready to play.

Note that I think that Meachum will make an impact in the league. While some questioned the fact that the Saints picked him, most folks agreed that the guy could be a standout wideout in the league. He has Brees to throw him the ball. All he has to do is stay healthy, get some separation and catch it.

We're going to have to give the guy a chance to prove himself. Payton redshirted him this year because he was hurt and the offense was clicking without him. Presumably the offense will click with him too.

As for keeping the ball longer, that wasn't really the problem. Between the defense's inability to get off the field on third down and explosive plays, when they were on the field, often they only got off after a score. There's nothing that the offense can do about that except not to turn the ball over.

Colston was injured during this season. Did the passing attack stop? Brees throws the ball to whichever receiver is out there.

Personally I didn't have a problem with Patton as the #2 receiver. He did the job the vast majority of the time.

If there's a vet that's cheap in free agency like Patton was, then that's fine. But spending a precious draft pick to get yet another receiver? I don't think so.

SFIAH

Re: Per Rotoworld/ Roy Williams
 

We're talking about prior to the season... no one knew our defense was going to be this bad. So still, what you said about the Saints reputation makes no sense.

Agreed. But if it doesn't pan out, then what? Do you realize the lack of depth we have on offense at both receiver and tight end?



Unless it's great, tweaking always can be done. Let me ask you something... say we go get Roy Williams... do you think he will make our team better overall?

Makes perfect sense and I don't disagree with you at all.

I agree our offense is far better than our defense... it still doesn't change the fact I feel we need an upgrade at WR. Who's knows... we might go and sign these impact defensive free agents leaving us to be able to do whatever we want with our draft picks. The draft isn't the only way to build our defense.


Actually I agree on mostly everything you've said... just not to dismiss an offensive player with our draft pick.


We sure could use him as we only have Colston to lean on.

I hope so too.


Even when he was healthy he didn't get to sniff the field.

And by getting quality talent at WR and TE, it will continue to not be a problem.



We might as well not re-sign Colston then when he's available to leave. We could use that money and go sign more defensive players. Just go sign a bunch of 2's, 3's, and 4's and let Brees operate with that all year long.

I thought he was fine... but Patten is no Williams.

It's only precious if it works out... which is no guarantee. Hit or miss draft pick for ProBowl WR? I don't see how it's even close. We'll just agree to disagree.

With all that said, we don't even know if Williams is on the market. But if he was, I would at least inquire about it. He's a gamebreaker... and would instantly make our offense better. But if we chose not to, we need to go sign a solid 2 while we break Meachem into the rotation.

I understand our defense is horrible and we definately need a heavy defensive draft. But that doesn't mean we don't need to address our problems on offense. I'm fine with drafting two defensive players first... but I wouldn't mind us selecting a LB, DT, CB along with a WR either.

Re: Per Rotoworld/ Roy Williams
 

I am with you Papz, on one hand you can get a Ryan and on the other you can get a Lehman....No one knows how it will work out. Last year we taded out of the second round to pick up either Young or Alleman, forget which but they didn't exactly come in right away and make a difference. I like them both for the long term, but we need help right away. Williams is still young, great in my opinion. He had Kitna throwing him the ball with one of the poorest lines in the league. Imagine if he played with Brees. A young reliable, fast wide receiver would be great for our team. To be honest, I don't see why teams don't trade more with picks for proven players who are just a few years in the league.

Free agency hasn't even started yet so I think this argument is a little premature.

Re: Per Rotoworld/ Roy Williams
 

This argument is premature, Boog. But what else are we going to argue about until the start of the 2008 season?

I'm with Saintfan on this. There is no question that Roy Williams
would be great in New Orleans but if the Saints did pick him up they'd not only lose a draft pick, they would also spend a lot of dough on the guy. If the Saints spend big money on one player, please, for the love of Bill, spend it on a defensive stud. Offense is really good right now. The defense needs big changes.

Re: Per Rotoworld/ Roy Williams
 

We have plenty of cap space and you are right, we do need help on the defensive side of the ball. One thing Loomis is good at, is managing the cap. I don't even think we've ever come close to going over. I am sure it's more of Benson's tight (you know what), but he has done well managing it. Receiver is as a need, might not be the biggest, but it is very well a need. I am not satisfied with our group of receivers at all. Patten, Henderson, and Copper are all free agents. Meachem is unproven and Moore is average IMO. We've dropped a lot of balls this year, especially in clutch situations and on 3rd down. Say we got a starting corner, linebacker, defensive tackle and a back-up corner in free agency and still had enough cap space to get Williams, would you do it then? I understand where you guys are coming from with the defensive needs and I think they will be addressed accordingly, which is why I think this would be a good deal for us.

