What if....?

[powda]

and no...while im overflowing with sarcasm...

I DONT AGREE WITH YOU.

[Vinny]

Originally Posted by TheOgre

He is clearing making fun of Ses for thinking Moran Norris is one of the best FB's in the NFL.

Um, he's clearly making fun of Ses calling Lucky "Son". Thats what that whole post was about.

Originally Posted by __V__

Has anyone even argued that point?

THERE YOU FREAKIN HAVE IT! Not 1 but 2 people argue that point.

[powda]

wow i feel like a celebrity. to have my words dissected just so.

mostly my mentioning norris being so great is a refrence to a post soup nazi
made about baxter having to be one of the best fullbacks around to displace norris.

you lost credibility with me when you said that. lucky on the other hand, hasnt.

and honestly im irritated that soup nazi would attempt to belittle lucky with terms like "SON". i dont care how old you are...it dosent make your opinion better then junior's. and it dosent make you wise. dont you have a bingo game to go to?

Originally Posted by powda

i'm a moron for thinking king is a bum in comparission to his competition.

No, but you are one for at least not respecting him and his accomplishments.

Originally Posted by powda

gildeon is old. his production has steadily declined. hes asking for more money then obviously what most teams consider reasonable. his addition means a young linebacker with a FUTURE here loses playing time..

Gildon is going to 33. Hes 1 year younger than Willie McGinest and 1 year older than Zach Thomas, both of whom made the Pro Bowl last year. His production has dropped off, but still was better than most of our linebackers.

So Poo, Someone will pick him up, he will not be left out there too much longer.

Originally Posted by powda

you lost credibility with me

I am hurting.

[infantrycak]

Alright folks--debate this issue if you like, although frankly you obviously aren't going to change one another's minds, but there is no need for personal insults such as calling people morons or whatever. Debate on.

I agree. And for the record I really don't think I called anyone a moron.

[powda]

Dan (DC): Where is Jason Gildon going to land? Who will be lucky enough to get his services?

Chris Mortensen: It looks like the Bengals or Bills. Both teams are offering basically the same money. So, it's just his choice. I guess it wouldn't surprise me if it's the Bengals because he can play against his former team, the Steelers, twice a year.


surprise, surprise, no mention of the texans.
so now im a moron because i value chris mortensen's opinion more then kings's? hmmmm. ok then.

(question: how much older is peter king then chris mortensen? i know how important that is to you.)

Originally Posted by SESupergenius

Gildon is going to 33..

aside from the fact that hes obviously past his prime what relevance does that have? do i need to name names they taught you in that school you went to like cade mcnown,andre ware, david klingler. how old were those guys when they stopped being productive and were still very overpaid like gildeon?

for every name you give me that was productive at 33 i'll give ya a dozen who didnt have nfl careers lasting that long.

Originally Posted by SESupergenius

I am hurting.

if its not blatantly obvious by now, you respect my opinion every bit as much as i (and perhaps the majority so far) respect yours. poo back at ya gramps (you realize they make diapers for that dontcha?)

my appologies infantrycak ,and i will give him kudos. he actually sent me a link to find a job at hbo! lmao

[powda]

Originally Posted by SESupergenius

And for the record I really don't think I called anyone a moron..

Originally Posted by powda

i'm a moron for thinking king is a bum in comparission to his competition?

Originally Posted by SESupergenius

No, but you are one for at least not respecting him and his accomplishments..

once again, mistaken! lol

Originally Posted by powda

so now im a moron because i value chris mortensen's opinion more then kings's? hmmmm. ok then.

no, and I will not call you one, but you are coming close for not following the thread. My point was made that the Texans were interested in Gildon. Along with several other teams, Packers, Bears, Bengals, Bills...etc. Here is ANOTHER reference aside from the Peter King quote earlier that mentions the Texans were interested in Gildon. Morty is just claiming now that its narrowed down to two teams. Mort NEVER claims that the TEXANS were not interested in him at some point. Please follow the along so we don't have to rehash old points.

Originally Posted by powda

aside from the fact that hes obviously past his prime what relevance does that have? do i need to name names they taught you in that school you went to like cade mcnown,andre ware, david klingler. how old were those guys when they stopped being productive and were still very overpaid like gildeon?

Sit back for a second , you're going to get pounded. Since Gildon has been in the league he's had 2 very similar seasons like he did last year, in 1999 and 1997. Was he past his prime in those years as well? Nope. And you are comparing the Steelers All-time sack leader with a couple of Pro-Bowls under his belt to the likes of Klingler, Ware, and McNown? OMG How many Pro-Bowls combined did your group of greats have? That was a pretty bad example. You need to have your training wheels put back on if you are coming with that weak take. You must think the same thing about Mark Bruener because He's the same age as Gildon, even coming from the same team. His stats have declined drastically over the last 2 years, due to injury, but never the less he hasn't been productive. I guess you don't like that one huh?

