PDA

View Full Version : Boulware or Shelton?


D-ReK
05-21-2005, 02:51 AM
According to the Chronic, we have shown interest in both LJ Shelton (http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/sports/fb/nfl/3192107) and Peter Boulware (http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/sports/fb/texans/3186742), and IMO both players will probably be asking for relatively similar contract numbers...Boulware was a perennial Pro Bowler prior to injury, and Shelton has been classified as an underachiever who has never lived up to his first round billing...Despite this, I am kind of skeptical that post-injury Boulware possesses the burst that pre-injury Boulware did, so he may be better off signing with a 4-3 team as a DE...Peek has earned his shot to be starting at ROLB, but we're thin on quality depth, and Peek has been injured in both of his seasons in the league...If this were to happen a third straight season, would we start Charlie Anderson or shift Wong back to the outside and start Moreno? Boulware would be a big lift in this scenario, but he's not a player who would help at a position of necessity, which is something Shelton would do...Shelton would bring more competition to the OL than Victor Riley has/will, and Shelton has plenty of experience at LT and RT...FWIW, I like Seth Wand, but if the organization feels that Shelton would be an upgrade over him, then so be it...We need the best 5 linemen we can get to be on the field...

throwANDREtheBALL
05-21-2005, 02:34 PM
I think that Peek will get more sacks than Babin this year, if they let him start, so I don't see the need for Boulware, since he might've lost a step. Its too risky with him coming off an injury. Plus we need as many good lineman as we can get. I consider Shelton a good lineman. And who knows maybe with him signed, we could move wand to Guard and Pitts to center......might not work, but, Shelton upgrades the line whether it gets Mckinney out of the center position or not.

WildBlackBear32
05-21-2005, 02:40 PM
Shelton, absolutely no doubt.

Jwwillis
05-21-2005, 02:42 PM
It has always been known that Peek has the skills to rush the QB. His big ? is can he read the play action and drop into coverage? He has to be able to read and anticipate the play otherwise his aggressivness will be his downfall.

D-ReK
05-21-2005, 03:01 PM
It has always been known that Peek has the skills to rush the QB. His big ? is can he read the play action and drop into coverage? He has to be able to read and anticipate the play otherwise his aggressivness will be his downfall.

I believe it was Vic Fangio who said that Peek was our best coverage LB last season, so his coverage skills aren't really a big question mark...His problem is that he overpersues on run plays, but you are correct that at times, he bites on play action...He also has the tendency to collect dumb penalties because he is so anxious to make plays...IMO if we get him out there full time, that wouldn't be a problem anymore...

LikeABoss
05-21-2005, 06:44 PM
I hope we can bring in Shelton.

PapaL
05-21-2005, 06:56 PM
From HoustonProFootball.com: (http://www.houstonprofootball.com/)


Texans Singing 'Gimme Shelton'
Pitts, Wand Flipping Out?

The Texans remained busy during a normally quiet period of the offseason on Friday, as there have been reports that the team has expressed an interest in signing left tackle L.J. Shelton.

Shelton, 29, was released by the Cardinals on Wednesday after losing his starting job midway though the 2004 season. At 6'6" and roughly 340 pounds, Shelton will likely command a lot of attention from other teams before he signs with any of them.

After being selected by the Cardinals in the first round of the 1999 draft, Shelton served as the Cardinals' starter for roughly five seasons. Until he was benched by new head coach Dennis Green last year, Shelton had been a consistent performer for the Cardinals, showing off his strength and athleticism.

Shelton signed a five-year contract extension in 2003 that paid him a $5 million signing bonus and $3 million per season in base salaries. Prior to last month's draft, his name was mentioned often in trade speculation with the Bills, though the Bears and Buccaneers were also rumored to have interest as well.

The Houston Chronicle reported on Saturday that the Texans' current starter, Seth Wand, had been swapping positions with left guard Chester Pitts during last week's coaching session workouts. The pursuit of another left tackle comes after the team substituted Marcus Spears for Wand late last season on passing downs, followed by the Texans' attempted acquisition of Rams' frachised player Orlando Pace.

The Texans also signed former Saints' right tackle Victor Riley earlier this month, though he reported to last week's coaching sessions out of shape.

O.G.
05-23-2005, 06:32 AM
i say we get shelton and ty law because i love peek so im alright with him and the we need a player like shelton and also a player like law for peyton manning

I'd like that, but can we afford both?

TexanFan881
05-23-2005, 08:35 AM
and also a player like law for peyton manning

If we got Law we would have the best backs in the league but getting him would be a waste of money when we could go get someone who could really step up our team instead of just adding to it. I like Law but we just don't need another CB.

Davis37
05-23-2005, 08:44 AM
We dont have the cap room to go out and grab Ty Law. Also, I would rather have Boulware over Shelton cause after Peek and Babin we have no depth at OLB. I think we should let Wand show us what he can do this season, then if he doesnt perform, grab a LT in 1st round of the draft next season. With Boulware, we could rotate him, Peek, and Babin at OLB to keep our pash rushers fresh so they could perform at higher levels the whole time they are in the game instead of wearing out in 3rd-4th qtrs.

Blake
05-23-2005, 09:36 AM
Ill take Shelton. I want to see what Peek can do when he gets the chance. I also want to see what Carr, and Johnson can do, when they get the time.

"helton had been a consistent performer for the Cardinals, showing off his strength and athleticism."

That's music to my ears.

infantrycak
05-23-2005, 09:45 AM
"helton had been a consistent performer for the Cardinals, showing off his strength and athleticism."

That's music to my ears.

Well it should sound like some sour notes then because teams don't let consistant performer LT's go or for that matter bench them.

Blake
05-23-2005, 10:06 AM
Well it should sound like some sour notes then because teams don't let consistant performer LT's go or for that matter bench them.

Good point. It could be a case of new HC, not working well with players from before him. Could be a cap move. Could be alot of things. But I do believe he would come in and win the starting LT job. JMHO.

El Tejano
05-23-2005, 10:30 AM
LJ is younger at a position that we desperately need to be upgraded.

O.G.
05-23-2005, 11:21 AM
So has anyone heard anything else on the this?

O.G.
05-23-2005, 11:25 AM
Also, got this on ESPN Insider on Boulware:

May 23. To date, Boulware has visited with only one team, the Houston Texans, who regard him as a pass-rush threat in their 3-4 front. There are other teams that have sought to meet with Boulware, to poke and probe him and adjudge his physical viability, but he likely will not schedule more visits until the end of this week at the earliest.

Barnes apprised the interested parties that his client wants to wait until after the NFL meetings in Washington, D.C., this week, which are Tuesday and Wednesday. Once the owners have moved beyond business issues, and are prepared to focus on football again, Boulware will set up visits with those franchises he discerns have legitimate interest in him, and a plan for how to utilize the four-time Pro Bowl performer.

Just curious, can we get both? It looks like the Texans are trying!

O.G.
05-23-2005, 11:29 AM
Lol, don't mean to keep posting but here is some info on Shelton as well from ESPN Insider:

May. 23 - Released by the Cardinals last week, Shelton already has met with the Texans, according to the Houston Chronicle. The paper indicates the team is committed to shoring up its pass protection in order to make a run at a playoff berth in 2005, the former expansion team's fourth season.
Arizona gave up trying to trade Shelton and elected not to wait until June 1 to cut him, instead swallowing his $3.3 million cap hit this year.

"We just felt like at this point it made no sense to hold him any longer," Rod Graves, Cardinals vice president of football operations, said. "There are ramifications from a cap standpoint but we have (a lot of) cap room and we'd rather take that medicine now rather than push it to next year."

Hervoyel
05-23-2005, 11:30 AM
I consider Shelton a good lineman. And who knows maybe with him signed, we could move wand to Guard and Pitts to center......might not work, but, Shelton upgrades the line whether it gets Mckinney out of the center position or not.