The ironic thing about this if it is true, is that the Lions spent 4 of the last 5 of their first rounders on wide receivers and now they want to get rid of their best.

Re: Per Rotoworld/ Roy Williams
 

Tell me if I'm wrong, but isn't great players supposed to suck up cash? I mean he deserves it much more than Deuce and Grant right about now. Trade for him, I'd love to see us do that. I would have no problem being the Colts a few years back, at least we'd know we'd have something to look forward every game for, thats NOT like Brees forcing a pass or Bush fumbling. We'd have another weapon, more choices the better. But another thing to look at is, trading for Vilma, who wants to be traded. A conditional 3rd or 4th this year or next would be sexy for J Vil

Re: Per Rotoworld/ Roy Williams
 

Last thing we need to do is burn a high pick on another receiver. The depth is fine, Brees will get the ball to anybody wearing the same color, and Roy Williams is a jackass who celebrates after every four yard gain. We should take a big pass on that one.

Re: Per Rotoworld/ Roy Williams
 

how about this. we swap #1s with Lions. 10 to 15. thats a third round value at 350 points and we throw in Stinch. Shift the line around and let our young guys play.

Re: Per Rotoworld/ Roy Williams
 

i may get the boot from this board for this but i think we should trade will smith. we could get roy williams (and maybe a pick). i realize he maybe our best defensive player but our defense is not good.

this is what we would have to build on for D.....harper, fujita, c grant. now we could let gibbs build his 3-4 OR we draft all db's and bank on having such a strong offense that teams will have to throw to stay in the games with us.

i understand that we have a pretty strong offense already but good defenses can hold us down. nobody can hold the patriots down so who cares how good their defense is. besides......if we were that good on offense i believe that our defense would rank 10 spots higher with the same personnel just b/c what is forces teams to do against u to keep up

i know it is just a dream but roy williams is our chance to become the most potent offense in the league! un-stop-able!!!!!!!

Re: Per Rotoworld/ Roy Williams
 

I kind of feel the same way about your third paragraph. However, I read somewhere that Williams isn't going anywhere anymore and he'll start along side Calvin Johnson next year.

Oh well... it was all hypothetical anyways.

Re: Per Rotoworld/ Roy Williams
 

So why suggest it then? Frankly it makes no sense to me.


Good luck with that. No team that's been built on that philosophy has succeeded in winning the championship. Entertaining? Certainly. Championship. Not a chance.

Because just like good pitching stops good hitting, good defenses in the NFL generally stop good offenses, especially in the playoffs.

The 2000 Baltimore Ravens and the 1985 Chicago Bears won championships with dominating defenses and really mediocre offenses. The opposite hasn't really been done ever. Last year the Colts defense in the regular season sucked rocks. However, in the playoffs, their defense became championship caliber.

Look at all the great offenses of the SB era. The Chargers in the 70's, the Colts of today, the Rams of the late 90's, and of course the 2007 Patriots. The teams that won championships had defenses capable of stopping other teams in their tracks. Remember that the Colts won a game against Baltimore in which no TDs were scored.

The bottom line is that thinking thematically about offense means that you're not interested in winning a championship.

And don't think that the Patriots of today are not in that category. Right now they are a top 5 defense in this league to go along with the #1 offense.

And sitting at home watching the playoffs next year, once again.

I'm writing this presuming that you are in fact serious. If this is a joke post, then my apologies.

SFIAH

Re: Per Rotoworld/ Roy Williams
 

Well, who would want Will Smith? Really? he had a bad year last year. He got handled by all the LTs he faced one-on-one. He wasn't our best defensive player last year, that was Fujita.

And I would disagree that having a better offense would make tis defense rank any higher... not when your Achilles heel is the pass.

Re: Per Rotoworld/ Roy Williams
 

Hey if they want to trade up and use him instead of picks I am all for it.

Re: Per Rotoworld/ Roy Williams
 

well boys, i suggest it because i thought that was what this board was about....fans talking about their team and possibilities of the future. plus i know that many of you are true geniuses that belong in the nfl coaching so i wanted to measure myself

i was just stating what i thought would be fun to watch next year and my point is our defense cannot get any worse than it already is. allowing gibbs to bring in extra guys thru the draft may do the D some good. gibbs would have some confidence in the guys he picks and he could draft to suit the style of D he wants to play. the cowboys picked up all LB's and D lineman just three years ago and look what they have turned that into.

my point was not to give up on D....it was to trade one defensive player that would make our offense unpredictable!

Re: Per Rotoworld/ Roy Williams
 

by the way tobias....definately agree that will smith is not our single best player, MM played even better than fujita did this past year...nobody gives MM credit b/c he has no help in the secondary

Re: Per Rotoworld/ Roy Williams
 

That's fine. And welcome. Everyone here is going to bring their opinion to the table.

