saints may go after mayberrry

saintswhodi · 03-03-2005, 10:54 AM

Thanks papz, right on.

Gumbo, if you are implying that Vick is the QB McNabb is, well whatever. Mayberry is not even close to the best guard available, he is 31, and 5th ranked of all free agent guards. Paps hit it right on, you can draft a G and develop him and we would be better off, and paying less. And yes he made it cause of McNabb again. Someone from that line had to make it. Vick gets sacked as much as anyone else, unlike McNabb. Plus 2 years ago, wasn\'t Vick hurt and the team like 5-11 or something?Sems like you wouldn\'t have a pro-bowler from a team like that.

Scotty, obviously the sarcasm of what I said was wasted on you. Nice job.

Even though G isn\'t a \"need\", if it can be improved there\'s nothing wrong with looking there.

Hhhhmmm, seems like that was said about another position and met with angry retorts. \"We don\'t need to look there, we have other needs and such.\" \"It\'s dumb to think about looking at that position when we have so many other holes.\" My my.

FireVenturi · 03-03-2005, 10:56 AM

Mayberry struggles and has trouble with quick defensive tackles. Limited mobility is becoming increasingly evident as Mayberry has difficulties changing direction and getting out on the sweep or screen passes.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why the hell do we want this guy? Are we suffering from sign anybodyitis???? :mad2:

I dont think he is a big upgrade. It would be nice to upgrade instead of attempting to sign anybody.

LKelley67 · 03-03-2005, 11:05 AM

don\'t get upset FV, you said it, \"attempting to sign\". this guy is on the high end after fred miller on their list. probably end up with someone with a catchier name and cheaper price... Tupe Peko Indy UFA

FireVenturi · 03-03-2005, 11:08 AM

I know... but our biggest need is OT, wait....could SUlly be an upgrade over Rliey?

GumboBC · 03-03-2005, 11:13 AM

It\'s amazing for me to hear folks talk about a 2-time probowl offensive guard that way. The guy was an alternate in the probowl in 2004 and played int the probowl in 2002.

It\'s also amazing for me to hear that some folks think good offensive guard grow on trees.

Kendal Jacox is nowhere near the player Mayberry is. For the most part, the inside of our line didn\'t open up any holes for Deuce. And Deuce ran almost exclusively up the middle. I don\'t know what happened to Jacox last year, but he sucked.

Pure and simple, it\'s a definate upgrade.

Danno · 03-03-2005, 11:34 AM

Its typical of the \"we suck and always will\" crowd. It really doesn\'t matter who we talk to, who we have in to visit, or who we eventually sign, there will be many that will blast that player with every possible negative their exhaustive little searches discover, while ignoring every positive. I\'ve seen it time and time again. And every player we don\'t sign, just the opposite will happen.
Its the typical saint\'s fans M.O.

LKelley67 · 03-03-2005, 11:41 AM

from neworleansprofootbal.com-

Big, tough lineman for the Eagles will visit New Orleans. Mayberry, 31, was a first round pick of the Eagles in 1996 and made the Pro Bowl in 2002. The Saints are looking for a dominant run blocker to replace Victor Riley. A dominant run blocker but a mediocre pass blocker and limited in space, he may not fit in at tackle at this point in his career but would be a great veteran option off the bench at guard where Kendyl Jacox and Montrae Holland have missed some time with injury. Mayberry himself has seen his share of injuries recently and was not a full time starter in 2003.

saintswhodi · 03-03-2005, 11:45 AM

Yeah, that certainly sounds like a guy you should get excited about. Especially this part:

he may not fit in at tackle at this point in his career but would be a great veteran option off the bench at guard where Kendyl Jacox and Montrae Holland have missed some time with injury

This move should turn us right around. Why should anyone be skeptical?

Mayberry himself has seen his share of injuries recently and was not a full time starter in 2003.

Oh yes, I am sold. This is the guy we need. Why would anyone question this move? Screw LBs, Dts, Ts. We don;t need that. A backup guard is the key.

Its typical of the \"we suck and always will\" crowd. It really doesn\'t matter who we talk to, who we have in to visit, or who we eventually sign, there will be many that will blast that player with every possible negative their exhaustive little searches discover, while ignoring every positive. I\'ve seen it time and time again. And every player we don\'t sign, just the opposite will happen.
Its the typical saint\'s fans M.O.

Very interesting coming from the guy who kicked anyone who didn\'t wanna talk about LB as our biggest and most important need.

papz · 03-03-2005, 11:46 AM

It\'s also amazing for me to hear that some folks think good offensive guard grow on trees.