That sounds like a recipe for a 50 sack season. Lets add a new LT, then take a guy (Wand) who's never played Guard and move him there and then we'll take a guy (Pitts) who's never played center and move him there.

In this scenario Shelton destroys the line he's brought in to help and everyones screaming for someone to get fired by week 3.

On the offensive line the answer right now is do nothing. Relaxe and let this group play a second season together.

bckey
05-23-2005, 12:00 PM
On the offensive line the answer right now is do nothing. Relaxe and let this group play a second season together.

Even if some of the 5 starters are not very good OL? You wouldn't replace one or two of them if a player was available after the june 1st cuts? Why let them develop a chemistry together if a couple of them are probably gone after this season? The only way we leave this OL alone is if there is nothing better to replace them with because this OL as is will not take us to the super bowl no matter how much chemistry they develop.

Hervoyel
05-23-2005, 12:51 PM
Even if some of the 5 starters are not very good OL? You wouldn't replace one or two of them if a player was available after the june 1st cuts? Why let them develop a chemistry together if a couple of them are probably gone after this season? The only way we leave this OL alone is if there is nothing better to replace them with because this OL as is will not take us to the super bowl no matter how much chemistry they develop.


First of all I'm very skeptical of all the "talent scouts" in here who think they know whether or not the players currently starting for the Texans offensive line are any good. Most everyone I see discussing the line in here can't tell the difference between a player who's not any good and a player who's been moved out of his position (Pitts), or a player who's starting for the first time in the NFL and playing like it (Wand). A lot of them think that signing Weigert was a mistake and Wade was another. If I thought that all the people commenting on the OL in here knew what they were looking at then that would be different but I don't.

Second you're a couple of years too late on the "Why let them develop a chemistry together if a couple of them are probably gone after this season?" part. Those guys were signed in 2002 and 2003 and if they weren't good enough to stick around then they're already gone. The players we have right now are mostly going to be the players we go into the season with and everyone had better get used to the idea.

The years of "They need to send a couple of them packing" are over folks. The only thing that's going to prompt massive change on our line from here on out is going to be injury. Players aren't going to be replaced in bunches anymore and not every group of cuts (June 1st or otherwise) is going to contain someone who can help our team.

If someone cuts loose a guy who can start for us I'm for it. Don't get me wrong, I don't think we have the second coming of Munchak, Mathews, Steinkuhler, and Co. on this team. We're just good enough now that you need to balance what you lose and what you gain when you start swapping out parts of this line. In terms of guys who are going to play for us this year the team only pursued one guy and that was Orlando Pace. That should tell you something about what the Texans think of their OL. They think a lot more of it than most of us do. Who do you think is more likely to be closer to the truth about the OL? A staff of NFL coaches or a bunch of fans on a message board?

Negative Jesus
05-23-2005, 12:56 PM
If I had my choice I would have to go with Shelton . Wand is unproven , and we definately need the help on the O-Line .

U4ikrob
05-23-2005, 01:30 PM
First of all I'm very skeptical of all the "talent scouts" in here who think they know whether or not the players currently starting for the Texans offensive line are any good.......... Who do you think is more likely to be closer to the truth about the OL? A staff of NFL coaches or a bunch of fans on a message board?

Rather than retort to this reply - i''ll let Coach Caper's answer your points as he addresses most of them and I'm not into the whole :brickwall scenario.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/sports/3192107

Covered most of this in the other topic. But Suffice to say I would at least try out a proven commodity [Shelton] to see if he provides the competition needed at the LT spot.

Honestly I think our line will keep changing until they find the 5 guys who can do the job well enough to start in their positions.

Those folks who talk about chemistry?? Thats the company line - HIMO This line has had plenty of time to gel - But they havent performed like it. I dont buy into the whole give em another year to prove me wrong thing. As Capers pointed out in the article.