I'm very firm with mine. The Saints need to improve the defense at all costs. There is nothing on the offensive side of the ball that even ranks in the top 10 of team needs this offseason IMHO. We don't need a #2 receiver. We don't need to replace the backup QB. We don't need another TE. We don't need to shuffle the O-line. We don't need yet another running back in the mix.

None of them are needs. Wants maybe, but not needs.

The Saints defense fails in personnel, coaching, scheme, and technique. Each and every one of the team needs of significance this offseason is on the defensive side of the ball. And they can be prioritized too:

1. Cornerbacks (we need 2 starters)

2. Linebackers (we need 2 starters)

3. D-Line (we need a tackle. In addition we need both ends to step up their games)

4. Safety (if all the above improve, then maybe we can get away with KK and Harper).

Frankly I'm no longer interested in fun to watch. I'm interested in going deep into the playoffs, and winning championships. I want the Saints to be the Patriots and Colts of this league: always in the championship mix and a team destined for greatness.

And it doesn't need to be fun at all. I'd be perfectly happy with running the ball 40 times a game and winning 9-3 like the 1985 Bears used to do.

That's why I get frustrated with many of these offseason threads that discuss the offense. Our offense is championship caliber just the way it is. It's championship caliber even in the fact of injuries. I mean we played the last game of the season with out 4th string undrafted rookie running back, and all the guys did was rush for 100+, receive for 100+, and totally shred what was a championship caliber defense. Yet folks are talking about McFadden. We have an offense that was in the top 3 in passing offense in every category, and yet we're talking about getting another receiver.

It drives me nuts. It drives me nuts because our team is sitting at home watching championship caliber defenses go to the championship.

As long as we're talking about defense I'm fine with it. Defense in free agency, defense in the draft, defense off the street (like the CB from Grambling we signed off the Bears practice squad).

I'd even be game to drop down if we can pick up an extra starter on defense.

But I fear that both Payton and Gibbs have fallen into the (I hate to say it) Haslett syndrome of sticking to "their guys" no matter what. I feel that Young, Simineau, Shanlee, David, and Bullocks at the very minimum should not have been on the field for the Saints. We had a stud middle LB last year: Danny Clark. They guy was let go. Simmons and Evans are better than the guys we had on the field. Same for KK and Lake. And yet week after week Gibbs and Payton trotted out guys that made our defense look awful.

So even if we bring on more folks, will it make a difference? Will it make a difference if David continues to screw up out on the island? Or if Bullocks is out of the play? Or of Simeneau is swallowed up at the line of scrimmage?

We don't need to do anything to the offense. Nothing. Nada. In the big scheme of things it will make not one whit of difference.

Then to do that you propose actually trading one of the players that at least has the potential of performing on the defensive side of the ball. Trade David or Bullocks and then you may be talking about something. But Smith?

I want a defense that can win the game if the offense kneels down with 3 and outs for an entire game. That's the goal. A defense that will stop the opposing offense in its tracks and will score enough points that they can win the game by themselves. I want the Dome Patrol, the 2000 Ravens, the Steel Curtain, the 1985 Bears.

There's absolutely no offense required for that to happen.

Help me build that defense. Help me find a way to convince Payton and Gibbs that that's the path to a dynasty. Spend your free agent wad on Haynesworth, Samuel, or Briggs. Spend every draft pick this April on defensive studs. Scour the practice squads, restricted free agent lists, and undrafted free agent pools for guys that fly to ball, create pressure, and generate turnovers. Find the next Antonio Cromartie who was drafted so low because he was injured in college.

Find a way to create a defense that works. A defense that is worthy of the offense that Payton has built over the last two years.

A defense that can finally bring a championship to a fanbase that has starved for a whiff of a Superbowl for over 40 years.

Help me do that.

SFIAH

Re: Per Rotoworld/ Roy Williams
 

i agree with you! who wouldnt want a defense like the ones named above....the problem is that defenses like that are not built every year....not even every decade, they are few and far between. that is why they all have names. we dont even need a defense that strong! (although i would love it). the rams D was not that good in 99-00.....the colts were not THAT good last year (although they played well in the Playoffs)....the Packers in the 90's....the Cowboys in the 90's.....yea they all had good defenses, it just does not take the talent that you are talking about. there are cap issues especially when you have the offensive players that we have already that keep us from having that kind of defense even with the increase in cap room from 2 years ago.

lets dream....but within what is possible, you forget that we brought in an offensive coach

Re: Per Rotoworld/ Roy Williams
 

My friend, you've wandered into the wrong area. My longtime quote on this board was:

The 2007 Colts finally broke the string. But that means that you are incorrect on each and every other team that you name here starting with the Rams. You can quickly get the data from here:

Pro Football & NFL History - Pro-Football-Reference.com

The Rams that year were #4 in scoring defense in the league.

