View Full Version : The Pats signed Traylor, why didn't we?
04-01-2004, 04:34 PM
I saw that the Pats have signed Keith Traylor. I think very good about him and I think that we need a big tackle (and a pass rusher also). Why do you think the Redskins didn't even mention the guy?
PA Skins Girl
04-01-2004, 05:04 PM
A little long in the tooth, probably (will be 35 in September). I think the focus was to get guys that will be here a few years.
04-01-2004, 05:17 PM
true! the oldest guy we have signed is brunell and he might be fine for the next 3 or 4 years. some qb's have their best years late into their 30's. everyone else has been 3 or more year deals, guys in their prime.
04-01-2004, 05:58 PM
I didn't know he was going to get 35. Then I can live with him in NE.
04-01-2004, 06:11 PM
Team likes Noble anyway.
04-02-2004, 01:39 AM
Old and an injury liability lately. No thanks.
04-02-2004, 08:11 AM
Two words why we did not : Bruce Smith
04-02-2004, 08:14 AM
two more words: deion sanders
i just want to go on record as saying that i was always against getting deion... bruce i thought was ok just a little over paid. the problem with bruce is that they never made him a situational pass rusher. it was painful watching him get dominated and just hang in to get the record.
04-02-2004, 09:13 AM
Traylor is a little past his prime.
04-02-2004, 10:29 AM
smoakme - very painful to watch Bruce over the last couple of years.
04-02-2004, 11:20 AM
We cannot sign every single FA defensive lineman like many of you seem to expect.
vBulletin® v3.6.7, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.