Was Michael Turner Worth the Tender? (1 Viewer)

[Bossman]

.... now that we see the Chargers in distress, it makes you wonder what may have been...

if SD made a deal with GB or NYJ to acquire a 1st rd draft pick vs. clinging to a back up RB.

not to mention that his franchise money could have been spent elsewhere... like on a WR.

(edit to delete the "franchise tag" from the title)

 

[Sheriff66]

.... now that we see the Chargers in distress, it makes you wonder what may have been... if SD made a deal with GB or NYJ to acquire a 1st rd draft pick vs. clinging to a back up RB.not to mention that his franchise money could have been spent elsewhere... like on a WR.

If you lose the best player in football to an injury, that will take a lot out of a team that had SB aspirations, Turner is a high priced insurance policy. Obviously Rivers can't carry the team at this point, it made sense for them to keep Turner IMO...

 

[twitch]

Its easy to second guess, but it just depends on the kindof offers San Diego was getting for Turner. If they were being offered a 1st rounder or more, then they were crazy for not making the move. I though that then and still do now. They could have used a 3rd or 4th rounder on a backup RB. Smith drafts well, so I have no doubt he would have found a gem to backup LT. I dont think it really matter right now based on how SD's looking. But Turner will get a starting job next year, and no doubt make some nice coin.

But incidentally, Im not sure he got 'franchise' contract. that would have given him top 5 RB money. Turner was signed to a one-yr restricted FA contract for something like 2.5mil. They still could have used that 1st rounder, though.

 

[nola]

Just to clarify, they did NOT franchise him. He was a restricted free agent, and they gave him the highest tender. Any team signing him would have had to hand over a #1. "Franchise tag" would mean they are paying him the average of the top 5 RBs in the NFL.

I think they did the right thing. The team's current problems are not talent problems. Since only about 1/2 of all 1st round picks become reliable, not pro-bowl, just reliable NFL starters, it makes sense to hold on to a great backup RB. Especially if you think you are close to a Super Bowl.

What they should have done was hold on to their coaching staff. If not Marty, at least Cameron or Phillips. Continuity can be a good thing...

 

[Bossman]

I don't put all the blame on the coaching staff.

What improvements did ownership make to the team in the offseason?

and how much of a priority do you put in a back-up RB?

Teams like the Colts (Dominic Rhodes), the Patriots (Corey Dillon), and the Bears (although they sent the wrong one- Thomas Jones), have all seemed to take the opposite approach. Let the guy go and grab a warm body to ride the pine.

I should think they would rather have more quality at the starting positions than on the bench... in a "just in case" scenario.

 

[PranksterJD]

I don't put all the blame on the coaching staff.What improvements did ownership make to the team in the offseason?and how much of a priority do you put in a back-up RB?Teams like the Colts (Dominic Rhodes), the Patriots (Corey Dillon), and the Bears (although they sent the wrong one- Thomas Jones), have all seemed to take the opposite approach. Let the guy go and grab a warm body to ride the pine.I should think they would rather have more quality at the starting positions than on the bench... in a "just in case" scenario.

I understand your point, but there's a couple of things...1) I honestly believe that the Chargers are closer to the post-season than the Bears, so we can use this more as an example of them doing it wrong. Kinda like you said, except Thomas Jones hasn't shown that he's much better than Benson at handling all the offense alone in the face of a bad QB, so it looks to me like it was the combination of Jones and Benson that made that scheme work.2) Rhodes and Dillon are nowhere near the talent level of Turner ( at least not anymore ), so selling them and getting serviceable replacements is easier. Additionally, the Colts and Pats don't have nearly the reliance on their runners, so keeping a solid backup wasn't as important.As others have said, you really need to think of what the Chargers expected before the season. They were hoping for 14-2, and were going to ride their running game as far as they could, depending on Rivers as little as possible. Opposing defenses figured this out and it has killed them, but that's where they were going. As such, they NEEDED to have a great backup to LT to maintain the same game plan and still be somewhat successful should he have gotten hurt. This has killed me, since I have Turner in both my dynasty/keeper leagues, but I certainly understood where the Chargers were going.

