Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 25
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    141

    Re: Vikings Low-Ball Burleson

    im not so sure about the note on edge. doesent he want to play someplace warm? i dont really want him anyway.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    1,185

    Re: Vikings Low-Ball Burleson

    I like those Notes! I think if Burleson does go, then we just move our receiver up a spot and bring in a good, young, and talented receiver to be the 4th or 5th slot!!!
    http://www.myspace.com/pooptin


  3. #13
    gregair13's Avatar
    gregair13 is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    14,579

    Re: Vikings Low-Ball Burleson

    we must keep burelson. am i the only one who thinks he is our best WR by far?
    We're bringing purple back.

  4. #14
    michaelmazid is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    2,876

    Re: Vikings Low-Ball Burleson

    "happy camper" wrote:
    "michaelmazid" wrote:
    I always thought that the vikes jumped on Burleson's bandwagon alittle too quick. He was a product of Moss. Everyone would double or triple team moss and burely was always man to man. I think New England would be a great place for him. He'll be just one of the guys there but man I would hate to see Brian Williams leave.
    Were other teams double teaming Moss while he was on the sidelines injured?
    yup

  5. #15
    eastcoastvikes is offline Starter
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    215

    Re: Vikings Low-Ball Burleson

    Count me among those who wants Nate to stay... I think he's far better than he showed last year and we would regret letting him go. Plus from what I've read he's one of the class guys in football, which can't help but be a good thing.

    Sig courtesy of josdin00

  6. #16
    michaelmazid is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    2,876

    Re: Vikings Low-Ball Burleson

    700K might be a lot of money to you and me but it ain't jack sh*t to someone like Nate who is a starting WR for a NFL team. He won't be playing for us next year. He should be able to get 1.5 Million easily elsewhere.

    Maybe coach Childress wants to make room to sign his boy Freddie Mitchell.

  7. #17
    i_bleed_purple's Avatar
    i_bleed_purple is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Canadialand
    Posts
    16,777
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Vikings Low-Ball Burleson

    "michaelmazid" wrote:
    700K might be a lot of money to you and me but it ain't jack sh*t to someone like Nate who is a starting WR for a NFL team. He won't be playing for us next year. He should be able to get 1.5 Million easily elsewhere.

    Maybe coach Childress wants to make room to sign his boy Freddie Mitchell.
    o god no. i would cry if that happened

  8. #18
    Wiggles67's Avatar
    Wiggles67 is offline Coordinator
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    756

    Re: Vikings Low-Ball Burleson

    "gregair13" wrote:
    we must keep burelson. am i the only one who thinks he is our best WR by far?
    Nope I would have to agree with you greg is his our most complete WR by far. What I have a question on is....is that considered our final offer then? OR if some teams comes in with like a million dollar contract could we still match that?

    "I choose my company by the beating of their hearts, not the swelling of their heads"

  9. #19
    NordicNed is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    9,513

    Re: Vikings Low-Ball Burleson

    I think there is a good shot at Nate still being here next year. As a matter of fact I'de say more of a chance of him staying than letting him go.

    I think there's a good chance Nate and his agent are in on this with the Vikings Office.

    They may be just trying to figure out where the FA market prices stand for WR's.....Because we can match any offer he recieves.

    This could very well be a plan just to see what the fare market value is for Nate...Then the Vikings just match and keep him

    Could backfire though, he might be offerd a ton, (which I doubt) and then we might be caught in a position to get someone just as good if not better for cheaper..

    I'de hate to see him go, but I really think he won't.....I hope I'm correct on this one..


    I LOVE THE SMELL OF VICTORY IN THE MORNING AIR.

  10. #20
    VikesfaninWis's Avatar
    VikesfaninWis is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    5,055

    Re: Vikings Low-Ball Burleson

    "Wiggles67" wrote:
    "gregair13" wrote:
    we must keep burelson. am i the only one who thinks he is our best WR by far?
    Nope I would have to agree with you greg is his our most complete WR by far. What I have a question on is....is that considered our final offer then? OR if some teams comes in with like a million dollar contract could we still match that?

    Burleson's agent has already said that he is not discouraged with that offer. He said the Vikes and Burleson are still talking about a long term contract offer.. I think what the Vikes are doing is seeing what he is worth on the market. If another team makes him an offer and the Vikes feel that he is worth it then they will match it. If they think someone is paying to much for him, then they get a 3rd draft pick for him.. It really is a win/win situation for the Vikes. They make sure that they don't over spend on him, and may actually get him cheaper that thet original plan..

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Vikings game ball
    By Mystophales in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 11-11-2007, 05:13 PM
  2. Vikings receivers need to get on the ball
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 10-22-2006, 10:26 AM
  3. Vikings place qualifying offer on Burleson
    By singersp in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 03-03-2006, 06:33 PM
  4. Replies: 13
    Last Post: 01-16-2005, 10:20 AM

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
  •