Go do you homework on offensive guards in this league, and you\'d be surprised Gumbo... VERY SURPRISED. If I\'m correct the top guards Rivera and Wahle were lower round picks and look at the contracts they just signed. Look at Holland a 4th round pick and you aren\'t complaining about him. Todd McClure, former LSU Tiger was a lower round pick and starting for Atlanta. Trust me, I can go on and on with this one... but I will probably be late for work if I do.

2003 New Orleans Saints 351 1641 4.7 76 8 16(20+ yards carries) 69 (longest run)

Aren\'t these ProBowl numbers? Wait didn\'t Bentley, Holland, and Jacox start on this line? Didn\'t Deuce while injured this year still have a 4 yards per carry and 1000 yards rushing with this same line?

In other words, let\'s go dish out a 20 million plus contract for an offensive guard. Because obviously it\'s been proven that our center-guard combo is completely worthless. I mean why go sign a stud left/right tackle when we can have 4 guards starting at the same time.

It\'s also is amazing when guys have one bad year, ala Trotter, Jacox or whoever, people write them off. Then they rebound and make everyone look like dummies. It\'s also amazing that when guys have one good year ala Antonio Pierce and a rebounding Trotter, people are all over the bandwagon.

And when we talk about veteran leadership on our line, then why did we get rid of Fotenot? Didn\'t we sign a vet the other year by the name of Wayne Gandy? Where has his leadership or skill led us?

Why are we talking about guards anyways? I rather spend money on other positions on this team. We\'ve been complaining for months about getting a safety, linebacker, offensive tackle, and a DT... why are we arguing about a 31 year old guard that we don\'t even need? :casstet:

saintswhodi · 03-03-2005, 11:50 AM

Why are we talking about guards anyways? I rather spend money on other positions on this team. We\'ve been complaining for months about getting a safety, linebacker, offensive tackle, and a DT... why are we arguing about a 31 year old guard that we don\'t even need?

Exactly why Danno\'s post was the most shocking to me in this thread. He hammered me about talking about positions other than defense repeatedly, and now he is railing on those unsatisfied with this crap move. Danno, any insight as to why this is?

03-03-2005, 10:54 AM	#21
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	saints may go after mayberrry Thanks papz, right on. Gumbo, if you are implying that Vick is the QB McNabb is, well whatever. Mayberry is not even close to the best guard available, he is 31, and 5th ranked of all free agent guards. Paps hit it right on, you can draft a G and develop him and we would be better off, and paying less. And yes he made it cause of McNabb again. Someone from that line had to make it. Vick gets sacked as much as anyone else, unlike McNabb. Plus 2 years ago, wasn\'t Vick hurt and the team like 5-11 or something?Sems like you wouldn\'t have a pro-bowler from a team like that. Scotty, obviously the sarcasm of what I said was wasted on you. Nice job. Even though G isn\'t a \"need\", if it can be improved there\'s nothing wrong with looking there. Hhhhmmm, seems like that was said about another position and met with angry retorts. \"We don\'t need to look there, we have other needs and such.\" \"It\'s dumb to think about looking at that position when we have so many other holes.\" My my.

03-03-2005, 10:56 AM	#22
FireVenturi Cold as Ice! Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Da Big Easy Posts: 2,978	saints may go after mayberrry Mayberry struggles and has trouble with quick defensive tackles. Limited mobility is becoming increasingly evident as Mayberry has difficulties changing direction and getting out on the sweep or screen passes. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Why the hell do we want this guy? Are we suffering from sign anybodyitis???? :mad2: I dont think he is a big upgrade. It would be nice to upgrade instead of attempting to sign anybody.

03-03-2005, 11:05 AM	#23
LKelley67 1000 Posts + Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: baton rouge Posts: 2,540	saints may go after mayberrry don\'t get upset FV, you said it, \"attempting to sign\". this guy is on the high end after fred miller on their list. probably end up with someone with a catchier name and cheaper price... Tupe Peko Indy UFA

03-03-2005, 11:08 AM	#24
FireVenturi Cold as Ice! Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Da Big Easy Posts: 2,978	saints may go after mayberrry I know... but our biggest need is OT, wait....could SUlly be an upgrade over Rliey?

03-03-2005, 11:13 AM	#25
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	saints may go after mayberrry It\'s amazing for me to hear folks talk about a 2-time probowl offensive guard that way. The guy was an alternate in the probowl in 2004 and played int the probowl in 2002. It\'s also amazing for me to hear that some folks think good offensive guard grow on trees. Kendal Jacox is nowhere near the player Mayberry is. For the most part, the inside of our line didn\'t open up any holes for Deuce. And Deuce ran almost exclusively up the middle. I don\'t know what happened to Jacox last year, but he sucked. Pure and simple, it\'s a definate upgrade.
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616

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

03-03-2005, 11:34 AM	#26
Danno Truth Addict Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Spanish Fort, AL (via NO and B/R) Posts: 24,723	saints may go after mayberrry Its typical of the \"we suck and always will\" crowd. It really doesn\'t matter who we talk to, who we have in to visit, or who we eventually sign, there will be many that will blast that player with every possible negative their exhaustive little searches discover, while ignoring every positive. I\'ve seen it time and time again. And every player we don\'t sign, just the opposite will happen. Its the typical saint\'s fans M.O.