 

[stevegamer]

Frankly, they should have traded Michael Turner when they decided to hire Norv Turner.

NT = no playoffs, so MT is not really not needed.

 

[MOAT]

Would it make sense for them to cantact TB and and send Turner for next year's 1st round? Would TB pay that?

I say probably not but am not too familiar with the details of either team. SD will lose Turner at the end of the season anyway. And the way they are playing they might make the playoffs but might not.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

There is some added value to S.D. if they trade him out of the Division, and out of the Conference. What could it hurt to give Green Bay a call?

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

bad move by AJ.

List of AJ's bad moves:

Rivers over Brees

Firing Marty after 14-2

Hiring Norv

Signing Jammer to a long term deal

Not getting max value for Turner

 

[mozzy84]

should have gotten what they could have for him, thought it then and even more now. They don't even use him on kickoffs returns most of the time and that was one of the big reasons people were saying they should keep him.

 

[zamboni]

As noted, hindsight is 20/20.

Still, the Chargers will likely get a 3rd round pick (albeit in 2009, I believe) as compensation when Turner walks, so it's not like they won't get anything in return. Obviously less than what they could have gotten prior to the draft, but again, who knew. Besides, the season isn't over yet, and the need for Turner as insurance is still there - but slipping, to be sure.

 

[jonessed]

If they don't make the playoffs it was unwise not to get what they could for him, but I don't believe they had expectations of that. He has value not only as a backup, but as a change of pace as well. He is much more of a bruiser than LT.

 

[Chase Stuart]

bad move by AJ. List of AJ's bad moves:Rivers over BreesFiring Marty after 14-2Hiring NorvSigning Jammer to a long term dealNot getting max value for Turner

Brees? Seriously? He's got 7 INTs and 1 TD this year.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

bad move by AJ. List of AJ's bad moves:Rivers over BreesFiring Marty after 14-2Hiring NorvSigning Jammer to a long term dealNot getting max value for Turner

Brees? Seriously? He's got 7 INTs and 1 TD this year.

Yes, I'd still take him over Rivers.

 

[Horses Mouth]

As noted, hindsight is 20/20. Still, the Chargers will likely get a 3rd round pick (albeit in 2009, I believe) as compensation when Turner walks, so it's not like they won't get anything in return. Obviously less than what they could have gotten prior to the draft, but again, who knew. Besides, the season isn't over yet, and the need for Turner as insurance is still there - but slipping, to be sure.

excuse my FA ignorance but why would they get a 2009 3rd round pick when Turner is an UFA next year?

 

[zamboni]

As noted, hindsight is 20/20. Still, the Chargers will likely get a 3rd round pick (albeit in 2009, I believe) as compensation when Turner walks, so it's not like they won't get anything in return. Obviously less than what they could have gotten prior to the draft, but again, who knew. Besides, the season isn't over yet, and the need for Turner as insurance is still there - but slipping, to be sure.

excuse my FA ignorance but why would they get a 2009 3rd round pick when Turner is an UFA next year?

I could be wrong, but my understanding is that the compensation picks are applied towards the following year that the FA is signed away. Maybe not though - I forgot from this past April.

 

[PranksterJD]

As noted, hindsight is 20/20. Still, the Chargers will likely get a 3rd round pick (albeit in 2009, I believe) as compensation when Turner walks, so it's not like they won't get anything in return. Obviously less than what they could have gotten prior to the draft, but again, who knew. Besides, the season isn't over yet, and the need for Turner as insurance is still there - but slipping, to be sure.

excuse my FA ignorance but why would they get a 2009 3rd round pick when Turner is an UFA next year?

I could be wrong, but my understanding is that the compensation picks are applied towards the following year that the FA is signed away. Maybe not though - I forgot from this past April.

Also not sure, but I think that's for RESTRICTED free agents, or what Turner was in this past offseason. As an UNRESTRICTED free agent, he's basically a man without a country. He will have no connection to the Chargers whatsoever.Calling NFL experts? Where's John Clayton when you need him?

