We have a good 1 & 2 receivers. We just need a QB to get them the ball. Why would we trade a pick (I assume) for Nate Burleson. He's a great WR but thats not what we need right now. And how bout Seaton Hall getting beat up right now by Withita St. WTF
Nate Burleson is a RFA. I'm not exactly sure what tender was placed on him but If I had to guess it'd cost you a 1st rounder.
I don't understand why Minnesota would even consider trading Burleson. He missed a lot of time last season and therefore isn't going to make any contract demands and if he does he wouldn't have a leg to stand on. I think he stays in Minnesota and then we'll see what happens this time next year.
According to rotoworld.com, Burleson was given the lowest tender. As a result it would cost a 3rd rounder to sign him. At that cost, its something I would consider, however since the Vikins are so far under the cap, I tend to doubt they'd let him walk.
We could do much worse with a 3rd roudn pick. I would give Nate a shot for a 3rd round pick ... I'd like to see him come in a push our receivers
hey this is a JETS forum which is the NFL not march maddness college basketball.......besides, syarcuse is takin it all home!!
We will probably getting the Raiders 3rd for Lamont, which isn't too far behind our choice. I'd definetly sign Burleson for a 3rd round pick, he'd be a great slot reciever and would be the speed reciever we need. Would be an outstanding pickup.
Compensentory are given at the end of the round and are not actually TAKEN from the team that signs your FA.