"We weren't pleased with the amount of sacks we gave up last year. The whole goal is to come out with the most efficient five and the best five." Coach Dom Capers

I just dont understand why they passed over the early FA LT's we could have picked up if we were on the ball and :fishing: Now that were almost to Training camp I see us waiting for June 1st cuts and - seeing whats on the market and signing any decent LT to provide depth and competition to a 1 or 2 year deal. Then drafting an LT in first round next year when there are more line prospects. to choose from.

infantrycak
05-23-2005, 03:34 PM
But Suffice to say I would at least try out a proven commodity [Shelton] to see if he provides the competition needed at the LT spot.

What is with all the talk about proven commodity, consistant performer, etc. The guy is a 1st round draft pick who was just released (at the cost of $3.3 mil on the cap) with no compensation by one of the league's bottom teams. Oh sorry, I know the answer--the field turf is greener on that side of the fence. There is one label for a 1st rounder (basically this year's Alex Barron) losing his starting job and getting released with no compensation--bust. Maybe, just maybe he will be re-motivated on a new team while learning zone blocking--could happen.

Those folks who talk about chemistry?? Thats the company line - HIMO This line has had plenty of time to gel - But they havent performed like it.

Really, when did they get all this time. This is the first year it appears the line won't be undergoing wholesale change.

I just dont understand why they passed over the early FA LT's we could have picked up if we were on the ball and :fishing:

And who would that have been? Here is a list of the top 100 FA's this year.

Link (http://www.profootballweekly.com/PFW/Features/Free+Agency/2005/top100.htm)

Now who on there other than Pace jumps out as an obvious solid starting LT?

Mr Shush
05-23-2005, 03:59 PM
I'd be very surprised to see us spend even remotely significant money on Shelton this summer, because I believe that Casserly plans to trade up in next year's draft, possibly even into the top five, and take one of the top tackles likely to be available.

LT is the one position in the league where the best players (as in, the ones who turn out best, the Ogdens, Joneses and Paces of this world) are almost invariably drafted high in the first and where high first round picks almost never bust. Casserly, in his time drafting for the 'Skins, exhibited a liking for trading up in the first anyway (one year holding the second and third picks overall in one draft).

We are thin at LB, and if Boulware can be had at a reasonable price, all the better. The Pats hardly suffered for having seven starting-quality LBs last year.

U4ikrob
05-23-2005, 04:24 PM
What is with all the talk about proven commodity, consistant performer, etc. The guy is a 1st round draft pick who was just released (at the cost of $3.3 mil on the cap) with no compensation by one of the league's bottom teams. Oh sorry, I know the answer--the field turf is greener on that side of the fence. There is one label for a 1st rounder (basically this year's Alex Barron) losing his starting job and getting released with no compensation--bust. Maybe, just maybe he will be re-motivated on a new team while learning zone blocking--could happen.

Proven commodity meaning nothing more than he has started at the position before. Does it mean he is the answer at LT - not necessarily thus I said for Competition and depth. This isnt a turf greener type of an approach but a recognition of the facts - our line is pretty porous.


Really, when did they get all this time. This is the first year it appears the line won't be undergoing wholesale change.

Wholesale changes is correct - But your giving that company line thing again about they are gonna have chemistry. My point would be according to the roster the only changes thus far on the line have been positional changes which is nothign new to O-line guys. They always bounce around on the line. Until last years scheme change to Zone blocking there was no real change to the line. Granted Zone blocking is a change in philosophy and takes time to learn, but these guys are proffesionals, it's not like they are learning rocket science and most of them have had more than a few years to figure things out. They still have to get up into their man and block him out. My point I guess is the entire line has played together in different combinations for a the last few years outside of a few new faces. Our regular starting line has guys that have played together for the last almost 4 years outside of Wade. Mckinney[4 yrs], Pitts [4 yrs], Wand [4 years] Wade[1 year], Wiegart[2 years]. These guys have played together a majority of the time. And Mckinney,Wade and Weigart are veterans from other teams too. Factor in that experience. Thats plenty of time to gel and get chemistry IMO for most people. Even the depth rotation players like Weary, Spears, Brown etc etc are still the same faces. Not really a whole lot of new guys running around. Thus my complaint that this chemistry thign is just a smoke and mirrors company lien thign they are putting out to try and give faith to the players nad send a smoke screen to the league.