The string was broken here. During the regular season their defense was terrible. But in the playoffs they played like at top 5 defense, which BTW they followed up last season with a top 3 ranking.

#1 scoring defense the year they won, #5 the year they lost to the Broncos.

#5, #2, and #3 those three years.
No. They all had great defenses. Top 5 defenses. It's a theme that's so consistent that it cannot be denied.

If the Giants win this year, they again will be the aberation because they ranked #17. The Pats are #4.

You don't need an allstar team to have a great defense. Look at the Minnesota Vikings of the past 2 years. Their run defense is superb. Can you name more than one player on their defense?

It takes a commitment to build such a defense. Everyone from the owner, GM, head coach, coordinator, scouts, and players have to decide that having great defense is the cornerstone of the franchise, the path to greatness. Set a simple goal:

The New Orleans Saints will have a top 5 scoring defense in the NFL consistently.

Now figure out how to do it. The Saints would not have a top 5 offense without Brees. The defense needs a similar player in terms of talent, leadership, and drive. Spend the money there.

You need young guys with talent and a burning desire to succeed. Draft them or bring them in as free agents. If they don't work out, then sit them and get someone else.

You have to find a scheme that works. Putting David out on an island doesn't work. So adjust or get someone out there who can function on the island.

Start with commitment. Then stock with talent. Then coach them up. Make it happen.

It happened on the offensive side of the ball in a single year. It can be done on defense. Not every position needs a pro bowler. But you need a squad that works together to achieve the goal.

Finally Payton is a head coach. In this league you can't just play offense. Funnily enough you can just play defense and win. Payton and Gibbs have to commit to building such a defense at all costs. Payton should want to do it because he can use that defense as his security blanket for his offense.

And I counter that Brian Billick was the offensive coordinator of the most prolific offense in the NFL. A scoring record that stood for a decade until broken by the Patriots last month.

All the guy did was have the #1 defense in the NFL and win a championship in 2000.

The Saints have to attain the will to be a defensive juggernaut. Everything else will flow from that.

SFIAH

Re: Per Rotoworld/ Roy Williams
 

The Saints have multiple Achilles heels on defense. They give up the big play. They can't consistently get to the QB. They can't get off the field on 3rd down. They don't generate turnovers.

In 2006 they couldn't stop the run. They were the #3 pass defense in the NFL.

In 2007 they stopped the run and gave up the pass.

The defense will not improve until they stop the run, the pass, and the big play consistently. And they need to generate turnovers.

SFIAH

Re: Per Rotoworld/ Roy Williams
 

really.....cause you seem to be proving my point for me!



now that makes them as good as the dome patrol??



that does not make them them the 00 raven!!






more to my point!!

yea.....without looking it up, i can name most of them


i love it! cant agree more!!




SFIAH[/QUOTE]

i think we agree more than we disagree.....draft all defensive players!!! i am all in, again my only point is that our defense sucks and will smith is not gonna make the diffence all by himself. he can be replaced, before we break the bank on his new contract lets look at options. we cannot pay him the kind of money that c grant is making and expect to bring in other players for the defense while remaining under the cap all at the same time

Re: Per Rotoworld/ Roy Williams
 

look....we agree, we need some defensive players! many of them! we cannot win without some playmakers on the defense. that does not mean we need the defense of the decade to win ballgames. we dont even need the best defense in the league for the year! (you say top 5--i agree) we just need some competitive players and good coaching that will allow our OFFENSE to win the ballgame for us. anyway....nice talk, i see you know your stuff anyway!

Re: Per Rotoworld/ Roy Williams
 

I wanted to come back and apologize to procto. I misread his point in his previous post comparing other SB winning defenses to the top defenses like the 2000 Ravens. I thought he was saying that the Rams and the others were "not that good". But I see now that he meant relative to those #1 defenses.

Sorry again.

SFIAH

Re: Per Rotoworld/ Roy Williams
 

Alright people look at it this way.

If we shore up some defensive areas in FA and we can get him for a 2nd NEXT year would be great. If not then I am worried about pending a first day draft pick on a player that is not as bad of a need as defensive players are. However there is no way to be sure that whoever we draft in the second round would even start.

We do not know what the FO is thinking, if Meachem is going to be good then we are fine and do not need Williams. With all the weapons we have Bush in the slot, Moore, Copper, both TE's I think the pick can be spent better elsewhere, unless we can do a lot in Free Agency.

Someone said we have a lack of depth at TE. Um, NO we do not. Eric Johnson and Billy MIller are both very, very good TE's. Not great mind you, but they are very good.

Re: Per Rotoworld/ Roy Williams
 

its cool saintsfan.....no harsh feelings here