 

[zamboni]

As noted, hindsight is 20/20. Still, the Chargers will likely get a 3rd round pick (albeit in 2009, I believe) as compensation when Turner walks, so it's not like they won't get anything in return. Obviously less than what they could have gotten prior to the draft, but again, who knew. Besides, the season isn't over yet, and the need for Turner as insurance is still there - but slipping, to be sure.

excuse my FA ignorance but why would they get a 2009 3rd round pick when Turner is an UFA next year?

I could be wrong, but my understanding is that the compensation picks are applied towards the following year that the FA is signed away. Maybe not though - I forgot from this past April.

Also not sure, but I think that's for RESTRICTED free agents, or what Turner was in this past offseason. As an UNRESTRICTED free agent, he's basically a man without a country. He will have no connection to the Chargers whatsoever.

IIRC, the compensation applies to previous RFAs that were offered and signed their tenders. The level of compensation largely depends on the tender. I'm too lazy to look it up, but perhaps someone else can.

 

[Gr00vus]

bad move by AJ. List of AJ's bad moves:Rivers over BreesFiring Marty after 14-2Hiring NorvSigning Jammer to a long term dealNot getting max value for Turner

You forgot: wishing Donnie Edwards into the corn field.

 

[Ed Wood]

They should have traded him for a good coach...

 

[PranksterJD]

As noted, hindsight is 20/20.

Still, the Chargers will likely get a 3rd round pick (albeit in 2009, I believe) as compensation when Turner walks, so it's not like they won't get anything in return. Obviously less than what they could have gotten prior to the draft, but again, who knew. Besides, the season isn't over yet, and the need for Turner as insurance is still there - but slipping, to be sure.

excuse my FA ignorance but why would they get a 2009 3rd round pick when Turner is an UFA next year?

I could be wrong, but my understanding is that the compensation picks are applied towards the following year that the FA is signed away. Maybe not though - I forgot from this past April.

Also not sure, but I think that's for RESTRICTED free agents, or what Turner was in this past offseason. As an UNRESTRICTED free agent, he's basically a man without a country. He will have no connection to the Chargers whatsoever.

IIRC, the compensation applies to previous RFAs that were offered and signed their tenders. The level of compensation largely depends on the tender. I'm too lazy to look it up, but perhaps someone else can.

WikipediaUnrestricted Free Agents (UFA) are players who have completed four or more accrued seasons of service and whose contracts have expired. They are free to sign with any club through July 22 (or the first scheduled day of the first NFL training camp, whichever is later). On July 23, their exclusive rights will revert to their original club if that club made a June 1 tender to these players. Teams will have until the Tuesday after the 10th week of the season (November 14) to sign their unrestricted veteran free agents to whom a tender was made on June 1. If the player does not sign by November 14, he must continue to sit out the remainder of the season. If a June 1 tender is not made to a UFA, he continues to be free to sign with any club.

KFFL

Players with four years or more of NFL experience who can sign with their own team or any other team in the NFL. If they leave their previous team the team that signs them can do so without having to award the previous team compensation.

Its a start. Wikipedia doesn't talk about what is requried if the original team had offered a tender to a UFA who signs before camp, and KFFL doesn't reference tender offers at all.

 

[BoltBacker]

bad move by AJ. List of AJ's bad moves:Rivers over BreesFiring Marty after 14-2Hiring NorvSigning Jammer to a long term dealNot getting max value for Turner

Brees? Seriously? He's got 7 INTs and 1 TD this year.

Yes, I'd still take him over Rivers.

That's just crazy. Rivers isn't having a great year but he's having a better year than Brees and at least the Chargers aren't paying him this much...."For the 2006 NFL season, here were the top 10 highest NFL salaries according to USA Today:1. Richard Seymour NE $24,691,1602. Drew Brees NO $22,000,0003. Bryant McKinnie MIN $17,500,0004. Steve Hutchinson MIN $16,588,0805. Jeff Backus DET $16,252,3106. Tom Brady NE $16,004,8407. Carson Palmer CIN $15,750,0008. John Abraham ATL $15,503,3009. Shaun Alexander SEA $15,125,00010. Reggie Wayne IND $15,100,440"

 

[Wally Cleaver]

Are there any murmers that they are shopping him?