Could I be wrong and this same group comes together in the first few games and puts the missing pieces they couldnt find last year together?

- IT is possible sure. IMO it's not a probable solution and even the coach is acknowledging he wasnt happy with how thigsn went. That should be a clear indication that something is just not right with the PR they are spinning on the situation.

And who would that have been? Here is a list of the top 100 FA's this year.

Link (http://www.profootballweekly.com/PFW/Features/Free+Agency/2005/top100.htm)

Now who on there other than Pace jumps out as an obvious solid starting LT?

Obviously Pace, but for some reason I recall there being like 2 or 3 LT's that were restricted FA's or had some ties that made them expensive, but they were available. Seattle and the BRowns keep coming to mind. Anywho I will try to track down some names to match for that point and get back later.

Edit - just checked your list - here are a few names on the list that stand out - Jonas Jennings - starting LT now for San Fran. Mike Wahle - OL role player - depth at LT, Kareem McKenzie plays RT but could have pushed for starters role, Stockar McDougle - Project player - could have been competition with Wand for an Upgrade, Rick DeMulling - Another role player that could start at Guard or Tackle etc etc - I havent even gotten half way down your list yet is my point. There were some people but the staff choose to ignore them all only trying for Pace and then going oh well - We meant to say - We want to stick with our guys because they will have chemistry and play better - not that we dont haev enough talent at the key spots to put up a decent line.

southtexan
05-23-2005, 04:29 PM
First of all I'm very skeptical of all the "talent scouts" in here who think they know whether or not the players currently starting for the Texans offensive line are any good. Most everyone I see discussing the line in here can't tell the difference between a player who's not any good and a player who's been moved out of his position (Pitts), or a player who's starting for the first time in the NFL and playing like it (Wand). A lot of them think that signing Weigert was a mistake and Wade was another. If I thought that all the people commenting on the OL in here knew what they were looking at then that would be different but I don't.

Second you're a couple of years too late on the "Why let them develop a chemistry together if a couple of them are probably gone after this season?" part. Those guys were signed in 2002 and 2003 and if they weren't good enough to stick around then they're already gone. The players we have right now are mostly going to be the players we go into the season with and everyone had better get used to the idea.

The years of "They need to send a couple of them packing" are over folks. The only thing that's going to prompt massive change on our line from here on out is going to be injury. Players aren't going to be replaced in bunches anymore and not every group of cuts (June 1st or otherwise) is going to contain someone who can help our team.

If someone cuts loose a guy who can start for us I'm for it. Don't get me wrong, I don't think we have the second coming of Munchak, Mathews, Steinkuhler, and Co. on this team. We're just good enough now that you need to balance what you lose and what you gain when you start swapping out parts of this line. In terms of guys who are going to play for us this year the team only pursued one guy and that was Orlando Pace. That should tell you something about what the Texans think of their OL. They think a lot more of it than most of us do. Who do you think is more likely to be closer to the truth about the OL? A staff of NFL coaches or a bunch of fans on a message board?

Excellent post, after reading all of the negative posts in here about our offensive line it got to the point that it I couldn't read any more negative posts about it, It's my opinion that the line needs time to gel and this coming season we will see some improvement.

Texas_Thrill
05-23-2005, 04:40 PM
Ok NO LAW. He would cost more than if we kept Glenn. And I doubt he'll be willing to be a nickel.

I'm all for shelton. We need OL help badly which we clearly didn't address in the draft.

Davis37
05-23-2005, 07:17 PM
I personally hope we dont waste cap space on Shelton. I think CC is gonna see what our line can do this year, and grab a LT in the early 1st round next season. If we can get Boulware, Im all for it. It would give us depth at OLB which we need to rotate in with Babin and Peek to keep them fresh for the whole game.