Originally Posted by powda

for every name you give me that was productive at 33 i'll give ya a dozen who didnt have nfl careers lasting that long.

And I could give you plenty that will never stack up to his accomplishments, or even a down season like he had last year.


How's that Job thing working for ya. Maybe you can use this to sharpen your skills, you are still very raw. :hehe:

[powda]

Originally Posted by SESupergenius

Morty is just claiming now that its narrowed down to two teams.

isnt there a distinct diffrence between sitting down with an agent to discuss a contract and someones intrest in a team vs. a casual call every team makes? teams inquire all the time. we've surley inquired about antonio bryant as have the rest of the league. does that make him great or the newest texan? and how many teams inquired about henson? how many teams showed up for his practice session? how many teams pursued him? its common practice to make a simple phone call.

well thats a nobrainer isnt it?

Originally Posted by SESupergenius

Mort NEVER claims that the were not interested in him at some point.

and mort never claims they were intrested at some point.

Originally Posted by SESupergenius

Sit back for a second , you're going to get pounded. Since Gildon has been in the league he's had 2 very similar seasons like he did last year, in 1999 and 1997. Was he past his prime in those years as well? Nope.

wow. thats a pounding im not sure i can endure. you said what? he had a great year in 99. 5 years ago? you said what? he had a great year in 97. 7 years ago? golly! what year was o.j. simpson at his finest? we should sign him to! really all you have to do is look at the stats o.j. put up.

well thats a nobrainer isnt it?

Originally Posted by SESupergenius

Gildon is going to 33. :

you arguing he's young enough to be productive?

Originally Posted by SESupergenius

He does have a limitted time table

but now hes old?





intresting to note how you've shy'ed away from the fact that bringing gildeon here prevents younger linebackers (with a career on a longer timetable and without diminshing skills) from having a chance to establish themselves.

i am so confused. perhaps i hit my head one to many times falling off my bike.

as for my job? if i can pull down peter king's salary for the propaganda he spews to make a buck...

well thats a nobrainer isnt it?

Well I've given you 2 sources that said the Texans were interested, you given 1 were it says that it's now narrowed down to 2 teams. Narrowing it down to 2 teams doesn't equate to only 2 teams being interested in him.


Obviously you read the thread wrong again. how many times is that going to happen. Class in in session again. I said that Gildon has had 2 similar seasons like he did last year, once in 99 and once in 97. These were statisticaly down years for Gildon, but my point was that even though he had those down years he's had productive seasons after them. So follow along, He could have the same rebound effect he had following those seasons. And in actually they were not down seasons compared to most LB's in the league, he still had enough sacks to tie him for 7th in the league. Not bad for a washed up old man of 33 as you suggest. And you OJ comment just doesn't fit anywhere in there so I'll move over that like its your school girl hall pass on the floor.

I've already stated that brining Gildon in, a veteran Pro-Bowler that knows the 3-4 like the back of his hand, would not prevent the young linebackers, but would help them in their progress. Loads of players express how important it is to learn from veterans. And who's to say that Gildon could not to a better job than Wong. One of several scenarios would have Gildon start at LOLB, Babins at ROLB, Wong at BLB and Sharper at MLB. Odd man out is Foreman, one of the weakest links on our defense.....ah nevermind, all this is probably way over your head by now. But then again it's a nobrainer.

[texan279]

Yeah i guess Gildon just all of the sudden got old from last years 7th ranking of sacks to this off season.

Not trying to start trouble , but Jason Gildon was 35th last year in the NFL with 6 sacks.

[powda]

The Texans, Redskins, Packers, Ravens and Browns are believed to be interested in Gildon.

even your source dosent say they are. it says believed to be. believed to be? yeah thats reassuring especially comming from someone as renowned as alan robinson. and how old is that article? june 2. 1 day after the june 1 cuts? 6 weeks old? didnt the texans have an intrest in trotter to? real compeling stuff there. hmmm. once again, only an inquiry wich should be a given considering hes a linebacker from one of the few 3-4 teams in the league.

Originally Posted by SESupergenius

Well I've given you 2 sources that said the Texans were interested, you given 1 .

did you want another source wich mentions jason gildeon on the free agent market and makes no mention of the texans?

here ya go:

http://www.nola.com/saints/t-p/index...1849153310.xml

stats.