 

[BoltBacker]

.... now that we see the Chargers in distress, it makes you wonder what may have been... if SD made a deal with GB or NYJ to acquire a 1st rd draft pick vs. clinging to a back up RB.not to mention that his franchise money could have been spent elsewhere... like on a WR.(edit to delete the "franchise tag" from the title)

Two things...- Were they under the cap before the season? If so they had $ they didn't use already.- What FA WR should they have signed?

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

SD wll get a 3rd as compensation for losing him in the offseason, right? So that should be the baseline. Getting a 3rd and a backup would be like trading him for the backup straight up. I'm not sure the offers they got were that much better than that.

 

[mobb_deep]

There is some added value to S.D. if they trade him out of the Division, and out of the Conference. What could it hurt to give Green Bay a call?

I have a feeling that's where he's going to land next year. That's what I'm hoping atleast...

 

[PranksterJD]

SD wll get a 3rd as compensation for losing him in the offseason, right? So that should be the baseline. Getting a 3rd and a backup would be like trading him for the backup straight up. I'm not sure the offers they got were that much better than that.

Check my above post, but I don't think this is correct.

 

[GroveDiesel]

As noted, hindsight is 20/20.

Still, the Chargers will likely get a 3rd round pick (albeit in 2009, I believe) as compensation when Turner walks, so it's not like they won't get anything in return. Obviously less than what they could have gotten prior to the draft, but again, who knew. Besides, the season isn't over yet, and the need for Turner as insurance is still there - but slipping, to be sure.

excuse my FA ignorance but why would they get a 2009 3rd round pick when Turner is an UFA next year?

I could be wrong, but my understanding is that the compensation picks are applied towards the following year that the FA is signed away. Maybe not though - I forgot from this past April.

Also not sure, but I think that's for RESTRICTED free agents, or what Turner was in this past offseason. As an UNRESTRICTED free agent, he's basically a man without a country. He will have no connection to the Chargers whatsoever.

IIRC, the compensation applies to previous RFAs that were offered and signed their tenders. The level of compensation largely depends on the tender. I'm too lazy to look it up, but perhaps someone else can.

WikipediaUnrestricted Free Agents (UFA) are players who have completed four or more accrued seasons of service and whose contracts have expired. They are free to sign with any club through July 22 (or the first scheduled day of the first NFL training camp, whichever is later). On July 23, their exclusive rights will revert to their original club if that club made a June 1 tender to these players. Teams will have until the Tuesday after the 10th week of the season (November 14) to sign their unrestricted veteran free agents to whom a tender was made on June 1. If the player does not sign by November 14, he must continue to sit out the remainder of the season. If a June 1 tender is not made to a UFA, he continues to be free to sign with any club.

KFFL

Players with four years or more of NFL experience who can sign with their own team or any other team in the NFL. If they leave their previous team the team that signs them can do so without having to award the previous team compensation.

Its a start. Wikipedia doesn't talk about what is requried if the original team had offered a tender to a UFA who signs before camp, and KFFL doesn't reference tender offers at all.

The NFL has a compensation system in place for teams that lose high profile free agents. It's based on a formula that factors in the contract that players they lose get, their performance the next season, and awards and then compares it to the free agents that the team brought in. They range from 3rd round picks on down and are applied to the end of the round.Edit: LINK

 

[zamboni]

As noted, hindsight is 20/20.

Still, the Chargers will likely get a 3rd round pick (albeit in 2009, I believe) as compensation when Turner walks, so it's not like they won't get anything in return. Obviously less than what they could have gotten prior to the draft, but again, who knew. Besides, the season isn't over yet, and the need for Turner as insurance is still there - but slipping, to be sure.

excuse my FA ignorance but why would they get a 2009 3rd round pick when Turner is an UFA next year?

I could be wrong, but my understanding is that the compensation picks are applied towards the following year that the FA is signed away. Maybe not though - I forgot from this past April.