D-ReK
05-23-2005, 07:36 PM
I personally hope we dont waste cap space on Shelton. I think CC is gonna see what our line can do this year, and grab a LT in the early 1st round next season. If we can get Boulware, Im all for it. It would give us depth at OLB which we need to rotate in with Babin and Peek to keep them fresh for the whole game.

I agree with you for the most part...There is no doubt in my mind that a Peek/Babin/Boulware rotation is a much better option than a Peek/Babin/Anderson rotation...The problem with this is that Boulware will likely want to get paid like a starter and not like a rotational player, though...As for drafting an OT in the first in 2006, I really don't see how that will help us in the 2006 season...Rookie OTs usually don't make an impact at OT in their rookie seasons, unless their name is Orlando Pace, so even if we take an OT in the first, he probably won't help us until 2007...

infantrycak
05-23-2005, 07:57 PM
Wholesale changes is correct - But your giving that company line thing again about they are gonna have chemistry.

Edit - just checked your list - here are a few names on the list that stand out - Jonas Jennings - starting LT now for San Fran. Mike Wahle - OL role player - depth at LT, Kareem McKenzie plays RT but could have pushed for starters role, Stockar McDougle - Project player - could have been competition with Wand for an Upgrade, Rick DeMulling - Another role player that could start at Guard or Tackle etc etc - I havent even gotten half way down your list yet is my point. There were some people but the staff choose to ignore them all only trying for Pace and then going oh well - We meant to say - We want to stick with our guys because they will have chemistry and play better - not that we dont haev enough talent at the key spots to put up a decent line.

It isn't a company line at all. The decision isn't change vs. no change. The decision is no change vs. acquiring a specific player to improve a specific position. No change vs. Pace--result, clear improvement with a hefty price tag. No change vs. Jonas Jennings--maybe some improvement, but with a price tag virtually everyone agrees was too high. No change vs. any of the ooh we could take the RT and make him into a LT alternatives--zero improvement or a step back along with more cap space used. Adopting the attitude that if no changes are made it means the staff are just "ignoring" the FA's is naive. They are analyzing all these possibilities at a far more in-depth level than "oh my god, the OL sucks, start calling everyone on the FA list."

wags
05-23-2005, 08:12 PM
In terms of guys who are going to play for us this year the team only pursued one guy and that was Orlando Pace. That should tell you something about what the Texans think of their OL.

How do you know Victor Riley won't start? Didn't we try and get Matt Lehr? Are we not currently interested in L.J. Shelton? Seems to me the Texans are trying to add players to this line.

Hervoyel
05-23-2005, 10:30 PM
wags

I'll be surprised if Riley can beat Wand out of that job. I also believe the work Wand is doing right now at LG does not reflect where he'll be playing on opening day. Maybe they are interested in Shelton but what does it mean when the Cardinals are telling him to hit the road and getting nothing in return?

This all reflects little more than an overall rise in the competition for a job on our offensive line. Riley will compete with Wand for the job and has a chance to beat him out of it but I bet will more than likely be behind Wand in the depth chart. If that happens then we've upgraded Marcus Spears position. Maybe we sign Shelton and he competes too. It's all good but Wand will start for us in 2005 and he'll have a Chester Pitts type sophmore year. For that matter Pitts second year at LG will be like his second year at LT. Much improved.

F-minus67
05-23-2005, 11:40 PM
I go with shelton, he is younger and less injury prone.

wags
05-23-2005, 11:53 PM
I'll be surprised if Riley can beat Wand out of that job.

I think Riley is more of a threat to take a guard spot.

Maybe they are interested in Shelton but what does it mean when the Cardinals are telling him to hit the road and getting nothing in return?

We are interested. No maybe about it.

We let Sharper and Glenn go without getting anything in return. They are quality players. Shelton was only let go after a trade for Travis Henry never materialized. Think we could put Wand on the trading block and get Travis Henry offers?

It's all good but Wand will start for us in 2005 and he'll have a Chester Pitts type sophmore year. For that matter Pitts second year at LG will be like his second year at LT. Much improved.

