Chicago Fanatics Message Board
https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/

Jake Long
https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/viewtopic.php?f=90&t=76016		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  FavreFan [ Wed Jan 02, 2013 1:51 pm ]
Post subject:  Jake Long
He has the potential to significantly alter an NFL team wherever he goes. Could be worth 2-3 wins alone depending on who he is replacing. Only concern with him is injuries. A lot of contenders have offensive line problems. There's gotta be at least a dozen teams ready to line up and pay him what he wants, which I've heard is something around $84 million over seven years, with $44 million guaranteed.

I would absolutely love seeing Green Bay make an unusual pitch for a highly coveted free agent like him. Him and Bulaga going forward would really be a great tandem of tackles to build the line around.

Obviously the Bears would be upgraded significantly if they could get him. Any Bear fans here who wouldnt want the Bears to go after him because the pricetag or injury concerns?

Other teams I can see making a serious offer for him are the Cowboys, Cardinals, Eagles, Steelers, etc.

I think whoever gets him wins the offseason.
Author:  Terry's Peeps [ Wed Jan 02, 2013 2:03 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Jake Long
He should be the number one priority for the Bears, maybe 1A if Denver is silly enough to not resign Ryan Clady.
Author:  Zippy-The-Pinhead [ Wed Jan 02, 2013 2:04 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Jake Long
FavreFan wrote:
He has the potential to significantly alter an NFL team wherever he goes. Could be worth 2-3 wins alone depending on who he is replacing. Only concern with him is injuries. A lot of contenders have offensive line problems. There's gotta be at least a dozen teams ready to line up and pay him what he wants, which I've heard is something around $84 million over seven years, with $44 million guaranteed.

I would absolutely love seeing Green Bay make an unusual pitch for a highly coveted free agent like him. Him and Bulaga going forward would really be a great tandem of tackles to build the line around.

Obviously the Bears would be upgraded significantly if they could get him. Any Bear fans here who wouldnt want the Bears to go after him because the pricetag or injury concerns?

Other teams I can see making a serious offer for him are the Cowboys, Cardinals, Eagles, Steelers, etc.

I think whoever gets him wins the offseason.
As a Packers fan I would love to see it as they should be doing everything possible to protect AR. That said, TT seems frustratingly stubborn with regard to outside free agents. I could see Emery pursuing him though as it would address a major need while also gaining him favor with his fan base.
Author:  FavreFan [ Wed Jan 02, 2013 2:06 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Jake Long
Zippy-The-Pinhead wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
He has the potential to significantly alter an NFL team wherever he goes. Could be worth 2-3 wins alone depending on who he is replacing. Only concern with him is injuries. A lot of contenders have offensive line problems. There's gotta be at least a dozen teams ready to line up and pay him what he wants, which I've heard is something around $84 million over seven years, with $44 million guaranteed.

I would absolutely love seeing Green Bay make an unusual pitch for a highly coveted free agent like him. Him and Bulaga going forward would really be a great tandem of tackles to build the line around.

Obviously the Bears would be upgraded significantly if they could get him. Any Bear fans here who wouldnt want the Bears to go after him because the pricetag or injury concerns?

Other teams I can see making a serious offer for him are the Cowboys, Cardinals, Eagles, Steelers, etc.

I think whoever gets him wins the offseason.
As a Packers fan I would love to see it as they should be doing everything possible to protect AR. That said, TT seems frustratingly stubborn with regard to outside free agents. I could see Emery pursuing him though as it would address a major need while also gaining him favor with his fan base.

Agreed on all points. The Bears are always going to be more likely to land a big time FA than GB. It is frustrating at times but it's also proven to be a great way to build a team.
Author:  man of few opinions [ Wed Jan 02, 2013 2:10 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Jake Long
whoever signs him better be willing to pour an inordinate amount of money into one offensive lineman. the guy can play for sure, but if you are a team with multiple holes to fill and a set amount of money to do it with, he may not be your guy. 2 years in a row on the IR too.
Author:  FavreFan [ Wed Jan 02, 2013 2:15 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Jake Long
man of few opinions wrote:
whoever signs him better be willing to pour an inordinate amount of money into one offensive lineman. the guy can play for sure, but if you are a team with multiple holes to fill and a set amount of money to do it with, he may not be your guy. 2 years in a row on the IR too.