2002 foreman had 105 tackles 0 sacks inside.

sharper had 95 tackles 5.5 sacks inside.

wong had 34 tackles 5.5 sacks on the strong side.

gildon had 67 tackles 9 sacks


2003 foreman had 135 tackles 2 sacks.

sharper had 164 tackles 4 sacks.

wong had 62 tackles 3 sacks on the strong side.

gildon had 61 tackles 6 sacks


did you notice a couple of trends? gildons numbers over the last 2 years( and really the last 5 years if you'd like me to post those stats) have dimisnished. wong played the strong side and foreman and sharper played inside...the sack numbers were ok considering they werent in a defense geared specifically to get them to the qb (weakside in the texans d) ,and their tackle numbers (productivity) blew gildon out of the water.thats not bad at all considering 2002 was an expansion year and 2003 we were playing 3rd string scrubs in the d-line. how long have the steelers been a franchise?


the bottom line is: look up the stats, gildon is on the downslope. even to you that should be obvious.

Originally Posted by SESupergenius

So follow along, He could have the same rebound effect he had following those seasons.

he could? history proves thats not the trend. babin on the otherhand has no history ,but he does have better physical tools, youth, and a high ceiling. he has a very good chance to do this year as well as gildon did in his first 4 years wich was by no means impressive. infact it wasnt remotely close to pro bowl status.

and once again you've shy'ed away from the fact that gildon on the field takes playing time away from people like peek or babin. evidently your not willing to concieve a 2 year stop gap such as gildon could impeed the progress of younger players. does that mean you consider the texans a superbowl contender this year or next? if not what your suggesting hurts the long term development of the defense and the team as a whole.

Originally Posted by SESupergenius

And who's to say that Gildon could not to a better job than Wong. One of several scenarios would have Gildon start at LOLB, Babins at ROLB, Wong at BLB and Sharper at MLB. Odd man out is Foreman, one of the weakest links on our defense....

what you've been comparing is linebackers to a pass rush specialist in an established defense vs an expansion defense. aside from sacks foreman's been more productive then gildon. and now you want the texans to make wholesale changes among their linebackers to accomadate a washed up pass rush specialist you've already admitted will only be productive in the league for another year or 2?

once again, the obvious choice is...

a no brainer.

Yes it was believed to be, from a reputable source. I'll take that. It's no like he's doing a bit for the National Enquirer. There is no 'weapons of mass Gildon' First you think that Peter King works for the Boston Globe and is can not be believed, now you assume that AP's Alan Robinson who covers a lot of Steelers news isn't reputable. Nice. Um Let's see. Do I believe some guy on the internet name Powda or 2 guys (or more) that have established reputations covering the NFL as well as NFL Coaches Marvin Lewis and Mularkey. No Brainer.

Originally Posted by powda

http://www.nola.com/saints/t-p/inde...71849153310.xml

And who is Jason .Gildeon by the way. This writer from New Orleans (yea they sure would know who Gildon talked to) Jeff Duncan can't even Spell Gildon right. Nice job on the research. And here is the exact quote from the article

The Bengals are the favorites to sign free agent linebacker Jason Gildeon. The two-time Pro Bowler already has visited Green Bay and Buffalo and has received interest from Chicago.

Once again it never says that at some point the Texans were not interested. Ever think that the Texans talked to Gildon's agent and afterwards felt that he wanted too much money or that he would rather play for a contender instead of a 5-11 team? Naw you never think of those things. TAll your article states is that on June 20th those were the teams left that had serious considerations for Gildon, oops sorry, GILDEON. But hey nice job on the research, maybe AP should give you a call to replace Robinson.

Originally Posted by powda

did you notice a couple of trends?

The only relevant trend I see is that Gildon has had very similar years in 2002, 2001, 1999, 1997, and 1996 just like he did last year. Your only making my point better. Sure he's had a decline in sack stats from a great season of over 13 sacks, but year after year he is still pumping out the stats like he's consistanly done throughout his career. In fact he's had worse seasons than last years so your total decline argument is blown out the water.

Originally Posted by powda

their tackle numbers (productivity) blew gildon out of the water.thats not bad at all considering 2002 was an expansion year and 2003

Sure the tackles numbers in productivity blow Gildons out of the water, BECAUSE THE TEXANS HAVE BEEN ON THE FIELD LONGER! LOL In fact the Texans have almost a game and half more plays than the Steelers had last year. That happens when the defense is ranked 2nd to last. Man this is easy. Wongs 2003 numbers were about the same as Gildons, they both played the same position, yet Gildon played in a game and half less plays.

Originally Posted by powda

gildon on the field takes playing time away from people like peek or babin. evidently your not willing to concieve a 2 year stop gap such as gildon could impeed the progress of younger players

Like I gave in a previous post, which you did not respond to. Gildon could play LOLB, Babin ROLB, Wong BLB and Sharper MLB. Babin doesn't seem to lose any playing time there. Oh but I guess you missed that one. And don't even tell me Foreman is better player than Wong or Gildon. I'm laughing hard at you already, any more and you'll make me bust a tube. Besides, even if Gildon did come in a take Babins spot, its not so bad to let him come in on pass downs and bring him along slowlym letting him learn the ropes from seasoned veterans. Many great LB's in the 3-4 have done that, but maybe you didn't know that.

We can go round and round about this. Its obvious you are not going to see my point no matter how many facts I give you. So there you have it. That ends the little exchange we've had. Next time be more prepared, you might actually give a decent debate.

P.S. texans279, I should have stated that he was ranked tied 7th amongst linebackers, didn't mean to infer that he was ranked 7th overall. I posted that earlier but was taking the short route in these longs posts. So no trouble started.

[powda]

commercial break.

at least one of us isnt retired.

[TheOgre]

Originally Posted by __V__

Um, he's clearly making fun of Ses calling Lucky "Son". Thats what that whole post was about.

That is what started the volleyball game, sure. Powda used Ses's take on Norris (being one of the top fullbacks in the league), though, to discredit his opinion. I was just throwing in my opinion on that statement.

If you are talking strictly about run blocking, I would agreed with Ses. In every other fullback duty, I think Norris is subpar.

Anyway, it really isn't that important. These guys are into a size contest. I really don't care which one is bigger.

[powda]

Originally Posted by SESupergenius

Do I believe some guy on the internet name Powda?

no, by all means ,but i brought 10 friends (now 12 total) you might find more trustworthy then me...

http://www.buffalobills.com/news/ind...cont_id=246234

http://www.billsdaily.com/news/archives/2004/jun3.shtml

http://www.profootballweekly.com/PFW...news062904.htm

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/04155/326288.stm

http://www.jsonline.com/packer/news/jun04/240086.asp

http://www.prosportsdaily.com/nfl/bills/rumors.html

http://bengals.enquirer.com/2004/06/19/ben1a.html

http://www.cincypost.com/bengals/200...6-18-2004.html

http://www.billsdaily.com/news/archives/2004/jul1.shtml

http://www.profootballcentral.com/archives.htm



WOW! thats a lot of sources isnt it Soup Nazi? theres something oddly funny about all these articles: they all talk about gildon as a free agent and make no mention of the texans. by now, i know you'll say, "they dont say the texans arent intrested." ya know, your right they dont. they also dont say another 25-30 teams arent intrested. does that mean all those teams ARE after gildon? feel free to check the spelling and gramatical errors if it makes you feel better. the point is you have 2 sources wich say the texans COULD be pursuing gildon; you've been provided with 12 sources now who talk about gildon on the free agent market and dont speak of the texans as a team activley looking to sign him.

Originally Posted by SESupergenius

Sure the tackles numbers in productivity blow Gildons out of the water, BECAUSE THE TEXANS HAVE BEEN ON THE FIELD LONGER! LOL In fact the Texans have almost a game and half more plays than the Steelers.

thats an intresting stat. i'd really enjoy a link that says just that. provide it or dont, i'll assume its legit. according to you the texans defense had an additional 6 quarters to gain their stats. in those 6 quarters sharper had 103 more tackles then gildon? but sharper isnt more productive then gildon? in those 6 quarters foreman ( who you've adamantly claimed is no comparision to gildon ) had 74 more tackles then gildon? but foreman isnt as productive as gildon? hmmmm...

when was the last time you saw a player make 103 tackles or even 74 tackles in a game and a half?

in addition to that what you've been comparing are inside and strongside linebackers to a weakside linebacker...so lets take a look at what kind of production the texans "other" linebackers had.

(they all shared time in a starting role)

shantee orr 4 tackles 2 sacks

antwan peek 25 tackles 1 sack

c clemons 26 tackles 1 sack

steve foley 31 tackles 1 sack

thats a total of 86 tackles and 5 sacks in comparision to gildon's 61 tackles and 6 sacks. now, some of those tackles are special teams tackles (as are some of gildon's tackles),but are you really going to sit there and tell me they had 25-30 tackles on special teams? no. they were all starters at one point during the season,and they've clearly been more productive then gildon despite playing on a team ravaged by injuries. peek and orr were also ROOKIES. as such, you might find it noteworthy they posted 16 tackles and 1 sack more then gildon did as a rookie...but you want them to sit the bench.

and for every politicaly correct player who claims "i learned a lot from the vetran starting ahead of me" ,you'll find another who says ,"theres no substitute for playing time". you'll also find a number of players who say they've learned a lot from their coaches. you'll even find players like antonio bryant who attack their coach because they're determined to get more playing time.

