PDA

View Full Version : Yet ANOTHER DT Denver is eyeing...



SmilinAssasSin27
02-25-2008, 08:54 PM
MIDDLE MEN: With free agency thin at defensive tackle, the Broncos have expressed an interest in acquiring Detroit's talented but enigmatic Shaun Rogers, who's on the trade block. But one other name to watch via that route is the New York Jets' Dewayne Robertson, who is only 26 years old and five years removed from being a top-10 pick.

Robertson has a balky contract that includes a high base salary and cap figure in excess of $11 million that will need restructuring if he's ultimately dealt.

But the feelers the Jets are putting out at the combine to gauge the market, which certainly has piqued the Broncos' interest, has more to do with the defensive tackle's lack of a fit within New York's 3-4 scheme than finances.
Robinson is regarded as a high-character performer and would be a solid acquisition as an experienced player in his prime at a need position with Denver.

Buff
02-25-2008, 09:42 PM
Wait, didn't the NYJ's front 7 suck ass too? Aside from Vilma and his replacement, Harris. I thought they were looking for help at DT too-- I don't want another has-been retread... Go for Rogers if we're gonna go that route.

G_Money
02-25-2008, 09:52 PM
He's not a retread. He's just a 4-3 lineman in a 3-4 scheme.

He's a worthy DT.

~G

mopatt24
02-25-2008, 09:52 PM
Wait, didn't the NYJ's front 7 suck ass too? Aside from Vilma and his replacement, Harris. I thought they were looking for help at DT too-- I don't want another has-been retread... Go for Rogers if we're gonna go that route.

Yeah it sucked, but he doesn't fit the 3-4 scheme. Same problem with Vilma, thats why their both up for trade

dogfish
02-25-2008, 10:28 PM
it's an interesting situation. . . he's shown flashes of excellence, but has failed to live up to his draft status. . . of course, as previously indicated, they've been asking an undersized, penetrating DT to play the 3-4 nose-- a position for which he is probably two inches too short and about twenty pounds too light. . . this guy was supposed to be warren sapp, not casey hampton or jamaal williams. . .


the big question is, how much better will he be if moved back to his natural position? therein lies the rub, IMO. . . the problem with trading for him is that monster cap number-- you would almost HAVE to work out an extension to reduce it substantially, especially if you're denver and not exactly flush with cap space to begin with. . . but how do you determine what's fair? do you pay him like a top-ten pick who's only 26 years old? or do you pay him like a guy who has fallen short of expectations and has been a solid but nothing special type of player? obviously you're likely to end up compromising, but i'd hate to sign him to a big extension and find out that he isn't substantially better in the 4-3. . . . at least he has a reputation as a solid character guy who's willing to work hard, which does offer some reassurance. . . i do respect the fact that he's worked hard to fit into their scheme rather than complaining about it and blaming it for his lack of pronounced success, or publicly demanding a trade. . .

also, what's the right trade compensation?


the one other thing i'd point out is that, like coleman, he's really not a one-technique that's going to come in and hold the point against double teams. . . he's a penetrating three-technique who relies on quickness and leverage to beat blocks. . . if we were starting him next to marcus thomas we're pretty much limited to a pure one-gap scheme, i would think. . . not that that's a bad thing. . . hell, does anyone even know what kind of gap-control scheme slowik likes to run?

WARHORSE
02-25-2008, 10:30 PM
For the guy whos gonna say Pat Bowlen said we arent going to be active in free agency: He didnt say that. Heres what he said:

"The lesson in free agency is slowly being learned," Bowlen said. "And I think that we probably learned it as much as anybody. . . . That's for all teams, sort of leveling off now, saying, 'Just a minute, our payrolls are over the top, we're taking bigger risks than we thought with some guys and we've got to be a lot more vigilant in how we do it.'

And also:

"I really like the defensive linemen that we drafted. I think we've got a left tackle in Ryan. Obviously, I like our quarterback. I think, barring any bad things happening to him, I think he's a solid player for a long time and a good player - among the top five quarterbacks as we go forward," Bowlen said.


