Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="HardRightEdge" data-source="post: 809603">I would rule out the Packers bringing back Cook, with or without Graham.  But if by chance they did, I would consider that a bad idea.Without Graham, it's just treading water and if the Packers didn't like Cook enough to pay him then they're not going to do an about face.  And that would be admitting two mistakes--  dropping Cook and signing Graham.  And who wants to go backward and not forward?With Graham, it is as you said, too much cap allocated to the position, with 10 and 11 year vets no less, compounded with draft picks in your scenario.  As for the "the meanest two te set in the league", that's wishful thinking.  Under what scenarios do these guys get on the field at the same time?  Not many.It's not like TE is the only priority, or even among the highest priorities.  Even within the receiver group I'd put slot above TE on the priority list.  Even if it is Cobb, which I doubt, that's still money out of the FA kitty.  It's always easy to isolate one position and envision loading it up if aging vets can be considered "loading" .  You have to look at the total picture in allocating limited resources.</blockquote>

No members online now.

Total: 232 (members: 0, guests: 232)