-
-
-
03-17-2012, 03:05 PM #243
Pro Bowl 24x7 Raven
- Join Date
- Sep 2011
- Posts
- 1,703
Re: Grubbs Contingency Plan - Evan Mathis?
Jake Scott's had one visit to the Cardinals, not sure of any others.
Schwartz has a few teams after him, including Vikings and Chiefs. Ravens would need to act fast if they want to try.
Nothing on Bobbie Williams, but Cincy may try to bring him back.
Chilo Rachal was not good at all last year. Don't think any visits.
Robert Galley, Kyle Kosier and former Raven Jason Brown could be other possibilities for FA.Last edited by Tyrian; 03-17-2012 at 03:11 PM.
-
Re: Grubbs Contingency Plan - Evan Mathis?
I'd still check out Vernon Carey. He's a very good run blocker and 6'6 340. If Birk is going to be the Center having a real road grader next to him is worth considering.
-
Re: Grubbs Contingency Plan - Evan Mathis?
-
03-17-2012, 03:17 PM #246
Pro Bowl 24x7 Raven
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
- Posts
- 2,380
Re: Grubbs Contingency Plan - Evan Mathis?
Scott is serviceable, but a poor run blocker. With him at LG and Birk back at C, we would probably be even worse in short yardage this year, particularly if they don't upgrade at power RB.
Gallery, Kosier, and Brown are all bad players. Rachal had a bad year last year, but was pretty good in 2010 and is younger than those guys. He's a possibility.
Bobbie Williams was the best player on that list last year, and worth a 1 year deal, IMO. Schwartz would also be a good pick up.
Bottom line here is that missing out on Mathis, particularly when the Eagles locked him up at such a low price, is devastating and a real head-scratcher. Unless he gave the Eagles a huge hometown discount, I don't understand why Ozzie didn't get it done.
-
03-17-2012, 03:18 PM #247
Re: Grubbs Contingency Plan - Evan Mathis?
Do you now take a pure guard higher then a center? maybe if they can get get gurode back for depth at center they can hold off a year. I also like the idea of going after Bobbie Williams as well. Im hoping for alot of movement draft day because we need to fill these holes w/adequate replacements.
-
03-17-2012, 03:20 PM #248
Re: Grubbs Contingency Plan - Evan Mathis?
Oh btw, i dont have Coirdy Glenn getting to 29 but if he did that would be sweet
-
-
03-17-2012, 03:21 PM #250
-
03-17-2012, 03:22 PM #251
Pro Bowl 24x7 Raven
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
- Posts
- 2,380
-
03-17-2012, 03:23 PM #252
Pro Bowl 24x7 Raven
- Join Date
- Sep 2011
- Posts
- 1,703
Re: Grubbs Contingency Plan - Evan Mathis?
He usually plays tackle, but it's an option. Also helps that he knows McKinnie from the U.
Right player, right price. The Ravens are up against the wall with the cap with important extensions ahead and they didn't want to pay more than 25 million for Mathis. I can't say I fault them - I thought 24-26 would be about their limit.
If there isn't much out there, rather they just draft a G or a C (that starts as a G) and go for the sink or swim. Still a couple of options worth thinking about for now.
-
Re: Grubbs Contingency Plan - Evan Mathis?
Good grief...WE DON'T HAVE THE CAP SPACE
FYI...for those of you that continue to complain about losing players, here are the cap numbers from PFT as of Thursday...
Broncos: $40.0 million.
Bengals: $38.9 million.
Seahawks: $28.6 million.
Titans: $26.2 million.
Jaguars: $24.8 million.
49ers: $23.5 million.
Eagles: $22.3 million.
Bills: $22.2 million.
Browns: $21.6 million.
Chiefs: $21.4 million.
Buccaneers: $17.9 million.
Vikings: $18.8 million.
Rams: $14.6 million.
Chargers: $14.5 million.
Dolphins: $14.3 million.
Colts: $14.3 million.
Patriots: $13.6 million.
Lions: $13.3 million.
Bears: $12.8 million.
Jets: $12.7 million.
Redskins: $11.3 million.
Texans: $8.7 million.
Packers: $7.2 million.
Falcons: $6.0 million.
Steelers: $5.8 million.
Cowboys: $5.5 million.
Raiders: $5.0 million.
Ravens: $4.7 million.
Panthers: $3.1 million.
Saints: $3.0 million.
Giants: $2.3 million.
Cardinals: $448,000.
As you can see, WE DON'T HAVE THE CAP ROOM. It's like some just don't want to acknowledge that cap space is really tight.
-
Re: Grubbs Contingency Plan - Evan Mathis?
-
Re: Grubbs Contingency Plan - Evan Mathis?
-
03-17-2012, 03:27 PM #256
Pro Bowl 24x7 Raven
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
- Posts
- 2,380
Re: Grubbs Contingency Plan - Evan Mathis?
No, that's not true. The Ravens have at least 7.7m in space as of this moment, and they haven't really used any of the many tricks available to them to expand their space yet. If they extend Flacco and/or Rice, that likely frees up a lot of room, and they can restructure a few contracts. They could easily open up another 10m of cap space if they needed it at this point, and eventually they'll need to if they want to make this team better.
The exact details of Mathis' contract aren't out yet, but in the first year of a new contract teams almost always minimize the cap hit with a big signing bonus. The Ravens probably could have locked Mathis up and only taken a 2012 cap hit of 2-4m on a similar contract to the 5/25 that he actually signed. That's a negligible cap hit for the best OL on the market.
-
Re: Grubbs Contingency Plan - Evan Mathis?
Here's another thought. The Eagles just spent a lot money for 2 Guards. They did draft a Guard in round 1 last year. Maybe they'd be willing to get out of his contract for 5th round pick. Watkins is already 27. He's very talented but Howard Mudd plays a tough system and a lot of guys just don't fit in it. If I was Ozzie I would at least make a call.
-
03-17-2012, 03:30 PM #258
Pro Bowl 24x7 Raven
- Join Date
- Sep 2011
- Posts
- 1,703
-
03-17-2012, 03:31 PM #259
Pro Bowl 24x7 Raven
- Join Date
- Sep 2011
- Posts
- 1,703
-
03-17-2012, 03:34 PM #260
Pro Bowl 24x7 Raven
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
- Posts
- 2,380
Re: Grubbs Contingency Plan - Evan Mathis?
Yeah, the numbers I looked at probably didn't include that. Still, they can restructure any one of half a dozen players to open up more space, and they know they have the Flacco deal on the horizon to open up space as well.
If the team doesn't have any space and isn't going to sign anyone, why did they even make Mathis an offer? Why bother with FA at all? That argument is senseless.



Reply With Quote

Bookmarks