PDA

View Full Version : Asante Samuel


bonzi
04-05-2007, 09:06 PM
Anyone think we should take a look at him. It seems like he wants to be traded, we have room under our cap and a horrible pass defense. I know i would be pretty Happy with Asante Samuel and Winfield at CB. If we could possibly get him for our first round pick i wouldn't mind picking him up, he's only 25 or 26 and already a pretty prove and a legit top 10, if not top 5 corner.

Vikes99ej
04-05-2007, 09:36 PM
Absolutely not. He's a great young corner, but that would be an absolutely terrible move. The problem with our pass defense begins with our lack of pass rush. Our defensive backs played fine.

The Dynasty
04-05-2007, 10:07 PM
We are not that bad at CB to need him and what he is worth. He's probably holding out because of what clements got and Samuels is around the same as him IMO. I wouldnt want to pay him that money and how many people to trade/picks for him. Im happy with Winfield/Griffin.

Crazy_Chris
04-05-2007, 10:47 PM
oh that would be horrible value... if we traded our first for him i would have a heart attack. If we traded our First for Asante Samuel and The Patriots 1(24) and a future 2nd or 1st than i might be ok with it but i would rather not even try trading for him

KWill93
04-05-2007, 10:48 PM
No, you don't need top notch CB's in the Tampa 2.

Severe Punishment
04-06-2007, 04:14 PM
We are not that bad at CB to need him and what he is worth. He's probably holding out because of what clements got and Samuels is around the same as him IMO. I wouldnt want to pay him that money and how many people to trade/picks for him. Im happy with Winfield/Griffin.
Agree.
Griffin / Winfield is probably the most underrated duo in the league right now. Samuel is going to want a trade and sign "lottery" deal. I think he's
good...but wouldn't put him on that top tier talent level just yet (he's close) he has 3 INT's in 05 with 50 tackels...had 50 tackles last year
and his INT's jumped form 3 to 10. Okay, now do it again....prove last year wasn't a fluke.

wogitalia
04-07-2007, 12:52 PM
Would depend on the value. I wouldnt be at all opposed to sending our 1st and 2nd for their 2 firsts. I cant see them doing it, but I wouldnt mind it at all if it was possible.

A straight swap of 1sts would also be interesting, it probably puts us in a better overall position as far as our needs go. Personally I'd rather try and get the 2 picks off of the Pats than Samuel though, as has been said, CB is not our biggest need and Samuel is probably overkill as your 2nd CB, even if he is one of my favourite players.

Also, given our division, do we really need 2 shutdown guys? I mean Chicago have a useless QB, Green Bay only have one NCAA caliber reciever and Detroit are just a combination of the other 2 teams. Thats 6 of our games where Samuel would basically just be eye candy. Bucs are no different. He would only really become of value if we played the Colts or Bengals in the SB.

Not that any of that matters because with out offense we dont have a chance of making the playoffs, as it stands we might be lucky to win 5 games next year.

DHVF
04-07-2007, 02:26 PM
Would depend on the value. I wouldnt be at all opposed to sending our 1st and 2nd for their 2 firsts. I cant see them doing it, but I wouldnt mind it at all if it was possible.

A straight swap of 1sts would also be interesting, it probably puts us in a better overall position as far as our needs go. Personally I'd rather try and get the 2 picks off of the Pats than Samuel though, as has been said, CB is not our biggest need and Samuel is probably overkill as your 2nd CB, even if he is one of my favourite players.

Also, given our division, do we really need 2 shutdown guys? I mean Chicago have a useless QB, Green Bay only have one NCAA caliber reciever and Detroit are just a combination of the other 2 teams. Thats 6 of our games where Samuel would basically just be eye candy. Bucs are no different. He would only really become of value if we played the Colts or Bengals in the SB.

Not that any of that matters because with out offense we dont have a chance of making the playoffs, as it stands we might be lucky to win 5 games next year.Huh? If I remember correctly, Green Bay has Donald Driver, Greg Jennings, Robert Ferguson and Koren Robinson...all four of which are probably better than anyone we have.

Severe Punishment
04-07-2007, 06:16 PM
And I'm pretty sure Roy Williams made the pro bowl last year (and was top 3 in yardage) Mike Furey had 98 grabs and Eddie Drummond got hurt otherwise he's explosive anytime he can catch the ball.

I see what your saying about "only getting enough talent to make sure you dominate those 6 games"...but I think our point is, why not put your
team to do much more than "just enough"...why not put your team in a position to dominate a very watered down NFC ?

Kid_Ego
04-07-2007, 11:42 PM
First off historically Great run defenses are bad against the pass. And great pass defenses normally get ran on. When a team knows you havent allowed a 100 yd rusher in two years they tend to come out throwing ala the patriots last year. Im not sure that are pass defense is as bad as advertised but a team any team who gets passed on 70-80% of the time is going to statistically be bad or look bad. I watcched alot of games this year. We need more pass rush we need another nickle corner there is no reason to panic and go over paying a system corner as a cover corner. especially in a primarily zone defense. It would be catistrophic if the viking even thoughtof making this deal.

The besthelp for our pass defense is simple.
Keep our defense off the field. Dont let the other team have as many possessions. With clock managment and first downs. Then the other teams wont have 60-70 pass attempts against our d.
Stop turning the ball over. giving them extra attemptsto pick apart our defense. Much like the Super bowl ravens a few years ago When you do one thing great other teams conceed that element and make something else a weakness. and when our offense doesnt move the ball and gives the ball back to the offense then our defense gives up more yards. If that makes any sense.

The Defense is a good offense. And Defense wins championships.

Simply Put And Very true!!!!!
Thanx for one thing Vince

Severe Punishment
04-08-2007, 01:22 AM
Your thinking there is flawed. Teams didn't run ...not because we were that dominant against the run (stats dictating opinion) as much as it was we COULDN'T stop the pass (and when I say this I mean consistently 3 times in a series). Teams planed their game plans against our biggest weakness....that's called proper coaching. You don't throw a tantrum and say "we'll defy common sense and run the ball against a team that for 5 weeks hasn't stopped anyone" that's just stupid. Coaches like that tend to "take the high road" - Dennis Green

When teams ran on us , it's not like they didn't have some success...however they ran to ensure we didn't drop 10 guys back into
coverage. It wasn't that they wanted to establish the run.
They passed, put up points, often, and forced our pathetic offense to do
something other than run themselves into the ground.
After week 9 it became glaringly obvious that we couldn't do it.
We'd better find a way this year to move the ball on a play other than the old "run a counter to the left" or "run a counter to the right" or this will
be Childress' swan song...and probably his last impact in the NFL world.

wogitalia
04-08-2007, 04:23 AM
Huh? If I remember correctly, Green Bay has Donald Driver, Greg Jennings, Robert Ferguson and Koren Robinson...all four of which are probably better than anyone we have.

Thats one good WR and a few decent ones. Being better than our WR just means you should be playing at a Division 1 college. If Griffin cant cover the guys outside Driver there he isnt worthy of starting anyway and we at least discover that.

And I'm pretty sure Roy Williams made the pro bowl last year (and was top 3 in yardage) Mike Furey had 98 grabs and Eddie Drummond got hurt otherwise he's explosive anytime he can catch the ball.

I see what your saying about "only getting enough talent to make sure you dominate those 6 games"...but I think our point is, why not put your
team to do much more than "just enough"...why not put your team in a position to dominate a very watered down NFC ?

For the first half of that, read the above answer, if Griffin cant handle the guy opposite of Williams than we need another CB and at least we learn that next year. Im perfectly happy going in with Griff, he looks good. If he cant cover the NFC North WR's man to man, he shouldnt start in the NFL, especially considering the QB play in that division, you got one guy who shouldnt be starting, one who should have retired, and one who cant even take the snap half the time.

As for the "just enough" thing, we have an offense that is basically a great LG better than the Raiders of last year. Our offense is horrible, we dont need another CB. There really isnt a team in the NFC that has two receivers that are good enough that with Winfield on one side, Griffin shouldnt be able to take the other guy. NFC is just that bad, not to mention that no one has a decent QB either. We should worry about being able to score against the teams we play, our defense is better than Indy's that won the SB, its our offense that is pathetic.


We'd better find a way this year to move the ball on a play other than the old "run a counter to the left" or "run a counter to the right" or this will
be Childress' swan song...and probably his last impact in the NFL world.

I'd be willing to give up on this season for that to happen. Im really against Childress, for a so called offensive guy, the whole offense looked horrible. Even Birk and Hutch looked lost most of the time. Who'd have thought we might actually want Tice and his horrid offense back...

Jay
04-09-2007, 11:47 AM
oh that would be horrible value... if we traded our first for him i would have a heart attack. If we traded our First for Asante Samuel and The Patriots 1(24) and a future 2nd or 1st than i might be ok with it but i would rather not even try trading for him

Haha yeah right, no way would you get an extra first or second out of the deal. I don't disagree with people saying he's a bad value for the Vikings, but he's still young and he is a premier corner in the league. Getting him and moving down 21 spots in the first is a great deal, just not one that makes sense for the Vikes.