MrLocke Posted April 24, 2013 Author Share Posted April 24, 2013 yes, because a 350 lbs man that has been that size long term only has knee and back troubles from playing football. it wasnt the right move, but it looks A LOT worse in hindsight than it did with foresight. you NEVER bank on a guy that big playing as long as he did. was it fair to say he had a couple years left? sure. is it fair to say it was obvious he would be in the probowl 4-5 years down the line? absolutely not. You make it sound like he was a 350 pound slug. If you were in the kind of shape he would have to be in tyo play football then yes, playing football would be the only way there would be wear and tear on his knees and back. IIRC correctly the Vikings originally gave him a 3 year contract so it would have been perfectly reasonable to give him a contract of that length. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 You make it sound like he was a 350 pound slug. If you were in the kind of shape he would have to be in tyo play football then yes, playing football would be the only way there would be wear and tear on his knees and back. IIRC correctly the Vikings originally gave him a 3 year contract so it would have been perfectly reasonable to give him a contract of that length. like i said, i agree a short term deal wouldve made sense but i think this board forgets he was a huge man (even if in great shape) playing at a very high level past the age of 35.... thats a freak of nature type occurrence. if you are simply playing the odds, his play shouldve been entering the downslope by the end of the 3 years. somehow it didnt play out that way. i think i compared it upthread to us potentially signing dansby today, and then suddenly getting 5-6 years of probowl play out of him. FANTASTIC, if it happens, but certainly not what you expect at the time of signing. it was a mistake not signing him, but given what we knew at the time - that he was a NT over the age of 30 - no one could reasonably forecast how large a mistake it turned out to be and sometimes it gets tossed around this board like it was obvious hed be a 36 year old pro bowler.... ps amazing that winfield, williams, and fletcher ALL have played so well, so much longer than almost any of their peers. mustve been something in the gatorade in buffalo back then.... just statistically speaking any one of them having as much success as all three have seemed to have into their mid/late 30s is amazing - to have all 3 pan out like that is just.... frustrating as a fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 I'm sorry but common sense said that one of the heaviest guys in the league wouldn't stick around to be the oldest defensive player in the nfl, just like an undersized middle linebacker wouldn't be in the top 5 oldest.... We managed to get bit on both guys. There's some element of dumb luck there. It'd be like signing dansby today and having him play out two full contracts while everyone's screaming stop gap or bandaid (if not over the hill already) You may be able to attribute it to dumb luck if the Bills had been able to draft anyone as good as either of them since. But they haven't, so it just looks dumb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts