but i cant believe it the gallery one seems to be true. i personally dont like it. #5 and samuels is WAY too much. i was thikning samuels and gardner or samuels and a 5th round pick. i really hope they dont give up the #5.
they are willing to give up samuels because he apparently doesn't want to restructure to a deal the skins agree with. he would probably just get cut eventually anyway. they might as well get something in return for him. I guarantee they WILL NOT pay him his scheduled 9.5 in 2005. that;s the problem with heavily backloading contracts.
"Well, I currently live near Seattle and up here everyone seems to completely understand if we [root] for teams other than the Seahawks." - GUS
steelyeri wrote:just for the record this was terp's response.
terpfan wrote:this is BS, there is no way we can trade samuels, the cap hit would be ENORMOUS. besides, what would we want the #2 pick for anyway? and how is samuels or ramsey worth giving up to move up 3 spots?
oh yeah, and this.
terpfan wrote:i just heard on a redskins board that peter king was reporting the redskins 5th ROUND PICK and samuels for the #2. that would mean the skins would pick #2 and #5. i think that would be a great deal for the skins, if we could handle the cap hit from samuels. still seems pretty unrealistic though, i dont know why the raiders would do it.
whoever posted this one was on something. he must have misunderstood the #5 pick as being a fifth round pick. no way that one would ever happen.
[/quote]
sportswriter peter king was the one who said it was samuels and the 5th rounder i believe, not just a random internet rumor... edit: i did just do a search for the article however, and could not find it, so who knows.
but i must say, i still cant believe we are considering this.
NittanyLions wrote:Samuels and #5 is too muich I agree, Gallery would be anice addition, though. He would, as was stated, give them cap relief, while adding young talent to the O-line. Id like to see them screw up though }:-)
Did you watch them play last year? JP, even though Samuels and the #5 is too much Gallery should be a stud and Samuels is costing hella cash to the Skins. I would rather keep the 5 and take Sean Taylor.
I ain't no suit-wearin' businessman like you... you know I'm just a gangsta I suppose... - Avon Barksdale
by Str8 Pimpin-Vikings » Mon Apr 12, 2004 11:17 pm
Well i dont think its 2 much since samuels will end up being cut but i think they can workout someting out without the #5 pick but yea i also herad abpout the trade with the chargers as well
Mel Kiper on ESPN's Draft Special just said the trade was not going to happen. He was pretty emphatic stating that it did not make any sense and was not going to go through.
i hope he's right...
im still hoping for samuels/gardner for the #2. gallery and taylor...mmmmm
YEah I just saw that. Seeing as he is the major guy in ESPNs draft stuff...Id trust him. Ive read a lot of his stuff and its pretty good. How can you still be hungry terp? Gibbs has feed you already...pig
Getting gallery and taylor would be unfair, those two are NEEDED in pitt
terpfan wrote:im still hoping for samuels/gardner for the #2. gallery and taylor...mmmmm
Dream on , that one is the least likely in the history of trade rumours. we have a very good left tackle in barry sims. and he isn't as expensive. I would much rather have fitz or roy than samuels. I was actually hoping for ramsey and swapping first rounders but that probably won't happen either.
"Well, I currently live near Seattle and up here everyone seems to completely understand if we [root] for teams other than the Seahawks." - GUS
terpfan wrote:im still hoping for samuels/gardner for the #2. gallery and taylor...mmmmm
Dream on , that one is the least likely in the history of trade rumours. we have a very good left tackle in barry sims. and he isn't as expensive. I would much rather have fitz or roy than samuels. I was actually hoping for ramsey and swapping first rounders but that probably won't happen either.
so whats with all the gallery and samuels talk in oakland if simms is so good? thats not meant to be rhetorical... im curious.
Cafe Home
Fantasy Baseball
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by steelyeri » Mon Apr 12, 2004 5:05 pm 
still seems pretty unrealistic though, i dont know why the raiders would do it.
, that one is the least likely in the history of trade rumours. we have a very good left tackle in barry sims. and he isn't as expensive. I would much rather have fitz or roy than samuels. I was actually hoping for ramsey and swapping first rounders but that probably won't happen either.
