The Tards sign Alan Faneca

Originally posted by 49oz2superbowl:

Originally posted by SonocoNinerFan:

Originally posted by 49oz2superbowl:

Originally posted by SonocoNinerFan:

Originally posted by 49oz2superbowl:
not that we needed Faneca, and he's seriously diminishing as a player... but it pains me to see the rest of the NFC West make moves to improve while we sit around and "resign our guys".... which we haven't done either.

I guess Franklin, Baas & Brooks don't count?

Franklin being franchised does not count, that's not extending a player Baas who will not see the field any longer, signing a one year tender does not count either... is the 2 mil/year we offered Ahmad Brooks over 2 years putting us over the edge?

It's a pathetic excuse if we aren't going to sign our real playmakers like Willis, Goldson, and Davis to longterm front-loaded contracts in this uncapped year

Pardon me . . . I thought you were talking about contracts that were actually set to expire this calendar year. Shame on me.

Our excuse was locking up our own guys, franchising and RFA tagging guys for one year is quite the opposite. Locking up franchise players longterm can be better than spending free agent dollars because it ensures reasonable longterm contracts for your franchise players... if we were only concerned with one year we'd be throwing contracts at guys like Westbrook, Tomlinson, Faneca, etc.

It's not others fault your post came off as whiney, cause it did come off that way......

Damn... I'd rather have him than let the Cards have him. Apparently he can't pass-protect anymore though so that's pretty good news.

Damn that sucks. It definately makes the Cards stronger.

Originally posted by WINiner:
Damn that sucks. It definately makes the Cards stronger.

And that was my exact point before people started putting words in my mouth, what was your point in saying I sounded whiny?

Originally posted by foreign49er:
Damn... I'd rather have him than let the Cards have him. Apparently he can't pass-protect anymore though so that's pretty good news.

Iupati isn't exactly great at that either, people need to taper their expectations.

Originally posted by 49oz2superbowl:

Originally posted by WINiner:
Damn that sucks. It definately makes the Cards stronger.

And that was my exact point before people started putting words in my mouth, what was your point in saying I sounded whiny?

You're spending an awful lot of time in this thread defending your comments to people who "misinterpreted" it. That tells me that you weren't very clear with your tone or the message you wanted to get across to begin with.

And I agree with the other poster that you did sound a bit whiny but only because you didn't back up anything you said originally - it wasn't until you were forced to get defensive that you started to make more sense (Plus your STFU comment was uncalled for).
Saying "How come we don't sign any guys while everyone else signs a bunch of people" with a grumpy sad face emote is usally a good way to provoke negative responses.

You could've also said:
"Nice signing by the Cards. I noticed that our only moves in the offseason were a, b and c while the other teams in our division seemed to be more aggressive by signing x, y and z and also resigning players p, q, and r. Is anyone else concerned by this or is it just me?"
See how much more civil and well-thought-out that comes across?

[ Edited by scopur49er on Apr 28, 2010 at 12:37:24 ]

Originally posted by scopur49er:

Originally posted by 49oz2superbowl:

Originally posted by WINiner:
Damn that sucks. It definately makes the Cards stronger.

And that was my exact point before people started putting words in my mouth, what was your point in saying I sounded whiny?

You're spending an awful lot of time in this thread defending your comments to people who "misinterpreted" it. That tells me that you weren't very clear with your tone or the message you wanted to get across to begin with.

And I agree with the other poster that you did sound a bit whiny but only because you didn't back up anything you said originally - it wasn't until you were forced to get defensive that you started to make more sense (Plus your STFU comment was uncalled for).
Saying "How come we don't sign any guys while everyone else signs a bunch of people" with a grumpy sad face emote is usally a good way to provoke negative responses.

You could've also said:
"Nice signing by the Cards. I noticed that our only moves in the offseason were a, b and c while the other teams in our division seemed to be more aggressive by signing x, y and z and also resigning players p, q, and r. Is anyone else concerned by this or is it just me?"
See how much more civil and well-thought-out that comes across?