So hes not saying we arent going to be players, or we're going to scale it back, or we arent going to pay any big paydays for free agents. All he said was that we need to be more 'vigilant' in the way we go about it. That meaning protecting ourselves from the Walker and Henry contract situations that we are experiencing.

If we get Rogers, I hope we put a workout clause in his contract, and some nice incentives for him to achieve.

SmilinAssasSin27
02-25-2008, 10:31 PM
At this point, I don't care who plays what gap or what technique...just about ANYTHING is better than our current options. Let's get something resembling talent in here and then figure things out. I know that's a simplistic, uneducated way of looking at it, but it can't get any worse than last year.

WARHORSE
02-25-2008, 10:31 PM
That being said, lets get both Rogers AND Robertson.:salute:

SmilinAssasSin27
02-25-2008, 10:32 PM
For the guy whos gonna say Pat Bowlen said we arent going to be active in free agency: He didnt say that. Heres what he said:

"The lesson in free agency is slowly being learned," Bowlen said. "And I think that we probably learned it as much as anybody. . . . That's for all teams, sort of leveling off now, saying, 'Just a minute, our payrolls are over the top, we're taking bigger risks than we thought with some guys and we've got to be a lot more vigilant in how we do it.'

And also:

"I really like the defensive linemen that we drafted. I think we've got a left tackle in Ryan. Obviously, I like our quarterback. I think, barring any bad things happening to him, I think he's a solid player for a long time and a good player - among the top five quarterbacks as we go forward," Bowlen said.


So hes not saying we arent going to be players, or we're going to scale it back, or we arent going to pay any big paydays for free agents. All he said was that we need to be more 'vigilant' in the way we go about it. That meaning protecting ourselves from the Walker and Henry contract situations that we are experiencing.

If we get Rogers, I hope we put a workout clause in his contract, and some nice incentives for him to achieve.

Been saying it for weeks...that comment right there about Harris is why I don't think we go OT at #12...but I have been wrong before.

underrated29
02-25-2008, 10:45 PM
Thats exactely what we should do. Get him and rodgers, obviously he would have to take a small contract and if he works out he can get some money. I dont know what slow runs, but i know what the broncos like to do..

They like to ROTATE, alot. If we get these two hopeful studs put and rotate them in with thomas and mckin. We should have a very solid, very FRESH set of DT's.

Weather we pick them up or not i still want us to draft another player- maybe frank in the 4th (if he makes it that far?)

But solving all of our DT needs in FA leaves us with LB,WR,OL,RB-hehe, S..And in regards to S, if we can shore up the run we can get by with adequate S like we did with fergy and lynch two years ago. ANd next year take a S early.

dogfish
02-25-2008, 10:57 PM
At this point, I don't care who plays what gap or what technique...just about ANYTHING is better than our current options. Let's get something resembling talent in here and then figure things out. I know that's a simplistic, uneducated way of looking at it, but it can't get any worse than last year.

oh believe me, i'm in FULL agreement that we need more talent there-- i just think it's worth discussing when you're looking at the different options that are available. . . if the price is comparable, i would definitely take rogers over robertson. . .

G_Money
02-25-2008, 11:07 PM
It depends on what we want our DTs to do. If we want two up-the-field DTs, then Dewayne is perfect, because he and Marcus Thomas play a lot alike. They're both better at penetrating than just occupying opposing linemen. They're strong and will move single opponents back into the backfield.

We'd need some serious fill capability by our LBs though, because moving and twisting DTs would leave holes to be filled.

I'd want an upgrade over DJ in the middle - like a Vilma - if we were going with that scheme. I'd take Connor in the draft as well.

But adding Vilma and Robertson would be perfect IMO.

~G

WARHORSE
02-25-2008, 11:29 PM
Couple thoughts on the Robertson/Rogers debate. Robertson is 6'1" 317 lbs. He had 57 tackles and four sacks last year. Rogers is 6' 4" 340 lbs. He had 39 tackles and 7 sacks last year.

