PDA

View Full Version : Nate Burleson Saga


Pages : [1] 2

texansfan1974
03-17-2006, 08:53 AM
The Houston Chronicle reports that "Burleson will visit early next week"
This could be good. I think it would cost us one our 3rd round picks.

Maddict5
03-17-2006, 09:00 AM
hopefully we can steal him for a 4th but i wouldnt mind giving a 3rd-hes a legitimate #2 wr who steps up to #1 if needed

Kaiser Toro
03-17-2006, 09:00 AM
I have no problme bringing him in. Would like to see how his physical goes and pay him #2 money. If we do get take him it changes the scales on selecting Bush in my opinion.

rittenhouserobz
03-17-2006, 09:05 AM
Burelson is a player that I would mind seeing here. Something about him says "solid player".

OzzO
03-17-2006, 09:12 AM
Here ya go in the Gaffney article (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/fb/texansfront/3729617.html)

...Bradford and Gaffney were the Texans' No. 2 and 3 receivers the past three seasons. The Texans won't likely have voids at receiver for long, though. They are still awaiting word on whether Cincinnati will match their offer sheet of $6.4 million over four years to Kevin Walter, a restricted free agent. The deadline is Sunday at midnight.

Early next week, Minnesota Vikings restricted free agent Nate Burleson, 24, also will visit the Texans, whose offseason program starts Monday. Burleson is just two years removed from a 1,000-yard season.

The Texans also will visit with former Denver Broncos tight end Jeb Putzier next week....

So by next week, we may have more news.

Maddict5
03-17-2006, 09:16 AM
I have no problme bringing him in. Would like to see how his physical goes and pay him #2 money. If we do get take him it changes the scales on selecting Bush in my opinion.

i dont see how- we'll have to fill #2 through draft or FA anyway and if hes brought in with a 3rd/4th, it just eliminates the risk that a draft player might be a bust. i dont see how it changes anything with reggie

ArlingtonTexan
03-17-2006, 09:25 AM
hopefully we can steal him for a 4th but i wouldnt mind giving a 3rd-hes a legitimate #2 wr who steps up to #1 if needed

Because Burleson is a Restricted FA, the Texans do not have a choice in the matter. It is a third.


Minnesota does have the money to match pretty much any offer for Burleson, but this also means that they had the money to place a higher tender on the player.

Bubbajwp
03-17-2006, 09:31 AM
Because Burleson is a Restricted FA, the Texans do not have a choice in the matter. It is a third.


Minnesota does have the money to match pretty much any offer for Burleson, but this also means that they had the money to place a higher tender on the player.
I thought that the teams could negotiate the deal and it could be less than a third rounder or am I thinking of somthing else.

Maddict5
03-17-2006, 09:43 AM
Because Burleson is a Restricted FA, the Texans do not have a choice in the matter. It is a third.


Minnesota does have the money to match pretty much any offer for Burleson, but this also means that they had the money to place a higher tender on the player.

no..its negotiable..the niners should've gotten a 1st and 3rd for lloyd from the skins..but negotiated a deal whereby the 9ers got a 3rd this year and a 4th next year

El Amigo Invisible
03-17-2006, 09:44 AM
He is not that good! :challenge

touttail
03-17-2006, 09:49 AM
Burelson or Moulds or whoever. We need a experienced #2 or they will dog AJ every play-every game!!!

Bobby 119C

chuckm
03-17-2006, 09:49 AM
Here's some info about him ...


http://www.nfl.com/draft/profiles/burleson_nate


ANALYSIS
Positives: Explosive breakaway threat with impressive leaping ability Shows a sudden burst coming off the line and uses his hands well to escape press coverage Has an array of moves to elude defenders and shows proper crack-block techniques upfield Sharp route-runner who is especially effective on underneath passes and crossing patterns Has good field awareness and is very conscious of the sideline markers Separates quickly from the defender in the open, showing that second gear needed to gain yardage after the catch Natural hand extender going up for the ball and shows fluid body adjustments coming back for the off-target tosses Very tough and physical going for the ball in a crowd His upfield acceleration consistently allows him to break tackles Always gets in the defender's way when trying to block for the ground game.


Negatives: Still learning how to vary his speed so he doesn't overrun on his routes Erratic blocker who needs to show better hand punch off the snap While explosive off the snap, he will gather himself before generating his separation burst after the catch Has a tendency to skip into his cuts.

some Combine notes ...

4.51 40 yd

ArlingtonTexan
03-17-2006, 10:04 AM
no..its negotiable..the niners should've gotten a 1st and 3rd for lloyd from the skins..but negotiated a deal whereby the 9ers got a 3rd this year and a 4th next year

Burleson is worth the texans 3rd round choice. Lloyd was not worth a first rounder. No reason for the Vikings to give him up for less the the tender price. In fact, if anything the Viking could go give us more or we will match. Texans don't have leverage to be lowering the price.

F-minus67
03-17-2006, 10:14 AM
Burleson is definitly worth a 3rd round pick, especially since this years draft has a poor WR class. I would be estatic if the team signned him, he is like Gaffney but better.

TheOgre
03-17-2006, 10:17 AM
He would be a great fit for us. I hope we get him. I wonder if we could trade our New Orlean's 3rd for a lower 3rd and additional pick then sign him and Minnesota would get stuck with a lower 3rd instead (assuming they didn't match the offer). I guess the downside is that if they matched the offer, we would be stuck with the lower 3rd.

chuckm
03-17-2006, 10:20 AM
edit ... my bad ... TGIF

newbiefan
03-17-2006, 10:22 AM
alright, honest mistake, but im curious about The OGre's suggestion of getting a lower 3rd round to trade them. trade down or trade up, either way it'd be better than trading one of the top 2 picks of the 3rd

aj.
03-17-2006, 10:33 AM
Great year in '04. Had some injury issues that kept him out of the lineup for 4 games last year. I've read where he would like to go to Seattle where his family lives.

Porky
03-17-2006, 10:34 AM
Man, this would be awesome. Bureleson reminds me of Peerless Price in that I think he can excel if he is the #2 in a good system, with a very good #1 to take the pressure off. I don't know that he can be "the man". Remember, when they had Moss protecting him, this guy was a 1000 yard WR. Folks, he is easily worth one of our 3rd's - a proven #2 at this point in the draft, when it's a weak WR yr and there are no guarantee's anyway. Sorry, but give me the proven guy. If we can sign this guy as our #2 and Walter as our #3, our WR problems are solved. Mathis is our #4 speed burner, and Armstrong and Starling probably fight it out for #5, and I actually give an edge to Starling because of Special teams.

chuckm
03-17-2006, 10:40 AM
I'm not sold on this .... this draft a too deep to use a high high 3rd round pick on Burleson ..... IMO

bigTEXan8
03-17-2006, 10:41 AM
I'll take Burleson...not going to complain about that. I'd gladly give up a third round for him, saves the Texans from having to draft a rookie, where they can get someone with a little experience.

Mr Shush
03-17-2006, 10:42 AM
Speaking of Price, does no-one else think he'd be a decent acquisition, who would probably come quite cheap? He was pretty good in what limited playing time he got with the 'Boys last year.

Mr Shush
03-17-2006, 10:51 AM
Oh, and the trade-down thing doesn't work. It has to be our own third (or a higher one, which obviously doesn't exist).

newbiefan
03-17-2006, 10:53 AM
Oh, and the trade-down thing doesn't work. It has to be our own third (or a higher one, which obviously doesn't exist).
oh alright, thanks

barzilla
03-17-2006, 10:54 AM
Hmmmm,

Burelson played in 12 games last season and had 30 catches. Yes he did have 1000 yards recieiving in 2004, but he had only 29 catches the season before that. Will the real Rich Burelson please stand up?

I don't think the Vikings would challenge us too much. They already have Travis Taylor, Troy Williamson, and Marcus Robinson. How much are they going to spend to keep a fourth reciever?

I for one want to find out why he was relegated to third or fourth reciever status last year. I guess if you extrapolated his stats out to 16 games you can say he would have caught 40 balls, but it seems to me that we need someone that will catch 60-70 balls opposite of AJ. If there is a good reason why he fell back then I'd say go for it, but if not I'd be really wary.

jerek
03-17-2006, 10:59 AM
Hmmmm,

Burelson played in 12 games last season and had 30 catches. Yes he did have 1000 yards recieiving in 2004, but he had only 29 catches the season before that. Will the real Rich Burelson please stand up?

I don't think the Vikings would challenge us too much. They already have Travis Taylor, Troy Williamson, and Marcus Robinson. How much are they going to spend to keep a fourth reciever?

I for one want to find out why he was relegated to third or fourth reciever status last year. I guess if you extrapolated his stats out to 16 games you can say he would have caught 40 balls, but it seems to me that we need someone that will catch 60-70 balls opposite of AJ. If there is a good reason why he fell back then I'd say go for it, but if not I'd be really wary.

I'm not privvy enough to Vikings football. Were they just a bad offensive unit, or was Burleson the sole reason for his underwhelming performance? In and of itself, those numbers do not make a strong case for the trade, but as always and since I have not watched myself, I suspect there might be another side to the story. Anyone else have a strong idea?

Bubbajwp
03-17-2006, 11:07 AM
Oh, and the trade-down thing doesn't work. It has to be our own third (or a higher one, which obviously doesn't exist).
The teams can negotiate on what picks they have to give.

Bsacamano
03-17-2006, 11:23 AM
We need to go after this guy if we can. He is a marginal #1 receiver and an exceptional #2. I would be willing to give up one of our #3 picks for the folllowing reasons:

1) He scored 9 touchdowns and had over 1,000 yards in 2004 (when he was #2 in Minny)
2) He is young (25/26)
3) He has an acceptable cap figure
4) He will be able to step in right away and play (as opposed to learning the ropes as a rookie)
5) The draft is very shallow this year at WR

newbiefan
03-17-2006, 11:25 AM
he's 24 i believe, so almost rookie age

Porky
03-17-2006, 11:27 AM
We need to go after this guy if we can. He is a marginal #1 receiver and an exceptional #2. I would be willing to give up one of our #3 picks for the folllowing reasons:

1) He scored 9 touchdowns and had over 1,000 yards in 2004 (when he was #2 in Minny)
2) He is young (25/26)
3) He has an acceptable cap figure
4) He will be able to step in right away and play (as opposed to learning the ropes as a rookie)
5) The draft is very shallow this year at WR

Bingo! We have a winner. Excellent second post. I welcome more. :yahoo:

Bsacamano
03-17-2006, 11:36 AM
I would rather go after this guy than Putzier at TE. We can draft a TE with our 1st pick in the fourth round (can anyone say David Thomas?). This is a seasoned, young receiver, perfect for taking pressure off of AJ. Plus, you know, he can actually CATCH the ball......as opposed to dropping it ala Corey Bradford

keyfro
03-17-2006, 11:38 AM
the only problem i have with this is knowing casserlys's history in trading picks for a player...his track record doesn't bold well for us

David's Busted Carr
03-17-2006, 11:39 AM
I'm not sold on this .... this draft a too deep to use a high high 3rd round pick on Burleson ..... IMO

I tend to agree with you here. I like Burleson, and if our 3rd round pick wasn't so high I would say go for it. But I don't think I'd give up a top 3rd round pick for him. If it was our 4th I'd do it in a heartbeat, but I don't think it's possible to negotiate that.

Bsacamano
03-17-2006, 11:43 AM
LoL....True

Casserly is an *** clown when it comes to trading for players

Bsacamano
03-17-2006, 11:44 AM
We do have 2 3rd round picks you know?