I really don't think Wand will be starting at left tackle this next season. Pace, Riley, Shelton, Pitts. Seeing a trend here. Apparently we are looking for competition/immediate upgrade at one spot: Left Tackle.

BornOrange
05-24-2005, 01:01 AM
Think we could put Wand on the trading block and get Travis Henry offers?
That is exactly what the Cardinals did. They took a player who is about the same level as Seth Wand and offered him to the Bills for Travis Henry.

The Bills declined.

LJ Shelton would be an improvement over Victor Riley for a backup position, but I don't think he would beat out Seth Wand.

I would stil try to sign him and then let everyone compete to see who the best man for the job will be, but in the end I think a young, hard-working, improving Seth Wand will be better than an under-achieving, as good as he'll ever be LJ Shelton.

infantrycak
05-24-2005, 08:15 AM
We let Sharper and Glenn go without getting anything in return. They are quality players. Shelton was only let go after a trade for Travis Henry never materialized.

The difference is Sharper and Glenn were aging players and the team saved cap money by releasing them vs. Shelton a 1st round LT in the absolute prime of his career age wise and the Cardinals are paying to see him go.

wags
05-24-2005, 10:18 AM
The difference is Sharper and Glenn were aging players and the team saved cap money by releasing them vs. Shelton a 1st round LT in the absolute prime of his career age wise and the Cardinals are paying to see him go.

That one year difference between Sharper and Shelton must be very dramatic.

infantrycak
05-24-2005, 10:38 AM
That one year difference between Sharper and Shelton must be very dramatic.

No what is dramatic is their age for their position. A just turned 29 LT can easily be expected to finish out a 5-7 year contract--see Willie Roaf, 35 and still going strong, Walter Jones, 31 with a new 7 yr contract and Orlando Pace, 30 with a new 7 yr contract. A 31.5 LB is hoping to play 3-4 more years--see pro-bowler, Peter Boulware born one month after Sharper looking for a new job and publicly stating he may need to DE to keep playing. Given their positions, yeah it is a dramatic difference.

OzzO
05-24-2005, 01:26 PM
Back to Boulware....

Browns | Boulware Likes Their Team - from www.KFFL.com
Tue, 24 May 2005 05:15:41 -0700

Mary Kay Cabot, of the Plain Dealer, reports free agent LB Peter Boulware (Ravens) said that he would love to play for the Cleveland Browns and general manager Phil Savage, who helped draft him in Baltimore. Savage was director of college scouting when the Ravens drafted Boulware. "Phil knows what it takes to win a Super Bowl and he knows how to acquire the players to do it," Boulware said. "He's a winner and he'll have the Browns going in the right direction." Boulware added he would love to play for Browns head coach Romeo Crennel. Boulware has played in the 3-4 and could be plugged right into Crennel's new 3-4 scheme. The two sides may meet after the NFL owners' meetings are completed.

...and Shelton
Bills | Passing on Shelton? - from www.KFFL.com
Mon, 23 May 2005 20:47:52 -0700

ESPN.com's John Clayton reports it appears the Buffalo Bills will pass on signing free agent OT L.J. Shelton (Cardinals). As noted earlier, he four visits scheduled but the Bills are not of them.

O.G.
05-25-2005, 06:43 AM
Thanks for the update.

JustBonee
05-25-2005, 05:12 PM
Boulware might want to hook up with his old team mate in Seattle, Jamie Sharper. They, along with Ray Lewis, had a super thing going when they played together in Baltimore.

TEXANS84
05-26-2005, 02:01 PM
-- Boulware to Cleveland or Seattle --
Thu May 26, 2005 --from FFMastermind.com

The Cincinnati Enquirer reports free-agent LB Peter Boulware, who played for DC Marvin Lewis with the Ravens, was released and appears headed for Cleveland or Seattle. A source told The Enquirer on Wednesday that there has not been and would not be a Boulware visit to Cincinnati. "Peter obviously has been a fine player," HC Marvin Lewis said after the on-field coaching session Wednesday, "someone we obviously know well. Let's just leave it at that."