How is Ahmad Brooks?

If Brooks is playing too well then asked him for cut moneys down if he is agree that is a great. He can play for us because he can play part time. He is too old and play too well..

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NorthBay49er:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NorthBay49er:
You think we trade brooks

Not sure who'd give us anything for a 32 OLB with the 9th highest OLB contract? Honestly he's more valuable on this team than anywhere else, which isn't saying much.

I don't see him getting cut though...this will be his last season with the 9ers all said and done.

We got something for parys. Think we can get something for ahmad

Parys had a $1.3 million dollar contract and was 29. (We got a 7th rd pick)...Brooks is on the books for $8 million+ and is 32 coming off a very subpar season lol. Your getting zero for him.

ouch maybe someone trades one of their overpaid player for ours

Originally posted by NorthBay49er:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NorthBay49er:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NorthBay49er:
You think we trade brooks

Not sure who'd give us anything for a 32 OLB with the 9th highest OLB contract? Honestly he's more valuable on this team than anywhere else, which isn't saying much.

I don't see him getting cut though...this will be his last season with the 9ers all said and done.

We got something for parys. Think we can get something for ahmad

Parys had a $1.3 million dollar contract and was 29. (We got a 7th rd pick)...Brooks is on the books for $8 million+ and is 32 coming off a very subpar season lol. Your getting zero for him.

ouch maybe someone trades one of their overpaid player for ours

lol we will see...think it's a little late in the game this yr.

It really depends on exactly what we're trying to accomplish this season.

Of course Jed, Trent, Chip will or should have a plan.

If we have a grip on reality and accept that we're rebuilding and NOT going to the SBowl then why keep Brooks and his salary?

With that in mind - his presence won't make any difference what-so-ever.

It would make more sense to see what our current guys can really do and get them as much game experience as possible.

If they rise to the occasion - then great!

If not - then we have the current cap space and the $$ form Brooks to get a top flight and proven FA or go back to the drawing board aka the draft.

My question is about the logic in keeping him and his salary as opposed to other options.

Originally posted by LasVegasWally:

It really depends on exactly what we're trying to accomplish this season.

Of course Jed, Trent, Chip will or should have a plan.

If we have a grip on reality and accept that we're rebuilding and NOT going to the SBowl then why keep Brooks and his salary?

With that in mind - his presence won't make any difference what-so-ever.

It would make more sense to see what our current guys can really do and get them as much game experience as possible.

If they rise to the occasion - then great!

If not - then we have the current cap space and the $$ form Brooks to get a top flight and proven FA or go back to the drawing board aka the draft.

My question is about the logic in keeping him and his salary as opposed to other options.

I think I get what you are questioning. If we are going in and really don't think we have a legitimate chance of a a winning, season/playoff run, what does he bring to the table for his salary, with us so far under the cap? If we keep him, I would like to think they have made a decision that he is clearly better than the other options at the position. That would really be too bad, IMO. If he isn't clearly the best I would like to think this is the year to just move on. I don't see him as adding anything by his presence as a leader of any sort. The opposite thinking, is that Kelly sees enough talent he could do A Philly style turnaround. In that case I still see the same scenario.

Originally posted by mojave45:

Originally posted by LasVegasWally:
It really depends on exactly what we're trying to accomplish this season.

Of course Jed, Trent, Chip will or should have a plan.

If we have a grip on reality and accept that we're rebuilding and NOT going to the SBowl then why keep Brooks and his salary?

With that in mind - his presence won't make any difference what-so-ever.

It would make more sense to see what our current guys can really do and get them as much game experience as possible.

If they rise to the occasion - then great!

If not - then we have the current cap space and the $$ form Brooks to get a top flight and proven FA or go back to the drawing board aka the draft.

My question is about the logic in keeping him and his salary as opposed to other options.

I think I get what you are questioning. If we are going in and really don't think we have a legitimate chance of a a winning, season/playoff run, what does he bring to the table for his salary, with us so far under the cap? If we keep him, I would like to think they have made a decision that he is clearly better than the other options at the position. That would really be too bad, IMO. If he isn't clearly the best I would like to think this is the year to just move on. I don't see him as adding anything by his presence as a leader of any sort. The opposite thinking, is that Kelly sees enough talent he could do A Philly style turnaround. In that case I still see the same scenario.

You got exactly what I was questionning.

IMO, we could trade him to a Super Bowl contender in need of a quality player like him and get an additional draft pick or 2.

Originally posted by LasVegasWally:

Originally posted by mojave45:

Originally posted by LasVegasWally:

It really depends on exactly what we're trying to accomplish this season.

Of course Jed, Trent, Chip will or should have a plan.

If we have a grip on reality and accept that we're rebuilding and NOT going to the SBowl then why keep Brooks and his salary?

With that in mind - his presence won't make any difference what-so-ever.

It would make more sense to see what our current guys can really do and get them as much game experience as possible.

If they rise to the occasion - then great!

If not - then we have the current cap space and the $$ form Brooks to get a top flight and proven FA or go back to the drawing board aka the draft.

My question is about the logic in keeping him and his salary as opposed to other options.

I think I get what you are questioning. If we are going in and really don't think we have a legitimate chance of a a winning, season/playoff run, what does he bring to the table for his salary, with us so far under the cap? If we keep him, I would like to think they have made a decision that he is clearly better than the other options at the position. That would really be too bad, IMO. If he isn't clearly the best I would like to think this is the year to just move on. I don't see him as adding anything by his presence as a leader of any sort. The opposite thinking, is that Kelly sees enough talent he could do A Philly style turnaround. In that case I still see the same scenario.