Maddict5
03-17-2006, 11:46 AM
Burleson is worth the texans 3rd round choice. Lloyd was not worth a first rounder. No reason for the Vikings to give him up for less the the tender price. In fact, if anything the Viking could go give us more or we will match. Texans don't have leverage to be lowering the price.

i know hes worth our 3rd but if he wants to leave and the vikes arent too bothered and our 4th is the best they get they could easily take it

TheTim5125
03-17-2006, 11:51 AM
Burleson is a great number 2 reciever... during the season where he caught for more then 1000 yards he was opposite moss so i think it would a good if we signed him... we'll see though

TheOgre
03-17-2006, 11:54 AM
I say get him. A 3rd for our #2 receiver? We should be so lucky....

keyfro
03-17-2006, 12:03 PM
i'm just looking at it different way...looking at all the lineman, corners, and linebackers we could get at the top of the third round

El Amigo Invisible
03-17-2006, 12:05 PM
No more trading away draft picks! Third round? Maybe 5th round . :confused:

TEXANS84
03-17-2006, 12:17 PM
A third round draft pick for a 2 year removed 1,000 yard recieving player...absolutely.

El Amigo Invisible
03-17-2006, 12:20 PM
Dante was not hurt yet and this guy could not get more than 30 yards a game last year.

Bsacamano
03-17-2006, 12:22 PM
i'm just looking at it different way...looking at all the lineman, corners, and linebackers we could get at the top of the third round


We are not going to fill all of our needs this season, so I think we need to look at this as a 2 year process. If we take Burleson, that WOULD fill a huge current hole at WR. We could fill out the other positions you mentioned as follows:

1st pick 2nd round: Lineman
1st pick in 3rd round: Linebacker or Corner
1st pick in 4th round: Tight End
1st pick in 5th, 6th and 7th: Lineman/Linebacker/Corner

El Amigo Invisible
03-17-2006, 12:26 PM
I think we need all of our picks. Nate was great but please post his numbers from last year. Dante needed a number two reciever and he was supposed to be their "go to" guy. He has a chance of being good but we do not need to take anymore gambles on these guys (SAGE) that noone wants.

TheTim5125
03-17-2006, 12:35 PM
RECEIVING

Year G GS No Yards Avg Lg TD 20+ 40+ FD
2003 16 9 29 455 15.7 52 2 7 1 17
2004 16 15 68 1006 14.8 68 9 14 4 50
2005 12 9 30 328 10.9 20 1 1 0 20
TOTAL 44 33 127 1789 14.1 68 12 22 5 87

chuckm
03-17-2006, 12:36 PM
was he the guy that caught the "over the shoulder" lateral from Randy Moss? or was it from Burger King?

WWJD
03-17-2006, 12:52 PM
I hope the Texans can get this guy.

kcwilson
03-17-2006, 01:08 PM
Take a look at weekly performance by Burleson... I remember from the get-go he had hamstring issues in early part of season. Culpepper in the beginning of the season was a mess as well.

Burleson missed games 4,5,6,11, and 12. According the news...
www.rotoworld.com Nov 28, 2005: The receiver missed last week's game due to hip, knee, neck and shoulder injuries. "Burleson looks good," coach Mike Tice said. "He's had a good week. I think he's starting to come back. He's made some good plays out there. He looks to have more juice, more energy."

Hip, knee, neck, and sholder... at least his pinky toe was feeling ok. That being said, there could be injury risk but you can definitely attribute his poor performance in 2005 to injury.

I like his potential and would take him since he thrived as a #2 previously. You can't gauge anything off of Minn receivers performance last year with rookie WR getting touches at the end of a disastrous year and Culpepper being a turnover machine.

bigTEXan8
03-17-2006, 01:08 PM
Dante was not hurt yet and this guy could not get more than 30 yards a game last year.

Well Minnesota had some real issues with their entire game, not just their passing game. Culpepper couldn't throw a completion for the bulk of the time he was playing, before he got injured. Plus, in 2004, Moss was still there, leaving Burleson constantly open. That's how he got all those yards.

kcwilson
03-17-2006, 01:10 PM
...let's not have anyone wearing Eddie George jerseys around town on Monday please.

Thanks.

TexanSam
03-17-2006, 01:24 PM
I would definately trade away our top 3rd round pick for Burleson. If we draft somebody with that pick instead of using it as compensation for Burleson, we get somebody who is unproven. If we give it to them, we get somebody who has proved he is a very good 2nd WR. In essence, we're using our 3rd round pick to get a guy who is young (24 years old) and who has had a 1000 yard season. Last year, he was supposed to be the top guy in their system. It didn't work out. Line him up along side Andre Johnson and we have a pretty good duo. And don't forget, with Corey Bradford and Jabar Gaffney leaving, WR just became an even bigger need than it was before. For those of you saying we should use our 3rd for a bigger need, well, WR is one of those right now.

run-david-run
03-17-2006, 01:45 PM
Right now giving up a 3rd for Burelson saves our higher picks. Mathis is 2nd leading receiver on our roster right now (that acctually plays WR)! There is no way we find someone with our 2nd 3rd round pick or lower who has a better chance at succeding opposite AJ. Thus, we would have to use a higher pick if we hope to find a true WR #2. To me this is a no-brainer. Give up the 3rd, then use the other 3rd to adress the many other needs on this team.

bigTEXan8
03-17-2006, 01:51 PM
Right now giving up a 3rd for Burelson saves our higher picks. Mathis is 2nd leading receiver on our roster right now (that acctually plays WR)! There is no way we find someone with our 2nd 3rd round pick or lower who has a better chance at succeding opposite AJ. Thus, we would have to use a higher pick if we hope to find a true WR #2. To me this is a no-brainer. Give up the 3rd, then use the other 3rd to adress the many other needs on this team.

I concur. More than likely, the Texans might pick up a WR with that extra 3rd, so to me, it would be worth it. Then, the Texans have a WR who can compliment AJ quite well as a #2 guy, he's young, and he's been in the league for a few years.

mancunian
03-17-2006, 01:55 PM
Great year in '04. Had some injury issues that kept him out of the lineup for 4 games last year. I've read where he would like to go to Seattle where his family lives.

and according to the Seahawks message board he's visiting Seattle friday

run-david-run
03-17-2006, 02:02 PM
and according to the Seahawks message board he's visiting Seattle friday
Meaning today or next friday?

TexanSam
03-17-2006, 02:02 PM
and according to the Seahawks message board he's visiting Seattle friday

I wouldn't be surprised to see him going to the Dolphins. Scott Linehan is the OC and they have Culpepper there. I really want to see him in our red, white, and blue though.

mancunian
03-17-2006, 02:07 PM
Meaning today or next friday?

today

texasguy346
03-17-2006, 02:16 PM
I wouldn't be surprised to see him going to the Dolphins. Scott Linehan is the OC and they have Culpepper there. I really want to see him in our red, white, and blue though.

I believe Linehan is in St Louis now.

Maddict5
03-17-2006, 02:23 PM
id like/prefer to get him but if we dont i wont start crying, he might be expensive if there are a load of other teams interested and it may become a bidding war-plus there are a load of cheaper talented guys to be gotten in the 3rd or 4th round.
yes there is a chance that they'll be a bust but theres also a chance they could be better than burleson

mancunian
03-17-2006, 02:26 PM
I believe Linehan is in St Louis now.

He's their new HC

O.G.
03-17-2006, 02:34 PM
Man, this would be awesome. Bureleson reminds me of Peerless Price in that I think he can excel if he is the #2 in a good system, with a very good #1 to take the pressure off. I don't know that he can be "the man". Remember, when they had Moss protecting him, this guy was a 1000 yard WR. Folks, he is easily worth one of our 3rd's - a proven #2 at this point in the draft, when it's a weak WR yr and there are no guarantee's anyway. Sorry, but give me the proven guy. If we can sign this guy as our #2 and Walter as our #3, our WR problems are solved. Mathis is our #4 speed burner, and Armstrong and Starling probably fight it out for #5, and I actually give an edge to Starling because of Special teams.

I second that. Add Putzier to the mix and in my opinion, with Bush or not with Bush, David Carr should have no more excuses on the offensive side as far as weapons is concerned.

TexanSam
03-17-2006, 02:35 PM
He's their new HC

Never mind then.

mancunian
03-17-2006, 02:37 PM
I second that. Add Putzier to the mix and in my opinion, with Bush or not with Bush, David Carr should have no more excuses on the offensive side as far as weapons is concerned.

might have the weapons - still like to see something done about the Oline so he has time to use those weapons.

texasguy346
03-17-2006, 02:40 PM
I think picking up Nate Burleson would be a good move for the Texans. He would compliment AJ nicely, and he could have some success as the #2. I wouldn't expect him to have the same sort of success he had in Minnesota with Moss as the #1 WR drawing triple teams, but he could still put up a 40 - 50 catch season with 800 + yds. That would leave us with AJ, Burleson, Armstrong, & Mathis, and if we pick up Walter then we'd have a nice group of WRs. There'd be a mix of proven WRs, and unproven but talented WRs eager to make a splash. I wouldn't mind that one bit.

TexanSam
03-17-2006, 02:41 PM
might have the weapons - still like to see something done about the Oline so he has time to use those weapons.

Agree. Give him the Lynn Swann, Barry Sanders, Jerry Rice, Shannon Sharpe, and Jim Brown as a fullback and with no O-line to protect him he still won't have time to throw or do much of anything else.

O.G.
03-17-2006, 02:44 PM
might have the weapons - still like to see something done about the Oline so he has time to use those weapons.

True, but I look at it like this, in the Second half of the season with a steady offensive that wasn't shuffled all over the place and bad coaching, he wasn't toasted as much as in the beginning of the season. Not giving the o line a pass by any means, but even if we don't address the o line problem via free agency or the draft, with Mike Sherman there, they will be better IMO.

O.G.
03-17-2006, 02:45 PM
Agree. Give him the Lynn Swann, Barry Sanders, Jerry Rice, Shannon Sharpe, and Jim Brown as a fullback and with no O-line to protect him he still won't have time to throw or do much of anything else.

Point taken and that's one of the points I brought up with the situation of how bad Carr was in comparision to VY.

keyfro
03-17-2006, 02:51 PM
how is burleson's injury status...i'm just curious because it makes no sense why if he is this talented why no one else seems to be making a serious bid for him...i understand why the vikings might be content on letting him go with a 3rd round pick seeing how the re-signed robinson and they have taylor along with williamson but you would think teams like the 49ers the brown and the seahawks would be making bids on him

JAXwithanX
03-17-2006, 03:09 PM
For what it is worth i remembered reading this in ESPN Bruce Feldman's blog and was pretty impressed then....decided to share it now.

Before his stint at UCF, McCarthy was the receivers coach at Nevada, where he coached Nate Burleson. I dealt with McCarthy some while doing a Burleson feature for ESPN The Magazine last year. McCarthy seemed like a great guy, and he was a big reason for transforming the former prep hoops star into an NFL standout. (McCarthy also named his son after Burleson.)

Nothing great, but at least provides some insight to his character and leaping ability. I also have a great article on Nate that ESPN did right after Moss left....he was the featured article. Can't find it online though, will keep looking....

TexanFan881
03-17-2006, 03:13 PM
Just think, thanks to dropping back three spots in last year's draft we can get Burleson and still have one pick in each round. :redtowel:

JAXwithanX
03-17-2006, 03:21 PM
Found these articles....interesting stuff in all of them....

Talks about his emergence....
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2169114

Good quote by Culpepper in this one....
http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/trainingcamp05/columns/story?columnist=clayton_john&id=2123333

Last year article anticipating his return....talks about the injury that kept him out of games....personally i think help explains his lack of production....after the 04 season....
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2199053

Stat Sheet
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/stats?playerId=4529

Scout Sheet
http://proxy.espn.go.com/nfl/players/scouting?statsId=6407

Forgot to mention he can return punts.....

bigTEXan8
03-17-2006, 03:24 PM
I saw Burleson play in college, and the QB for Nevada forced that ball down Burleson's and and the D's throats. He can make good catches...but like the scouting report said, he's not crisp out of his routes.

