Youre right, getting rid of his pro bowl guard, his main WR and his top 5 TE surely means Drew is staying
Since this is all speculation, what happens if Cooper and Mariota are on the board at 6, and then the Saints come calling. What do the Jets do? Do they pick Mariota or go with Brees?
Brees is signed through 2016 and has received all of his guaranteed money. He is due about $20 mil (slightly under) in 2015 and 2016. Not sure if he has any no-trade clauses in the deal. So after overpaying him a lot early in his contract it is pretty doubtful the Saints would want to get rid of him now.
Right. They're juggling the cap. They just signed Spiller. Payton and Brees go hand in hand, and they're not done yet. I wish we could grab him. Just not gonna even hope for that right now.
Brees' talent is undeniable, and if we were a dome team, it wouldn't even be a choice. But he's 36, and he'd be playing in dramatically different conditions than where he's been for the past decade plus (i.e., cold outdoors as opposed to NoCal and the Superdome), both home and away (except for Miami). The change could have no effect on his play (considering that he did his college work at Purdue). But it could significantly alter his play style and reduce his longevity. That's all not to say that I wouldn't do the deal - it is Drew freaking Brees - it's just more things to think about, and things I'd want to know before jumping head first.
I would love for this to happen. As long as we dont mortgage our cap so that in coming years we cannot keep Mo, Sheldon etc then I would be all for it. With the defence we now have and the offensive weapons. We just need a steady player under centre. Even an ageing Brees would elevate our offence beyond what we can imagine. This could make us contenders in one move.
That's the million dollar question right there. I say no. My reasoning is probably gonna get shit on, but I don't know if he's gonna be the Drew Brees we all expect. Playing cold, outdoor December and January football is not his strong suit. His numbers dip pretty significantly when he's outdoors in the elements, and the meadowlands does no one any favors in that department. Also, it's two years and that's it. Square one. It's a real tight shot that can set us back into dark times pretty quick if it doesn't work. I've flip flopped on this like 50 times. Right now I'm feeling like its a bad idea. Take the kid if he's there. Develop him. Think long term. Have faith in fitz being our Dilfer with the rest of the squad being as talented as it is. Idk man. It's a way tougher decision in my mind than I think most people here believe it is. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Not sure..... SB competitors for the next 2 yrs, sure. However the price could be a SB contenders for 12 years, but not the first 2. For the latter to be true, MM has to be as good as we hope he is AND he has to be developed properly. Probability of both being so is actually pretty decent. IDK.... I'd probably go with MM if he is available.
You mean SoCal and yes, that's definitely something to consider. He's played almost his whole pro career in mild weather conditions. Although, I don't think the weather really would affect him all that much because he's got an insanely gifted arm, thows a really tight spiral and has a quick, compact throwing motion.
This is a tough question. I want long term success. Brees is short term fun, but would most likely put us in a position to win now. I'd go with Brees and take a qb in the late rounds. Never know what you may find in the sixth???
I hate the fucker, but this sounds like Brady's offseason every year for the past decade. I see your logic but maybe they're fully expecting Brees to elevate that team. He's one of the few QBs that I think could do that.
I don't necessarily think getting an aging QB mortgages the future for us - dependent on the price of course. I think we've all seen that game reps aren't as necessary at the QB level and can be counter-productive in some cases. Let a young guy sit behind a real QB like they're doing in Denver and New England...and like the best QB in the league did for 3 years
Why am I not excited at the prospect of a 36 year old QB who is beginning his decline who has played INDOORS for the past 6-7 years and has never been a great outdoor QB in the cold weather. Why mortgage future picks by trading for Brees? I get it he's a future HOF but in my opinion he's starting his decline and will fair terribly in the wind and weather conditions of the Meadowlands
The reason they traded stills and Grubbs is because Brees wasn't happy with either of them This won't happen
Brees like Geno was a 2nd round pick and not a fast developer. It's hard to conceive of Geno ever being on that level but if he takes off this is the year. If it's same old then you have to get rid of him.
If putting Brees in the line up makes us a Superbowl contender now, then why are you worried about the future? This argument makes no sense to me. Isn't this the point of putting the right personnel on your roster? If you have a chance to win the Superbowl now, you take it. You don't know what the team will look like in 3-4 years. Deal with it then...
I guess the point is, how much will it cost in terms of future value. Everyone want's to win now, but some of us also want to build for the future. For example, Peyton Manning would also make us SB contenders. Do you give up the number 6 pick for him? For 1 year? Drew Brees would be fantastic but I'm not sure I'm trading a big piece of my future for maybe a two year window. I'd trade something sure, maybe a lot, but not sure how much. _