REPORT.... woodson wants to play for niners and is lowering demands

Originally posted by cciowa:

Originally posted by NCommand:
Woodson would add a lot...intangibles, character, leadership and for Fangio, a peace of mind. Woodson, IMHO, if signed, should be moved to SS while we draft a high, true FS with a ton of range and speed and coverage ability! This way Woodson can play his game, up near the LOS, tackle and blitz a lot (could help refocus Fangio in this area)...he can certainly cover TE's better than Whitner and I doubt he'd give up 14 TD's by himself, no matter what age he is. LOL. That said, we still need a SS that can be groomed to start as early as next year.

there is nothing wrong with what NC said. good thoughts on both sides. I do wonder why charles is not even getting a look by other teams. Is there some sort of secret decoder ring agreement with he and the niners that he will sign and he is shunning all other attempts by teams? do teams just not think he can do the job anymore?

It sounds like he really wants to play here..badly. Even over the Packers who have Rodgers. That says something. I originally thought he had a hand shake agreement with the FO and the draft would dictate when/if we signed him...and he would request a fair deal with us. But, it's all speculation naturally. We'll see in the next coming days.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by cciowa:

Originally posted by NCommand:
Woodson would add a lot...intangibles, character, leadership and for Fangio, a peace of mind. Woodson, IMHO, if signed, should be moved to SS while we draft a high, true FS with a ton of range and speed and coverage ability! This way Woodson can play his game, up near the LOS, tackle and blitz a lot (could help refocus Fangio in this area)...he can certainly cover TE's better than Whitner and I doubt he'd give up 14 TD's by himself, no matter what age he is. LOL. That said, we still need a SS that can be groomed to start as early as next year.

there is nothing wrong with what NC said. good thoughts on both sides. I do wonder why charles is not even getting a look by other teams. Is there some sort of secret decoder ring agreement with he and the niners that he will sign and he is shunning all other attempts by teams? do teams just not think he can do the job anymore?

It sounds like he really wants to play here..badly. Even over the Packers who have Rodgers. That says something. I originally thought he had a hand shake agreement with the FO and the draft would dictate when/if we signed him...and he would request a fair deal with us. But, it's all speculation naturally. We'll see in the next coming days.

I'm sure we could get him cheap, but how are we going to pay for him? Would we cut Whitner?

Originally posted by NinerBuff:
I'm sure we could get him cheap, but how are we going to pay for him? Would we cut Whitner?

He or Goodwin have been, IMHO, and remains the two most viable June 1st "veteran cuts" d/t their salary and that we may have younger, stronger, cheaper players who have more upside (Kilgore and Looney for Goodwin and Dahl and Woodson for Whitner plus draft picks).

Restructure of contracts as well...Boldin, J.Smith, etc.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by NinerBuff:
I'm sure we could get him cheap, but how are we going to pay for him? Would we cut Whitner?

He or Goodwin have been, IMHO, and remains the two most viable June 1st "veteran cuts" d/t their salary and that we may have younger, stronger, cheaper players who have more upside (Kilgore and Looney for Goodwin and Dahl and Woodson for Whitner plus draft picks).

Restructure of contracts as well...Boldin, J.Smith, etc.

In general I agree with you, but wasn't the whole reason we got Boldin was because he didn't want to restructure his deal. Seems doubtful that we can if the Ravens couldn't. But I guess you never know.

Originally posted by NinerBuff:
In general I agree with you, but wasn't the whole reason we got Boldin was because he didn't want to restructure his deal. Seems doubtful that we can if the Ravens couldn't. But I guess you never know.

That could very well be real...but I thought when he came to us there was mention of him being open to signing a LT deal with us? But probably not the best example. I'll leave that up to the genius Paraag Marathe!

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by NinerBuff:
In general I agree with you, but wasn't the whole reason we got Boldin was because he didn't want to restructure his deal. Seems doubtful that we can if the Ravens couldn't. But I guess you never know.

That could very well be real...but I thought when he came to us there was mention of him being open to signing a LT deal with us? But probably not the best example. I'll leave that up to the genius Paraag Marathe!

