There are 253 users in the forums
**** BREAKING NEWS***** GOLDSON GOT THE FRANCHISE TAG
Dec 28, 2011 at 1:08 PM
- OtisDriftwood
- Veteran
- Posts: 1,146
I just dont think you can let either walk since we know we kinda need another CB to help this defense out , not to lose a CB and FS or both. Brown isnt the answer at the other CB spot, Culliver might be but we need one more young stud in there. 2nd round pick imo.
Dec 28, 2011 at 1:10 PM
- Marvin49
- Hall of Fame
- Posts: 16,501
Originally posted by sean610:
Originally posted by 49ersMyLife:
I can name at least 15 players who are better...or as good as Goldson is:
In no specific order:
Ed Reed
Nick Collins
Eric Berry
Michael Griffin
Antrel Rolle
Antoine Bethea
Ryan Clark
Atogwe
Weddle
Earl Thomas
Malcolm Jenkins
Delmas
DeCoud (very under-rated safety)
Tyvon Branch
George Wilson
Really dude?!? No disrespect but the only two players on that list I would even consider Reed and Berry. But Reed his down to his last few games...
Seriously? I'd EASILY put Collins, Clark, Thomas, Jenkins, and Weddle ahead of him....and I'm not even looking too much into the other guys.
Dec 28, 2011 at 1:11 PM
- Marvin49
- Hall of Fame
- Posts: 16,501
Originally posted by OtisDriftwood:
I just dont think you can let either walk since we know we kinda need another CB to help this defense out , not to lose a CB and FS or both. Brown isnt the answer at the other CB spot, Culliver might be but we need one more young stud in there. 2nd round pick imo.
I think the Niners take a Safety in one of the first 3 rounds in April.
Dec 28, 2011 at 1:13 PM
- OtisDriftwood
- Veteran
- Posts: 1,146
Originally posted by Marvin49:
I think the Niners take a Safety in one of the first 3 rounds in April.
safeties thin this draft and FS is even thinner. If he doesnt resign that'll be a huge need for us.
Dec 28, 2011 at 1:15 PM
- paulk205
- Veteran
- Posts: 824
Originally posted by overthemiddle:
The Niners are now winners with a good to great HC. Players unlike years past are going to want to come to the Niners. Wont have to pay exhorbant salaries anymore to attract FAs. We have lots of FAs ourselfs like Rogers who have never won anything. Speaking on the premise that the reason players want to play is for the Super Bowl the Niners are now an attractive team with a new stadium on the horizon. Only drawback for attraction to the Niners is the state of Calif and its economy and politics which really shouldnt be that much of a factor. With all that being said I wouldnt franchise Goldson.
That's all wishful thinking at best. FAs are looking for money first and foremost. This is a very short and very dangerous career. There are some cases of taking "less" money for a better tilt at a title, like Adalius Thomas in 07, Deion et al in 1994, or Cliff Lee in baseball; but such case always involve a genuine, ESTABLISHED title contender and even then a bushel of money.
Really, the obsession with "overpaying" simply baffles me. We're not in cap trouble. Furthermore, the tag is not a recognition of a player's value; "franchise tag" is not the same as "franchise QB". It's just a way to stop an FA from leaving for a year while still paying him decent money. In the case of a QB, a corner or a similar expensive position it's almost always not worth it. In the case of a safety however, it allows the team to buy some time. If Goldson was the only FA in our secondary, or if there were good FAs in CB and safety like last year, then it would be worth taking the risk. As it is, just tag him for the 6 million or whatever it is, and spend the FA money on long term deals for more deserving targets. Then, next season let the man walk; perhaps we will have drafted a replacement, or the FA picture will be rosier.
