Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 56
  1. #11
    Prophet Guest

    Re: Adam Schefter on Porter

    "Eyedea" wrote:
    You have to remember the Childress was the guy that delt Culpepper for something just like this.
    Its clear that he won't put up with that crap, so why would he go out and sign a guy and brings the problems to him?

    Will the signing of Porter make us a superbowl caliber team?
    The answer is no, and thats why trading for him is not wise.
    ....and why it won't happen.

  2. #12
    snowinapril's Avatar
    snowinapril is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    13,404

    Re: Adam Schefter on Porter

    "Eyedea" wrote:
    You have to remember the Childress was the guy that delt Culpepper for something just like this.
    Its clear that he won't put up with that crap, so why would he go out and sign a guy and brings the problems to him?

    Will the signing of Porter make us a superbowl caliber team?
    The answer is no, and thats why trading for him is not wise.
    That is a good question.

    The answer is no, it is still a team sport.

    Can one person make your team better, yes!
    Maybe by only a degree or a few plays.

    The question is will this guy be helpful?
    That is the difference among opinions here.
    At this point it appears that he is a problem for the Raiders.

    He didn't seem like a problem until just the last year.

    Do you believe people can change?
    I am not asking people to answer that question.


  3. #13
    NodakPaul's Avatar
    NodakPaul is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    West Fargo, ND
    Posts
    17,602
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Adam Schefter on Porter

    I am not arguing that Porter wouldn't be a good pick up.
    he might or might not be a valuable addition to the Vikings if we were to trade for him.
    But debating his potential worth owith th eVikes is a moot debate, because there is no way Childress would want him here.

    Troubled WRs don't sit well with Childress.
    Here is a man who would (rightly) rather lose the team's biggest impact player than have a cancer in the lockerroom.
    I don't know if porter will ever get to "T.O." levels, but I just don't see Chlidress taking that chance.

    We will not see Porter in Purple in Gold.
    Zeus wrote:
    When are you going to realize that picking out the 20 bad throws this year and ignoring the 300 good ones does not make your point?

    =Z=

  4. #14
    ejmat is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    8,849

    Re: Adam Schefter on Porter

    "snowinapril" wrote:
    "Eyedea" wrote:
    You have to remember the Childress was the guy that delt Culpepper for something just like this.
    Its clear that he won't put up with that crap, so why would he go out and sign a guy and brings the problems to him?

    Will the signing of Porter make us a superbowl caliber team?
    The answer is no, and thats why trading for him is not wise.
    That is a good question.

    The answer is no, it is still a team sport.

    Can one person make your team better, yes!
    Maybe by only a degree or a few plays.

    The question is will this guy be helpful?
    That is the difference among opinions here.
    At this point it appears that he is a problem for the Raiders.

    He didn't seem like a problem until just the last year.

    Do you believe people can change?
    I am not asking people to answer that question.

    Again, I want to hear proof that Porter was the problem.
    Everybody has given Porter the bad name because he has requested a trade.
    Is it his fault or is it because of the coaching staff and front office?
    I'm just curious as to what Porter did that is so bad.
    If someone would enlighten me please do.


    Cajun, that is actually the word I meant to use "conditional".
    I'm sorry I said compensatory.

  5. #15
    Prophet Guest

    Re: Adam Schefter on Porter

    "ejmat" wrote:
    "snowinapril" wrote:
    "Eyedea" wrote:
    You have to remember the Childress was the guy that delt Culpepper for something just like this.
    Its clear that he won't put up with that crap, so why would he go out and sign a guy and brings the problems to him?

    Will the signing of Porter make us a superbowl caliber team?
    The answer is no, and thats why trading for him is not wise.
    That is a good question.

    The answer is no, it is still a team sport.

    Can one person make your team better, yes!
    Maybe by only a degree or a few plays.

    The question is will this guy be helpful?
    That is the difference among opinions here.
    At this point it appears that he is a problem for the Raiders.

    He didn't seem like a problem until just the last year.

    Do you believe people can change?
    I am not asking people to answer that question.

    Again, I want to hear proof that Porter was the problem.
    Everybody has given Porter the bad name because he has requested a trade.
    Is it his fault or is it because of the coaching staff and front office?
    I'm just curious as to what Porter did that is so bad.
    If someone would enlighten me please do.


    Cajun, that is actually the word I meant to use "conditional".
    I'm sorry I said compensatory.
    True, we've heard mostly about his wanting to be traded and haven't heard much from the other side.
    Here's an article from a couple days ago, doesn't say much.

    Porter sheds no light on benching

    from article:

    ...That was in reference to his being banished from the starting lineup for getting into a disagreement with Shell during the off-season and voicing his displeasure over the Raiders not hiring former St. Louis Rams coach Mike Martz instead of Shell in February...