You do realize that you just put quotation marks around something that I never said... do you know what quotation marks imply?

I said that I hate watching the rest of the NFC West making moves to improve their team through free agency... and I prefaced that by saying I didn't want Faneca as he doesn't fit our team...

People know that we weren't active in free agency, and the free agent acquisitions we did make (minus Paymah) weren't necessary additions. The money we tied into Carr could have brought aboard a veteran like Nathan Vasher or Brian Westbrook who would have a clear role with our team, on the field.

People also know that we have yet to ink a legitimate contract extension to any franchise player this offseason, which was our excuse for not being more active. It was even reported that we've essentially ended all talks and will likely wait the year out to see how these contract year players will perform (which isn't a bad idea for Brooks, Franklin or Goldson). But if that's the plan, then why are we not offering short term front loaded contracts to a couple players that will improve our team.

Why is it my duty to spell it out? These are all knowns.

The following poster replied that he loves how people get pissed that we don't sign every free agent, in an attempt to mock me... Don't try and mock someone if you are too lazy or unobservant to read the actual post. That to me is more insulting than writing STFU.

Originally posted by 49oz2superbowl:

Originally posted by lamontb:

Originally posted by AB83Rules:
not to get off subject but for those pissed, we havent extended players, well maybe they arent ready to be extended.

Bingo unless i missed something VD and Goldson have only had 1 good season. Why should they be getting huge extensions? Would it hurt for the team and fans to actually see these guys have consecutive great seasons before breaking the bank. Matter of fact Goldson had a great final 6/7 games. Willis no doubt, but these other guys need to prove they are worth it. See Parys as an example of what happens when you get an extension too quickly.

Well if we're not ready to pay them this year, then we should atleast sign a relatively big name free agent (ex. Joey Porter) with a front-loaded contract. We are too complacent just letting cap space sit and go to waste for a year. It's not like we're a small market team that's strapped for cash.

Ownership isn't the best thing about this team. This year I would disagree b/c I really didn't see any big named guys to go after. I did want them to take a look at Porter but that was about it. You can't always spend your money sometimes you have to fall back and wait a year. With all the new restrictions on free agency there just wasn't a lot out there. Niners did pay hefty for Smith and Clements in recent history.

Originally posted by 49oz2superbowl:

Originally posted by scopur49er:

Originally posted by 49oz2superbowl:

Originally posted by WINiner:
Damn that sucks. It definately makes the Cards stronger.

And that was my exact point before people started putting words in my mouth, what was your point in saying I sounded whiny?

You're spending an awful lot of time in this thread defending your comments to people who "misinterpreted" it. That tells me that you weren't very clear with your tone or the message you wanted to get across to begin with.

And I agree with the other poster that you did sound a bit whiny but only because you didn't back up anything you said originally - it wasn't until you were forced to get defensive that you started to make more sense (Plus your STFU comment was uncalled for).
Saying "How come we don't sign any guys while everyone else signs a bunch of people" with a grumpy sad face emote is usally a good way to provoke negative responses.

You could've also said:
"Nice signing by the Cards. I noticed that our only moves in the offseason were a, b and c while the other teams in our division seemed to be more aggressive by signing x, y and z and also resigning players p, q, and r. Is anyone else concerned by this or is it just me?"
See how much more civil and well-thought-out that comes across?

You do realize that you just put quotation marks around something that I never said... do you know what quotation marks imply?

I said that I hate watching the rest of the NFC West making moves to improve their team through free agency... and I prefaced that by saying I didn't want Faneca as he doesn't fit our team...

People know that we weren't active in free agency, and the free agent acquisitions we did make (minus Paymah) weren't necessary additions. The money we tied into Carr could have brought aboard a veteran like Nathan Vasher or Brian Westbrook who would have a clear role with our team, on the field.