Well yeah, those are obviously the two primary concerns with him, as I mentioned in my OP. It wouldnt make sense for every NFL team, but it would make sense for a majority of them and he will easily be the most coveted FA in the class if Miami lets him go, which it's really looking like they will do.
Author:  Hatchetman [ Wed Jan 02, 2013 2:16 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Jake Long
I dunno. Lot of these large men are finished by 28-30 years old. Kind of risky.
Author:  good dolphin [ Fri Jan 04, 2013 9:52 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Jake Long
like I wrote in another post, I would be on his doorstep at 12:01 of the first day of FA is I were Emery.

This would allow him to treat OL like he treated WR last year and take a guy in the second rather than be pigeon holed into reaching with a 1st.

If Long and Clady are unavailable I would be looking at Brandon Albert.
Author:  RFDC [ Fri Jan 04, 2013 9:55 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Jake Long
gd how much are you willing to spend on a guy like Long? He seems like a huge health risk.
Author:  Kirkwood [ Fri Jan 04, 2013 12:32 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Jake Long
Eagles participation in the Long sweepstakes depends I guess on how Jason Peters returns from his Achilles injury.

I'd rather not have the Packers in on Long. The salary cap is projected to be flat the next 3 years thanks to NFLPA. Not sure if website I found is 100% correct but the Packers have quite a few players up the next 2-3 years:

This year: Dietrich-Smith, Shields, Crabtree, Walden, Ross
Next Year: Pickett, Raji, Finley, Matthews, J. Jones, Kuhn, Saturday, Neal, Burnett, Newhouse, Starks, M.D. Jennings
Two Years: Rodgers, Woodson, T. Williams, Nelson, Cobb, House,

Though Thompson can cut some fat by getting rid of Woodson, Hawk, Finley, and Saturday at the very least.
Author:  FavreFan [ Fri Jan 04, 2013 12:42 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Jake Long
Matthews and Rodgers are the only guys on that list I want as much/more than Long.
Author:  Hawg Ass [ Fri Jan 04, 2013 12:46 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Jake Long
Kirkwood wrote:
Eagles participation in the Long sweepstakes depends I guess on how Jason Peters returns from his Achilles injury.

I'd rather not have the Packers in on Long. The salary cap is projected to be flat the next 3 years thanks to NFLPA. Not sure if website I found is 100% correct but the Packers have quite a few players up the next 2-3 years:

This year: Dietrich-Smith, Shields, Crabtree, Walden, Ross
Next Year: Pickett, Raji, Finley, Matthews, J. Jones, Kuhn, Saturday, Neal, Burnett, Newhouse, Starks, M.D. Jennings
Two Years: Rodgers, Woodson, T. Williams, Nelson, Cobb, House,

Though Thompson can cut some fat by getting rid of Woodson, Hawk, Finley, and Saturday at the very least.

You forgot Greg Jennings this year.
Author:  Kirkwood [ Fri Jan 04, 2013 12:47 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Jake Long
Hawg Ass wrote:
Kirkwood wrote:
Eagles participation in the Long sweepstakes depends I guess on how Jason Peters returns from his Achilles injury.

I'd rather not have the Packers in on Long. The salary cap is projected to be flat the next 3 years thanks to NFLPA. Not sure if website I found is 100% correct but the Packers have quite a few players up the next 2-3 years:

This year: Dietrich-Smith, Shields, Crabtree, Walden, Ross
Next Year: Pickett, Raji, Finley, Matthews, J. Jones, Kuhn, Saturday, Neal, Burnett, Newhouse, Starks, M.D. Jennings
Two Years: Rodgers, Woodson, T. Williams, Nelson, Cobb, House,

Though Thompson can cut some fat by getting rid of Woodson, Hawk, Finley, and Saturday at the very least.

You forgot Greg Jennings this year.

Who's that? :scratch:
Author:  Big Chicagoan [ Fri Jan 04, 2013 12:52 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Jake Long
I think Jennings will be a NY Jet this next season.
Author:  Hawg Ass [ Fri Jan 04, 2013 12:57 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Jake Long
Kirkwood wrote:
Hawg Ass wrote:
Kirkwood wrote:
Eagles participation in the Long sweepstakes depends I guess on how Jason Peters returns from his Achilles injury.