BrianC
03-17-2006, 03:25 PM
a 3rd round pick is no guarantee for a good player. The Texans have done pretty good in the 3rd round through our History and w/ that said only one of our 3rd round picks is a current starter, a 3rd rd pick is a gamble Id like to gamble and bet that Burleson will be better than whoever we would take in the 3rd.

Our history in the 3rd round:
Charles Hill
Fred Weary
Dave Ragone
Seth Wand
Antwan Peek
Vernand Morency

We have done extremely well in the 3rd compared to others, but the only player on that list you maybe could say is better than Burleson is Peek, if we were guaranteed to get a quality starter in the 3rd id say no deal, but were not, so trade for Burleson.

JAXwithanX
03-17-2006, 03:30 PM
What people don't realize with this whole 'weak receiver draft' garbage....is that that doesn't mean because none of the receivers are great....none will be taken before the 3rd round. It means the guys who would usually be taken around the 3rd and 4th round that are projected to be Number 2 guys like we need.....will be taken in the 1st and 2nd. Its best to fill this need in FA....and not give up a high draft pick like the teams that unfortunately need a Number 1 extremely bad.

David's Busted Carr
03-17-2006, 03:36 PM
Plus, in 2004, Moss was still there, leaving Burleson constantly open. That's how he got all those yards.

EXACTLY. And we have AJ, which will again leave Burleson open ALOT. And he's already proven he can excel in that role. Can he be a legit #1 WR. NO, but that's not what we need. Can he be a STUD #2 WR. ABSOLUTELY!!! Something we have never had!

JAXwithanX
03-17-2006, 03:45 PM
Whats crazy is if you read those articles....everyone seems to think he can emerge into a Number 1. I mean he is 24....his rookie season he caught 29 passes and averaged 15.7 on each catch and that was as their Number 3 receiver and behind Randy Moss. Second year as Number 2 receiver....over 1000 on 68 catches. And last year he was hurt....only played in 12 games, and looks like he may have tried to come back from his injury too soon judging from the other Vikings receiver's comments. Someone who knows he is still a Number 2 right now....but has Number 1 potential....they are gold to sign. You get a playmaker in an unexpected position for half the money and great trade value when teams come looking for their number 1....by then....hopefully a number 2 will have emerged.

I don't think we personally need to worry about him going to Seattle, his hometown. He was there last night and there is no word about any offer sheet. Also with quotes like this - "Man, I think about [Seahawks quarterback] Matt Hasselbeck putting the ball between the 1 and the 9 on my jersey, and my heart starts racing," Johnson told the magazine Tuesday. from Keyshawn....i think its same to say he will end up there.

The Vikings are who we need to worry about....i'm looking around for any possible talk of them and big name receivers.

This is from today's St. Paul Pioneer Press' paper Receiver Nate Burleson, who visited with the Seahawks on Friday, is scheduled to head to Houston for a meeting with the Texans on Monday.
Burleson is a restricted free agent, and the Vikings can match any offer he receives. If the Vikings do not match, they would receive a third-round pick from the team that signs Burleson.

keyfro
03-17-2006, 04:06 PM
i'm sold as long as he's coming to us fully recovered from his injuries...although if we sign him and walter that means once again derick armstrong is the 4th or 5th reciever on the dept chart along with mathis

bigTEXan8
03-17-2006, 04:14 PM
i'm sold as long as he's coming to us fully recovered from his injuries...although if we sign him and walter that means once again derick armstrong is the 4th or 5th reciever on the dept chart along with mathis

No, I think that Walter, Mathis, and Armstrong are going to be switching on & off at the #3 spot. Of course, Mathis may just want to stick with kick-return duties, and then it's Walter and Armstrong gong back and forth with the #3.

JAXwithanX
03-17-2006, 04:32 PM
I think Mathis will spend another year learning routes better....and then emerge throughout the 07 season as a Number 2 burner. Walter and Armstrong will be the 3rd recievers i believe. Hopefully Mathis is realizing his potential and working on his routes as we speak.

run-david-run
03-17-2006, 04:42 PM
I think if we get Burelson, we wont get Walter, because he I beleive is also an RFA, meaning we will have to give the Bengals compensation as well. Both Mathis and Armstrong can do a good job as the #3 guy, neither have proven they can be #2, Burelson has. Get him, stick with MAthis/Armstrong at #3 and #4.

dat_boy_yec
03-17-2006, 04:44 PM
I think the timing is good, because if Walters doesn't make it down here we are in a position to get Burleson. If Walters does end up here than we have leverage and our need is not so great. Also about the third rd. pick. I think We could compensate for that by trading the second rd. pick and moving down a few spots and picking up another third rd. Even without that though we are in a good position. Our offense is coming together nicely personnel wise if we land this guy and Putzier and Flannagan (does anyone know what's going on with this guy) and that would leave us with a few holes come draft time.

TexanFan881
03-17-2006, 04:57 PM
I think if we get Burelson, we wont get Walter, because he I beleive is also an RFA, meaning we will have to give the Bengals compensation as well. Both Mathis and Armstrong can do a good job as the #3 guy, neither have proven they can be #2, Burelson has. Get him, stick with MAthis/Armstrong at #3 and #4.

Walter's compensation is a 7th round pick, so it's not really that big of a deal.

JAXwithanX
03-17-2006, 05:02 PM
Walter's compensation is a 7th round pick, so it's not really that big of a deal.

Yeah if Walters signs that will have almost no-bearing on the Burleson deal....draft wise or position wise. Walters isn't going to the Number 2 reciever next year....he would be a great Number 3 and slot reciever though. Mathis will eventually become the Number 2 burner we need, i think....and maybe by then Burleson will be worth more after proving he can be back to 2004 numbers. Not to mention there is always a coach out there who thinks they can turn a great Number 2 into a 1 (sometimes it even works in the right system and right reciever).

TD143
03-17-2006, 05:12 PM
Burleson is not unrestricted folks.... he is restricted and I don't want to give up anything for him. :stirpot: Heck I'd prefer Dez White

JAXwithanX
03-17-2006, 05:15 PM
Burleson is not unrestricted folks.... he is restricted and I don't want to give up anything for him. :stirpot: Heck I'd prefer Dez White

I'm pretty sure everyone hear knows he isn't unrestricted....thus the talk over draft compensation....and i hope the rest is just a joke.

TD143
03-17-2006, 05:20 PM
I'm joking on the 2nd part...BUT I am not a fan of Burleson...he hasn't done anythign to warrant giving up compensation.

keyfro
03-17-2006, 05:27 PM
well let's take a look at the recievers that would be available to us in the top of the 3rd round

greg jennings
derek hagan probably
jason avant
greg lee
mike haas
travis wilson
skyler green
jonathan orr

none of these players are anywhere near the talent of nate burleson...haas might be a great reciever eventually but he's not worth the high 3rd round pick we would have to use on him...skyler green probably has the most talent of all those guys above...fits the steve smith mold...personally after looking over the options and believing that we need to shore up this offense first signing burleson makes the most sense

JAXwithanX
03-17-2006, 05:28 PM
I'm joking on the 2nd part...BUT I am not a fan of Burleson...he hasn't done anythign to warrant giving up compensation.

Lol. I figured but wanted to make sure. Well....i think anyone who is 24, had a 1000 yard season in only their second season and is considered an emerging Number 1 reciever (the Vikings were convinced when they traded Moss....although they did just give up Culpepper for a 2nd round pick....but so were and are many other people if you check the articles) deserves heavy consideration for a 3rd rounder....hell we have 2 anyways. Teams should be so lucky to get potential like that in the late 1st round, not to mention he already has a 1000 recieving season in the NFL....which is more than anyone in the draft can say....

TD143
03-17-2006, 05:32 PM
Your point is well made Keyfro..... :ok: I'm just concerns what the compensation will be and WHAT else it will cost us.

Texas
03-17-2006, 05:36 PM
I really hope we get this guy. He would almost be a perfect pick for a #2 Receiver. Hopefully we will get him!

TexanFan881
03-17-2006, 05:37 PM
Your point is well made Keyfro..... I'm just concerns what the compensation will be and WHAT else it will cost us.

The compensation is a 3rd round pick

JAXwithanX
03-17-2006, 05:38 PM
Your point is well made Keyfro..... :ok: I'm just concerns what the compensation will be and WHAT else it will cost us.

The compensation is the 3rd round pick...period. And what do you mean 'what else' will it cost us? No one has to give up their first born if thats what your saying?

keyfro
03-17-2006, 05:41 PM
right there is a slight possibility that we can talk them into taking our 4th round instead of the third given how high these picks are...however...the viks are wanting to trade up to pick up one of the top three QB's in the draft to bring up under brad johnson...so they might stick to their guns with this one...anyways...is burleson worth the 66th pick in the draft...yeah probably...is he worth anything less definitly

Texas
03-17-2006, 05:44 PM
Also just to say..It doesnt look like we can "trade down" to get D'Brick anymore. I beleive the saints will take him with there 2nd pick. It only makes since.

JAXwithanX
03-17-2006, 05:45 PM
Here is an interesting way of thinking about it....are there 65 players better than Burleson entering the league this year. Easy pick.

keyfro
03-17-2006, 05:48 PM
exactly jax...if burleson were to come out this year in the draft he's probably a 1st round pick given the fact that he's 24 and has had a 1000yd receiving year...plus this year is weak at receiver

JAXwithanX
03-17-2006, 05:50 PM
Also just to say..It doesnt look like we can "trade down" to get D'Brick anymore. I beleive the saints will take him with there 2nd pick. It only makes since.

Thats a possibility....but i wouldn't be surprised to see Mario Williams come in. The hype around this guy is insane....and nothing brings fans to the stadium like hype. Also i think it is a bigger need for them.

Scouts Inc. sees the same dilemma. And i agree that Ferguson is a safer pick.

By addressing the quarterback need before the draft, the Saints have made the second overall pick the target for teams interested in trading up for the chance to draft QB Matt Leinart. Between now and draft day, the Saints will put pick No. 2 up for public auction and wait for the highest bidder. If they don't get the right price, the Saints will have a difficult decision to make between Ferguson and DE Mario Williams. In my opinion, Ferguson would be the safer pick. He could solidify the Saints' offensive line at left tackle opposite last year's top pick, ROT Jammal Brown.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/draft06/insider/columns/story?columnist=mcshay_todd&id=2372493

Koolbrz
03-17-2006, 08:28 PM
I think the timing is good, because if Walters doesn't make it down here we are in a position to get Burleson. If Walters does end up here than we have leverage and our need is not so great. Also about the third rd. pick. I think We could compensate for that by trading the second rd. pick and moving down a few spots and picking up another third rd. Even without that though we are in a good position. Our offense is coming together nicely personnel wise if we land this guy and Putzier and Flannagan (does anyone know what's going on with this guy) and that would leave us with a few holes come draft time.


Walters will be here and as far as getting Burleson forget it. He will sign with the Seahawks. Texans can not offer him what the seahawks can. He is gonna use the Texans to get more out of Seattle. Looking at a contract similar to D. Givens. Oh well!!! Seattle has alot of interest in him from wht i have heard.

TexanFan881
03-17-2006, 08:30 PM
Walters will be here and as far as getting Burleson forget it. He will sign with the Seahawks. Texans can not offer him what the seahawks can. He is gonna use the Texans to get more out of Seattle. Looking at a contract similar to D. Givens. Oh well!!! Seattle has alot of interest in him from wht i have heard.

Who ever said he wanted what Givens wanted?