Rogers is known as a slouch. Robertson is known as a hard worker, high character guy.
Something to look at with Robertson.....he played in the 3-4 at NT, when hes better suited for the 4-3. He was highly productive in the 3-4......how much more in the 4-3?

If the money is comparable.........its Robertson Id take.

If Rogers was high character, Id say the scales would tip slightly to his side.

Requiem / The Dagda
02-25-2008, 11:30 PM
Couple thoughts on the Robertson/Rogers debate. Robertson is 6'1" 317 lbs. He had 57 tackles and four sacks last year. Rogers is 6' 4" 340 lbs. He had 39 tackles and 7 sacks last year.

Rogers is known as a slouch. Robertson is known as a hard worker, high character guy.
Something to look at with Robertson.....he played in the 3-4 at NT, when hes better suited for the 4-3. He was highly productive in the 3-4......how much more in the 4-3?

If the money is comparable.........its Robertson Id take.

If Rogers was high character, Id say the scales would tip slightly to his side.

Spot on, now call Mike and Ted before these tardo's make a mistake and send #42 to Detroit.

SmilinAssasSin27
02-25-2008, 11:36 PM
Couple thoughts on the Robertson/Rogers debate. Robertson is 6'1" 317 lbs. He had 57 tackles and four sacks last year. Rogers is 6' 4" 340 lbs. He had 39 tackles and 7 sacks last year.

Rogers is known as a slouch. Robertson is known as a hard worker, high character guy.
Something to look at with Robertson.....he played in the 3-4 at NT, when hes better suited for the 4-3. He was highly productive in the 3-4......how much more in the 4-3?

If the money is comparable.........its Robertson Id take.

If Rogers was high character, Id say the scales would tip slightly to his side.

Unfortunately Robertson is making top 5 money...that's the kicker.

WARHORSE
02-25-2008, 11:37 PM
Spot on, now call Mike and Ted before these tardo's make a mistake and send #42 to Detroit.


Cant call right now. Theyre mad at me for the whole Jared Allen idea. They said I should have kept it under wraps.

I sent a fax though telling them Robertsons the studmuffin we want, and we have a golf date for Saturday to converse on it after its done.:cool:

SmilinAssasSin27
02-25-2008, 11:38 PM
36 tackles, 21 assisted.

silkamilkamonico
02-25-2008, 11:38 PM
That being said, lets get both Rogers AND Robertson.:salute:

We could probably get Robertson for our first, and then Rogers for our second.

I'd do it.

If those 2 players are in the draft and available, I'm easily drafting them.

WARHORSE
02-25-2008, 11:40 PM
Unfortunately Robertson is making top 5 money...that's the kicker.

The kicker is Elam SmilinAssas......thought you knew that?:coffee:


Robertson is an unsung dude because hes on a sickly green loser, and he plays a position that gets no glory. Bring him here, and he'll be a star for us. I really believe that. In the 4-3, his talents will speak louder than ever before. Worth the money.

SmilinAssasSin27
02-25-2008, 11:42 PM
The kicker is Elam SmilinAssas......thought you knew that?:coffee:


Robertson is an unsung dude because hes on a sickly green loser, and he plays a position that gets no glory. Bring him here, and he'll be a star for us. I really believe that. In the 4-3, his talents will speak louder than ever before. Worth the money.

I want him regardless...just say he's making crazy bank.

SmilinAssasSin27
02-25-2008, 11:44 PM
Robertson's cap cost is @ $11mil.

shank
02-26-2008, 12:18 AM
We could probably get Robertson for our first, and then Rogers for our second.

I'd do it.

If those 2 players are in the draft and available, I'm easily drafting them.

you think robertson would be our first?!

i don't know, but i wouldn't hope so... what about our first for robertson and vilma? maybe throw in walker if that's not enough. even close?

silkamilkamonico
02-26-2008, 12:24 AM
you think robertson would be our first?!

i don't know, but i wouldn't hope so... what about our first for robertson and vilma? maybe throw in walker if that's not enough. even close?


I'm trying to look at it like this.

If Robertson miraculously went into the draft this year, and we knew what he was capable of, and he's young, and we need DT, I don't know why we wouldn't draft him with our first.

