*** Official Michael Turner 2007 offseason thread *** (2 Viewers)

[grind]

I guess the bottom line in my thinking that the AJ really messed up by getting greedy . . .

This seems like a funny way to characterize AJ's determination that Turner was worth more to the Chargers than what they were offered for him. What does "greed" have to do with that?You might disagree with AJ by contending that Turner isn't as good as AJ thinks he is, or that a fourth CB is more important than a second RB, or whatever. But I don't know why you'd characterize that disagreement as a matter of greed versus generosity instead of it just being a matter of evaluating players differently.

Not sure I can sum this up just right here, but I will try. I don’t have any question that AJ is a smart guy. That said, I really think that (1) he had every intention of trading Turner and (2) he fully understood that no one in their right mind would give up a 1st and a 3rd. That doesn’t happen for any player. I believe he knew that. I don’t blame him though for putting the 1st and 3rd tender on him, as that gives him control over where Turner goes. I just think he got greedy trying to get as much as he could, which was over fair value, that he ended up getting nothing as the other suitors walked. Jeff Fisher talking about it after the draft seemed to indicate as much. He seemed to say they had a basis for a trade and then the closer and closer it got to finalizing, the more and more AJ wanted in return. Maybe AJ was too arrogant or greedy and ended up blowing the deal completely.Or else, maybe he had no intention of trading Turner in the first place, which would make him a media seeking hound. Any NFL GM could say so and so is available for a 1st and 3rd knowing no one will offer it. Get the media to bite and listen to your every word and then make the announcement that “he is off the market”, while thanking the media for their attention in the process.

Anything is possible, but there's generally no reason to make up elaborate conspiracy-theory type stuff about what AJ Smith was thinking. He's generally been a perfectly straight shooter on every issue like this in the past -- Eli/Rivers (when he said he'd pick Eli first and most didn't believe him), Brees/Rivers (when he said he'd keep both in 2005 and most didn't believe him), Donnie Edwards (when he said he'd take a second-rounder for him in 2006 but no less, and would otherwise keep him, and most didn't believe him).It seems to me that Michael Turner fits right into that exact pattern.AJ said all along that it was a one and a three, but that he was flexible, meaning it could be in 2008 instead of all both in 2007. He said he was perfectly happy to keep Michael Turner, but if somebody met his asking price he'd do a trade.Nobody offered a one and a three, so AJ was perfectly happy to keep Michael Turner. The simplest explanation for everything is that AJ meant exactly what he said, just like every other time nobody believed him.

This is a good post and I understand what you're saying. I guess I give AJ too much credit and I'm probably wrong on two accounts. First off, he sounds very honest for sure, but a dumba** none the less. It is comical he even thought about a 1st and 3rd for Turner. Every GM should list the players that would be available for a 1st and 3rd. I'm sure every team has at least 50 such players. Second, he must not really have wanted to trade Turner. I felt all along that he actually wanted to trade him.Wonder why more GM's don't tell all that will listen who is available for a 1st and 3rd?

 

[BoltBacker]

I'm sure the Chargers will be playing a lot of nickle against the big passing offenses. An injury to Jammar and you have no 3rd CB. Also, couldn't Jammar play some safety?

So you're still saying that SD would have been better off with a 4th CB than Turner as backup RB in '07? This has turned into one of those fishing trips of Ministry of Pain proportions. You've got an idea set in your head and are willing to go over and over the same ground in hopes of finding someone(anyone?) that agrees with you. Maybe there are plenty of people that think a rookie 4th CB will be more valuable than the best backup RB in the league. I just don't think there are many that would share that view.

 

[Banger]

Per the NFL Network Radio it (I believe G Brandt was the source), SD was offered the Cowboys 1st round pick (1.22) for Turner during the draft and SD turned it down.Effectively Smith is putting all the eggs in the 2007 basket.

What I've heard is that Dallas offered their #22 for SD's pick in the 1st (#30) and Turner and before the Chargers could turn it down Dallas took it off the table and dealt it to Clev. It's really all moot now though....

 

[grind]

I'm sure the Chargers will be playing a lot of nickle against the big passing offenses. An injury to Jammar and you have no 3rd CB. Also, couldn't Jammar play some safety?

So you're still saying that SD would have been better off with a 4th CB than Turner as backup RB in '07? This has turned into one of those fishing trips of Ministry of Pain proportions. You've got an idea set in your head and are willing to go over and over the same ground in hopes of finding someone(anyone?) that agrees with you. Maybe there are plenty of people that think a rookie 4th CB will be more valuable than the best backup RB in the league. I just don't think there are many that would share that view.

I guess it just seems to me that most Charger fans are h*ll bent on making sure they have a backup RB in the event LT gets hurt, I was just trying to point out that injuries happen. What happens if Jammar tears his ACL? With that O. Line, most any RB will produce to a respectable degree. Not sure anyone can play CB. What I am learning without being much of a Charger fan is that the team have no weaknesses among their starting units and there is no way to add a dimension to the existing system, using a backup RB that got a total of 80 carries last year with high value to most teams that don't have the best RB in the league can help. The road to the Super Bowl runs through San Deigo this year.