Dec 28, 2011 at 1:20 PM
- SanDiego49er
- Veteran
- Posts: 47,923
Originally posted by paulk205:
Originally posted by overthemiddle:
The Niners are now winners with a good to great HC. Players unlike years past are going to want to come to the Niners. Wont have to pay exhorbant salaries anymore to attract FAs. We have lots of FAs ourselfs like Rogers who have never won anything. Speaking on the premise that the reason players want to play is for the Super Bowl the Niners are now an attractive team with a new stadium on the horizon. Only drawback for attraction to the Niners is the state of Calif and its economy and politics which really shouldnt be that much of a factor. With all that being said I wouldnt franchise Goldson.
That's all wishful thinking at best. FAs are looking for money first and foremost. This is a very short and very dangerous career. There are some cases of taking "less" money for a better tilt at a title, like Adalius Thomas in 07, Deion et al in 1994, or Cliff Lee in baseball; but such case always involve a genuine, ESTABLISHED title contender and even then a bushel of money.
Really, the obsession with "overpaying" simply baffles me. We're not in cap trouble. Furthermore, the tag is not a recognition of a player's value; "franchise tag" is not the same as "franchise QB". It's just a way to stop an FA from leaving for a year while still paying him decent money. In the case of a QB, a corner or a similar expensive position it's almost always not worth it. In the case of a safety however, it allows the team to buy some time. If Goldson was the only FA in our secondary, or if there were good FAs in CB and safety like last year, then it would be worth taking the risk. As it is, just tag him for the 6 million or whatever it is, and spend the FA money on long term deals for more deserving targets. Then, next season let the man walk; perhaps we will have drafted a replacement, or the FA picture will be rosier.
This post makes too much sense. Now we will go back to posts that have no understanding of football for the next 10 pages.
Dec 28, 2011 at 1:26 PM
- Marvin49
- Hall of Fame
- Posts: 16,501
Originally posted by paulk205:
Originally posted by overthemiddle:
The Niners are now winners with a good to great HC. Players unlike years past are going to want to come to the Niners. Wont have to pay exhorbant salaries anymore to attract FAs. We have lots of FAs ourselfs like Rogers who have never won anything. Speaking on the premise that the reason players want to play is for the Super Bowl the Niners are now an attractive team with a new stadium on the horizon. Only drawback for attraction to the Niners is the state of Calif and its economy and politics which really shouldnt be that much of a factor. With all that being said I wouldnt franchise Goldson.
That's all wishful thinking at best. FAs are looking for money first and foremost. This is a very short and very dangerous career. There are some cases of taking "less" money for a better tilt at a title, like Adalius Thomas in 07, Deion et al in 1994, or Cliff Lee in baseball; but such case always involve a genuine, ESTABLISHED title contender and even then a bushel of money.
Really, the obsession with "overpaying" simply baffles me. We're not in cap trouble. Furthermore, the tag is not a recognition of a player's value; "franchise tag" is not the same as "franchise QB". It's just a way to stop an FA from leaving for a year while still paying him decent money. In the case of a QB, a corner or a similar expensive position it's almost always not worth it. In the case of a safety however, it allows the team to buy some time. If Goldson was the only FA in our secondary, or if there were good FAs in CB and safety like last year, then it would be worth taking the risk. As it is, just tag him for the 6 million or whatever it is, and spend the FA money on long term deals for more deserving targets. Then, next season let the man walk; perhaps we will have drafted a replacement, or the FA picture will be rosier.
Overpaying at one position means you can't use the money elswhere and end up letting someone else go or not being in the market for a player at another position.
Its not my money. I don't care how much it costs. I care that we have a number of free agents and franchising a guy who isn't worth the designation weakens the team. If I have to choose between Rogers and Goldson, its not a contest. CB is a much harder position to fill and Rogers is a better player.
As for players wanting to come here, you are both right. SF will be viewed as a better destination than in the past, but $$$$ are always the #1 factor.
FS in the draft. I don't buy the "weak class for Safeties" thing either. All that means is no slam dunk candidates. This regime has shown some ability to take a player and look outside the box (see Miller, Bruce). Chris Culliver might be able to play FS (he did so in college) and would have alot more range and coverage ability than Goldson.