He!!, I don't know why he wouldn't go top 5. If Robertson miraculously went into the draft, he would immediately bounce Sedrick Ellis and Glen Dorsey as the best DT available. If we would draft those 2, why not Robertson.

I don't know, but if you're looking like that, which seems incredibly logical to me, why wouldn't you "draft" him with your first?

WARHORSE
02-26-2008, 01:16 AM
Robertson's cap cost is @ $11mil.

Thats perfect. Cause Denver will want to restructure, and he'll want a new contract. That way we tie him up for his best years.

dogfish
02-26-2008, 01:18 AM
I'm trying to look at it like this.

If Robertson miraculously went into the draft this year, and we knew what he was capable of, and he's young, and we need DT, I don't know why we wouldn't draft him with our first.

He!!, I don't know why he wouldn't go top 5. If Robertson miraculously went into the draft, he would immediately bounce Sedrick Ellis and Glen Dorsey as the best DT available. If we would draft those 2, why not Robertson.

I don't know, but if you're looking like that, which seems incredibly logical to me, why wouldn't you "draft" him with your first?


this whole "if he was back in the draft" talk is pointless-- he's not back in the draft, he's a veteran NFL player who has never performed at an elite level-- there is zero chance that any team in the league will give up a 1st round pick for him. . . with college players, you obviously have to judge them off of their college performance, but robertson has a solid body of NFL work which he can be judged by, and none of it indicates in any way that he's worth a 1st. . . 1sts are rarely traded, and when they are it's for all-pros, perennial pro bowlers-- not guys with unrealized potential who might play better in a different system. . . .

silkamilkamonico
02-26-2008, 01:28 AM
this whole "if he was back in the draft" talk is pointless-- he's not back in the draft, he's a veteran NFL player who has never performed at an elite level-- there is zero chance that any team in the league will give up a 1st round pick for him. . . with college players, you obviously have to judge them off of their college performance, but robertson has a solid body of NFL work which he can be judged by, and none of it indicates in any way that he's worth a 1st. . . 1sts are rarely traded, and when they are it's for all-pros, perennial pro bowlers-- not guys with unrealized potential who might play better in a different system. . . .

Considering first round picks are a crapshoot, and first round DT's fail more often then they achieve, I'd take a guy like Robertson, who's young, a proven solid player, with the potential to be even better in a system that fits him better, easily.

1st are overrated. Highly "precious", with a less than 50% hit rate.

Perhaps it's the "mysterious" factor.

shank
02-26-2008, 02:18 AM
well then what would you (dog, and anyone else) think about our 1st for robertson and vilma?

walker included or left out?

a conditional pick required next year depending on vilma's health?

dogfish
02-26-2008, 02:26 AM
well then what would you (dog, and anyone else) think about our 1st for robertson and vilma?



no chance, under any circumstances. . . . i think stewart and mendenhall are surefire studs, guys who i expect to be on a par with steven jackson-- no way i give up the chance to draft one of them for a solid D tackle who has never truly shined at this level and a one-time elite LB who now has a coleslaw knee. . . JMO, but i wouldn't even consider it. . . .

lex
02-26-2008, 03:24 AM
Robertson's cap cost is @ $11mil.

How does the signing bonus work...how much of that is an accelerated signing bonus? Wouldnt we be on the hook for just the base salary since the signing bonus was on the Jets books?

lex
02-26-2008, 03:30 AM
this whole "if he was back in the draft" talk is pointless-- he's not back in the draft, he's a veteran NFL player who has never performed at an elite level-- there is zero chance that any team in the league will give up a 1st round pick for him. . . with college players, you obviously have to judge them off of their college performance, but robertson has a solid body of NFL work which he can be judged by, and none of it indicates in any way that he's worth a 1st. . . 1sts are rarely traded, and when they are it's for all-pros, perennial pro bowlers-- not guys with unrealized potential who might play better in a different system. . . .

Plus, as I understand it, NY was shopping him and its not so much other teams initiated this idea of a Robertson trade. If thats actually correct, its a case of NY wanting to get rid of him. So they also undermine their leverage to even ask for a 2nd but I dont think they really expect a 2nd as much as they want a third...they start at a second to accommodate negotiation. Robertson is worth a 3rd, and nothing more. Rogers is worth a 4th.

WARHORSE
02-26-2008, 04:48 AM
Plus, as I understand it, NY was shopping him and its not so much other teams initiated this idea of a Robertson trade. If thats actually correct, its a case of NY wanting to get rid of him. So they also undermine their leverage to even ask for a 2nd but I dont think they really expect a 2nd as much as they want a third...they start at a second to accommodate negotiation. Robertson is worth a 3rd, and nothing more. Rogers is worth a 4th.


I beg to differ.

Robertson for a second would be a very good deal.

For us.

Dreadnought
02-26-2008, 09:22 AM
I beg to differ.

Robertson for a second would be a very good deal.

For us.

I agree - I'd do that one in a flash. Don't want Rogers though, unless we can get him in a steal - like as a FA pickup if the Lions cut him - and that won't happen I don't think.

HORSEPOWER 56
02-26-2008, 09:35 AM
How does the signing bonus work...how much of that is an accelerated signing bonus? Wouldnt we be on the hook for just the base salary since the signing bonus was on the Jets books?

FYI, NFL Radio on Sirius is saying that the $11 mil is just his base salary this year. He also has a $2 mil roster bonus coming due along with workout bonuses and other stuff. Basically, he's in the same position as Larry Fitzgerald from Arizona (his cap hit this year is like $18 mil!), he's reached the back end of a back-loaded contract that his team cannot afford and must trade or cut him for cap reasons. No team in their right mind would trade for him with his current cap hit and will have to restructure (convert base salary to bonus money) or sign him to a new cap-friendly contract. Frankly, I'd rather have Robertson than Rodgers because he's younger, and a high character guy. I think he's very talented and would do well in our new "blitz heavy"/eight in the box Slowik system. Don't get me wrong, I'd welcome either as they are head and shoulders better than our current roster.

It also looks like the deal that was all but finished (according to the Denver post) for Rodgers is going to fall through because other teams (Atlanta, Tampa Bay, etc) are driving up the trade value of Rodgers. At this point, whoever gets him will most likely overpay for him (unless we can dupe Detroit with more worthless players - Ian Gold anyone? - to sweeten the deal).

I don't want to see us overpay for either guy, but I'd happily give up Walker, Gold, and/or Foxworth and a 4th rounder for either of them (Detroit may want Gold or Foxy and the Jets may be interested in Walker). I'd also switch first round picks with Detroit and maybe give up a 4th, too to get Rodgers here, but no more than that. I sure as heck wouldn't give up a second rounder for either of them with guys like Laws, Moore, and Sims potentially being available in the second round at #42.

Either way, let's fix the :defense::defense::defense:!!!

Scarface
02-26-2008, 09:43 AM
Thats perfect. Cause Denver will want to restructure, and he'll want a new contract. That way we tie him up for his best years.

Yep, teams almost always restructure a players deal after acquiring them thru a trade. No big deal at all.:coffee:

lex
02-26-2008, 09:45 AM
FYI, NFL Radio on Sirius is saying that the $11 mil is just his base salary this year. He also has a $2 mil roster bonus coming due along with workout bonuses and other stuff. Basically, he's in the same position as Larry Fitzgerald from Arizona (his cap hit this year is like $18 mil!), he's reached the back end of a back-loaded contract that his team cannot afford and must trade or cut him for cap reasons. No team in their right mind would trade for him with his current cap hit and will have to restructure (convert base salary to bonus money) or sign him to a new cap-friendly contract. Frankly, I'd rather have Robertson than Rodgers because he's younger, and a high character guy. I think he's very talented and would do well in our new "blitz heavy"/eight in the box Slowik system. Don't get me wrong, I'd welcome either as they are head and shoulders better than our current roster.