In Harbaugh, Baalke, Marathe, York we trust

Whitner >>> Woodson

Originally posted by NCommand:
He or Goodwin have been, IMHO, and remains the two most viable June 1st "veteran cuts" d/t their salary and that we may have younger, stronger, cheaper players who have more upside (Kilgore and Looney for Goodwin and Dahl and Woodson for Whitner plus draft picks).

Restructure of contracts as well...Boldin, J.Smith, etc.

but to make a move like that esp with goodwin,, you gotta gotta gotta,, make sure kilgore and or looney can do the job. That is a big maybe and i am not sure we can determine if they can do the job, thus making goodwin expendable in three months whitner I am not as concerned providing that the rookie we draft can play and the combo of charles, dahl and whoever else will be a upgrade if we cut whitner

Originally posted by Frisco69ers:
Whitner >>> Woodson

the age thing bothers me and i wish i could get over it

Originally posted by cciowa:

Originally posted by NCommand:
He or Goodwin have been, IMHO, and remains the two most viable June 1st "veteran cuts" d/t their salary and that we may have younger, stronger, cheaper players who have more upside (Kilgore and Looney for Goodwin and Dahl and Woodson for Whitner plus draft picks).

Restructure of contracts as well...Boldin, J.Smith, etc.

but to make a move like that esp with goodwin,, you gotta gotta gotta,, make sure kilgore and or looney can do the job. That is a big maybe and i am not sure we can determine if they can do the job, thus making goodwin expendable in three months whitner I am not as concerned providing that the rookie we draft can play and the combo of charles, dahl and whoever else will be a upgrade if we cut whitner

True, Whitner would be my choice, no doubt, if we got Woodson. That said, we also have to consider that BOTH Looney and Kilgore have had an entire year to learn/practice. Do the coaches feel they are ready? Nobody wants to talk about it either but with a no-catch season for AJ, Baalke might be wanting to justify his last draft by proving drafting an injured Looney was the right choice for the future...a future that may be now. MM was talking about Looney in his latest interview today as well...about how high they were on him.

Originally posted by NCommand:
True, Whitner would be my choice, no doubt, if we got Woodson. That said, we also have to consider that BOTH Looney and Kilgore have had an entire year to learn/practice. Do the coaches feel they are ready? Nobody wants to talk about it either but with a no-catch season for AJ, Baalke might be wanting to justify his last draft by proving drafting an injured Looney was the right choice for the future...a future that may be now. MM was talking about Looney in his latest interview today as well...about how high they were on him.

well after what they did with boone last year I really have no doubt that looney/kilgore will be our center of the future and the other will be a valuable reserve for us. just not sure it will be this year or even this summer but you never know. i thought it was insanity that they let alex start and he only played at near pro bowl level on a side note i think that the two backers, looney and jenkins from that draft class will end up being players for us this year not to mention the safety , robinson?

Whitner is the leader of the secondary and a huge vocal leader on the team. He's not going to be cut.

Woodson would add a lot in terms of veteran savvy and leadership, but he's nothing special on the field. I'd have no qualms about starting a rookie 1st/high 2nd rounder.

Our chances of making the SB are better with a vet at safety IMHO. We can't assume a rookie will step in and be lights out and have that instinct. If we can shore up the DL, maybe trade-up in the draft to get that pass rusher to add to our already solid DL, signing Woodson makes sense to me. After all, our defense starts with the pass rush and everything else just falls into place but I'd rather have a vet at the safety position. Especially with the schedule we have this season.

In my opinion, signing Woodson would be a "get back to the SB now" move, along with the Nnamdi and Boldin signings which I think Nnamdi make the roster as well. If we are going to win the SB, this should be the year to do it especially with the experience Kaep has acheived from last year and the signings we will/have signed to shore up the defense for this season.

Originally posted by Frisco69ers:
Whitner >>> Woodson

Not in coverage

Originally posted by Leathaface:
Whitner is the leader of the secondary and a huge vocal leader on the team. He's not going to be cut.

Woodson would add a lot in terms of veteran savvy and leadership, but he's nothing special on the field. I'd have no qualms about starting a rookie 1st/high 2nd rounder.

i agree with you , i am more than fine with a rookie starting and you know how i feel bout charles,,, however NC does make a good compelling case for signing charles. wow tough one. Now i do disagree with those who feel that charles is the key to winning another super bowl. i am not in that group