I'm not saying that the Niner WILL or SHOULD move Culliver, I'm just saying that there are a number of possibilities and when you have good personel men they will be investigated. Remember...the Niners had no intention of signing Goldson this year until Reggie Smith got hurt.
[ Edited by Marvin49 on Dec 28, 2011 at 1:28 PM ]
Dec 28, 2011 at 1:30 PM
- SanDiego49er
- Veteran
- Posts: 47,923
Originally posted by Marvin49:
Originally posted by paulk205:
Originally posted by overthemiddle:
The Niners are now winners with a good to great HC. Players unlike years past are going to want to come to the Niners. Wont have to pay exhorbant salaries anymore to attract FAs. We have lots of FAs ourselfs like Rogers who have never won anything. Speaking on the premise that the reason players want to play is for the Super Bowl the Niners are now an attractive team with a new stadium on the horizon. Only drawback for attraction to the Niners is the state of Calif and its economy and politics which really shouldnt be that much of a factor. With all that being said I wouldnt franchise Goldson.
That's all wishful thinking at best. FAs are looking for money first and foremost. This is a very short and very dangerous career. There are some cases of taking "less" money for a better tilt at a title, like Adalius Thomas in 07, Deion et al in 1994, or Cliff Lee in baseball; but such case always involve a genuine, ESTABLISHED title contender and even then a bushel of money.
Really, the obsession with "overpaying" simply baffles me. We're not in cap trouble. Furthermore, the tag is not a recognition of a player's value; "franchise tag" is not the same as "franchise QB". It's just a way to stop an FA from leaving for a year while still paying him decent money. In the case of a QB, a corner or a similar expensive position it's almost always not worth it. In the case of a safety however, it allows the team to buy some time. If Goldson was the only FA in our secondary, or if there were good FAs in CB and safety like last year, then it would be worth taking the risk. As it is, just tag him for the 6 million or whatever it is, and spend the FA money on long term deals for more deserving targets. Then, next season let the man walk; perhaps we will have drafted a replacement, or the FA picture will be rosier.
Overpaying at one position means you can't use the money elswhere and end up letting someone else go or not being in the market for a player at another position.
Its not my money. I don't care how much it costs. I care that we have a number of free agents and franchising a guy who isn't worth the designation weakens the team. If I have to choose between Rogers and Goldson, its not a contest. CB is a much harder position to fill and Rogers is a better player.
As for players wanting to come here, you are both right. SF will be viewed as a better destination than in the past, but $$$$ are always the #1 factor.
FS in the draft. I don't buy the "weak class for Safeties" thing either. All that means is no slam dunk candidates. This regime has shown some ability to take a player and look outside the box (see Miller, Bruce). Chris Culliver might be able to play FS (he did so in college) and would have alot more range and coverage ability than Goldson.
I'm not saying that the Niner WILL or SHOULD move Culliver, I'm just saying that there are a number of possibilities and when you have good personel men they will be investigated.
1) It's not overpaying. The guy had 7 turnovers. And made the Pro Bowl. He's one of the best safetys in the league.
2) Rogers will cost much more. The franchise # on a CB is far more expensive. Or any competative contract for a CB.
Dec 28, 2011 at 1:36 PM
- OtisDriftwood
- Veteran
- Posts: 1,146
Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
1) It's not overpaying. The guy had 7 turnovers. And made the Pro Bowl. He's one of the best safetys in the league.
2) Rogers will cost much more. The franchise # on a CB is far more expensive. Or any competative contract for a CB.
exactly and those of you that think Dashon is a one year fluke franchise tagging him is the way to go. Your only paying him for one season, if he tails off there's no long term cap hit on the team. If negotiations go bad, just tag his ass for a season then let him follow a great season with another great season. In that time maybe a better FS becomes a free agent or one we can draft in 2013. Thats why franchising him does make alot of sense.
Dec 28, 2011 at 1:40 PM
- Jesu80ncleats
- Veteran
- Posts: 2,501
Originally posted by SanDiego49er:Don't forget Dashon's 14 passes defensed, which is good for 6th by NFL safeties.
Another way of looking at it. 2011 season #'s.
Dashon Goldson: 27 years old. 64 tackles, 1 forced fumble, 6 interceptions.
Ed Reed: 33 years old. 48 tackles, 1 forced fumble, 3 interceptions.
Plus a very bad neck for Reed. Age and injuries catching up.
No person in their right mind would take Reed now or long term over Goldson. These guys are going off of "past reputation." What do you get for past great play? Mabye a bag of skittles or something...
Dec 28, 2011 at 2:47 PM
- Marvin49
- Hall of Fame
- Posts: 16,501
Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
Originally posted by Marvin49:
Originally posted by paulk205:
Originally posted by overthemiddle:
The Niners are now winners with a good to great HC. Players unlike years past are going to want to come to the Niners. Wont have to pay exhorbant salaries anymore to attract FAs. We have lots of FAs ourselfs like Rogers who have never won anything. Speaking on the premise that the reason players want to play is for the Super Bowl the Niners are now an attractive team with a new stadium on the horizon. Only drawback for attraction to the Niners is the state of Calif and its economy and politics which really shouldnt be that much of a factor. With all that being said I wouldnt franchise Goldson.
That's all wishful thinking at best. FAs are looking for money first and foremost. This is a very short and very dangerous career. There are some cases of taking "less" money for a better tilt at a title, like Adalius Thomas in 07, Deion et al in 1994, or Cliff Lee in baseball; but such case always involve a genuine, ESTABLISHED title contender and even then a bushel of money.
Really, the obsession with "overpaying" simply baffles me. We're not in cap trouble. Furthermore, the tag is not a recognition of a player's value; "franchise tag" is not the same as "franchise QB". It's just a way to stop an FA from leaving for a year while still paying him decent money. In the case of a QB, a corner or a similar expensive position it's almost always not worth it. In the case of a safety however, it allows the team to buy some time. If Goldson was the only FA in our secondary, or if there were good FAs in CB and safety like last year, then it would be worth taking the risk. As it is, just tag him for the 6 million or whatever it is, and spend the FA money on long term deals for more deserving targets. Then, next season let the man walk; perhaps we will have drafted a replacement, or the FA picture will be rosier.
Overpaying at one position means you can't use the money elswhere and end up letting someone else go or not being in the market for a player at another position.
Its not my money. I don't care how much it costs. I care that we have a number of free agents and franchising a guy who isn't worth the designation weakens the team. If I have to choose between Rogers and Goldson, its not a contest. CB is a much harder position to fill and Rogers is a better player.
As for players wanting to come here, you are both right. SF will be viewed as a better destination than in the past, but $$$$ are always the #1 factor.
FS in the draft. I don't buy the "weak class for Safeties" thing either. All that means is no slam dunk candidates. This regime has shown some ability to take a player and look outside the box (see Miller, Bruce). Chris Culliver might be able to play FS (he did so in college) and would have alot more range and coverage ability than Goldson.
I'm not saying that the Niner WILL or SHOULD move Culliver, I'm just saying that there are a number of possibilities and when you have good personel men they will be investigated.
1) It's not overpaying. The guy had 7 turnovers. And made the Pro Bowl. He's one of the best safetys in the league.
2) Rogers will cost much more. The franchise # on a CB is far more expensive. Or any competative contract for a CB.
1) I don't buy that he's one of the best. He's had a good year. I won't deny that. He still has some SERIOUS holes in his game tho. I don't care how many turnovers he's had, he isn't very good in coverage. I think he'll be exposed against NO or GB and he won't be back. Niners will take a FS in the first 3 rounds. Book it.
2) Of course Rogers will cost more. Why? He'll cost more because CBs are hard to find and when you get one you don't let them go. BTW, Rogers has had SIX turnovers, doesn't miss tackles, and is excellent in run support..