BrianC
03-17-2006, 08:33 PM
Who ever said he wanted what Givens wanted?

apparently his sources w/ the seahawks :sarcasm:

JAXwithanX
03-17-2006, 10:58 PM
Yeah Paul Allen doesn't care about the hometown guy Burleson. Anyways he was there last night and today and i haven't heard anything. The Seahawks were just in the Super Bowl....they will most likely be signing Keyshawn....he really wants to go there. I think we would probably give Burleson the most money, seeing how we want to use the draft to fill so many other needs.

texman8
03-18-2006, 12:32 AM
If the Seahawks can get around that poison pill "clause" in Vikings contract with Hutchison and they are looking to get Abraham,also....they won't have the cap room to go after Burleson.

bckey
03-18-2006, 12:50 AM
I for one don't want Burleson. Minnesota would be real happy if the Texans signed him because we would basically be giving them a late 2nd rounder. Out of 31 teams we would have to give up the most because of our draft position. The Texans aren't going to the playoffs next year so what is the need to give up a high pick when we aren't one or two players away. Just sit tight in the draft and if a wr falls to us take him if not we are serviceable enough. I'm sure we can pick up a wr on the cheap if we have to. We have given away too many draft picks in the past. We need more not less. This guy had 1 good year. You can come up with whatever reasons he did but fact is he is still enough of a ? mark to pass on. I hope we get Walter and are done with giving up draft picks.

JAXwithanX
03-18-2006, 01:04 AM
I for one don't want Burleson. Minnesota would be real happy if the Texans signed him because we would basically be giving them a late 2nd rounder. Out of 31 teams we would have to give up the most because of our draft position. The Texans aren't going to the playoffs next year so what is the need to give up a high pick when we aren't one or two players away. Just sit tight in the draft and if a wr falls to us take him if not we are serviceable enough. I'm sure we can pick up a wr on the cheap if we have to. We have given away too many draft picks in the past. We need more not less. This guy had 1 good year. You can come up with whatever reasons he did but fact is he is still enough of a ? mark to pass on. I hope we get Walter and are done with giving up draft picks.

1 we gave up some picks for Buchanan....other than that I can't think of many we have just thrown away
2. what WR are you exactly salivating to fall to the Texans? (i can't think of one that will be taken in the first round who is better....)
3. yes he had only one good year.....he has played two full years....the other being his rookie season
4. i don't care how high the 3rd round pick is....its a 3rd round pick....i hate when people try and mix the rounds up because they are close....well its just the most ridiculous thing ever....its a third round pick....period
5. sure we can pick up a WR on the cheap.....but we aren't looking at burleson to be just a WR....we want a legitimate Number 2....which he has proven he can be
6. you say Burleson is a question mark but what exactly do you call a 3rd round WR?
7. The Texans aren't going to the playoffs next year so what is the need to give up a high pick when we aren't one or two players away.....that rationale makes absolute ZERO sense. you don't make good trades if they don't involve all the players you need at once?? what do you call the one pick in the draft we would give up for him....last time i checked you don't pick 5 guys with a high 3rd round.....'basically late 2nd round pick'

Carr Bombed
03-18-2006, 01:12 AM
I for one don't want Burleson. Minnesota would be real happy if the Texans signed him because we would basically be giving them a late 2nd rounder. Out of 31 teams we would have to give up the most because of our draft position. The Texans aren't going to the playoffs next year so what is the need to give up a high pick when we aren't one or two players away. Just sit tight in the draft and if a wr falls to us take him if not we are serviceable enough. I'm sure we can pick up a wr on the cheap if we have to. We have given away too many draft picks in the past. We need more not less. This guy had 1 good year. You can come up with whatever reasons he did but fact is he is still enough of a ? mark to pass on. I hope we get Walter and are done with giving up draft picks. We just dropped our #2 and #3 recievers. WR has quickly became our biggest need behind solidifying the Oline. If we don't pick up Nate most likely one of our 3rd rounders (which btw are both high 3rd rounders) are going to be spent adding a reciever to this team regardless. So the argument shouldn't be if you would want to spend a 3rd rounder on him, which one is going to be spent (or a higher pick) anyways if we dont get him, but if you think we can find better talent in the draft and I don't think we can. This is a very weak draft at the WR position and there is a ton of WRs that come in and don't live up to their hype (see detroit lions, even Gaffney didn't perform up to the position he was taken in the draft). If we have a chance to take this guy (who is only 24), you do it and don't look back, its a no brainer.

horn_omatic
03-18-2006, 01:18 AM
First let me start off by saying i already know what half of the people are going to respond with.............normal sacarasm. Having said that, i am getting really frustrated with the rest of the NFL signing free agents and the texans doing just about nothing. I know we signed Weaver who i think will help, we needed a DE. I will also assume that Cook is the FB Kubes wants. If we sign the wideout from Cincy i guess that will be another welcome addition, due to the fact that we have exactly 3 recievers. I think we will end up getting Jeb and i think that will really help Carr, having another pass catching tight end. We MUST get Burleson, i know it may cost us a 3rd round pick but so be it. If we can get a legit #2 to help ease the burden of Andre and a recieving tight end, the defense may actually get to catch their breath and possibly a sip of water!

Carr Bombed
03-18-2006, 01:21 AM
theres already a whole other thread on this topic

JAXwithanX
03-18-2006, 01:22 AM
there is a topic already overflowing with the same sentiment.....

RB5
03-18-2006, 01:33 AM
I for one don't want Burleson. Minnesota would be real happy if the Texans signed him because we would basically be giving them a late 2nd rounder. Out of 31 teams we would have to give up the most because of our draft position. The Texans aren't going to the playoffs next year so what is the need to give up a high pick when we aren't one or two players away. Just sit tight in the draft and if a wr falls to us take him if not we are serviceable enough. I'm sure we can pick up a wr on the cheap if we have to. We have given away too many draft picks in the past. We need more not less. This guy had 1 good year. You can come up with whatever reasons he did but fact is he is still enough of a ? mark to pass on. I hope we get Walter and are done with giving up draft picks.

You're still getting a young guy that could be here in the future when we do have a better shot at the playoffs. A third round pick is nothing for a proven NFL receiver. :redtowel:

horn_omatic
03-18-2006, 01:35 AM
indeed carr bomb, wanted one to call my own! i just didn;t want mine to be all doom and gloom. Just frustrated, plus half the time you cannot say anything on this board without having someone jump down your throat.

run-david-run
03-18-2006, 01:46 AM
Lol, someone said in an earlier thread, the possibility of getting a player with Burelson's talent with that 3rd round pick is very low, let alone someone who has proven he can do it at an NFL level (1000 yds in 04). He is 24 years old, coming into his forth year. With Moss by his side, he played at an almost Pro Bowl level, even when Randy missed games that season.

As we have seen in the past season and a half, AJ has delt with plenty of double and triple teaming, mostly because of the lack of time and the lack of weapons in the passing game. Adding a legit threat takes away half the problem, thoroughly addressing a need as pressing as this one then allows us to continue in the draft and FA knowing we dont need to worry about the receiver position.

bckey
03-18-2006, 01:53 AM
1 we gave up some picks for Buchanan....other than that I can't think of many we have just thrown away

Babin, Hollings, and P-Burnt

2. what WR are you exactly salivating to fall to the Texans? (i can't think of one that will be taken in the first round who is better....)

I'm not. I'd be happy with Walters, Dez White, Quincy Morgan, Peerless Price

3. yes he had only one good year.....he has played two full years....the other being his rookie season

OK

4. i don't care how high the 3rd round pick is....its a 3rd round pick....i hate when people try and mix the rounds up because they are close....well its just the most ridiculous thing ever....its a third round pick....period

Well when you are the 1st pick of each round it is just like drafting at the end of the previous round. Get used to hatin.

5. sure we can pick up a WR on the cheap.....but we aren't looking at burleson to be just a WR....we want a legitimate Number 2....which he has proven he can be

we want the same thing just different opinions on how to get them

6. you say Burleson is a question mark but what exactly do you call a 3rd round WR?

a question mark

7. ....that rationale makes absolute ZERO sense. you don't make good trades if they don't involve all the players you need at once?? what do you call the one pick in the draft we would give up for him....last time i checked you don't pick 5 guys with a high 3rd round.....'basically late 2nd round pick'

We don't need to overspend in free agency right now. You pull out the big contracts when you are a couple of players away. We have a lot of holes to fill. Trying to fill them all via free agency will send this team into cap hell. How much do you think Burleson is going to want to come and play for our 2-14 team?

keyfro
03-18-2006, 01:55 AM
plus when you look at the draft this year there really are only a few guys who might make a difference on a given team at the WR position...those being jackson, holmes, moss, and green...imo...three of those guys aren't getting out of round 1 and the other will take 2-3 years to develop...rather have burleson and have an instant number 2 guy

RB5
03-18-2006, 01:55 AM
Good point. I'm just thinking that particular hole would be tough to fill in the draft.

Carr Bombed
03-18-2006, 01:57 AM
How much do you think Burleson is going to want to come and play for our 2-14 team?

I don't know we havn't seen anything that shows the type of contract hes going to command, so we don't know if the texans would be over spending or not. With most of the high profile WRs off the board I think we can get him at a very affordable price.

Mathis13
03-18-2006, 02:27 AM
First let me start off by saying i already know what half of the people are going to respond with.............normal sacarasm. Having said that, i am getting really frustrated with the rest of the NFL signing free agents and the texans doing just about nothing. I know we signed Weaver who i think will help, we needed a DE. I will also assume that Cook is the FB Kubes wants. If we sign the wideout from Cincy i guess that will be another welcome addition, due to the fact that we have exactly 3 recievers. I think we will end up getting Jeb and i think that will really help Carr, having another pass catching tight end. We MUST get Burleson, i know it may cost us a 3rd round pick but so be it. If we can get a legit #2 to help ease the burden of Andre and a recieving tight end, the defense may actually get to catch their breath and possibly a sip of water!

Not every team is spending all this money on FA. I agree we must make some moves but look at New England they havent done anything

Koolbrz
03-18-2006, 02:33 AM
Who ever said he wanted what Givens wanted?


All you have to do is watch how this plays out. Going to be the same kind of deal Givens recieved from Tenn. Just give it a few days.

Koolbrz
03-18-2006, 02:36 AM
apparently his sources w/ the seahawks :sarcasm:


I would love to have Burleson here. Question is are they willing to pay him. Givens walked and so will Nate. TO SEATTLE!! Just wait and see. It'll surprise the hell out of me if we get him.

Carr Bombed
03-18-2006, 02:46 AM
All you have to do is watch how this plays out. Going to be the same kind of deal Givens recieved from Tenn. Just give it a few days. I really doubt coming off a down year and a year of injury Nate is going to command a 24 million dollar contract at about 4 mil a year, he will cost much much less. The Texan were willing to offer Givens close to 19 million (so they're willing to spend the money) and Nate will cost much less than that.

Koolbrz
03-18-2006, 02:52 AM
I really doubt coming off a down year and a year of injury Nate is going to command a 24 million dollar contract at about 4 mil a year, he will cost much much less. The Texan were willing to offer Givens close to 19 million (so they're willing to spend the money) and Nate will cost much less than that.


I do hope that you are right. Like i said before I would love for him to play for the Texans. He would be a great addition. Just a wait and see game now.

Carr Bombed
03-18-2006, 02:59 AM
I do hope that you are right. Like i said before I would love for him to play for the Texans. He would be a great addition. Just a wait and see game now. I do like the approach the Texans are taking. With all these people complaining how they aren't doing this and aren't doing that and aren't signing this player, they are over looking that FA and the offseason is a long process and if your a major player that buys up players in the first week you end up over spending (Titans and Skins) for similar talent that will eventually fall through the cracks at a much lower price later on. The Texans are just sitting back and waiting, but are slowing going to fill needs, we might lock up our #2 with Nate and in the next couple of days we should acquire Putzier to help solidify our TE position

MorKnolle
03-18-2006, 01:13 PM
Burleson would be ok but I think we're going to end up overpaying him in addition to using one of our 3rd round picks on him. If we do bring him in, then I think that rules out drafting a WR since we will have used one of our 3rds on him and we're giving up a 7th for Walter (assuming we get him), that's two draft picks for WRs. I'd prefer to grab one of the bigger WRs in this draft in the 4th or even 3rd round rather than getting another fairly small one in Burleson and then a bigger, really slow WR in Walters.