People also know that we have yet to ink a legitimate contract extension to any franchise player this offseason, which was our excuse for not being more active. It was even reported that we've essentially ended all talks and will likely wait the year out to see how these contract year players will perform (which isn't a bad idea for Brooks, Franklin or Goldson). But if that's the plan, then why are we not offering short term front loaded contracts to a couple players that will improve our team.

Why is it my duty to spell it out? These are all knowns.

The following poster replied that he loves how people get pissed that we don't sign every free agent, in an attempt to mock me... Don't try and mock someone if you are too lazy or unobservant to read the actual post. That to me is more insulting than writing STFU.

Relax bud, you're still being way too defensive.
I was obviously paraphrasing and even though I misused quotes, I know you got my point so please just let it go already.

The following poster was a bit trollish yes, but he wasn't blatantly rude like you were. Your post was a complaint and complaints often come acrossy whiny and whiny posts generally provoke the kind of response he gave you.

Now to address your point (and the reason you got the kind of response you did)...
People constantly post about how they think it's a good idea to sign or resign so-and-so player but they don't usually look at it from every angle. The Niner brass has a better perspective on this than we do.
They understand:
1) The quality of available free agents
2) The potential role a particular free agent would play
3) The relative impact they might have
4) The financial state of the organization
5) The longterm league outlook and the status of the CBA
6) The opportunity cost of signing or resigning someone (who would we not draft or resign as a result)
All of these factors, as well as others, are looked at and taken into consideration. Teams like the Rams and Seahawks have more holes than us so they need to make more moves to keep pace. Notice how the top 2 teams in our division (us and the Cards) were the least active in free agency? Guess who's most likely to finish 1-2 again next year? Here's a hint - not the Rams and Seahawks.

The bottom line is that it's probably a good sign that we aren't being aggressive. We favor building through the draft and team stability over risky signings, trades and "big" moves that often result in the team chemistry being thrown off.
We didn't lose a single key player this offseason and we have time to resign the guys that help us win - it just doesn't need to happen right now.

Originally posted by HessianDud:

Originally posted by bigmike55:
meh we'll still destroy them, twice.

Originally posted by pelos21:
f**k the Cardinals!

Originally posted by scopur49er:

Originally posted by 49oz2superbowl:

Originally posted by scopur49er:

Originally posted by 49oz2superbowl:

Originally posted by WINiner:
Damn that sucks. It definately makes the Cards stronger.

And that was my exact point before people started putting words in my mouth, what was your point in saying I sounded whiny?

You're spending an awful lot of time in this thread defending your comments to people who "misinterpreted" it. That tells me that you weren't very clear with your tone or the message you wanted to get across to begin with.

And I agree with the other poster that you did sound a bit whiny but only because you didn't back up anything you said originally - it wasn't until you were forced to get defensive that you started to make more sense (Plus your STFU comment was uncalled for).
Saying "How come we don't sign any guys while everyone else signs a bunch of people" with a grumpy sad face emote is usally a good way to provoke negative responses.

You could've also said:
"Nice signing by the Cards. I noticed that our only moves in the offseason were a, b and c while the other teams in our division seemed to be more aggressive by signing x, y and z and also resigning players p, q, and r. Is anyone else concerned by this or is it just me?"
See how much more civil and well-thought-out that comes across?

You do realize that you just put quotation marks around something that I never said... do you know what quotation marks imply?

I said that I hate watching the rest of the NFC West making moves to improve their team through free agency... and I prefaced that by saying I didn't want Faneca as he doesn't fit our team...

People know that we weren't active in free agency, and the free agent acquisitions we did make (minus Paymah) weren't necessary additions. The money we tied into Carr could have brought aboard a veteran like Nathan Vasher or Brian Westbrook who would have a clear role with our team, on the field.

People also know that we have yet to ink a legitimate contract extension to any franchise player this offseason, which was our excuse for not being more active. It was even reported that we've essentially ended all talks and will likely wait the year out to see how these contract year players will perform (which isn't a bad idea for Brooks, Franklin or Goldson). But if that's the plan, then why are we not offering short term front loaded contracts to a couple players that will improve our team.