Dec 28, 2011 at 2:50 PM
- Marvin49
- Hall of Fame
- Posts: 16,501
Originally posted by OtisDriftwood:
Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
1) It's not overpaying. The guy had 7 turnovers. And made the Pro Bowl. He's one of the best safetys in the league.
2) Rogers will cost much more. The franchise # on a CB is far more expensive. Or any competative contract for a CB.
exactly and those of you that think Dashon is a one year fluke franchise tagging him is the way to go. Your only paying him for one season, if he tails off there's no long term cap hit on the team. If negotiations go bad, just tag his ass for a season then let him follow a great season with another great season. In that time maybe a better FS becomes a free agent or one we can draft in 2013. Thats why franchising him does make alot of sense.
I don't think he's a one year fluke. I just don't think this year was as good as everyone says.
Again, I'm not saying the guy sucks. I'm not saying that he isn't a servicable starter. I'm saying he isn't a franchise player and I'm MUCH, MUCH more worried about losing Rogers than Goldson.
Dec 28, 2011 at 3:18 PM
- Marvin49
- Hall of Fame
- Posts: 16,501
Originally posted by Natewillis2252:
Originally posted by SanDiego49er:Don't forget Dashon's 14 passes defensed, which is good for 6th by NFL safeties.
Another way of looking at it. 2011 season #'s.
Dashon Goldson: 27 years old. 64 tackles, 1 forced fumble, 6 interceptions.
Ed Reed: 33 years old. 48 tackles, 1 forced fumble, 3 interceptions.
Plus a very bad neck for Reed. Age and injuries catching up.
No person in their right mind would take Reed now or long term over Goldson. These guys are going off of "past reputation." What do you get for past great play? Mabye a bag of skittles or something...
UH....he has 8.
Rogers (18), Terrell Brown (13), Patrick Willis (12), and Donte Whitner (10) have more ON HIS OWN TEAM.
His 8 would put him around 14th or 15th among Safeties.
Dec 28, 2011 at 3:47 PM
- OtisDriftwood
- Veteran
- Posts: 1,146
Never did say who we'd draft in the first 3 rounds Marvin any idea. I could be on board with it but I think for the most part round 1 and 2 are probably WR and Cb maybe guard if there's value there. But anyways I just dont think it'd be a huge deal to tag him and keep him a season. If we tag him this season and shoot for TJ McDonald next season I'd be down for that.
Dec 28, 2011 at 9:25 PM
- posayshoohaa
- Veteran
- Posts: 552
Originally posted by OtisDriftwood:
exactly and those of you that think Dashon is a one year fluke franchise tagging him is the way to go. Your only paying him for one season, if he tails off there's no long term cap hit on the team. If negotiations go bad, just tag his ass for a season then let him follow a great season with another great season. In that time maybe a better FS becomes a free agent or one we can draft in 2013. Thats why franchising him does make alot of sense.
It's not even a fluke year. It's the same guy he's always been. Goldson in 2010 is basically what Goldson is when he isn't getting 6 ints(which isn't going to happen every year). He gets sucked into coverage and let's guys get behind him, he takes bad angles, and whiffs on big hits. He basically is an Antrel Rolle clone(which is ironic considering his *supposed* Antrel Rolle money demands)
Guys I would take easily before Goldson:
Ed Reed
Earl Thomas
Eric Weddle
Jarius Byrd(some of you forgot about him)
Danieal Manning
Eric Berry
Nick Collins
Malcolm Jenkins
Tanard Jackson(who I really wanted in the off-season, but the Bucs extended him an extra year)
and this isn't counting some other guys who may be having down years this year, but have easily had better years in the past than any of Goldson's years(Michael Huff, Michael Griffin, Quintin Mikell)
edit:
Also .. difference between Goldson and Rogers is this. When you take away Rogers INTs .. he's still a very good cover corner.
[ Edited by posayshoohaa on Dec 28, 2011 at 9:30 PM ]