Dunta_23
03-18-2006, 01:16 PM
I agree with the post above...Smart teams wait and make solid deals and acquisitions...underacheiving teams with a lot of cap space make huge splashes early...As you can see the perenial AFC contenders are not making moves yet, and if they do, they are small ones( Indy, Pitt, NE, Denver etc)...I think it is smart to stay relatively quiet in the beginning of FA because that is when u pay for late season hype...

The Texans have been fairly good so far and if they manage to land Putzier, Burleson and Flanagan then we will be in great shape for the draft. I think Burleson is a solid pick up if it costs a 3rd round pick...He has similar numbers to AJ in the "breakout" year and will be a solid # 2...I really hated to lose Gaffney especially to a 1 year deal...

If we address TE, DE, WR, and C in Free agency then it leaves us with a lot less holes to fill during the draft giving us the choice of taking the BPA over a reach player(another strong point of contending teams)...

The Preacher
03-18-2006, 01:45 PM
I think this makes sense for both teams and espsecially the Texans. Burleson was a solid #2 two years ago and even #1 when Moss got hurt. For whatever reason his #'s were skewed last season due to a weak line, poor Culpepper play, Minnesota chaos, injuries, and the revival of Koren Robinson. Robinson appaears to be the steal of the year from the Betty Ford center and understands how sad a path he was headed down and has gone into Cris Carter recovery mode. With the addition of their 7th overall pick in Williamson last year and Marcus Robinson, Travis Taylor to boot, they have the makings of a ridiculously crowded WR position and would most likely not be terribly hurt to lose who they expected to be their #1 last year. I'm sure they could find a solid value at the 65th slot.

The increase in the cap is my #1 push for loading up on FA's. 2007's cap will be close to 15 mil more than last year's. Backing up the truck on a Burleson contract will seem not so heavy when we get there. Even Weaver's contract won't seem that huge when you figure the cap divided by # of players will reach 2+mil. So you have a few guys who cost 4-5 mil the inflation rate will make this years' deals seem tame. It seems ridiculous guys will get paid so much but the NFL is a cash hoarding cow that will continue to have massively increasing revenues allowing for bigger cap figures each year. After looking at what Tenn did w/Givens his bonus prorated is only 2 mil per plus something like 650,000, 1 mil, and 1.5 in the first three years. The big part of the contract is in years 4 and five and by then he will be almost thirty and expendable. Just saying his 2.5-3.5 cap figure per seems cheap though you would have to take a 4 mil hit if you let him go after 3 years. By 2009 that will probably seem chincy.

I know this is long winded but my point is I think it is wise to load up on FA now even if they seem expensive because with the new CBA 4-5 mil per year isn't outrageous when you have 53 guys and 2/3rds of them aren't making 1mil plus and several much less. There is a going to be a lot of cash to slosh around and if you think guys our asking a lot now just wait until future years. Burleson is definitely better than any receiver that will be there at #65 and if there is one (which most likely a big sleeper will develop that most teams won't recognize...cough cough Travis Wilson), our chances of us finding him and making him NFL ready out of the gate are practically zero. Burleson is proven and along AJ, probably Walter, probably Bush, Putzier, DD and the Mathis kicker that's one sweet group of playmakers. I don't know the exact amount of cap space we have left for the rookie pool but we could always restructure somebody and not feel like we're headed towards cap purgatory, because I think teams are underestimating exactly how much room they will have in the future.

:texans:

keyfro
03-18-2006, 01:51 PM
preacher man i agree with everything you said except one...the travis wilson as the sleeper in this draft at the wide out position...beside the point that i can't stand OU wilson was the biggest dissapointment for the sooners this season...he was supposed to pick up where mark clayton left off and he fell completely on his face...his missed so many catchable balls i was starting to feel sorry for the sooners...he has the hands of dropford with the speed of gaffney...not exactly a good combination

The Preacher
03-18-2006, 01:57 PM
preacher man i agree with everything you said except one...the travis wilson as the sleeper in this draft at the wide out position...beside the point that i can't stand OU wilson was the biggest dissapointment for the sooners this season...he was supposed to pick up where mark clayton left off and he fell completely on his face...his missed so many catchable balls i was starting to feel sorry for the sooners...he has the hands of dropford with the speed of gaffney...not exactly a good combination

Probably a reach but I'll always find a way to deflect from my main point. :cool: Sorry I had to go there

JAXwithanX
03-18-2006, 03:44 PM
Anyone who doesn't want Burleson....I would love for them to name this magical WR that we will be getting in the 3rd round for him. Its got to be a sleeper that no one has noticed and would love to know.

P.S. - Burleson isn't going to command the same money as Givens....he has only played 2 full years, was hurt for most of last, and even though this is pure speculation - doesn't seem like the type of guy who overvalues himself. If you don't know you should check the articles i posted back around page 3 i think.

Mightymike
03-18-2006, 03:50 PM
Anyone who doesn't want Burleson....I would love for them to name this magical WR that we will be getting in the 3rd round for him. Its got to be a sleeper that no one has noticed and would love to know.
P.S. - Burleson isn't going to command the same money as Givens....he has only played 2 full years, was hurt for most of last, and even though this is pure speculation - doesn't seem like the type of guy who overvalues himself. If you don't know you should check the articles i posted back around page 3 i think.

it's not that their will be a better WR with our 3rd rd. pick, its that we might want to use it on a diff. position, like MLB, S, G, T, CB

Dunta_23
03-18-2006, 03:52 PM
it's not that their will be a better WR with our 3rd rd. pick, its that we might want to use it on a diff. position, like MLB, S, G, T, CB

Then who will we put out as a # 2 receiver?

JAXwithanX
03-18-2006, 03:53 PM
it's not that their will be a better WR with our 3rd rd. pick, its that we might want to use it on a diff. position, like MLB, S, G, T, CB

Now i can understand that. I don't agree with it because i think we need a Number 2 more because of the way we were shut down on passing to AJ last year. But other people seem to think that a 3rd Round WR would be better than Burleson, which just doesn't make sense.

Mightymike
03-18-2006, 03:53 PM
a diff. UFA that you don't lose any picks for signing him

Dunta_23
03-18-2006, 03:55 PM
a diff. UFA that you don't lose any picks for signing him

Fair enough...do you know of any players ???? Names ???

JAXwithanX
03-18-2006, 03:57 PM
There are no UFA's with that have shown Burleson's capability for production not to mention, upside at 24 years old. And i am including Keyshawn. The thing is i wouldn't have my hopes up on giving him the contract he wants if he wouldn't have been 1. hurt last year and 2. given any indication that he believes he is now a Number 1.

JAXwithanX
03-18-2006, 03:59 PM
See i believe when a team is this bad you should be trying to acquire young talent....and you can't tell me there is someone in the third round you know has more talent than Burleson.

TexanFan881
03-18-2006, 04:17 PM
See i believe when a team is this bad you should be trying to acquire young talent....and you can't tell me there is someone in the third round you know has more talent than Burleson.

That's how I feel too. How is a bad team supposed to get better when you don't pick up some talent that will be real good in the future.

keyfro
03-18-2006, 04:22 PM
bottom line is any reciever that we pick up via UFA's that would be comparable to burleson are all over the age of 30...peerless price, keenan mccardell, etc...our number one priority this offseason should be to try and give carr and this offense the best chance to succeed...yes that means defense needs to take a back seat for a year or two but with all the money we have invested in our offense via the draft with carr and johnson and soon bush we need to start showing something for it...so get carr his TE, his wide outs, two very good RB's, and a decent o-line with a system that actually works and then we will start winning games...now i know that defense wins championships but i think we all will agree that another year with an offense as pathetic as last years no one will be wanting to watch our games including the fans...there would be no reason to...so i say fix the offense...win some games...atleast make them exciting with high scores like the KC chiefs and then fix the defense

Mightymike
03-18-2006, 04:28 PM
Fair enough...do you know of any players ???? Names ???

its gettin slim....
david boston
quincy morgan
troy walters
troy brown

tulexan
03-18-2006, 04:30 PM
Then who will we put out as a # 2 receiver?


Reggie will be playing WR for a lot of plays. He is avery good complementary WR to AJ

Dunta_23
03-18-2006, 04:37 PM
Reggie will be playing WR for a lot of plays. He is avery good complementary WR to AJ

Yeah more as a slot kind of receiver...you cant just line up AJ out there by himself and then motion Bush out of the backfield...Mathis is not ready to be a full time WR yet unless he improves a lot....and other than than we have nobody...so get Burleson, put him out there with Mathis and AJ....and then you put Reggie out

tulexan
03-18-2006, 04:40 PM
When Davis is the running back, Bush will most likely be lined up as a receiver, like they did at USC.

bigTEXan8
03-18-2006, 04:45 PM
I sure hope the Texans get Burleson...he would be extremely valuable. I can really see AJ blossiming even more so than we've seen.

Dunta_23
03-18-2006, 04:50 PM
So far AJ's career has been fairly inconsistant...he has shown flashes of brilliance but he has also shown his fair share of mediocrity...I dont think he should be judged much different than Carr...until he becomes consistant...Part of that is Carr's inability to get protected but Johnson must also get open...Burleson will help ALOT....more than any rookie would...he is a threat...plus with Bush, Putzier, and maybe even DD on the field...AJ wont be swamped with defenders and should be able to get open... for a 3rd round pick I think the Texans would be crazy not to do it...seeing that they didnt actively go after a playmaker(Bryant, Randle El, Owens, Keyshawn etc)

bckey
03-18-2006, 04:51 PM
Anyone who doesn't want Burleson....I would love for them to name this magical WR that we will be getting in the 3rd round for him. Its got to be a sleeper that no one has noticed and would love to know.

Who said we need to sign a receiver in the 3rd? If we don't get Burleson so what.

Dunta_23
03-18-2006, 04:53 PM
QUOTE]

Who said we need to sign a receiver in the 3rd? If we don't get Burleson so what.[/QUOTE]

If we dont get Burleson, we have to draft a WR seeing that we havent actively looked for a good one...and nothing drafted after the first round will be able to accomplish what Burleson could accomplish

bckey
03-18-2006, 04:53 PM
Fair enough...do you know of any players ???? Names ???

Peerless Price, Dez White, Quincy Morgan

Dunta_23
03-18-2006, 04:56 PM
only decent player there is Price and he is getting old and may not want to come here

bckey
03-18-2006, 04:57 PM
If we dont get Burleson, we have to draft a WR seeing that we havent actively looked for a good one...and nothing drafted after the first round will be able to accomplish what Burleson could accomplish

Don't get me wrong. I like Burleson but I don't want to give up a high 3rd AND pay big $ for him. If we were going to overpay for a wr we would have raised the ante for Givins and not had to give up a draft pick.

TexanFan881
03-18-2006, 04:58 PM
Price is falling apart year after year and hasn't been very productive for awhile. Nobody left at WR is better than Burleson.

TexanSam
03-18-2006, 08:40 PM
Maybe you people are not remember is that we have the first AND second picks in the 3rd round. I see it this way, we are basically using our first 3rd round draft pick on Burleson if we get him. He's a guy who's proven he can be a very good 2nd wide reciever. For the person who said he's a question mark, well yes coming off after last season, but anyone we draft in the 3rd round will be a question mark who hasn't proven anything in the pro's. Burleson has proven something. We need a wide reciever, and Burleson is better than anyone we'll get in the 2nd or 3rd round.

TexansNeedRBin05
03-18-2006, 08:58 PM
The guy is worth a 2nd rounder+more, we could use very much!

aj.
03-18-2006, 09:22 PM
If they were going to give $18 million to Givens, there's probably no reason why they wouldn't use that $18 million for Walter and Burleson.

They would probably be able to land Burleson easily for 3 yrs $11.5 mill or less (including the s/b). The Vikes tender was only the 700k variety.