Why is it my duty to spell it out? These are all knowns.

The following poster replied that he loves how people get pissed that we don't sign every free agent, in an attempt to mock me... Don't try and mock someone if you are too lazy or unobservant to read the actual post. That to me is more insulting than writing STFU.

Relax bud, you're still being way too defensive.
I was obviously paraphrasing and even though I misused quotes, I know you got my point so please just let it go already.

The following poster was a bit trollish yes, but he wasn't blatantly rude like you were. Your post was a complaint and complaints often come acrossy whiny and whiny posts generally provoke the kind of response he gave you.

Now to address your point (and the reason you got the kind of response you did)...
People constantly post about how they think it's a good idea to sign or resign so-and-so player but they don't usually look at it from every angle. The Niner brass has a better perspective on this than we do.
They understand:
1) The quality of available free agents
2) The potential role a particular free agent would play
3) The relative impact they might have
4) The financial state of the organization
5) The longterm league outlook and the status of the CBA
6) The opportunity cost of signing or resigning someone (who would we not draft or resign as a result)
All of these factors, as well as others, are looked at and taken into consideration. Teams like the Rams and Seahawks have more holes than us so they need to make more moves to keep pace. Notice how the top 2 teams in our division (us and the Cards) were the least active in free agency? Guess who's most likely to finish 1-2 again next year? Here's a hint - not the Rams and Seahawks.

The bottom line is that it's probably a good sign that we aren't being aggressive. We favor building through the draft and team stability over risky signings, trades and "big" moves that often result in the team chemistry being thrown off.
We didn't lose a single key player this offseason and we have time to resign the guys that help us win - it just doesn't need to happen right now.

I appreciate your thoughtful response. My complaint isn't even so much that we're not agressive, it just seems that we're not even active (bringing worthwhile free agents in to visits to kick around the tires or making calls and rumored for available free agents) and that the players we do sign are mediocre at positions of depth.

1) Carr, likely won't see the field, and if he does, many would have preferred Shaun Hill.

2)Paymah won't see the field unless injury, and I've got no complaints except that Vasher is better and wasn't commanding alot... no upgrade over what we had in Hudson or Bly though, and they atleast had experience in our system

3) Leboy I just don't see fitting in, we've got tons of decent OLB's, what we need is an elite OLB (which there wasn't in free agency, except maybe Porter for a year or two). He's just a waste of money and roster space.

Every single one of these signings aren't expected to contribute unless we get the injury bug, and what we had before (ie. Shaun Hill, Marcus Hudson/Dre Bly) was arguably better. Our starting roster wasn't playoff caliber last year, so it just seems odd that we don't try and atleast bring in a contributor.

If we aren't going to be active, why not just extend a guy like Patrick Willis while we have this void in expenditures and unlimited cap space? I just want us to be active with relegating our salary expenditures... put us in a good position for when a free agent that fits our team does become available.

[ Edited by 49oz2superbowl on Apr 28, 2010 at 14:22:32 ]

Originally posted by 49oz2superbowl:

Originally posted by scopur49er:

Originally posted by 49oz2superbowl:

Originally posted by scopur49er:

Originally posted by 49oz2superbowl:

Originally posted by WINiner:
Damn that sucks. It definately makes the Cards stronger.

And that was my exact point before people started putting words in my mouth, what was your point in saying I sounded whiny?

You're spending an awful lot of time in this thread defending your comments to people who "misinterpreted" it. That tells me that you weren't very clear with your tone or the message you wanted to get across to begin with.

And I agree with the other poster that you did sound a bit whiny but only because you didn't back up anything you said originally - it wasn't until you were forced to get defensive that you started to make more sense (Plus your STFU comment was uncalled for).
Saying "How come we don't sign any guys while everyone else signs a bunch of people" with a grumpy sad face emote is usally a good way to provoke negative responses.