You got exactly what I was questionning.

IMO, we could trade him to a Super Bowl contender in need of a quality player like him and get an additional draft pick or 2.

I like your thinking! But I really don't believe we could get much of anything for him. Would love to get something though. Next year we may need to bundle some picks to move in the draft.

Originally posted by mojave45:

Originally posted by LasVegasWally:

Originally posted by mojave45:

Originally posted by LasVegasWally:
It really depends on exactly what we're trying to accomplish this season.

Of course Jed, Trent, Chip will or should have a plan.

If we have a grip on reality and accept that we're rebuilding and NOT going to the SBowl then why keep Brooks and his salary?

With that in mind - his presence won't make any difference what-so-ever.

It would make more sense to see what our current guys can really do and get them as much game experience as possible.

If they rise to the occasion - then great!

If not - then we have the current cap space and the $$ form Brooks to get a top flight and proven FA or go back to the drawing board aka the draft.

My question is about the logic in keeping him and his salary as opposed to other options.

I think I get what you are questioning. If we are going in and really don't think we have a legitimate chance of a a winning, season/playoff run, what does he bring to the table for his salary, with us so far under the cap? If we keep him, I would like to think they have made a decision that he is clearly better than the other options at the position. That would really be too bad, IMO. If he isn't clearly the best I would like to think this is the year to just move on. I don't see him as adding anything by his presence as a leader of any sort. The opposite thinking, is that Kelly sees enough talent he could do A Philly style turnaround. In that case I still see the same scenario.

You got exactly what I was questionning.

IMO, we could trade him to a Super Bowl contender in need of a quality player like him and get an additional draft pick or 2.

I like your thinking! But I really don't believe we could get much of anything for him. Would love to get something though. Next year we may need to bundle some picks to move in the draft.

Anything is better than zero.

Originally posted by LasVegasWally:

Originally posted by mojave45:

Originally posted by LasVegasWally:

Originally posted by mojave45:

Originally posted by LasVegasWally:
It really depends on exactly what we're trying to accomplish this season.

Of course Jed, Trent, Chip will or should have a plan.

If we have a grip on reality and accept that we're rebuilding and NOT going to the SBowl then why keep Brooks and his salary?

With that in mind - his presence won't make any difference what-so-ever.

It would make more sense to see what our current guys can really do and get them as much game experience as possible.

If they rise to the occasion - then great!

If not - then we have the current cap space and the $$ form Brooks to get a top flight and proven FA or go back to the drawing board aka the draft.

My question is about the logic in keeping him and his salary as opposed to other options.

I think I get what you are questioning. If we are going in and really don't think we have a legitimate chance of a a winning, season/playoff run, what does he bring to the table for his salary, with us so far under the cap? If we keep him, I would like to think they have made a decision that he is clearly better than the other options at the position. That would really be too bad, IMO. If he isn't clearly the best I would like to think this is the year to just move on. I don't see him as adding anything by his presence as a leader of any sort. The opposite thinking, is that Kelly sees enough talent he could do A Philly style turnaround. In that case I still see the same scenario.

You got exactly what I was questionning.

IMO, we could trade him to a Super Bowl contender in need of a quality player like him and get an additional draft pick or 2.

I like your thinking! But I really don't believe we could get much of anything for him. Would love to get something though. Next year we may need to bundle some picks to move in the draft.

Anything is better than zero.

True enough.

Gonna be so stoked if somehow Ahmad returns to old form.. I'm sure Bowmans in his ear saying how much we need him.

Originally posted by SmokeCrabtrees:

Gonna be so stoked if somehow Ahmad returns to old form.. I'm sure Bowmans in his ear saying how much we need him.

My man never gets love. He's saved our asses so many times with disability and clutch play. Hopefully he's still got some magic.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by SmokeCrabtrees:
Gonna be so stoked if somehow Ahmad returns to old form.. I'm sure Bowmans in his ear saying how much we need him.

My man never gets love. He's saved our asses so many times with disability and clutch play. Hopefully he's still got some magic.

I agree,. why do people think we can just simply cast him off. sometimes i think people would not care if we lost him in a glaring area of need esp with lynch gone for four games.. while at the same time slash their wrists if bruce miller does not make the team in an area where we have better tight ends than he could be in my opinion

Originally posted by cciowa:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by SmokeCrabtrees:

Gonna be so stoked if somehow Ahmad returns to old form.. I'm sure Bowmans in his ear saying how much we need him.

My man never gets love. He's saved our asses so many times with disability and clutch play. Hopefully he's still got some magic.

I agree,. why do people think we can just simply cast him off. sometimes i think people would not care if we lost him in a glaring area of need esp with lynch gone for four games.. while at the same time slash their wrists if bruce miller does not make the team in an area where we have better tight ends than he could be in my opinion

Lol, it's funny how the three of us are the ones being first to respond, I believe it's because he's always the guy that's floating in our minds as someone that can be just the guy we need for the job and be a legit difference maker. The guy is a handful, just had some ups and downs that you're like, okay who the eff are you now, it's like i don't even know what to think about you. Cause the guy can be great.

I like Chip&O'Neill,Harold(UVA connection) being around him, along with the rest of our vets. The young players look up to him, I think I'm excited to see if he can have one of those magic seasons we look back on. "Remember when Ahmad Brooks gave us that monster 15 sack season and tore it up in the playoffs!" .... I know, , I like it doe haha.

Best pass rusher on the team.

He's very good against the run. Notice opposing teams mostly run off the edge opposite of Brooks and rarely directly at Brooks. I always thought he's a mediocre pass rusher and pass defender.