I'd rather not have the Packers in on Long. The salary cap is projected to be flat the next 3 years thanks to NFLPA. Not sure if website I found is 100% correct but the Packers have quite a few players up the next 2-3 years:

This year: Dietrich-Smith, Shields, Crabtree, Walden, Ross
Next Year: Pickett, Raji, Finley, Matthews, J. Jones, Kuhn, Saturday, Neal, Burnett, Newhouse, Starks, M.D. Jennings
Two Years: Rodgers, Woodson, T. Williams, Nelson, Cobb, House,

Though Thompson can cut some fat by getting rid of Woodson, Hawk, Finley, and Saturday at the very least.

You forgot Greg Jennings this year.

Who's that? :scratch:

Maybe you might know his sister.
Author:  denisdman [ Fri Jan 04, 2013 1:04 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Jake Long
At some point, the Bears are going to have to find talent in the draft. You cannot build an entire roster through free agency. They have committed dollars and/or picks to get Marshall, Cutler, and Peppers because they have been unable to do that in the draft. I am ok if they go sign Long, but I want to see a couple of solid linemen drafted this year. If I recall, the Packers are the team with the highest percentage of their own draft picks on their roster, and that is the model I'd prefer to follow. It is more sustainable.
Author:  good dolphin [ Fri Jan 04, 2013 1:39 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Jake Long
denisdman wrote:
At some point, the Bears are going to have to find talent in the draft. You cannot build an entire roster through free agency. They have committed dollars and/or picks to get Marshall, Cutler, and Peppers because they have been unable to do that in the draft. I am ok if they go sign Long, but I want to see a couple of solid linemen drafted this year. If I recall, the Packers are the team with the highest percentage of their own draft picks on their roster, and that is the model I'd prefer to follow. It is more sustainable.


If you sign Long, have Louis and Garza at G, draft the top C in the draft in round 2 and left Webb/Carimi compete, I think you have a competent line.
Author:  Zippy-The-Pinhead [ Fri Jan 04, 2013 1:54 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Jake Long
Kirkwood wrote:
Eagles participation in the Long sweepstakes depends I guess on how Jason Peters returns from his Achilles injury.

I'd rather not have the Packers in on Long. The salary cap is projected to be flat the next 3 years thanks to NFLPA. Not sure if website I found is 100% correct but the Packers have quite a few players up the next 2-3 years:

This year: Dietrich-Smith, Shields, Crabtree, Walden, Ross
Next Year: Pickett, Raji, Finley, Matthews, J. Jones, Kuhn, Saturday, Neal, Burnett, Newhouse, Starks, M.D. Jennings
Two Years: Rodgers, Woodson, T. Williams, Nelson, Cobb, House,

Though Thompson can cut some fat by getting rid of Woodson, Hawk, Finley, and Saturday at the very least.
I don't think it's as big of a concern as you paint it. The Packers will end the year approx. $8 million under the cap. They would save another 18 million by parting ways with Woodson & Finley. Jennings is likely gone as well unless his recent injury history brings his price down. Rodgers & Matthews will get theirs before next season starts. Raji is the only guy in line for a raise that may require any cap manipulation. The remainder are either low paid, disposable (TT keeps more rookies than most) or far enough down the road to be non-considerations.
Author:  24_Guy [ Fri Jan 04, 2013 9:19 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Jake Long
good dolphin wrote:
denisdman wrote:
At some point, the Bears are going to have to find talent in the draft. You cannot build an entire roster through free agency. They have committed dollars and/or picks to get Marshall, Cutler, and Peppers because they have been unable to do that in the draft. I am ok if they go sign Long, but I want to see a couple of solid linemen drafted this year. If I recall, the Packers are the team with the highest percentage of their own draft picks on their roster, and that is the model I'd prefer to follow. It is more sustainable.


If you sign Long, have Louis and Garza at G, draft the top C in the draft in round 2 and left Webb/Carimi compete, I think you have a competent line.


Do you think so, gd? That's assuming all those guys stay healthy, too. I don't trust Carimi's health, Garza is getting up there, and Louis is coming off a bad injury. If Long goes down again like he has the past two seasons, you're back to Carimi at RT, and the Webb-Kyle Adams combo pretending to be a single mediocre LT, leaving you with effectively 10 men on offense again just like this past year (actually 9 since Kellen Davis needed no accounting for by opposing defenses).

If I'm going to spend that kind of money, I'd rather add two or three solid guys on the line. Isn't there a law of diminishing returns once you get up to a certain level of skill by an offensive lineman? I don't think the elite o-line guys have as much impact as an elite WR or DE. Teams are winning with average lines.
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/