  6. #16
    Mr. Purple's Avatar
    Mr. Purple is offline Ring of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    4,005

    Re: Adam Schefter on Porter

    You gotta wonder if the guy is THAT bad.Look at the "black hole" out in Oakland thier team is falling into.Al Davis is and will be the problem of that franchise till he is gone.Now I can understand why Porter wants out, but he might not have gone bye it the correct way.I'd take him, I'm not gonna lie.However I do beleive strongly in what Childress is doing with this team, and I cant see Porter in its future.

    Theres NOTHING greater then a Florida Gator!
    "I promise everyone this. When Childress is let go in two years I can honestly say this.
    "I am not surprised"."-PurplePackerEater

  7. #17
    snowinapril's Avatar
    snowinapril is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    13,404

    Re: Adam Schefter on Porter

    According to that article, Shell says it is on skills each sunday, it isn't about a fued.

    If that is the case, then he shouldn't require much in trade. Also, why would they want to pay him to sit on their bench.
    Unload him to some team that is willing to give a pick and take on his contract.

    Is the guy that bad or is everyone assuming the worst about him?

  8. #18
    Prophet Guest

    Re: Adam Schefter on Porter

    I think the core of the problem of the whole Porter/Shell/Raiders ordeal is that Porter called a spade a spade during the time of optimism when Shell was picked over Martz.
    Here is another excerpt:

    Porter, when all was silent in the offseason, was the one person inside of the organization who saw the train wreck ahead. As a result, he took heat from his coaches, the media and fans alike. When Tom Walsh's offense generated six points in the team's first eight quarters of the season, however, the tide turned. The 28-year-old receiver reportedly spoke out against Art Shell and Walsh before the pair was even tested, saying, "I wanted Mike Martz as my coach and a real offense that's proven in today's NFL. Not something dusted off from a bed and breakfast in God knows where." Five weeks into the season, Porter is raking in the same paycheck from the bench, while his coaches are on the threshold of premature unemployment. I wouldn't be surprised if he was thinking, "I told you so," either.
    Sorry, I forgot to save the link and lost it.

  9. #19
    cajunvike's Avatar
    cajunvike is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    32,063

    Re: Adam Schefter on Porter

    "ejmat" wrote:
    "snowinapril" wrote:
    "Eyedea" wrote:
    You have to remember the Childress was the guy that delt Culpepper for something just like this.
    Its clear that he won't put up with that crap, so why would he go out and sign a guy and brings the problems to him?

    Will the signing of Porter make us a superbowl caliber team?
    The answer is no, and thats why trading for him is not wise.
    That is a good question.

    The answer is no, it is still a team sport.

    Can one person make your team better, yes!
    Maybe by only a degree or a few plays.

    The question is will this guy be helpful?
    That is the difference among opinions here.
    At this point it appears that he is a problem for the Raiders.

    He didn't seem like a problem until just the last year.

    Do you believe people can change?
    I am not asking people to answer that question.

    Again, I want to hear proof that Porter was the problem.
    Everybody has given Porter the bad name because he has requested a trade.
    Is it his fault or is it because of the coaching staff and front office?
    I'm just curious as to what Porter did that is so bad.
    If someone would enlighten me please do.


    Cajun, that is actually the word I meant to use "conditional".
    I'm sorry I said compensatory.
    I wasn't commenting on your choice of words, ej...I was just emphasizing that we should tie his production DIRECTLY to the compensation that the Raidahs get for him...therefore, if he SUCKS, they don't get crap...but if he helps our team, then they get something worthwhile for him.
    It's a WIN-WIN situation...or both teams get nothing...seems fair to me!
    BTW, I think that Porter can help us...he's no Randy...but he could help us stretch the field...if Brad can get him the ball that is!
    BANNED OR DEAD...I'LL TAKE EITHER ONE

  10. #20
    oddjob142's Avatar
    oddjob142 is offline Training Camp
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    40

    Re: Adam Schefter on Porter

    man...i have to agree that we need a reciever on the team.
    Someone who can get open, be physical, and CATCH the dang ball.
    Williamson still has a little to go, great potential, but he is still not a #1.
    He is definitely a number 2 who can stretch the field.
    We need someone and Porter is the best on the market.
    And for just a 3rd rounder?
    I say pull the trigger...not much to lose.
    We arent going to get a WR like Porter in the 3rd round regardless.

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Adam Schefter
    By Purple Floyd in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 04-07-2011, 02:01 PM
  2. Anybody miss Adam Schefter?
    By Purple Floyd in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 04-26-2009, 10:14 PM
  3. adam schefter reports possible tony gonzalez trade
    By pepper 0n moss in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 09-24-2008, 11:35 PM
  4. Adam Schefter Reports Vikings release S Dwight Smith
    By SharperImage in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 124
    Last Post: 02-27-2008, 10:39 PM
  5. Schefter: Williamson cut before training camp ends.
    By Billy Boy in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 05-04-2007, 11:22 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •