February 3, 200620 yr Broncos targeting Ricky? BY ARMANDO SALGUERO asalguero@MiamiHerald.com The Denver Broncos have had at least two internal discussions about acquiring Dolphins running back Ricky Williams, but the teams have not talked about a deal. The Denver Post, citing two NFL sources, reported this week that coach Mike Shanahan might consider trading for Williams but likely only if the team does not trade for receiver Terrell Owens. The Broncos have a desire to add playmakers at receiver and running back and this week hosted a meeting that included Owens, his South Florida agent, Drew Rosenhaus and Shanahan. The Broncos' preliminary interest in Williams stems from a desire to upgrade a position manned by Mike Anderson and Tatum Bell. Both had good seasons in 2005 -- Anderson gaining 1,014 yards and Bell 921 -- but neither possesses the combination of size and speed that Williams has and Denver wants. Dolphins coach Nick Saban on Wednesday declined to comment on a possible deal with the Broncos, but a source said no talks between the teams have taken place. Moreover, the Broncos have not talked to Williams' agent, Leigh Steinberg, according to another source. That Williams is available is without doubt, however. During his final regular-season news conference, Saban said every player on the Dolphins roster is available for the right price. When pressed about Williams specifically, he said the best interest of the franchise would force him to listen to any offer. Williams, meanwhile, seemed to warm to the notion of playing elsewhere during the season. Early on he seemed uncomfortable with such talk but toward the end of the season said he would accept a trade if it happened, especially to a California team. No NFL trades can be made until the league year begins in March, although teams routinely hold informal talks about players well in advance of that. http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/sport...ll/13770984.htm
February 3, 200620 yr Denver would be perfect for Ricky. He could smoke up all he wants in Telluride. Do it.
February 3, 200620 yr I'd rather Jerome Bettis go for one more year then trade for Ricky Williams. :plain
February 3, 200620 yr Ricky wont be traded for less then a high 2nd or 1st Denver does have 2 1st round picks. Discussed this a week ago elsewhere.. I could see us getting the 29th pick for him. It would be a good trade for bot hteams as Ricky will break 2,000 yards easily behind that denver O-line
February 3, 200620 yr Ricky wont be traded for less then a high 2nd or 1st Denver does have 2 1st round picks. Discussed this a week ago elsewhere.. I could see us getting the 29th pick for him. It would be a good trade for bot hteams as Ricky will break 2,000 yards easily behind that denver O-line Agreed. No sense in trading an awesome player making the minimum for something that won't net as good results for more money.
February 3, 200620 yr Ricky wont be traded for less then a high 2nd or 1st Denver does have 2 1st round picks. Discussed this a week ago elsewhere.. I could see us getting the 29th pick for him. It would be a good trade for bot hteams as Ricky will break 2,000 yards easily behind that denver O-line Agreed. No sense in trading an awesome player making the minimum for something that won't net as good results for more money. 29th pick could be a good OT or Bobby Carpenter perhaps would be nice hehe
February 3, 200620 yr Ricky wont be traded for less then a high 2nd or 1st Denver does have 2 1st round picks. Discussed this a week ago elsewhere.. I could see us getting the 29th pick for him. It would be a good trade for bot hteams as Ricky will break 2,000 yards easily behind that denver O-line Agreed. No sense in trading an awesome player making the minimum for something that won't net as good results for more money. 29th pick could be a good OT or Bobby Carpenter perhaps would be nice hehe Take OLB at 16 and Chad Jackson at 29... :o
February 3, 200620 yr Ricky wont be traded for less then a high 2nd or 1st Denver does have 2 1st round picks. Discussed this a week ago elsewhere.. I could see us getting the 29th pick for him. It would be a good trade for bot hteams as Ricky will break 2,000 yards easily behind that denver O-line Agreed. No sense in trading an awesome player making the minimum for something that won't net as good results for more money. 29th pick could be a good OT or Bobby Carpenter perhaps would be nice hehe Take OLB at 16 and Chad Jackson at 29... :o chad greenway/Manny lawson OLBs at 16 and Ko Simpson Safety at 29?
February 3, 200620 yr I'd be shocked if Denver gives up a 1st for a man a strike away from a year suspension who has also questioned how long he wants to remain playing the game. He is also about to be what, 29 or 30 years-old? He also has not carried a full work load in over 2 years and is about 20+lbs lighter than his prime playing weight. I'd say Denver has a lot more leverage than we do in this trade and if we got a first from them it would be the trade of the year.
February 3, 200620 yr I'd be shocked if Denver gives up a 1st for a man a strike away from a year suspension who has also questioned how long he wants to remain playing the game. He is also about to be what, 29 or 30 years-old? He also has not carried a full work load in over 2 years and is about 20+lbs lighter than his prime playing weight. I'd say Denver has a lot more leverage than we do in this trade and if we got a first from them it would be the trade of the year. They used a 3rd rounder on Maurice 4.9 40 Clarrett.
February 3, 200620 yr I'd be shocked if Denver gives up a 1st for a man a strike away from a year suspension who has also questioned how long he wants to remain playing the game. He is also about to be what, 29 or 30 years-old? He also has not carried a full work load in over 2 years and is about 20+lbs lighter than his prime playing weight. I'd say Denver has a lot more leverage than we do in this trade and if we got a first from them it would be the trade of the year. They used a 3rd rounder on Maurice 4.9 40 Clarrett. That is comparing apples to oranges.
February 3, 200620 yr I'd be shocked if Denver gives up a 1st for a man a strike away from a year suspension who has also questioned how long he wants to remain playing the game. He is also about to be what, 29 or 30 years-old? He also has not carried a full work load in over 2 years and is about 20+lbs lighter than his prime playing weight. I'd say Denver has a lot more leverage than we do in this trade and if we got a first from them it would be the trade of the year. They used a 3rd rounder on Maurice 4.9 40 Clarrett. That is comparing apples to oranges. I still think that Ricky has more upside than Clarrett.
February 3, 200620 yr I'd be shocked if Denver gives up a 1st for a man a strike away from a year suspension who has also questioned how long he wants to remain playing the game. He is also about to be what, 29 or 30 years-old? He also has not carried a full work load in over 2 years and is about 20+lbs lighter than his prime playing weight. I'd say Denver has a lot more leverage than we do in this trade and if we got a first from them it would be the trade of the year. They used a 3rd rounder on Maurice 4.9 40 Clarrett. That is comparing apples to oranges. I still think that Ricky has more upside than Clarrett. Do you have a point you are trying to make? Because if so, it is not really happening. What I think you are trying to say is because the Broncos used something like the last pick of the 3rd round on Maurice Clarett, they will give a 1st for Ricky. If that is the logic you are using, then you should re-think your thought process. That may work for John Madden football, but not the NFL.
February 3, 200620 yr I'd be shocked if Denver gives up a 1st for a man a strike away from a year suspension who has also questioned how long he wants to remain playing the game. He is also about to be what, 29 or 30 years-old? He also has not carried a full work load in over 2 years and is about 20+lbs lighter than his prime playing weight. I'd say Denver has a lot more leverage than we do in this trade and if we got a first from them it would be the trade of the year. They used a 3rd rounder on Maurice 4.9 40 Clarrett. That is comparing apples to oranges. I still think that Ricky has more upside than Clarrett. Do you have a point you are trying to make? Because if so, it is not really happening. What I think you are trying to say is because the Broncos used something like the last pick of the 3rd round on Maurice Clarett, they will give a 1st for Ricky. If that is the logic you are using, then you should re-think your thought process. That may work for John Madden football, but not the NFL. I'm living in the world of hypotheticals right now in regards to Ricky. It's fairly obvious the Broncos wouldn't give us a first or high second for Ricky, however, that's about all I would accept for him. He's an extremely valuable commodity in the NFL, regardless of past transgressions.
February 3, 200620 yr I agree with those who say you keep Ricky unless someone's offering you at least a top 40 pick.
February 3, 200620 yr Fair enough Fritz on your last post. However I will disagree with those who say keep Ricky unless you get a mid 2nd or above. I think a 3rd would be worth it for him right now or a package deal with our pick to trade up to get one of the 'Big' 3 QBs. I think right now we have a lot of holes and depth issues and while Ricky is a great, great RB, we already have a stud and that is a position that is historically easier to fill than others. To contend anytime in the near future we are going to have to get a QB while also improving other areas, specifically the OLine and Secondary would be the most immediate needs. If trading Ricky allows us to help those areas, I am all for it.
February 3, 200620 yr In the new age of the NFL...I think it is wise to have TWO feature backs. One back cant take all the pounding like a few years ago. Players are bigger, and faster. Perfect examples..KC (Holmes and Johnson)..NY Giants (Barber and Jacobs)..Denver (Anderson and Bell)...Pittsburgh (Parker, Staley, Bettis)...Carolina (Smith and Foster)...Jacksonville (Taylor and Jones)...see a trend. All of then were in the playoff or in series contention. Now teams with one feature back...NO (McAllister, lost with injury. who picks up the slack)...St.Louis (Stephen Jackson)...Buffalo (McGahee)...NYJ (martin)..Raiders (Jordan)...Philadelphia (Westbrook)..Dallas (Jones)..Detroit (Jones)..see another trend... Then you have those exceptions like Seattle and Indianapolis who can afford the one MAJOR back such as Alexander, and James. There offense is spectacular, and even then they have capable backs ups in Ind..(dominic Rhodes), and I think it is Sam Goings in Seattle.... Unless we would be able to pick up another PREMIER BACK in the draft like Bill Callhoun (Wisconsin), or DeAngelo Williams..I would not do that trade at least untile Ronnie brown proves he is a FEATURE BACK, and we have a proven QB.
February 3, 200620 yr Do I think Denver trades for Ricky with a 1st? No. I think Miami holds him unless they get a 1st round pick (or top 10 in the 2nd like SF). The reasons is he is young (27 not 30 to the one that posted that). He has alot less carries on him then most RBs. He has no Injury history at all. He has the talent to be a top 3 back in this league. He is a game changing player and those arent that easily found. Someone that every time they touch the ball the game will change some. That is why we dont give ricky away and why the Broncos want him. Anderson is 34 years old next year and Bell is a nice 3rd down back but he isnt make for their running system. Do I think Denver does it? No. But, is that what Miami wants? Yes.
February 3, 200620 yr Miami has no reason to trade him. He is a great running back making very little against the cap. Therefore any possible offer to get him must be convincing enough. The 29 pick sounds about right. If they did that I get the feeling there might be a trade up for one of the big 3 QBs.
February 3, 200620 yr I would rather trade him to a NFC team like Arizona (who needs a back) Other options would be SF (but they like Frank Gore)...Carolina may be interesting ( I dont think they trust Foster and Smith that much)...maybe Philly..that would be devastating in Philly..McNabb and Williams.
February 3, 200620 yr The reasons is he is young (27 not 30 to the one that posted that). He has alot less carries on him then most RBs. He has no Injury history at all. He has the talent to be a top 3 back in this league. Actually, before you go and correct me, you should look things up. He was born May 21, 1977. That makes him 28 right now and since we age foward and not backwards, he will be 29 when we start the 2006-07 season. That would make me correct in saying he "is about to be 29 or 30". He is NOT a young back.
February 3, 200620 yr The reasons is he is young (27 not 30 to the one that posted that). He has alot less carries on him then most RBs. He has no Injury history at all. He has the talent to be a top 3 back in this league. Actually, before you go and correct me, you should look things up. He was born May 21, 1977. That makes him 28 right now and since we age foward and not backwards, he will be 29 when we start the 2006-07 season. That would make me correct in saying he "is about to be 29 or 30". He is NOT a young back. He is not an old back either and doesnt have as many carries on the treads because of his time off. Do I think Denver would be smart to give up a 1st? No, but will they have to, in order to get him? Most likely yes.
February 3, 200620 yr well if Denver is willing to give up a 1st round pick...The dolphins may uses that extra first rounder to trade their second round pick to Houston for David Carr. The Dolphins could go ahead and used there two first round pick to trade up to a higher pick and get Brickshaw Ferguson or Marcus McNeil. Or they could stay and hope DeAngelo Williams falls there way (which would feature to young backs), and Micheal Huff (wich would solve there CB problem.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.