You could've also said:
"Nice signing by the Cards. I noticed that our only moves in the offseason were a, b and c while the other teams in our division seemed to be more aggressive by signing x, y and z and also resigning players p, q, and r. Is anyone else concerned by this or is it just me?"
See how much more civil and well-thought-out that comes across?

You do realize that you just put quotation marks around something that I never said... do you know what quotation marks imply?

I said that I hate watching the rest of the NFC West making moves to improve their team through free agency... and I prefaced that by saying I didn't want Faneca as he doesn't fit our team...

People know that we weren't active in free agency, and the free agent acquisitions we did make (minus Paymah) weren't necessary additions. The money we tied into Carr could have brought aboard a veteran like Nathan Vasher or Brian Westbrook who would have a clear role with our team, on the field.

People also know that we have yet to ink a legitimate contract extension to any franchise player this offseason, which was our excuse for not being more active. It was even reported that we've essentially ended all talks and will likely wait the year out to see how these contract year players will perform (which isn't a bad idea for Brooks, Franklin or Goldson). But if that's the plan, then why are we not offering short term front loaded contracts to a couple players that will improve our team.

Why is it my duty to spell it out? These are all knowns.

The following poster replied that he loves how people get pissed that we don't sign every free agent, in an attempt to mock me... Don't try and mock someone if you are too lazy or unobservant to read the actual post. That to me is more insulting than writing STFU.

Relax bud, you're still being way too defensive.
I was obviously paraphrasing and even though I misused quotes, I know you got my point so please just let it go already.

The following poster was a bit trollish yes, but he wasn't blatantly rude like you were. Your post was a complaint and complaints often come acrossy whiny and whiny posts generally provoke the kind of response he gave you.

Now to address your point (and the reason you got the kind of response you did)...
People constantly post about how they think it's a good idea to sign or resign so-and-so player but they don't usually look at it from every angle. The Niner brass has a better perspective on this than we do.
They understand:
1) The quality of available free agents
2) The potential role a particular free agent would play
3) The relative impact they might have
4) The financial state of the organization
5) The longterm league outlook and the status of the CBA
6) The opportunity cost of signing or resigning someone (who would we not draft or resign as a result)
All of these factors, as well as others, are looked at and taken into consideration. Teams like the Rams and Seahawks have more holes than us so they need to make more moves to keep pace. Notice how the top 2 teams in our division (us and the Cards) were the least active in free agency? Guess who's most likely to finish 1-2 again next year? Here's a hint - not the Rams and Seahawks.

The bottom line is that it's probably a good sign that we aren't being aggressive. We favor building through the draft and team stability over risky signings, trades and "big" moves that often result in the team chemistry being thrown off.
We didn't lose a single key player this offseason and we have time to resign the guys that help us win - it just doesn't need to happen right now.

I appreciate your thoughtful response. My complaint isn't even so much that we're not agressive, it just seems that we're not even active (bringing worthwhile free agents in to visits to kick around the tires or making calls and rumored for available free agents) and that the players we do sign are mediocre at positions of depth.

1) Carr, likely won't see the field, and if he does, many would have preferred Shaun Hill.

I agree with you on the Carr signing. Even though he has more potential than Hill, he still isn't the longterm answer for us and that makes you question why you'd get rid of a guy that was familiar with the team and the system and can fill-in adequately with someone who likely won't contribute much this season and will probably leave next year anyway.

Quote:

2)Paymah won't see the field unless injury, and I've got no complaints except that Vasher is better and wasn't commanding alot... no upgrade over what we had in Hudson or Bly though, and they atleast had experience in our system

3) Leboy I just don't see fitting in, we've got tons of decent OLB's, what we need is an elite OLB (which there wasn't in free agency, except maybe Porter for a year or two). He's just a waste of money and roster space.

These are just "warm body" signings. I think they're meant to fill immediate roster spots and keep things competetive for the vets. until the roster count dwindles down.