It also looks like the deal that was all but finished (according to the Denver post) for Rodgers is going to fall through because other teams (Atlanta, Tampa Bay, etc) are driving up the trade value of Rodgers. At this point, whoever gets him will most likely overpay for him (unless we can dupe Detroit with more worthless players - Ian Gold anyone? - to sweeten the deal).

I don't want to see us overpay for either guy, but I'd happily give up Walker, Gold, and/or Foxworth and a 4th rounder for either of them (Detroit may want Gold or Foxy and the Jets may be interested in Walker). I'd also switch first round picks with Detroit and maybe give up a 4th, too to get Rodgers here, but no more than that. I sure as heck wouldn't give up a second rounder for either of them with guys like Laws, Moore, and Sims potentially being available in the second round at #42.

Either way, let's fix the :defense::defense::defense:!!!

Wow! So much for that idea.

mclark
02-26-2008, 11:20 AM
Couple thoughts on the Robertson/Rogers debate. Robertson is 6'1" 317 lbs. He had 57 tackles and four sacks last year. Rogers is 6' 4" 340 lbs. He had 39 tackles and 7 sacks last year.

Rogers is known as a slouch. Robertson is known as a hard worker, high character guy.
Something to look at with Robertson.....he played in the 3-4 at NT, when hes better suited for the 4-3. He was highly productive in the 3-4......how much more in the 4-3?

If the money is comparable.........its Robertson Id take.

If Rogers was high character, Id say the scales would tip slightly to his side.

Let's get both of them. And Vilma too.

Lonestar
02-26-2008, 02:15 PM
FYI, NFL Radio on Sirius is saying that the $11 mil is just his base salary this year. He also has a $2 mil roster bonus coming due along with workout bonuses and other stuff. Basically, he's in the same position as Larry Fitzgerald from Arizona (his cap hit this year is like $18 mil!), he's reached the back end of a back-loaded contract that his team cannot afford and must trade or cut him for cap reasons. No team in their right mind would trade for him with his current cap hit and will have to restructure (convert base salary to bonus money) or sign him to a new cap-friendly contract. Frankly, I'd rather have Robertson than Rodgers because he's younger, and a high character guy. I think he's very talented and would do well in our new "blitz heavy"/eight in the box Slowik system. Don't get me wrong, I'd welcome either as they are head and shoulders better than our current roster.

It also looks like the deal that was all but finished (according to the Denver post) for Rodgers is going to fall through because other teams (Atlanta, Tampa Bay, etc) are driving up the trade value of Rodgers. At this point, whoever gets him will most likely overpay for him (unless we can dupe Detroit with more worthless players - Ian Gold anyone? - to sweeten the deal).

I don't want to see us overpay for either guy, but I'd happily give up Walker, Gold, and/or Foxworth and a 4th rounder for either of them (Detroit may want Gold or Foxy and the Jets may be interested in Walker). I'd also switch first round picks with Detroit and maybe give up a 4th, too to get Rodgers here, but no more than that. I sure as heck wouldn't give up a second rounder for either of them with guys like Laws, Moore, and Sims potentially being available in the second round at #42.

Either way, let's fix the :defense::defense::defense:!!!

Roberstosn numbers from NFLPA web site

These are his salary numbers and the rest would or should be NYJ bonus issues.
2003 1746428.00
2004 516250.00
2005 952000.00
2006 4669994.00
2007 4975000.00
2008 6,800,000.00
2009 4,500,000.00

BOSSHOGG30
02-26-2008, 03:30 PM
FYI,

The Jets traded the 13th and 22nd picks, and a 4th rounder for Dewayne Robertson.

The Bears then traded the 13th pick to the New England Patriots who selected Ty Warren, picking up the 14th pick and a 6th Rounder.

The Bears haul ended up being Michael Haynes, Rex Grossman, Ian Scott, and they used the 6th Rounder from the Patriots to trade up for Justin Gage.

Lonestar
02-26-2008, 04:51 PM
FYI,

The Jets traded the 13th and 22nd picks, and a 4th rounder for Dewayne Robertson.

The Bears then traded the 13th pick to the New England Patriots who selected Ty Warren, picking up the 14th pick and a 6th Rounder.

