Which signing was the best? - Page 2

Jughead10 · 03-03-2008, 08:12 PM

I actually really like Odom signing with the Bengals the best.

ATLDirtyBirds · 03-03-2008, 08:12 PM

It's Moss or Briggs. Two elite players who didn't get paid like the market would suggest.

Crazy_Chris · 03-03-2008, 08:12 PM

I'd have to say the bears re-signing Lance Briggs for only 36 Million with 12 Garunteed is the best Signing so far. Followed by the patriots re-signing Randy Moss.

hugegmenfan · 03-03-2008, 08:14 PM

I totally agree with JoeyJr. Assuming Vilma is healthy and his injury turns out well, he was a total steal for the Saints. For a 3rd or 4th round conditional pick? thats incredible. Vilma is a great MLB...in a 4-3 system. He did not work well with Mangini but people forget he was defensive rookie of the year and was an animal before Mangini came. He is still very young and I think he will be a very good player for the Saints

regoob2 · 03-03-2008, 08:16 PM

Briggs was the best player for the money by far. Vilma is he plays to expectations.

SaintsFanForLife · 03-03-2008, 08:16 PM

I would have to say Vilma was the best sign. Not just becoause im a Saints fan but I think for the price we paid we got a steal.

eaglesalltheway · 03-03-2008, 08:20 PM

I say Moss because the Pats would have been Hurting bad if he were to sign somewhere else. The Briggs deal is a close second for me with Samuel my third. CB wasn't exactly this big of a need, but if the Eagles keep all of theirs, it won't be a need for a long, long time. This would be much lower on the list if it weren't for Samuel being the best player in the FA market. Briggs going back to the Bears is second because the Bears, whether they beleive it or not, need Briggs, and as it turned out Briggs needed the Bears. Their system is truly what fits him best, and the Bears keep him for a while. Moss is first for many reasons. The Pats lost sooo much in this FA period, that losing Moss would have been a big blow. I wouldn't say it would cripple them, but it might have given them a gimp. :) Moss was the second best player available in FA, by a very close margin, and fitted on of the seamingly biggest needs on their team. If this signing were not to have happened, Wes Welker would not be able to make the plays he made this year. Don't get me wrong, Welker would have been productive, but we certainly would have seen a major drop in stats from this past year.

jetsfan0099 · 03-03-2008, 08:22 PM

I think Faneca was, because I think he could make the greatest impact. The Jets needed to make this move, to help out Ferguson and Mangold. It could now form one of the best left sides of a OL in the NFL.

Xiomera · 03-03-2008, 08:39 PM

Lance Briggs . . . they gave him the least amount of guaranteed money, and an annual salary of just 6 mil.

Pretty good deal if you ask me.

But let's not underestimate the Lions signing of Michael Gaines . . . hahahahaha

eaglesfan_45 · 03-03-2008, 09:11 PM

I have to say that the jets are looking good with their offseason this far

iowatreat54 · 03-03-2008, 09:13 PM

umm Briggs...he received 6 years $36M one year of high production and another pro bowl after we offered him 6 years $36M last year

LonghornsLegend · 03-03-2008, 09:13 PM

My choice wasnt up there, im going with Dante Stallworth, because he makes alot of guys job so much easier even without doing anything, and he was alot cheaper then Berrian who does virtually the same things...Braylon and Winslow should flourish, and you have to respect stallworths speed, Anderson has the arm to get the ball to these guys as well, I think he can make a huge difference in their offense...

If I had to go with a choice I really like Turner to ATL, perfect compliment to Norwood, he fits the ZBS great and can also take it the distance, and assures they dont have to spend an early pick on a rb...Great fit.

Bills2083 · 03-03-2008, 09:18 PM

Lance Briggs.
The Bears signed him for cheap. I was expecting him to get $8 or $9 million a season.

The Great Jonathan Vilma · 03-03-2008, 10:41 PM

I voted the Vilma trade for the Saints. It was an area of considerable need for a long time, and to finally address it with what is hopefully a healthy Jonathan Vilma, I think is a great acquisition. The impact he can have for that team is well worth the value.

Based on actual FA, and not a trade, i'd say Briggs, which i never would have though would happen based on last season. All i had heard was about how he wouldn't return and how he was going to be getting a monster contract, so to actually resign him and get it at a very reasonable price given his past performance and market factors, i think they got great value.

Faneca is a nice pickup, and his value will come more from how he helps the two guys beside him than just what he does as an upgrade at his position. I definitely think he was worth the money, and although his contract is larger than Briggs, the 'value' that comes with the signing to the overall offensive line stability it may provide may be equal to Briggs. However, due to the uncertainty of not knowing if it really will be the factor that helps Mangold and D’Brick break out, its hard to be certain, so i give the edge to Briggs because you know what your getting and what he can do for that defense.

Not a huge fan of the Samuel contract, and Turner is an unproven commodity as a starter, so they are harder to gauge at this point
Moss is a nice signing. We know what he and Brady can do together already so there is no doubt that maintaining that combination is huge for the Patriots team/offense. Doesn't really matter if its a higher per year contract, they need to be accounted for. Lets hope (well, i'll hope the opposite) that him not being on a one year contract doesn't let him settle for being average again. I don't see that happening, but its worth noting.

Nitschke-Hawk · 03-03-2008, 10:53 PM

I choose Michael Turner based on potential. He's got a chance to be a main reason why the franchise could turn around and if he puts up big numbers it's a nice contract for Atlanta.

bantx · 03-03-2008, 10:56 PM

add big ben on there!

MasterShake · 03-03-2008, 11:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BaLLiN72

But he averages 15.1 per reception, he doesn't have to be the #1 reciever and he has only been that once, at philly where he would've gotten 1,000 if he hadn't gotten injured.

Bingo! Story of his career...

TitleTown088 · 03-04-2008, 12:32 AM

No Bernard Berrian or Madieu Williams?

JagHombre22 · 03-04-2008, 12:35 AM

ha...Williams got WAYYY too much money...and Berrian did too...

skiinginNJ · 03-04-2008, 01:10 AM

justin tuck........oops

UKfan · 03-04-2008, 05:57 AM

I like the Stroud to Bills move personally, but in terms of value it's got to be Briggs.

Meta4 · 03-04-2008, 06:01 AM

For the price the Bears retained Briggs for I would say the Briggs signing was the best thus far.

Dam8610 · 03-04-2008, 08:36 AM

I can't believe Cleveland gave Anderson that much in guarantees...but after this season it could be a very tradeable contract, which is probably what they were looking for, so in that sense, it could be the best overall signing. For overall value though, I'd have to go with either of the trades. Vilma and Stroud could make very large impacts on their new teams provided they come back at 100%.

The Legend · 03-04-2008, 08:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mqtirishfan

No love for Tommy Kelly?

lol i think that won the worsting signing
Briggs or Asante, i went with Asante

bigbluedefense · 03-04-2008, 10:39 AM

Briggs for the money. Moss for the player.

Its real close between those 2. Briggs was a great move. And they got him for cheap. Moss is Moss. The greatest deep threat in NFL history. And he only got 3 mill more than Berrian's overrated ass.

Id give a slight edge to Moss, because i think he impacts the game more than Briggs does, but its close.