 

[Carter_Can_Fly]

I'm sure the Chargers will be playing a lot of nickle against the big passing offenses. An injury to Jammar and you have no 3rd CB. Also, couldn't Jammar play some safety?

So you're still saying that SD would have been better off with a 4th CB than Turner as backup RB in '07? This has turned into one of those fishing trips of Ministry of Pain proportions. You've got an idea set in your head and are willing to go over and over the same ground in hopes of finding someone(anyone?) that agrees with you. Maybe there are plenty of people that think a rookie 4th CB will be more valuable than the best backup RB in the league. I just don't think there are many that would share that view.

I don't share his view, but a Corner or Safety drafted in the first round have the potential to be as good or better than their current Corner situation making him not their 4th corner but perhaps a starter vs any chance of Turner being a starter over L.T. Also, you will have that corner for the future to move into the starting role. Now, A.J. clearly feels that he has all the tools to win a SB this year and feels Turner is/was more important than anything else he could have done. Frankly I think if you are playing for this year then it is a smart move. But if you don't win the SB this year, you missed out on picking up a pretty good player in the first round. It shows the value AJ places on Turner and indicates the high price tag he will have in free agency next season. The only thing that would suck for Chargers fans or perhaps be ironic is having an injury to their defense like a corner or safety that causes their team to faulter in regular season or perhaps the playoffs.

 

[Tau837]

I guess the bottom line in my thinking that the AJ really messed up by getting greedy . . .

This seems like a funny way to characterize AJ's determination that Turner was worth more to the Chargers than what they were offered for him. What does "greed" have to do with that?You might disagree with AJ by contending that Turner isn't as good as AJ thinks he is, or that a fourth CB is more important than a second RB, or whatever. But I don't know why you'd characterize that disagreement as a matter of greed versus generosity instead of it just being a matter of evaluating players differently.

Not sure I can sum this up just right here, but I will try. I don’t have any question that AJ is a smart guy. That said, I really think that (1) he had every intention of trading Turner and (2) he fully understood that no one in their right mind would give up a 1st and a 3rd. That doesn’t happen for any player. I believe he knew that. I don’t blame him though for putting the 1st and 3rd tender on him, as that gives him control over where Turner goes. I just think he got greedy trying to get as much as he could, which was over fair value, that he ended up getting nothing as the other suitors walked. Jeff Fisher talking about it after the draft seemed to indicate as much. He seemed to say they had a basis for a trade and then the closer and closer it got to finalizing, the more and more AJ wanted in return. Maybe AJ was too arrogant or greedy and ended up blowing the deal completely.Or else, maybe he had no intention of trading Turner in the first place, which would make him a media seeking hound. Any NFL GM could say so and so is available for a 1st and 3rd knowing no one will offer it. Get the media to bite and listen to your every word and then make the announcement that “he is off the market”, while thanking the media for their attention in the process.

Anything is possible, but there's generally no reason to make up elaborate conspiracy-theory type stuff about what AJ Smith was thinking. He's generally been a perfectly straight shooter on every issue like this in the past -- Eli/Rivers (when he said he'd pick Eli first and most didn't believe him), Brees/Rivers (when he said he'd keep both in 2005 and most didn't believe him), Donnie Edwards (when he said he'd take a second-rounder for him in 2006 but no less, and would otherwise keep him, and most didn't believe him).It seems to me that Michael Turner fits right into that exact pattern.AJ said all along that it was a one and a three, but that he was flexible, meaning it could be in 2008 instead of all both in 2007. He said he was perfectly happy to keep Michael Turner, but if somebody met his asking price he'd do a trade.Nobody offered a one and a three, so AJ was perfectly happy to keep Michael Turner. The simplest explanation for everything is that AJ meant exactly what he said, just like every other time nobody believed him.

 

[BoltBacker]

The only thing that would suck for Chargers fans or perhaps be ironic is having an injury to their defense like a corner or safety that causes their team to faulter in regular season or perhaps the playoffs.

... and this is because AJ or the Chargers orginization should have known that CB would get injured instead of a RB? I still say the way things played out they have the best insurance against injury in '07 which looks like one of the years they have their best chance to win a SuperBowl in decades.

 

[Burning Sensation]

Another thing that people just have not been factoring in was that this draft was terrible. AJ saw no one in it that he particuarly liked, so he grabs a WR he can live with at the end of round 1, and trades away a bunch of picks that were probably not going to make the team anyway to get the safety he wanted. I really think that AJ felt (and rightly so) that this draft just didnt have the players that he had to have to move turner. This is mostly about what a bad draft this was.

Agreed, which makes it surprising that he would turn down a #1 for next year , which would be a presumably better draft.But again, it's clear that the desire to win now was far greater who they could possibly get next year, and it's hard to argue that viewpoint.

Who offered that for Turner?

I think you've spent more time bashing Turner supporters than reading the thread. The price tag has been said several times.

When did i bash Turner?

 

[BostonSportsGuy]

This is a classic reason why San Diego is owned by New England. They are unrealistic of their own player's values, and only move when it's clearly in thier favor. Turner will sit behind LT when they could have dealt him for something that could help --- instead, they will be slapped around by NE, Denver, Indy & the Jets. Their (regular season) run in the AFC is OVER.

 

[Righetti]

It took 32 days to rack up 500 posts in this thread

It took only 24 to rack up the next 500 posts

It took only 5 days to go from 1000 to 1500 posts

I expect us to hit post 2000 by the end of the day.. GET ON IT

 

[Burning Sensation]

This is a classic reason why San Diego is owned by New England. They are unrealistic of their own player's values, and only move when it's clearly in thier favor. Turner will sit behind LT when they could have dealt him for something that could help --- instead, they will be slapped around by NE, Denver, Indy & the Jets. Their (regular season) run in the AFC is OVER .

 

[Gr00vus]

Between Jammer, Florence and Cromartie they have three starting quality CBs. With McCree, Hart, Jue and now Weddle they've got 4 safeties, plus it sounds like Weddle can play CB in a pinch. I don't understand the people who keep harping on the idea that the Chargers would be better off having an 8th DB rather than the best 2nd running back in the NFL, who can spell LaDainain without much of a drop off. Someone please explain that concept to me.

 

[Gr00vus]

This is a classic reason why San Diego is owned by New England. They are unrealistic of their own player's values, and only move when it's clearly in thier favor. Turner will sit behind LT when they could have dealt him for something that could help --- instead, they will be slapped around by NE, Denver, Indy & the Jets. Their (regular season) run in the AFC is OVER.

You should edit your post even more - as it stands now it makes no sense.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

This is a classic reason why San Diego's philosophy is owned by different from New England's. They are unrealistic of value their own players values, and only move when it's clearly in thier favor. Turner will sit behind LT when they could have dealt him for something that could help an untested rookie who may or may not be worth anything this year --- instead, they will be slapped around by play competitive games against NE, Denver, and Indy & the Jets. Their (regular season) run in the AFC is OVER figures to last at least one more year.

Fixed.

 

[BostonSportsGuy]

This is a classic reason why San Diego's philosophy is owned by different from New England's. They are unrealistic of value their own players values, and only move when it's clearly in thier favor. Turner will sit behind LT when they could have dealt him for something that could help an untested rookie who may or may not be worth anything this year --- instead, they will be slapped around by play competitive games against NE, Denver, and Indy & the Jets. Their (regular season) run in the AFC is OVER figures to last at least one more year.

Fixed.

Right........

 

[BostonSportsGuy]

This is a classic reason why San Diego is and always will be owned by New England. They are unrealistic of their own player's values, and only move when it's clearly in thier favor. Turner will sit behind LT when they could have dealt him for something that could help --- instead, they will be slapped around by NE, Denver, Indy & the Jets. Their (regular season) run in the AFC is OVER.

You should edit your post even more - as it stands now it makes no sense.

Here you go. Corrected.

 

[Gr00vus]

This is a classic reason why San Diego is and always will be owned by New England. They are unrealistic of their own player's values, and only move when it's clearly in thier favor. Turner will sit behind LT when they could have dealt him for something that could help --- instead, they will be slapped around by NE, Denver, Indy & the Jets. Their (regular season) run in the AFC is OVER.

You should edit your post even more - as it stands now it makes no sense.

Here you go. Corrected.

It still doesn't make sense. But I'll give you a cookie for your impressive use of the strikeout feature - both in the message board graphic and in the actual content of your post.

 

[PadresLakers]

This is a classic reason why New England is and always will be owned by Indianapolis. They are unrealistic of their own player's values, and only move when it's clearly in thier favor. Turner will sit behind LT when they could have dealt him for something that could help --- instead, they will be slapped around by NE, Denver, Indy & the Jets. Their (regular season) run in the AFC is OVER.

You should edit your post even more - as it stands now it makes no sense.

Here you go. Corrected.

It still doesn't make sense. But I'll give you a cookie for your impressive use of the strikeout feature - both in the message board graphic and in the actual content of your post.

Updated

 

[Gr00vus]

This is a classic reason why New England is and always will be owned by Indianapolis. They are unrealistic of their own player's values, and only move when it's clearly in thier favor. Turner will sit behind LT when they could have dealt him for something that could help --- instead, they will be slapped around by NE, Denver, Indy & the Jets. Their (regular season) run in the AFC is OVER.

You should edit your post even more - as it stands now it makes no sense.

Here you go. Corrected.

It still doesn't make sense. But I'll give you a cookie for your impressive use of the strikeout feature - both in the message board graphic and in the actual content of your post.

Updated

Oh Snap!I prefer the more understated: October 2, 2005 Chargers 41 Patriots 17

The Chargers really got owned there!

Back to Michael Turner - so does he keep the Billy Goat beard this season or should he trade it for a 1st and a 3rd? Discuss.

 

[PadresLakers]

This is a classic reason why New England is and always will be owned by Indianapolis. They are unrealistic of their own player's values, and only move when it's clearly in thier favor. Turner will sit behind LT when they could have dealt him for something that could help --- instead, they will be slapped around by NE, Denver, Indy & the Jets. Their (regular season) run in the AFC is OVER.

You should edit your post even more - as it stands now it makes no sense.

Here you go. Corrected.

It still doesn't make sense. But I'll give you a cookie for your impressive use of the strikeout feature - both in the message board graphic and in the actual content of your post.

Updated

Oh Snap!I prefer the more understated: October 2, 2005 Chargers 41 Patriots 17

The Chargers really got owned there!

Back to Michael Turner - so does he keep the Billy Goat beard this season or should he trade it for a 1st and a 3rd? Discuss.

I heard the Titans offered two first round picks just for Turner's beard but AJ Smith said it was not enough

 

[enfuego]

This is a classic reason why San Diego is and always will be owned by New England. They are unrealistic of their own player's values, and only move when it's clearly in thier favor. Turner will sit behind LT when they could have dealt him for something that could help --- instead, they will be slapped around by NE, Denver, Indy & the Jets. Their (regular season) run in the AFC is OVER.

You should edit your post even more - as it stands now it makes no sense.

Here you go. Corrected.

Final edit...game over...let it die...PLEASE. I beg of you....no more...(at least until the first RB ACL tears).

 

[Traders2001]

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

This is a classic reason why San Diego is owned by New England. They are unrealistic of their own player's values, and only move when it's clearly in thier favor. Turner will sit behind LT when they could have dealt him for something that could help --- instead, they will be slapped around by NE, Denver, Indy & the Jets. Their (regular season) run in the AFC is OVER.

 

[Crazy8s]

Per the NFL Network Radio it (I believe G Brandt was the source), SD was offered the Cowboys 1st round pick (1.22) for Turner during the draft and SD turned it down.

Effectively Smith is putting all the eggs in the 2007 basket.

People can talk forever about what AJ coulda woulda shoulda done, but a smart fantasy player might want to focus on the bolded comment above. If true, (1) chances are decent that Turner becomes a Cowboy next year, and (2) even if that doesn't occur, neither Julius Jones or Marion Barber are held in high enough esteem long term to keep DAL from being willing to give up a 1st round pick for a new RB. Definitely worth a mental note for dynasty players when valuing JJ and MB long term.

I agree. It really makes me think since I'm a Turner and Barber owner. Maybe I shouldn't be so high on Barber....who knows!

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Seems to me S.D. had two needs in a trade. First assurance that the backup R.B. spot did not go wanting, and second that they improved their prospects elsewhere. Seems to me Dallas could have acquired Moss from the Raiders, have packaged him with Julius Jones, and sent them off for Turner. Dallas would have had a devastating 1, 2 punch at R.B. while S.D. would have had its assurance and an upside weapon for Rivers. Of course S.D. would have to believe that Moss has something of the old Moss left. After playing against him 4 times in the last two years they may have zero respect for him, or they may have seen flashes of the old self, who knows. I just think it's a shame that their young Q.B. doesn't have a more dynamic W.R. to throw to.

I appreciate the insurance that comes with keeping Turner. They can insure that in a disaster they remain nearly as good as last year. My question is was last years result what they are looking for again this year? I note that N.E., Denver, Jax, Pitt., evn Indy are all looking to upgrade over last year's teams and unquestionably some have done so.

Regardless I believe S.D. will have its fans cheering into the playoffs again this year, and for a few years to come. A remarkable feat one one considers where the franchise was a short time ago. Remembering that it is understandable when some like to point out that opinions on a message board seem foolish when compared to the results S.D.'s G.M. has produced.

Through all of this Turner has remained publicly classy. That only reinforces my belief that he deserves to be now, and will besoon, a very good starter for someone.

 

[BoltBacker]

I note that N.E., Denver, Jax, Pitt., evn Indy are all looking to upgrade over last year's teams and unquestionably some have done so.

Of that list the only teams I think improved are NE and DEN. It's hard to say anyone in the entire league really matches up with NE right now so they are and should be the front-runner going into the season to win the SB. That's one of the reasons it seems so silly for people to insist SD needs 4CB's to matchup with NE..... nobody in the league has 4 CB's to matchup with NE. If Maroney can carry the load(and I think he can) then all NE may need to do is stay healthy and gaurd against "one bad game" in the playoffs. DEN also made strides and I'd favor them slightly over SD but it's very close, let's keep in mind they didn't even make the playoffs last year and missed the playoffs because they couldn't win a home game in DEC vs the Niners.I actually downgrade PIT. Why do you think they are improved? Cowher was holding that team back? I don't think so. JAX looks very similar to the team they had last year to me, and Fred Taylor played in the most games since '03. He's 31 now so I'm not sure how many full seasons he has left in the tank. I also don't see IND being stronger than they were last year(maybe they have a better #3 WR but he's a rookie). They're defense wasn't great last year to begin with and they'll need to replace a lot of it. Of those three I'm more worried about BAL than PIT/JAX and IND has come back to the pack a little bit imo.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

Currently my AFC pecking order is:

NE

Indy

Cincy

SD

Pitt

Den

------------

Balt

Jax

NYJ

I expect the top 6 to make the playoffs with the bottom 3 next in line.

We will see how NE handles being overwhelming favorites for a change. No more of this , we just a group of football players who play great as a unit. There is tons of talent and maybe alittle more ego on that team now.

 

[BoltBacker]

Currently my AFC pecking order is:NEIndyCincySDPittDen------------Balt JaxNYJ

Mine would beNEINDDENSDBALJAXCINNYJPIT

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

Currently my AFC pecking order is:NEIndyCincySDPittDen------------Balt JaxNYJ

Mine would beNEINDDENSDBALJAXCINNYJPIT

Take a look at Pitts schedule and tell me they dont make the playoffs. THe new coach is a risk, but I expect Big Ben to bounce back nicely.

 

[DanFouts]

Currently my AFC pecking order is:NEIndyCincySDPittDen------------Balt JaxNYJ

Mine would beNEINDDENSDBALJAXCINNYJPIT

How about NEIndySDBalDenJaxCinci

 

[zamboni]

Nice to see the Turner talk finally dying down, but how about a new thread for the pecking order?

That way, we don't have to keep opening this one thinking that something has changed in Turner's situation.

 

[grind]

I note that N.E., Denver, Jax, Pitt., evn Indy are all looking to upgrade over last year's teams and unquestionably some have done so.

Of that list the only teams I think improved are NE and DEN. It's hard to say anyone in the entire league really matches up with NE right now so they are and should be the front-runner going into the season to win the SB. That's one of the reasons it seems so silly for people to insist SD needs 4CB's to matchup with NE..... nobody in the league has 4 CB's to matchup with NE. If Maroney can carry the load(and I think he can) then all NE may need to do is stay healthy and gaurd against "one bad game" in the playoffs. DEN also made strides and I'd favor them slightly over SD but it's very close, let's keep in mind they didn't even make the playoffs last year and missed the playoffs because they couldn't win a home game in DEC vs the Niners.I actually downgrade PIT. Why do you think they are improved? Cowher was holding that team back? I don't think so. JAX looks very similar to the team they had last year to me, and Fred Taylor played in the most games since '03. He's 31 now so I'm not sure how many full seasons he has left in the tank. I also don't see IND being stronger than they were last year(maybe they have a better #3 WR but he's a rookie). They're defense wasn't great last year to begin with and they'll need to replace a lot of it. Of those three I'm more worried about BAL than PIT/JAX and IND has come back to the pack a little bit imo.

Just because no one in the league employs four CB’s, doesn’t mean it is a bad idea. The fact is, the league is going more and more toward passing offenses. I just don’t see as much smash mouth football being played. Teams do use three CB’s quite regularly. The point with having four CB’s is in the event of injury. Apparently Turner is so valueable because LT could get injured. Same can be said for any position on the football field. Is the current third CB in San Diego real good or what? I really don’t know. Just curious. If he sucks, I would think an upgrade at the third CB with the current third CB moving to the fourth spot would benefit the team more then a backup RB. The fact is, Turner and LT won’t be on the field together more then maybe five snaps this year. The elite NFL RB’s don’t belong in RBBC systems (LJ, SA, LT). I’d venture a guess that three CB’s will be on the field for San Diego more then the five or so snaps that Turner and LT on on the field at the same time.

 

[grind]

Currently my AFC pecking order is:NEIndyCincySDPittDen------------Balt JaxNYJ

Mine would beNEINDDENSDBALJAXCINNYJPIT

This absolutely amazes me. San Diego was the best team in the AFC last year. Weren't they 14-2 and the #1 seed in the playoffs? So now based on these pecking orders, they are the third or forth best team in the AFC, but at the same time it was a brilliant move to keep their backup RB instead of taking an offer that far exceeds any offer made for a RB in the last three plus years. Based on the fact a 1st round pick couldn't improve their team in any way, why isn't San Diego still #1 on these lists?

 

[BoltBacker]

The elite NFL RB’s don’t belong in RBBC systems (LJ, SA, LT). I’d venture a guess that three CB’s will be on the field for San Diego more then the five or so snaps that Turner and LT on on the field at the same time.

So what you're saying is KC was stupid to draft LJ because they had Priest? They should have just played Priest until he eventually got hurt and when that happens.... well, thrown in the towel that year and draft a RB next year. Wasting a 1st rounder was dumb because they could have drafted a CB instead and the Chiefs are kicking themselves right now for not doing so?I'd venture to guess Turner plays more snaps than the dime CB. And the fact that Turner is lightening the load for LT it just makes LT that much more of a weapon when he's on the field because he's well rested and isn't forced to play in case of a nagging injury.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

sorry to hijack Zam

as to grind's point. The moves that NE did puts them as the #1 team to beat in the NFL. Indy is defending champ. and I think Cincy/Pitt both have alot going for them this season. SD's best chance might have been last year and because Marty couldnt keep his team discipline enough, they blew it.

I dont think the draft day move to add rookies would have put SD over the top of NE.

 

[BoltBacker]

Currently my AFC pecking order is:NEIndyCincySDPittDen------------Balt JaxNYJ

Mine would beNEINDDENSDBALJAXCINNYJPIT

This absolutely amazes me. San Diego was the best team in the AFC last year. Weren't they 14-2 and the #1 seed in the playoffs? So now based on these pecking orders, they are the third or forth best team in the AFC, but at the same time it was a brilliant move to keep their backup RB instead of taking an offer that far exceeds any offer made for a RB in the last three plus years. Based on the fact a 1st round pick couldn't improve their team in any way, why isn't San Diego still #1 on these lists?

And it amazes me that you can't understand that I have them in a group under NE. I don't have them #4, I have them in a group at #2. Actually on second thought it doesn't amaze me in the least. It doesn't even surprise me.

 

[MelKiperJr]

Is this thread about Turner or which team is #1 in the AFC?

I think given NE's moves, they have clearly risen to the top. After that, you have to give indy the nod over San Diego.

Just my input.

 

[-OZ-]

Is this thread about Turner or which team is #1 in the AFC?

After 1639 posts, a thread can be about anything you want it to be. *** Official Michael Turner 2007 offseason thread *** is life.

 

[grind]

Who is the backup RB to LJ in Kansas City and SA in Seattle or SJ in St. Louis (the other three RB's in LT's class)? They're irrelevant. Of course, if what I'm reading is true, San Diego doesn't have a weakness among all 22 starters that play each down. That said, how can anyone rank them below New England.

 

[Tau837]

I think San Diego was a better team than New England last year but obviously choked. Now that New England has improved, they may be better. However, as we saw last season (IMO), the better team doesn't always win this matchup... San Diego could still easily finish as a better team and/or beat the Pats in the playoffs.

I think San Diego was a better team than Indy last year but didn't get the opportunity to play them in the playoffs and prove it. In my opinion, Indy has regressed this offseason. So I still think San Diego is better.

I think San Diego was a better team than Denver last year. I think Denver has improved, but I still think San Diego is better.

I definitely think San Diego remains better than Cincy, Pittsburgh, Baltimore, Jacksonville, and the Jets.

Not sure why so many seem to think San Diego, which was clearly the best team in the NFL entering last season's playoffs (IMO), is potentially not a top 3 team in their own conference entering this season.

 

[grind]

The elite NFL RB’s don’t belong in RBBC systems (LJ, SA, LT). I’d venture a guess that three CB’s will be on the field for San Diego more then the five or so snaps that Turner and LT on on the field at the same time.

So what you're saying is KC was stupid to draft LJ because they had Priest? They should have just played Priest until he eventually got hurt and when that happens.... well, thrown in the towel that year and draft a RB next year. Wasting a 1st rounder was dumb because they could have drafted a CB instead and the Chiefs are kicking themselves right now for not doing so?I'd venture to guess Turner plays more snaps than the dime CB. And the fact that Turner is lightening the load for LT it just makes LT that much more of a weapon when he's on the field because he's well rested and isn't forced to play in case of a nagging injury.

You really think Turner is going to play more snaps then the dime CB? Don't most teams play nickle more then 2 or 3 plays a game? You have me thinking more about that. Maybe they don't.

 

[Donnybrook]

Per the NFL Network Radio it (I believe G Brandt was the source), SD was offered the Cowboys 1st round pick (1.22) for Turner during the draft and SD turned it down.Effectively Smith is putting all the eggs in the 2007 basket.

Hindsight is 20/20 but I am going to stir the pot anyways. They could have packages their own 1st and the Cowboys 1st and sent it to Washington and got Landry at 1.06. Washington took the entire 15 minutes and the speculation was that they wanted to trade down.

 

[Yitbos69]

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

Per the NFL Network Radio it (I believe G Brandt was the source), SD was offered the Cowboys 1st round pick (1.22) for Turner during the draft and SD turned it down.Effectively Smith is putting all the eggs in the 2007 basket.

Hindsight is 20/20 but I am going to stir the pot anyways. They could have packages their own 1st and the Cowboys 1st and sent it to Washington and got Landry at 1.06. Washington took the entire 15 minutes and the speculation was that they wanted to trade down.

I know Landry was the stud saftey in the draft, But Im pretty happy with Weddle, who should start soon if not the opener

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Who is the backup RB to LJ in Kansas City and SA in Seattle or SJ in St. Louis (the other three RB's in LT's class)? They're irrelevant. Of course, if what I'm reading is true, San Diego doesn't have a weakness among all 22 starters that play each down. That said, how can anyone rank them below New England.

Super Bowl odds. The Chargers are still the favorites, ahead of the Colts and Pats.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Bolts need more MT with LT

Nick Canepa

May 2, 2007

Sez Me . . .

Let's look at it in a positive way. The Chargers have acquired an additional No. 1 draft choice. His name is Michael Turner.

“That's how I see it,” General Manager A.J. Smith says. “For one year.”

That's also how Turner sees it.

Look at the just-completed NFL draft. Say Turner, who has been the Chargers' backup tailback since being drafted in 2004's fifth round, somehow had become eligible for it. Oklahoma's Adrian Peterson and Cal's Marshawn Lynch were the only runners taken in the first round.

Are they better than a proven commodity, a man who has averaged 6 yards a carry in the NFL? He's 25, with very fresh legs. Give me someone who's done it. He might have been the best back in the draft.

“I think so,” says Turner, now a Charger for at least another season. “But I thought I was the best back in the draft when I was taken in the fifth round. No matter what year I'm coming out, I'm going to think I'm the best running back.”

At the end of the 2006 season, Turner became a restricted free agent, meaning he could talk with other clubs, but any offer could be matched by San Diego. Smith made it difficult for him to go elsewhere, though, when he asked for a first-and third-round pick in return.

Smith didn't get what he wanted by the end of the draft and, so, Monday, he pulled Turner completely off the shelf, insisting he no longer will listen to offers. There are those who don't believe him, and that ticks Smith off.

“They say it's a ploy, that I really don't mean it,” Smith says. “I mean what I say. Now how can I say something like that and then trade him in October?”

Well, if the right deal comes along, he could say: “I reserve the right to change my mind.”

“I do,” he says. “But not on this.”

Believe me. Turner remains here.

But what to do with him? He's been underused. New coach Norv Turner has to find a way to get LaDainian Tomlinson and his backup together on the field more often. Why keep a genuine weapon sitting on the bench? As it was, the previous coaching regime was guilty of sitting tight end Antonio Gates at the wrong times.

There is room in Norv Turner's bulging offensive mind to find a way. Will he?

“No question,” the coach says. “We talked about it but didn't spend a lot of time on it because Michael might have been playing across the country. I actually talked to LT about it today. We need a plan to get Michael involved throughout the game.”

The tailback will be here for one more season and then become an unrestricted free agent when, if healthy, he'll make much more than his present salary of $2.35 million. To re-sign him would mean the Chargers would be paying a fortune for two running backs, so it's unlikely. But intriguing.

“I can't answer that now,” Smith says. “I can answer your question in '08, after the '07 season.”

Hate to see good football players walk, but when you have so many of them, it's bound to happen. . .

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

'Win-win' situation keeps Turner happy

By Kevin Acee

UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER

May 2, 2007

He's back to being an insurance policy with a high premium, appreciated but not exalted.

Michael Turner is now officially the best player in the league that his team hopes doesn't start a game.

“I learned that teams really are interested in me,” Turner said of his foray into free agency and turn as trade bait. “It's not just talk. It's for real. . . . There were more teams than what I thought.”

But that means nothing at the moment.

“My role hasn't changed since the first day I've been here,” he said yesterday. “When I get the opportunity, I'll play, and hopefully I'll play well. I'm just helping out the team the way I can. With us winning and it's working, how can I complain?”

But there is this hope for the near future, now that disassociating MT from LT has to wait: that Norv Turner somehow uses both of his running backs in some offensive sets.

“I would imagine they'll try to use me more since they only have me one more season (and are) paying a little more,” Michael Turner said. “I would imagine they would use LT and me (together) more.”

The day after he learned he was here to stay – General Manager A.J. Smith saying Turner will not be traded under any circumstance – Turner spoke for the first time about his status. He had essentially been underground at his mother's home in Chicago.

Yesterday was Turner's second day back at the Chargers' complex after two months of waiting and wondering. He ran and lifted with teammates. Afterward, he expressed his contentment, all things considered.

“It was a win-win for me,” Turner said. “I don't have a problem being in San Diego.”

So close to being a star, he has returned to being a role player. The only guarantee is that he will return kickoffs and carry the ball when LaDainian Tomlinson is tired.

But the low-key Turner knew this was a possibility, knew it was even probable after the Chargers demanded so much in return for his rights.

He is as happy as someone could be who has left about $13 million on the table – to be picked up in a year, if all goes well.

Turner's high-pitched, infectious laugh filled the air throughout a 15-minute conversation. One day after Smith took him off the trade market, Turner said he is glad to be able “to focus on football” again.

“I'm still on a championship-level team,” he said. “This team is ready to win right now instead of going to a team that is possibly rebuilding. It would have been my show, I would have been the headliner or whatever, but that's not everything.

“Of course, every guy in this league looks forward to the day when they're the man and they're the one the team is depending on every week. Right now, I've just got to wait one more season.”

He will make $2.35 million this year.

“Who can complain about making seven figures?” he said.

Turner will turn 26 before the next free-agency period starts, though. A window of opportunity is getting smaller. He is not ecstatic about that, but neither is he upset. No one doubts the market for him will include many bidders in 2008. Another season like '06 – 80 carries, 6.3 yards per – and he'll be looking at $17 million or so up front.

“I haven't been playing,” he said. “I don't have wear and tear on me. I just know the game. I know what to expect out of an NFL season.”

True enough. Turner has carried from scrimmage just 157 times in three seasons, fewer than 73 other backs in that span and not even a third as many times as most starting backs have carried by their 26th birthday.

Still, he takes his career average of 6 yards a carry into a second straight contract year, the risk of injury ever present in a violent game.

So, while he will make more than five times as much in 2007 as he did in '06, his lifestyle will not change. Not yet.

“It will probably change next year,” he said. “I'll just save this year's money and not just blow it. Next year, I'll see what can I really afford. Some people might think it's guaranteed they're going to get $15 million next year. I don't think like that. You don't know what is going to happen day to day.”

And, barring disaster striking the league's MVP, Turner will be working for someone else in 2008. That is neither his fault nor the Chargers'. There is simply a big difference between the money he will get from someone in need of a No. 1 running back and someone who doesn't need such a back.

“They know they're not going to match anybody's offer,” Turner said. “It ain't all about money. But there are going to be more opportunities out there for me.”

 

[grind]

Bolts need more MT with LT

Nick Canepa

May 2, 2007

Sez Me . . .

Let's look at it in a positive way. The Chargers have acquired an additional No. 1 draft choice. His name is Michael Turner.

“That's how I see it,” General Manager A.J. Smith says. “For one year.”

That's also how Turner sees it.

Look at the just-completed NFL draft. Say Turner, who has been the Chargers' backup tailback since being drafted in 2004's fifth round, somehow had become eligible for it. Oklahoma's Adrian Peterson and Cal's Marshawn Lynch were the only runners taken in the first round.

Are they better than a proven commodity, a man who has averaged 6 yards a carry in the NFL? He's 25, with very fresh legs. Give me someone who's done it. He might have been the best back in the draft.

“I think so,” says Turner, now a Charger for at least another season. “But I thought I was the best back in the draft when I was taken in the fifth round. No matter what year I'm coming out, I'm going to think I'm the best running back.”

At the end of the 2006 season, Turner became a restricted free agent, meaning he could talk with other clubs, but any offer could be matched by San Diego. Smith made it difficult for him to go elsewhere, though, when he asked for a first-and third-round pick in return.

Smith didn't get what he wanted by the end of the draft and, so, Monday, he pulled Turner completely off the shelf, insisting he no longer will listen to offers. There are those who don't believe him, and that ticks Smith off.

“They say it's a ploy, that I really don't mean it,” Smith says. “I mean what I say. Now how can I say something like that and then trade him in October?”

Well, if the right deal comes along, he could say: “I reserve the right to change my mind.”

“I do,” he says. “But not on this.”

Believe me. Turner remains here.

But what to do with him? He's been underused. New coach Norv Turner has to find a way to get LaDainian Tomlinson and his backup together on the field more often. Why keep a genuine weapon sitting on the bench? As it was, the previous coaching regime was guilty of sitting tight end Antonio Gates at the wrong times.

There is room in Norv Turner's bulging offensive mind to find a way. Will he?

“No question,” the coach says. “We talked about it but didn't spend a lot of time on it because Michael might have been playing across the country. I actually talked to LT about it today. We need a plan to get Michael involved throughout the game.”

The tailback will be here for one more season and then become an unrestricted free agent when, if healthy, he'll make much more than his present salary of $2.35 million. To re-sign him would mean the Chargers would be paying a fortune for two running backs, so it's unlikely. But intriguing.

“I can't answer that now,” Smith says. “I can answer your question in '08, after the '07 season.”

Hate to see good football players walk, but when you have so many of them, it's bound to happen. . .

And every rookie is going to be an all pro this time of year too. History repeats itself. Turner rides one horse and one horse only. Coaches talk a lot this time of year. Talk is one thing. Actions are another.

 

[Carter_Can_Fly]

My man crush on Turner has become even greater with how well he has dealt with this whole ordeal. There needs to be more players with an attitude like this in pro sports.

 

[Banger]

My man crush on Turner has become even greater with how well he has dealt with this whole ordeal. There needs to be more players with an attitude like this in pro sports.

Agree completely.