03-03-2005, 11:41 AM	#27
LKelley67 1000 Posts + Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: baton rouge Posts: 2,540	saints may go after mayberrry from neworleansprofootbal.com- Big, tough lineman for the Eagles will visit New Orleans. Mayberry, 31, was a first round pick of the Eagles in 1996 and made the Pro Bowl in 2002. The Saints are looking for a dominant run blocker to replace Victor Riley. A dominant run blocker but a mediocre pass blocker and limited in space, he may not fit in at tackle at this point in his career but would be a great veteran option off the bench at guard where Kendyl Jacox and Montrae Holland have missed some time with injury. Mayberry himself has seen his share of injuries recently and was not a full time starter in 2003.

03-03-2005, 11:45 AM	#28
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	saints may go after mayberrry Yeah, that certainly sounds like a guy you should get excited about. Especially this part: he may not fit in at tackle at this point in his career but would be a great veteran option off the bench at guard where Kendyl Jacox and Montrae Holland have missed some time with injury This move should turn us right around. Why should anyone be skeptical? Mayberry himself has seen his share of injuries recently and was not a full time starter in 2003. Oh yes, I am sold. This is the guy we need. Why would anyone question this move? Screw LBs, Dts, Ts. We don;t need that. A backup guard is the key. Its typical of the \"we suck and always will\" crowd. It really doesn\'t matter who we talk to, who we have in to visit, or who we eventually sign, there will be many that will blast that player with every possible negative their exhaustive little searches discover, while ignoring every positive. I\'ve seen it time and time again. And every player we don\'t sign, just the opposite will happen. Its the typical saint\'s fans M.O. Very interesting coming from the guy who kicked anyone who didn\'t wanna talk about LB as our biggest and most important need.

03-03-2005, 11:46 AM	#29
papz Problem? Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: New Orleans Posts: 11,754	saints may go after mayberrry It\'s also amazing for me to hear that some folks think good offensive guard grow on trees. Go do you homework on offensive guards in this league, and you\'d be surprised Gumbo... VERY SURPRISED. If I\'m correct the top guards Rivera and Wahle were lower round picks and look at the contracts they just signed. Look at Holland a 4th round pick and you aren\'t complaining about him. Todd McClure, former LSU Tiger was a lower round pick and starting for Atlanta. Trust me, I can go on and on with this one... but I will probably be late for work if I do. 2003 New Orleans Saints 351 1641 4.7 76 8 16(20+ yards carries) 69 (longest run) Aren\'t these ProBowl numbers? Wait didn\'t Bentley, Holland, and Jacox start on this line? Didn\'t Deuce while injured this year still have a 4 yards per carry and 1000 yards rushing with this same line? In other words, let\'s go dish out a 20 million plus contract for an offensive guard. Because obviously it\'s been proven that our center-guard combo is completely worthless. I mean why go sign a stud left/right tackle when we can have 4 guards starting at the same time. It\'s also is amazing when guys have one bad year, ala Trotter, Jacox or whoever, people write them off. Then they rebound and make everyone look like dummies. It\'s also amazing that when guys have one good year ala Antonio Pierce and a rebounding Trotter, people are all over the bandwagon. And when we talk about veteran leadership on our line, then why did we get rid of Fotenot? Didn\'t we sign a vet the other year by the name of Wayne Gandy? Where has his leadership or skill led us? Why are we talking about guards anyways? I rather spend money on other positions on this team. We\'ve been complaining for months about getting a safety, linebacker, offensive tackle, and a DT... why are we arguing about a 31 year old guard that we don\'t even need? :casstet:
	Everyone is entitled to be stupid, but some abuse the privilege. All little common sense goes a long way.

03-03-2005, 11:50 AM	#30
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	saints may go after mayberrry Why are we talking about guards anyways? I rather spend money on other positions on this team. We\'ve been complaining for months about getting a safety, linebacker, offensive tackle, and a DT... why are we arguing about a 31 year old guard that we don\'t even need? Exactly why Danno\'s post was the most shocking to me in this thread. He hammered me about talking about positions other than defense repeatedly, and now he is railing on those unsatisfied with this crap move. Danno, any insight as to why this is?