Mightymike
03-18-2006, 09:27 PM
If they were going to give $18 million to Givens, there's probably no reason why they wouldn't use that $18 million for Walter and Burleson.

They would probably be able to land Burleson easily for 3 yrs $11.5 mill or less (including the s/b). The Vikes tender was only the 700k variety.

does anyone know of other teams trying to sign burleson

aj.
03-18-2006, 09:40 PM
Seattle is the main one.....given equal money, he would go there before coming here.

Mightymike
03-18-2006, 09:49 PM
Seattle is the main one.....given equal money, he would go there before coming here.

this is the main reason why we end up overpaying FA. noone wants to go to a 2-14 team

aj.
03-18-2006, 10:04 PM
Mainly because it's his home town and his family lives there. Then there's the thing about going (on one hand) to the defending NFC champs or (on the other hand) to a 2-14 team. Hmmmmm. Tough choice.

Mightymike
03-18-2006, 10:08 PM
Mainly because it's his home town and his family lives there. Then there's the thing about going (on one hand) to the defending NFC champs or (on the other hand) to a 2-14 team. Hmmmmm. Tough choice.

i was sayin that in general, the FA we have signed this year. Those are valid points. He would be the #3 receiver in Seattle or #4 if Peter Warrick beat him, opposed to definite #2 in Houston

Maddict5
03-18-2006, 10:30 PM
who's seattles #2 wr again. at least we have the adv of the vikes wanting him to sign for us as it a 30 pick difference. if he agrees to terms with both teams- they choose right?

TexanFan881
03-18-2006, 10:33 PM
I guess the fact we lost a lot of games last year is a reason a lot of free agents don't want to come here, but...

I think our team has a lot of upside. A star rookie running back (coming soon), and a young QB and WR with a lot of talent. We remodled the whole coaching staff with a lot of good coaches and the team has vastly improved. If they want to do good in the short term they can go sign somewhere else, but I think we will be good in the long run.

Mightymike
03-18-2006, 10:40 PM
bobby engram

JAXwithanX
03-19-2006, 01:25 AM
Who said we need to sign a receiver in the 3rd? If we don't get Burleson so what.

Your ridiculous....do you even get the idea of trying to fill positions?

....and Peerless Price, Dez White, Quincy Morgan as alternatives we wouldn't have to give up a pick for?

Peerless Price is on his last leg and Dez White and Morgan hopefully is a really bad joke.

Kaiser Toro
03-19-2006, 06:20 AM
So far AJ's career has been fairly inconsistant...he has shown flashes of brilliance but he has also shown his fair share of mediocrity...I dont think he should be judged much different than Carr...until he becomes consistant...Part of that is Carr's inability to get protected but Johnson must also get open...Burleson will help ALOT....more than any rookie would...he is a threat...plus with Bush, Putzier, and maybe even DD on the field...AJ wont be swamped with defenders and should be able to get open... for a 3rd round pick I think the Texans would be crazy not to do it

He has played three years. He was banged up early last year and did not look to be right most of the year. According to the pulse of this site he has played with out a serious #2 or a TE. Moreover, he played well enough in year two be named to the Pro Bowl.

We need AJ to come to work this year and put up year 2 numbers. The drop need to diminish, but as the Offense gets better those drops will be not become as magnified as well.

jacquescas
03-19-2006, 02:17 PM
I admit i didn't have Burleson on the radar and i'm not happy about giving up a pick for him.

That being said the need for a legit number 2 who can come in and contriubte immediately is so great that its worth it.
Someone that comes in 24 years old with over 100 receptions, almost 2000 total yards and 10+ Career TDs, plus a 1000 yard season and a pro bowl already? Plus adding him next to AJ is gonna allow him to thrive.

This plus Putzier will solidify our offensive skill positions.

TexanFan881
03-19-2006, 02:25 PM
I admit i didn't have Burleson on the radar and i'm not happy about giving up a pick for him.

That being said the need for a legit number 2 who can come in and contriubte immediately is so great that its worth it.
Someone that comes in 24 years old with over 100 receptions, almost 2000 total yards and 10+ Career TDs, plus a 1000 yard season and a pro bowl already? Plus adding him next to AJ is gonna allow him to thrive.

This plus Putzier will solidify our offensive skill positions.

I honestly don't mind giving up a pick for him but I agree with you on the other points 100%

Kookus
03-19-2006, 02:46 PM
He has played three years. He was banged up early last year and did not look to be right most of the year. According to the pulse of this site he has played with out a serious #2 or a TE. Moreover, he played well enough in year two be named to the Pro Bowl.

We need AJ to come to work this year and put up year 2 numbers. The drop need to diminish, but as the Offense gets better those drops will be not become as magnified as well.

I would agree, AJ and Nate might be a very intesting tandem. Last year both of them were predicted to have breakout years! Both recievers were in their 3rd year in the league, this has been in the past a statistical monster for a lot of 3rd year recievers. Nate was projected #1 on his team with the departure of Randy Moss.

Both had similar issues. NO LEGIT #2 and they both got hurt and their QB's underperformed. (In Nates case Daunte got hurt.)

From Minnsotas Website;
Explosive WR who enjoyed a breakout season in his second year in the league in 04, becoming only the 9th player in franchise history to post a 1,000-yard season and led the team with 1,006 yards receiving...Ranked 7th in the NFC in 2004 with 9 TD catches...His 91-yard punt return at Indianapolis (11/8/04) was the first by a Viking since '99 and was the longest in the NFL in 2004...Joined Randy Moss as the only player in team history to catch a TD pass and return a punt for a TD in the same game when he accomplished the feat at Indianapolis (11/8/04)...Ranks 5th in Vikings history for starts by a rookie WR with 9 in 2003, the most since Randy Moss' 11 in 1998 and trailing only Anthony Carter, Paul Flatley and Sammy White, (Carter came to the Vikings as an NFL rookie in 1985 following a career in the USFL)...Ranks 5th in Vikings history in receiving yards by a rookie with 455...Selected by the Vikings in the 3rd round (71st overall) in the 2003 Draft...Highest WR drafted by the Vikings since Randy Moss was selected in the 1st round (21st overall) in 1998...First University of Nevada-Reno player ever drafted by the Vikings.



AJ constantly was double and sometimes triple teamed. Nate was hurt but showed some flashes of being a solid #1 for Minnesota. Taking into consideration his recovery from injury, we could potentially have two #1's in AJ and Nate. Not to mention we would have a young, talented recieving core that we would not have to worry about for years.

Lets look at our 5 Reciever set: AJ and Nate, "Stretch the D" Mathis, "Over the middle" Walters and "Flat Route" Bush or Davis. I like it.

I would give up the pick to have all those pluses!

bigTEXan8
03-19-2006, 02:52 PM
I still think that Burleson would be an excellent compliment to AJ.

TexanFan881
03-19-2006, 02:54 PM
I still think that Burleson would be an excellent compliment to AJ.

Andre Johnson and Nate Burleson: Now that would be a great WR duo. Throw Mathis out in the slot and we'll be unstoppable on offense.

TexanSam
03-19-2006, 02:55 PM
AJ constantly was double and sometimes triple teamed. Nate was hurt but showed some flashes of being a solid #1 for Minnesota. Taking into consideration his recovery from injury, we could potentially have two #1's in AJ and Nate. Not to mention we would have a young, talented recieving core that we would not have to worry about for years.



I'm hoping that he isn't asking for the same price tag as David Givens though. Burleson just came off a season where he was injured for part of it, so I think teams will be less willing to offer him as much money as Givens. I'm willing to slightly overpay for him, but I don't want to go overboard.

TexanFan881
03-19-2006, 03:02 PM
I'm hoping that he isn't asking for the same price tag as David Givens though. Burleson just came off a season where he was injured for part of it, so I think teams will be less willing to offer him as much money as Givens. I'm willing to slightly overpay for him, but I don't want to go overboard.

Coming off an injury he shouldn't want as much as Givens. Maybe 3 mil a year or in that range

TexansTrueFan
03-19-2006, 03:27 PM
i like what the front office is trying to do, they are bringing in solid players we can get rasonably and not give an arm and leg for. i think they are beign very smart with FA at this point. i'm curious to see who else comes to houston to be a part of a championship team next year :) lol it could happen !

rockabilly
03-19-2006, 03:31 PM
I really hope the Walter signing doesnt hurt the Burleson possibility. We would be set with an AJ, Burleson, Walter, Mathis/Armstrong receiving corps.

Ibar_Harry
03-19-2006, 03:38 PM
I really hope the Walter signing doesnt hurt the Burleson possibility. We would be set with an AJ, Burleson, Walter, Mathis/Armstrong receiving corps.

It would be a lot stronger lineup and may be take some pressure off of AJ. You might add to your list BJ. If BJ is able to play to our expectations we would be a very difficult team to play against. That's without any draft considerations.

Wolf
03-19-2006, 03:44 PM
It would be a lot stronger lineup and may be take some pressure off of AJ. You might add to your list BJ. If BJ is able to play to our expectations we would be a very difficult team to play against. That's without any draft considerations.


very true and if someone threw the kitchen sink at he texans during draft time and we moved down and got vernon Davis wow (I think we can still be serviceable with DD in the lineup..not spectacular,but solid in the run game):drool:

2 TE set with Joppru and Davis with AJ ( I can dream can't I ????) would the Texans run or pass??)


hmm the options.. one back with davis and Burleson out wide or 2 backs with norris/DD

rockabilly
03-19-2006, 03:50 PM
yeah, this is getting exciting. i for one think the texans will be a great team next year, right away. Now im not talking super bowl, but at least respectable. I think that at least the games will stay on tv here in Austin THE WHOLE season.

Our offensive ranking should at least improve by 10.

JAXwithanX
03-19-2006, 04:58 PM
I'm glad to see people are starting to feel Burleson a little more. I'm telling you the guy is great and has a great personality too. I really wish i could find that feature article on him by ESPN when Moss left. He really is the perfect match for AJ. And i mean ****....look how great he is on Madden!?

that last part was sarcastic....although he is pretty good.

texasguy346
03-19-2006, 05:31 PM
I really wish i could find that feature article on him by ESPN when Moss left.

Is this it? link 1 (http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/wire?section=nfl&id=2148838)

Or is this it? link 2 (http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/wire?section=nfl&id=2120504)

Or how about this one? link 3 (http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/wire?section=ncf&id=1980572)

mexican_texan
03-19-2006, 05:33 PM
Some of you are talking like we already got Burleson. Did we?:confused:

TexanFan881
03-19-2006, 08:58 PM
Some of you are talking like we already got Burleson. Did we?:confused:

I wish :redtowel:

edo783
03-19-2006, 09:28 PM
Some of you are talking like we already got Burleson. Did we?:confused:

Not yet. It's just a wet dream some are fantasizing about and sharing with everyone at the moement. :rolleyes:

Texans Pride
03-19-2006, 10:21 PM
I don't think it's going to happen, Minnesota can match any offer if they choose, and he's got a visit to Seattle coming up.....I'd say we are the odd man out in this race.

Koolbrz
03-19-2006, 10:23 PM
Nate would be a nice pick-up for the Texans, but what if we offered a 3rd or 4th rd. pick to GB for J. Walker. Dude is an awesome Reciever. He was hurt last yr and might not demand as much money as he did last yr. AJ, Walker, and Walter is not a bad corps of Recievers. Walker has already said he does not want to play for GB. He is a proven player and would be worth a 3rd pick. I believe he would be an even better add. than Nate.

Texans32
03-19-2006, 10:28 PM
there is no way we get javon walker. he is a #1 reciever on most teams right now and his ego won't allow him to play behind AJ. i doubt we get him for a 3rd or 4th round pick. i totally agree on picking up nate. he is a pretty good reciever and would play nicely at #2.

TexanFan881
03-19-2006, 10:29 PM
there is no way we get javon walker. he is a #1 reciever on most teams right now and his ego won't allow him to play behind AJ. i doubt we get him for a 3rd or 4th round pick.