Quote:

Every single one of these signings aren't expected to contribute unless we get the injury bug, and what we had before (ie. Shaun Hill, Marcus Hudson/Dre Bly) was arguably better. Our starting roster wasn't playoff caliber last year, so it just seems odd that we don't try and atleast bring in a contributor.

If we aren't going to be active, why not just extend a guy like Patrick Willis while we have this void in expenditures and unlimited cap space? I just want us to be active with relegating our salary expenditures... put us in a good position for when a free agent that fits our team does become available.

So the thing to consider here is that despite our record last year, we were less than a touchdown away from potentially winning 6 more games.
The optimist would look at this and say "hey that's not bad".
Weigh that alongside the relative weakness of our division, not losing any key players, and a boost in performance across the board for simply keeping the systems and coaching staffs in place.
Why rock the boat by bringing in a high profile player with baggage and overpaying for his services?

As far as signing our own players is concerned, the front office has already shown that they're willing to do this with the ridiculous Staley extension through the year 2054.
I'm certain that Willis and Davis are next in line and others will follow. The biggest unknown right now is around the salary cap and the state of the 2011 season. Nobody really knows what will happen so very few teams (it's not just us) are going deep into their pocketbooks to resign players. They're just playing it smart and I can't faulth them for that.

Originally posted by 49oz2superbowl:

Originally posted by scopur49er:

Originally posted by 49oz2superbowl:

Originally posted by scopur49er:

Originally posted by 49oz2superbowl:

Originally posted by WINiner:
Damn that sucks. It definately makes the Cards stronger.

And that was my exact point before people started putting words in my mouth, what was your point in saying I sounded whiny?

You're spending an awful lot of time in this thread defending your comments to people who "misinterpreted" it. That tells me that you weren't very clear with your tone or the message you wanted to get across to begin with.

And I agree with the other poster that you did sound a bit whiny but only because you didn't back up anything you said originally - it wasn't until you were forced to get defensive that you started to make more sense (Plus your STFU comment was uncalled for).
Saying "How come we don't sign any guys while everyone else signs a bunch of people" with a grumpy sad face emote is usally a good way to provoke negative responses.

You could've also said:
"Nice signing by the Cards. I noticed that our only moves in the offseason were a, b and c while the other teams in our division seemed to be more aggressive by signing x, y and z and also resigning players p, q, and r. Is anyone else concerned by this or is it just me?"
See how much more civil and well-thought-out that comes across?

You do realize that you just put quotation marks around something that I never said... do you know what quotation marks imply?

I said that I hate watching the rest of the NFC West making moves to improve their team through free agency... and I prefaced that by saying I didn't want Faneca as he doesn't fit our team...

People know that we weren't active in free agency, and the free agent acquisitions we did make (minus Paymah) weren't necessary additions. The money we tied into Carr could have brought aboard a veteran like Nathan Vasher or Brian Westbrook who would have a clear role with our team, on the field.

People also know that we have yet to ink a legitimate contract extension to any franchise player this offseason, which was our excuse for not being more active. It was even reported that we've essentially ended all talks and will likely wait the year out to see how these contract year players will perform (which isn't a bad idea for Brooks, Franklin or Goldson). But if that's the plan, then why are we not offering short term front loaded contracts to a couple players that will improve our team.

Why is it my duty to spell it out? These are all knowns.

The following poster replied that he loves how people get pissed that we don't sign every free agent, in an attempt to mock me... Don't try and mock someone if you are too lazy or unobservant to read the actual post. That to me is more insulting than writing STFU.

Relax bud, you're still being way too defensive.
I was obviously paraphrasing and even though I misused quotes, I know you got my point so please just let it go already.

The following poster was a bit trollish yes, but he wasn't blatantly rude like you were. Your post was a complaint and complaints often come acrossy whiny and whiny posts generally provoke the kind of response he gave you.