Originally Posted by SESupergenius

he's had a decline in sack stats

yes he has, despite being on the 9th best defense in a scheme specifically designed to get him to the quarterback. over recent years his sack numbers have DECLINED. over recent years his tackle numbers have DECLINED. but you wont say hes DECLINED because he COULD rebound? huh? my aunt COULD be my uncle if she had surgery.

gildon was good once (just as jerry rice, tim brown, emmitt smith, eddie george, and dozens others were),but he isnt the player he was. he was released in favor of a player the texans cut (clark haggans). what does that tell you? he was overpaid and hes done...and the steelers know it.

gramps, i just know theres a rerun of those HOT golden girls on right now. maybe you should take a break. ohhh, and try adding some fiber to your diet. throughout all of this you've been full of it.

NO SOUP FOR YOU!

ok lets get this thing back on track. I will graciously stick to arguing my points and do without the name calling and smartass comebacks and will respect you. So far we have good debate, lets not make it childish as Infantry pointed out, ok?

So far you have quoted 12 articles on-line that don't mention the Texans in them. I know for a fact that most of these papers pick up stories from wires and are owned by a few large companies. So you will come across the same stories with the same information. But back again to my argument, no where does it state that the Texans were never interested at some point, and yes there probably have been other teams interested in Gildon. When you quoted Mortenson that the Bills and Bengals were the teams interested in him, there was no mention of the Bears by him. But the
Chicago Tribune states The Bears were setting up a meeting as of June 5 with Gildon's agent and that he had already visited the Packers. Like I said, Mort was quoted as saying those were the team he's narrowed it down to at that time, and the same can be said about all those links you referenced. In fact even the Green Bay newspaper is quoted as saying the Texans were interested in Gildon. I think 3 seperate sources is good enough, I don't think I need to quote any more. I have 3 good resources that say the Texans were persuing him, you have none that say they haven't.


Gildon is a strong-side linebacker, same as Kailee Wong. Both had the same about of total tackles, yet Houston was on the field more. Gildon had 6 sacks yet Wong only had 3. So if you want to compare apples to apples, Gildon still comes out on top. No you want to compare Gildon to Sharper, that's is a little more tougher but Gildon did have more sacks than him and Sharper will always have more tackes statistically because that is what the ILB in the 3-4 produces most. (the Steelers ILB had total tackes of 141 and 99, more than Gildon) I think Sharper is the better ILB, which is why I said maybe Gildon is better depending on what postion you want to compare them at. As for Foreman, It's pretty much a consensus around here that he is the weakest link amoungst our linebackers, Since Gildon is better than Wong, that speaks for itself.

As far as your comment about players like antonio bryant who attack their coach because they're determined to get more playing time. I'm not sure what your point is but fighting with your head coach because a young guy like Bryant can't beat a 32 and 30-year old vets in KJ and Glenn makes my argument for Gildon look pretty good.

Gildon only decline is from is great season of 13.5 sacks, but last year he put up the similar numbers to 2002, 2001, 1999, 1997, and 1996. If he put up stats similar to 1996 and 1997, almost 8 years ago then he still has gas in the tank. If he had produced numbers well below that I could see that, but he clearly hasn't.

but he isnt the player he was. he was released in favor of a player the texans cut (clark haggans). what does that tell you?

No, Gildon isn't the player that got 13.5 sacks, but he is every bit as much the player in all those other years. And let me correct you again, the Texans never signed Haggans, so we couldn't have cut him. Just to let you know. I like Haggans, but its taken him at 27-years old to finally get a starting job in the NFL. There is a reason for that. The Steelers clearly cut Gildon because of his high salary, they'v done that many times to their stars in the past.

[powda]

Originally Posted by SESupergenius

ok lets get this thing back on track. I will graciously stick to arguing my points and do without the name calling and smartass comebacks and will respect you. So far we have good debate, lets not make it childish as Infantry pointed out, ok?

agreed.

in our attempts to determine the "alpha-male" here i think we've both managed to alienate ourselves from the rest of the room. thats a shame because inspite of our childish remarks, i think we've both made solid arrguments and presented some very good posts. i will try and refrain from that behavior because in case you hadnt noticed all my effort, i do respect you.

that dosent mean i'm obligated to agree with you...

at this point the question is: will the addition of gildon help or hinder the texans regardless of what any schmoe in maine or oregon says?

time permitting i will fully address your post tommorow. by now, you should have very little doubt about that.

the saga continues...