He might have an ego problem but your right there's no way the Packers let him go for a 3rd or 4th round pick.

Koolbrz
03-19-2006, 10:40 PM
there is no way we get javon walker. he is a #1 reciever on most teams right now and his ego won't allow him to play behind AJ. i doubt we get him for a 3rd or 4th round pick.


IMO #1 or #2 doesn't really matter. They will both be on the field and they will get there touches. They would also make for an awesome Tandem. Never know what a player will think about different situations with diff. teams. He just might like the fact that he would be playing with AJ. Defenses would be foolish to try and double team either one of these guys. Hell, i would give up my 2nd rd pick to get this guy. AJ and Walker could be as good a tandem as Duper and Clayton, Wayne and Harrison, Rice and Taylor. I guess we'll never know.

TheOgre
03-19-2006, 10:41 PM
If McLame is correct (a leap in of itself), the Texans might be targeting a WR with our 2nd rounder if we don't sign one. If that is the case, I would MUCH rather us use our 3rd on Burleson and use our 2nd on a DE or O-lineman.

texanskan
03-19-2006, 10:49 PM
If McLame is correct (a leap in of itself), the Texans might be targeting a WR with our 2nd rounder if we don't sign one. If that is the case, I would MUCH rather us use our 3rd on Burleson and use our 2nd on a DE or O-lineman.

I could not agree more!

Let's please fill as many needs as we can in FA so that come draft day we can start adding quality depth!

As far as giving up a third round pick thats worth it we have two and that would still give us three chances to get quality guys who can step in right away. And maybe just maybe we can hit another home run in a late round ie Davis, Mathis, Earl, Brown.

TexanFan881
03-19-2006, 11:34 PM
If McLame is correct (a leap in of itself), the Texans might be targeting a WR with our 2nd rounder if we don't sign one. If that is the case, I would MUCH rather us use our 3rd on Burleson and use our 2nd on a DE or O-lineman.

Which option sounds better?

An unproven WR with the second round pick
or...
A proven WR with the third round pick


I think it's pretty obvious what the better choice is.

Ibar_Harry
03-20-2006, 10:31 PM
Seattle lost Hutch in arbitration to the Vikes, so will the Seahawks go after Burleson as thought or will that deal die. If it does will we be in good shape to attemp to deal with him? Kind of interesting gambit when you think about it. Burleson's options are a little more defined, but may be not....

Ibar_Harry
03-20-2006, 10:37 PM
Seattle lost Hutch in arbitration to the Vikes, so will the Seahawks go after Burleson as thought or will that deal die. If it does will we be in good shape to attemp to deal with him? Kind of interesting gambit when you think about it. Burleson's options are a little more defined, but may be not....

I posted under a new thread, but it was moved. I object only, because the visit was canceled and it really is a new possibility. Perhaps the title should be changed from visit.....

Koolbrz
03-20-2006, 10:57 PM
I posted under a new thread, but it was moved. I object only, because the visit was canceled and it really is a new possibility. Perhaps the title should be changed from visit.....


I told you guys a few days ago...Burleson will be playing for the Seahawks this coming season. They are really interested in him. With Hutchingson gone it will free up some money and they will sign him. I thought i heard that the Texans canceled there meeting with Burleson today. Am i correct on this? If so you can kiss him goodbye.

TEXANS84
03-20-2006, 11:01 PM
I thought i heard that the Texans canceled there meeting with Burleson today. Am i correct on this? If so you can kiss him goodbye.

You are correct. They didn't want to get into a bidding war with the Vikings and the Seahawks.

TexanFan881
03-20-2006, 11:02 PM
You are correct. They didn't want to get into a bidding war with the Vikings and the Seahawks.

Whichever one doesn't get Hutchinson is going to have the upper hand on Burleson.

Ibar_Harry
03-20-2006, 11:02 PM
I told you guys a few days ago...Burleson will be playing for the Seahawks this coming season. They are really interested in him. With Hutchingson gone it will free up some money and they will sign him. I thought i heard that the Texans canceled there meeting with Burleson today. Am i correct on this? If so you can kiss him goodbye.

Yes, they did and that's why I asked the moderator to change the title of the thread. I'm not discounting what you are saying. I'm just saying there is always a possibility that the deal will fall through or they will have 2nd thoughts. We will have to wait and see.

My thoughts were would we invite him in if everything fell through. If it did he might be looking for less money. I think the amount he wanted was an issue in light of the draft pick we would have to give up.

Koolbrz
03-20-2006, 11:04 PM
You are correct. They didn't want to get into a bidding war with the Vikings and the Seahawks.


That only leaves one other option...Get J. Walker from GB!!! Man, wouldn't that be nice.

TexanFan881
03-20-2006, 11:05 PM
That only leaves one other option...Get J. Walker from GB!!! Man, wouldn't that be nice.

Walker and AJ would kill defenders. They'd get so much attention Mathis would be able to run down the field and get wide open.

HoustonTexans
03-20-2006, 11:10 PM
yeah walker would be amazing seriously. Everyone says he is not a #2 and he wont come and play behind AJ... who says they both cant be #1? They are both on the field at the same time who cares what their numbers are. Hell, i'd let walker be number 1 if he would come play for the texans.

TEXANS84
03-20-2006, 11:12 PM
That only leaves one other option...Get J. Walker from GB!!! Man, wouldn't that be nice.

High compensation or trade would have to be in the worked out. I do not see either one happening.

TexanFan881
03-20-2006, 11:13 PM
yeah walker would be amazing seriously. Everyone says he is not a #2 and he wont come and play behind AJ... who says they both cant be #1? They are both on the field at the same time who cares what their numbers are. Hell, i'd let walker be number 1 if he would come play for the texans.

I'm sure AJ would be happy, he wouldn't be double teamed the whole game.

Ibar_Harry
03-20-2006, 11:17 PM
Years ago at Fresno State we had Page and Ellard lining up on opposite sides of the field at the same time. It was a site to behold. The opposition was driven nuts. The coach at Cal was the QB for us and they never would believe he could throw the ball that far nor that those guys could go get it. It was fun and a joy to watch.

I think we are making good decisions in the FA period and there may be a surprise or two yet. We just have to be careful with the money we have. We are quitely filling a lot of the holes. We haven't even got to the draft yet. I think we have a good coaching staff making a lot of wise decisions. We will just have to see how it all fits together, but more the moment I like what we see.

Koolbrz
03-20-2006, 11:19 PM
High compensation or trade would have to be in the worked out. I do not see either one happening.

I'd give them our 2nd rd pick this yr and our 3rd next yr. I do believe he is worth it. I also believe 18 mil for 4 yrs could get him here. Compare that to what GB is paying him...You would have to be crazy to pass it up. Then again if someone else with more money is thinking the same thing you can forget it. Damn, this sux!! Maybe since he is from Galveston, he might consider playing here. Just trying to look at all the positives guys.

Carr Bombed
03-20-2006, 11:23 PM
I'd give them our 2nd rd pick this yr and our 3rd next yr. I do believe he is worth it. I also believe 18 mil for 4 yrs could get him here. Compare that to what GB is paying him...You would have to be crazy to pass it up. Then again if someone else with more money is thinking the same thing you can forget it. Damn, this sux!! Maybe since he is from Galveston, he might consider playing here. Just trying to look at all the positives guys. There is no way I'd be willing to give up a 2nd (#33 pick in the draft), especially since it didn't even take that much to get Culpepper. Third round pick or no deal.

Waltman
03-20-2006, 11:23 PM
I see J Walker in a Texans uniform, but for some reason he vanishes when I wake up. Dam those dreams.:brickwall

Koolbrz
03-20-2006, 11:34 PM
There is no way I'd be willing to give up a 2nd (#33 pick in the draft), especially since it didn't even take that much to get Culpepper. Third round pick or no deal.

So you would rather they use the second pick on an unproven WR out of college than give GB the pick for a great WR how has not even hit his prime. Doesn't make any sense to me. They will go after a WR with that second pick...you know that right. We need that #2 guy, after the 2nd rd there will be slim pickens. I'd rather have Walker. Awesome pair of recievers. You will be able to compare them to Duper/Clayton, Rice/Taylor, Harrison/Wayne...Man what a pick up this would be!

Carr Bombed
03-20-2006, 11:42 PM
So you would rather they use the second pick on an unproven WR out of college than give GB the pick for a great WR how has not even hit his prime. Doesn't make any sense to me. They will go after a WR with that second pick...you know that right. We need that #2 guy, after the 2nd rd there will be slim pickens. I'd rather have Walker. Awesome pair of recievers. You will be able to compare them to Duper/Clayton, Rice/Taylor, Harrison/Wayne...Man what a pick up this would be! Nope if we can't find a #2 in FA, we take one in the third, I'd rather use the #2 on defense or OL. We should be able to get a excellent offensive lineman with that pick and I'm tired of hoping mid rounders will work out, we should be able to get a blue chipper with that second round pick in this draft.

Even though the top level of talent at WR is weak there still is alot of quality WRs in the draft that go well through the third round, so its not slim pickens, there just isn't the elite talent this year.

I would love to have Walker, but not for a second, if the Pack don't bite at a third, then no deal. If we were in dire need of a #1 WR I'd be more inclined to part with the #2, but were not.

ReggieTheRealDeal
03-20-2006, 11:48 PM
Looks like were not getting Burleson
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=rotowire-ateurlesonexansackin&prov=rotowire&type=lgns

Carr Bombed
03-21-2006, 12:18 AM
Seattle just signed Peterson to a blockbuster 54 million dollar contract

http://www.kffl.com/hotw/nfl

I think they just might of took themselves out of the Burleson sweepstakes.

outofhnd
03-21-2006, 12:21 AM
Duh...

Look at the denver offense... Here is the breakdown.

Rod Smith - Andre Johnson
Ed McCaffrey - Kevin Walter
Ashlie Lelie - Jerome Mathis

Stephen Alexander - Mark Bruener
Jeb Putzier - Jeb Putzier

Mike Anderson - Jonathan Wells
Tatum Bell - Reggie Bush

Kyle Johnson - Jameel Cook

The Snake - The Carr

tulexan
03-21-2006, 12:23 AM
The only problem is that you left out Domanick Davis and Jonathan Wells hasn't been re-signed yet.

The Dude Abides
03-21-2006, 12:23 AM
Seattle just signed Peterson to a blockbuster 54 million dollar contract

http://www.kffl.com/hotw/nfl

I think they just might of took themselves out of the Burleson sweepstakes.

I could see them going after Keyshawn Johnson. He could be their Jurevicius type receiver

The Dude Abides
03-21-2006, 12:24 AM
Duh...

Look at the denver offense... Here is the breakdown.

Rod Smith - Andre Johnson
Ed McCaffrey - Kevin Walter
Ashlie Lelie - Jerome Mathis

Stephen Alexander - Mark Bruener
Jeb Putzier - Jeb Putzier

Mike Anderson - Jonathan Wells
Tatum Bell - Reggie Bush

Kyle Johnson - Jameel Cook

The Snake - The Carr

Ed McCaffery - Kevin Walter :ok:

outofhnd
03-21-2006, 12:26 AM
The only problem is that you left out Domanick Davis and Jonathan Wells hasn't been re-signed yet.

I think we get Wells back... Domanick Davis is not a Denver guy because

where it will differ is

In multiple rec set formations we will move reggie to a slot rec and DD will play RB.

Reggie Bush can be Watts & Bell

tulexan
03-21-2006, 12:27 AM
I also don't think that Mathis is anywhere near Lelie yet and is much smaller. I believe Lelie is around 6'2 or 6'3 where Mathis is about 5'11.

outofhnd
03-21-2006, 12:28 AM
Denver usually gets their backs and receivers via the draft. I see that trend carrying over to our team. we will develop the talent from within with people who know the system. The only FA WR I remember them picking up is Jerry Rice.

tulexan
03-21-2006, 12:28 AM
I think Bush will be used like Ricky Watters was when he was on the Niners in the mid nineties when Kubiak was there. But he is a lot better than Ricky.