Now to address your point (and the reason you got the kind of response you did)...
People constantly post about how they think it's a good idea to sign or resign so-and-so player but they don't usually look at it from every angle. The Niner brass has a better perspective on this than we do.
They understand:
1) The quality of available free agents
2) The potential role a particular free agent would play
3) The relative impact they might have
4) The financial state of the organization
5) The longterm league outlook and the status of the CBA
6) The opportunity cost of signing or resigning someone (who would we not draft or resign as a result)
All of these factors, as well as others, are looked at and taken into consideration. Teams like the Rams and Seahawks have more holes than us so they need to make more moves to keep pace. Notice how the top 2 teams in our division (us and the Cards) were the least active in free agency? Guess who's most likely to finish 1-2 again next year? Here's a hint - not the Rams and Seahawks.

The bottom line is that it's probably a good sign that we aren't being aggressive. We favor building through the draft and team stability over risky signings, trades and "big" moves that often result in the team chemistry being thrown off.
We didn't lose a single key player this offseason and we have time to resign the guys that help us win - it just doesn't need to happen right now.

I appreciate your thoughtful response. My complaint isn't even so much that we're not agressive, it just seems that we're not even active (bringing worthwhile free agents in to visits to kick around the tires or making calls and rumored for available free agents) and that the players we do sign are mediocre at positions of depth.

1) Carr, likely won't see the field, and if he does, many would have preferred Shaun Hill.

2)Paymah won't see the field unless injury, and I've got no complaints except that Vasher is better and wasn't commanding alot... no upgrade over what we had in Hudson or Bly though, and they atleast had experience in our system

3) Leboy I just don't see fitting in, we've got tons of decent OLB's, what we need is an elite OLB (which there wasn't in free agency, except maybe Porter for a year or two). He's just a waste of money and roster space.

Every single one of these signings aren't expected to contribute unless we get the injury bug, and what we had before (ie. Shaun Hill, Marcus Hudson/Dre Bly) was arguably better. Our starting roster wasn't playoff caliber last year, so it just seems odd that we don't try and atleast bring in a contributor.

If we aren't going to be active, why not just extend a guy like Patrick Willis while we have this void in expenditures and unlimited cap space? I just want us to be active with relegating our salary expenditures... put us in a good position for when a free agent that fits our team does become available.

I agree man. If you could define our core players who would that be?

Willis
Gore
Crabtree
Davis

?

Finally, someone on this board with some sense .

Originally posted by DaDivaRecieva15:
who care's he's old

Originally posted by RedWaltz24:

Originally posted by 49oz2superbowl:
not that we needed Faneca, and he's seriously diminishing as a player... but it pains me to see the rest of the NFC West make moves to improve while we sit around and "resign our guys".... which we haven't done either.

I guess that explains the Ginn trade.

I would rather us save money under the self-imposed budget the Niners have, rather than waste a ton of money on a declining G, especially since we still have youth at that position.

It is amazing. People complain if the Niners don't sign every FA that hits the market.

I swear some of you people blindly follow everything the Niners say or do (or don't do, to be more precise). You think everything they do is right and everything they don't do is also right.

All year long people have been b*tching about how we need O-Line help. We addressed it in the draft, but these guys are inexperienced youngsters who will need guidance. Not to mention Faneca >>>> Rachal and Baas, so he would be an upgrade despite his age and declining skills. A measly 1 year deal worth 2.5 mil is not going to break the bank, especially since this year is uncapped and the deal is short-term.

You people always want to bring up that "people get mad whenever we don't sign every free agent" bullsh*t, but when a signing makes sense, why the hell wouldn't people be upset when we didn't pull it off? He's better than what we have at RG (yes I know he is a LG) and he came relatively cheap on a one-year deal in an uncapped year. Your "people complain if the Niners don't sign every free agent that hits the market" comment is straight up LAME. This would have made sense. Now our sorry ass division rivals have gotten better while we sat around twiddling our thumbs like we did all offseason.