The Bears haul ended up being Michael Haynes, Rex Grossman, Ian Scott, and they used the 6th Rounder from the Patriots to trade up for Justin Gage.



Sounds like we need the bears GM for the numbers alone..

G_Money
02-26-2008, 05:06 PM
He just re-signed Sexy Rexy AND Randy...I mean Kyle Orton for the express purpose of having a quarterback controversy between Tweedle-dumb and Tweedle-armless.

I don't think I need the Bears GM, thanks...

~G

Lonestar
02-26-2008, 05:31 PM
He just re-signed Sexy Rexy AND Randy...I mean Kyle Orton for the express purpose of having a quarterback controversy between Tweedle-dumb and Tweedle-armless.

I don't think I need the Bears GM, thanks...

~G

Hey he made numbers appear I'm not all that sure he would not be worse that mikey at picking day one..

dogfish
02-26-2008, 05:49 PM
Sounds like we need the bears GM for the numbers alone..


He just re-signed Sexy Rexy AND Randy...I mean Kyle Orton for the express purpose of having a quarterback controversy between Tweedle-dumb and Tweedle-armless.

I don't think I need the Bears GM, thanks...

~G

hah! yea, give me the patriots GM-- i'll take ty warren over michael haynes, dewayne robertson, and all the rest of those odds and ends. . . .

Lonestar
02-26-2008, 05:56 PM
hah! yea, give me the patriots GM-- i'll take ty warren over michael haynes, dewayne robertson, and all the rest of those odds and ends. . . .

I'd take him in heart beat over what we have now.. He has built semi dynasty there compare to the ciaos we have every year.. They crap talent down the toilet we can't even touch..

They almost always picking two years ahead of their needs..

Whats his name, over orange man and mikey in heartbeat..

JONtheBRONCO
02-26-2008, 06:02 PM
More jibber jabber on this guy, but, I found this article somewhat interesting... I only copied half of the article, it gets me a little more excited for free agency, and trade talks.

Jets' Dewayne Robertson on block

Dewayne Robertson doesn't tie up blockers on a consistent basis, largely because he's too small to play nose tackle in the Jets' 3-4 defense. But there is one thing he can tie up: the salary cap. His $11.2 million figure consumes one-tenth of the team's cap.

For those reasons - money and scheme - the Jets are willing to listen to trade offers for the former first-round pick, the Daily News has learned. Over the last few days at the scouting combine in Indianapolis, the Jets have been gauging Robertson's value around the league, according to several NFL sources. A handful of teams, including the Broncos, are showing interest.

It means that two of the Jets' highest-drafted defensive players, Robertson and linebacker Jonathan Vilma, could be traded. The Daily News reported on Friday that Vilma, a first-round pick in 2004, has received permission from the team to seek a trade. He, too, is ill-suited to Eric Mangini's 3-4 scheme.

Robertson, the fourth pick in 2003, never has lived up to expectations and his contract has become an albatross. He's due to make $9.8 million this season - $6.8 million in base pay, plus a $3 million roster bonus (due in June). In five seasons, he has pocketed more than $26 million, a hefty price for 14-1/2 sacks. He's signed through 2009.

But he's still only 26, and many believe he could be an impact player in the right scheme. Robertson would be a good fit in the Broncos' 4-3 scheme, and they're known to be in the market for a defensive tackle. The Broncos reportedly are getting close to a trade for the Lions' Shaun Rogers, who almost certainly will be dealt when the trading period begins Friday.

ProSportsDaily.com

Lonestar
02-26-2008, 06:06 PM
Robertsons numbers from NFLPA web site

These are his salary numbers and the rest would or should be NYJ bonus issues.
2003 1746428.00
2004 516250.00
2005 952000.00
2006 4669994.00
2007 4975000.00
2008 6,800,000.00
2009 4,500,000.00

Vilma

Salary History

2004 230,000.00
2005 305,000.00
2006 667,500.00
2007 750,000.00
2008 1,097,500.00

If his knee is OK these two could be players IF they will re-do their contracts.