Kaiser Toro
03-21-2006, 12:34 AM
What a saga! Not really in the 70's tv drama type of way, but in the rock band Saga type of way. Will Burelson tap his cleats three times finally to go to the emerald city, which has been home most of the time anyway? Or will he fall under the spell of the Great Kubiak? So much intrigue so much time until the season. :rolleyes:

outofhnd
03-21-2006, 12:35 AM
Lelie wasnt developed overnight, I should know after 3 years of fantasy league futility with him. Which is why I think he and Mathis are so similar, and its not like lelie goes over the middle, Lelie is the burner who stretches the field and gets like 5 throws a game just to keep the defense stretched and honest. With a TE this year we have a short intermediate option, so we need the down the field option then the AJ option they cant let mathis run free, and they cant keep giving putzier the intermediate stuff. They will have to rotate safeties this year to double Andre as they cant do it initially with the addition of a TE.

SnakeOilTanker
03-21-2006, 12:36 AM
Kubiak didn't have much impact on how they used Watters in the 90's.

He was only the QB coach for one year there, I'm not sure if Watters was there or not.

Doesn't mean he might not be used like him,but don't think too much into that.

tulexan
03-21-2006, 12:40 AM
I'm not saying that Kubiak had an impact on how they used Ricky Watters, I am just saying that he was a coach on a team that had a player of a very similar style to Reggie Bush.

Ibar_Harry
03-21-2006, 02:20 AM
Seahawks spent the money from Hutch plus on a 49er. Will they have enough for Burleson.... Stay Tuned!!!!

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2377300

O.G.
03-21-2006, 07:41 AM
Seahawks spent the money from Hutch plus on a 49er. Will they have enough for Burleson.... Stay Tuned!!!!

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2377300

I don't think they will persue Burleson. It opens the door for us to get back in the sweepstakes.

pskinny
03-21-2006, 09:15 AM
Seahawks spent the money from Hutch plus on a 49er. Will they have enough for Burleson.... Stay Tuned!!!!

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2377300


Do you even know if we are still interested? I mean, we canceled his visit. What makes you think we will even try to sign Burelson?

O.G.
03-21-2006, 09:41 AM
Do you even know if we are still interested? I mean, we canceled his visit. What makes you think we will even try to sign Burelson?

The visit was cancelled only because of the supposed bidding war that was going to happen between Seattle and Minnesota. Now both have commited over 50 million in two players, Julius Peterson (55 million) now at Seattle and Steve Huchinson (50 million) now at Minnesota. With the visit with Ike Hilliard ending with a non-signing and the two teams that battled for Burleson now financially commited to other players, this opens the door to re-establish talks with Houston if they (being Houston) wants too. IMO

The Preacher
03-21-2006, 09:42 AM
Do you even know if we are still interested? I mean, we canceled his visit. What makes you think we will even try to sign Burelson?

Yeah you would think if there were any chance he would have at least met with the team. Something must have happened obviously so at least our 3rd is more of a sure thing. I don't know if that's good or bad but if we were to look receiver I think there a lot of guys who will be NFL quality but who they are is questionable. I think this group of WR's is underrated and between Nance, Jennings, Colston, Hass, Wilson , and a couple others you could find a pretty good steal.

pskinny
03-21-2006, 09:55 AM
The visit was cancelled only because of the supposed bidding war that was going to happen between Seattle and Minnesota. Now both have commited over 50 million in two players, Julius Peterson (55 million) now at Seattle and Steve Huchinson (50 million) now at Minnesota. With the visit with Ike Hilliard ending with a non-signing and the two teams that battled for Burleson now financially commited to other players, this opens the door to re-establish talks with Houston if they (being Houston) wants too. IMO


So John McClain says.....Seems like to me there's more to this one. I hope we go after Burelson, but we may have already burnt that bridge by canceling the visit.

LBC_Justin
03-21-2006, 11:52 AM
So John McClain says.....Seems like to me there's more to this one. I hope we go after Burelson, but we may have already burnt that bridge by canceling the visit.Money talks.

Bridges are rarely burned as long as Benjamin Franklin is in the room.

O.G.
03-21-2006, 01:13 PM
Money talks.

Bridges are rarely burned as long as Benjamin Franklin is in the room.

Exactly, ask the man standing on the star that just got 10 mil a year that question.

rockabilly
03-21-2006, 01:41 PM
Now that Seattle and Minnesota have basically shut the door on the Burleson deal, it gives a shot to land him for a VERY good price. Nate may have to settle for what we would want to give him. Which is a win for us. Leaving us with 2 #1 receiver quality receivers on the roster. Not bad Kubes and Cass.

jmerog
03-21-2006, 02:25 PM
At the beginning of the day i knew very little about burleson. I knew he was a decent wr and that we were interested. Life stole my research time untill today. After reading a little help from the Kaiser i became intrigued-He isn't prone to overrate a guy. Then after checking him out on the rest of the web I became downright excited. Then the news about the cancelled visit came and my cheerios were yellow again. Then the bidding war was cancelled due to other interests and obligations. We have a chance again! My emotions are rollercoastering today over this...especially after the thrilling news of getting putzier.

I said all that to saythis...If we get Burleson and get as good of a deal as we got on putzier...I may soil myself. At the very least laugh histerically and pee down my own leg in crazy joy and disbelief at the prospect of a winning season.

If we then get An O-Line in the draft..... I cant even say it.*sobs,laughs,shakes head

Dare i be excited?

Texas
03-21-2006, 03:00 PM
So whats the deal. Are we most likely going to get him or not?

TexanFan881
03-21-2006, 03:24 PM
So whats the deal. Are we most likely going to get him or not?

For Burleson? We're out of the running for him as of now. It's between the Vikings and Seahawks.

O.G.
03-21-2006, 04:03 PM
For Burleson? We're out of the running for him as of now. It's between the Vikings and Seahawks.

Unless they both come up with more funds due to there latest signings, they both are out of the running. Of course the Vikings have a leg up since they can match any offer.

TexansFanatic
03-21-2006, 04:14 PM
I said all that to saythis...If we get Burleson and get as good of a deal as we got on putzier...I may soil myself. At the very least laugh histerically and pee down my own leg in crazy joy and disbelief at the prospect of a winning season.



You may want to seek professional help for your incontinence. Either that, or find a less exhilarating hobby....

O.G.
03-21-2006, 04:27 PM
You may want to seek professional help for your incontinence. Either that, or find a less exhilarating hobby....

Lol, yeah. Some things you just don't say out loud. Think it, maybe. That's on you. Say it......no.

jerek
03-21-2006, 05:01 PM
I am amazed to see 230+ posts and 6,000 hits on the prospect of Nate Burleson.

I still wish we had resigned Gaffney.

O.G.
03-21-2006, 05:09 PM
I am amazed to see 230+ posts and 6,000 hits on the prospect of Nate Burleson.

I still wish we had resigned Gaffney.

Yeah I did as well but I'm happier with the Walters signing.

jmerog
03-21-2006, 06:13 PM
Gee whiz, its a joke guys. Dont be so stiff.


ps. i have an appointment with the doc for next week...just in case we sign him.

Texas
03-21-2006, 06:13 PM
It looks like we are going to get him and he may come cheap because of all the drama between seattle and minnesota

jmerog
03-21-2006, 06:16 PM
texas- that would be sweet

BrianC
03-21-2006, 06:22 PM
It looks like we are going to get him and he may come cheap because of all the drama between seattle and minnesota


i may have missed it but has a visit been rescheduled yet? or is this just speculation?

pskinny
03-21-2006, 07:46 PM
i may have missed it but has a visit been rescheduled yet? or is this just speculation?

speculation.

YoungTexanFan
03-21-2006, 08:10 PM
Money talks.

Bridges are rarely burned as long as Benjamin Franklin is in the room.


Thats my favorite president!!

(a joke from when I was younger)

outofhnd
03-21-2006, 10:12 PM
I have to ask myself is he really worth the salary and the 3rd round compensation? His 1 good year was when Randy Moss was still a viking... Other than that year he doesnt have any impressive stats in my estimation. Why not pickup Quincy Morgan? hes unrestricted and was only used on ST in Pittsburgh.. I think he would come at a better price anyways. If I had my way, I would rather try and fill other needs besides a No 2. receiver. There are not too many impressive Wideouts available this year... If I had to choose, I would like to get Moulds but Buffalo is basically making it to where he loses out on getting a blockbuster deal. Not to mention I think he would prolly end up in an eagles uniform if he became available.

Carr Bombed
03-21-2006, 10:23 PM
In the year that Burleson had a break out year Moss missed 3 starts and was injured all year, Nate was their #1 option and had such a good year the Vikings were more than comfortable in letting Moss go. This past year Nate struggled with injuries just like AJ and by the time he got healthy he had a new QB that was throwing to his new favorite targets.

Nate is the best option #2 reciever out there, given his age and speed/hands, he is more than worth a 3rd round pick.

pskinny
03-21-2006, 10:28 PM
In the year that Burleson had a break out year Moss missed 3 starts and was injured all year, Nate was their #1 option and had such a good year the Vikings were more than comfortable in letting Moss go. This past year Nate struggled with injuries just like AJ and by the time he got healthy he had a new QB that was throwing to his new favorite targets.

Nate is the best option #2 reciever out there, given his age and speed/hands, he is more than worth a 3rd round pick.

I have to agree. Get it done Charley.

outofhnd
03-21-2006, 10:29 PM
He wont come at the bargain Putz did, and they may be happy with the walter pickup to where they wont make a play for him at all. I doubt he comes here, however Minnesota would be less inclined to match the offer as long as it isnt seattle... Hey since they have Hutch who job was lost? Maybe we can sign them?

Bearfan Blue and Orange
03-21-2006, 11:15 PM
He wont come at the bargain Putz did, and they may be happy with the walter pickup to where they wont make a play for him at all. I doubt he comes here, however Minnesota would be less inclined to match the offer as long as it isnt seattle... Hey since they have Hutch who job was lost? Maybe we can sign them?

First of all, if he is that good, do you think they are going to let him go for less than a 3rd round, and REMEMBER our 3rd wound it the 1st pick in the third round, therefore you are saying he is really worth a 2nd round pick (NOT). We can better use that pick for a OL or DT MUCH MORE NEEDED than taking a "chance" dropping a pick and high money for him. I think we forget, yes we compensate a 3rd rounder, but you also have to use CAP money to get the guy paid... So you are really LOSING the opportunity of possibly 2 players.

kiwitexansfan
03-21-2006, 11:17 PM
First of all, if he is that good, do you think they are going to let him go for less than a 3rd round, and REMEMBER our 3rd wound it the 1st pick in the third round, therefore you are saying he is really worth a 2nd round pick (NOT). We can better use that pick for a OL or DT MUCH MORE NEEDED than taking a "chance" dropping a pick and high money for him. I think we forget, yes we compensate a 3rd rounder, but you also have to use CAP money to get the guy paid... So you are really LOSING the opportunity of possibly 2 players.

Why????

Bearfan Blue and Orange
03-21-2006, 11:23 PM
Why????


Why What??

Bearfan Blue and Orange
03-21-2006, 11:28 PM
We do not need to get any DLineman right now. Good call last year right DJohnson and I am not even a UT guy.

If that is the case, why did everyone run all over the Defense last season? Literally

Carr Bombed
03-21-2006, 11:28 PM
Why What??

We are converting from a 3-4 team so we don't need any DTs we have a surplus of DTs

Texas
03-21-2006, 11:37 PM
T-Johnson it is...and He didnt play that much...Plus we had alot of weak holes and our 3-4 scheme didnt fit our personell. Plus havent we realized yet that the main problem was our coaching?