Also not sure, but I think that's for RESTRICTED free agents, or what Turner was in this past offseason. As an UNRESTRICTED free agent, he's basically a man without a country. He will have no connection to the Chargers whatsoever.

IIRC, the compensation applies to previous RFAs that were offered and signed their tenders. The level of compensation largely depends on the tender. I'm too lazy to look it up, but perhaps someone else can.

WikipediaUnrestricted Free Agents (UFA) are players who have completed four or more accrued seasons of service and whose contracts have expired. They are free to sign with any club through July 22 (or the first scheduled day of the first NFL training camp, whichever is later). On July 23, their exclusive rights will revert to their original club if that club made a June 1 tender to these players. Teams will have until the Tuesday after the 10th week of the season (November 14) to sign their unrestricted veteran free agents to whom a tender was made on June 1. If the player does not sign by November 14, he must continue to sit out the remainder of the season. If a June 1 tender is not made to a UFA, he continues to be free to sign with any club.

KFFL

Players with four years or more of NFL experience who can sign with their own team or any other team in the NFL. If they leave their previous team the team that signs them can do so without having to award the previous team compensation.

Its a start. Wikipedia doesn't talk about what is requried if the original team had offered a tender to a UFA who signs before camp, and KFFL doesn't reference tender offers at all.

The NFL has a compensation system in place for teams that lose high profile free agents. It's based on a formula that factors in the contract that players they lose get, their performance the next season, and awards and then compares it to the free agents that the team brought in. They range from 3rd round picks on down and are applied to the end of the round.

That's it - thanks.

 

[Tau837]

bad move by AJ. List of AJ's bad moves:Rivers over BreesFiring Marty after 14-2Hiring NorvSigning Jammer to a long term dealNot getting max value for Turner

Brees? Seriously? He's got 7 INTs and 1 TD this year.

Yes, I'd still take him over Rivers.

 

[Koya]

Great move to hold onto Turner.

You have to remember, a month ago SD was not thinking about saving a season. They were thinking Super Bowl.

So you have a team with very high asperations that is utterly centered around the RB - the best in the game at that.

While Turner would not be LT2, he could at least be good enough that in the event SD lost LT2 for a few weeks that would not sink the ship. Again, this is a VERY RB centric offense so having a very good backup is a huge insurance policy, imo.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

bad move by AJ. List of AJ's bad moves:Rivers over BreesFiring Marty after 14-2Hiring NorvSigning Jammer to a long term dealNot getting max value for Turner

Brees? Seriously? He's got 7 INTs and 1 TD this year.

Yes, I'd still take him over Rivers.

I would expect nothing less from a guy with a NCstate logo in their avatar

 

[Bossman]

.... now that we see the Chargers in distress, it makes you wonder what may have been... if SD made a deal with GB or NYJ to acquire a 1st rd draft pick vs. clinging to a back up RB.not to mention that his franchise money could have been spent elsewhere... like on a WR.(edit to delete the "franchise tag" from the title)

Two things...- Were they under the cap before the season? If so they had $ they didn't use already.- What FA WR should they have signed?

Well I'm just assuming they didn't bring in any help at their weakest position (WR) because of cap reasons. There were a bunch of WR's avialable...Kevin Curtis would have made sense, Donte Stallworth, Darrel Jackson, and Stokely were all out there, Randy Moss was traded for cheap. I'm sure there were more that arn't coming to mind that are better than what the team is putting on the field at the moment.It seems to me that management was satisfied with their team "as is" and made little effort to improve it... where teams like the Patriots were improving thru trades and free agent signings.Why insist on being so one dimentional? Just because your a great running team, that doesnt mean you shouldn't try and improve your passing attack imo.

 

[Tau837]

bad move by AJ. List of AJ's bad moves:Rivers over BreesFiring Marty after 14-2Hiring NorvSigning Jammer to a long term dealNot getting max value for Turner

Brees? Seriously? He's got 7 INTs and 1 TD this year.

Yes, I'd still take him over Rivers.

I would expect nothing less from a guy with a NCstate logo in their avatar

Doesn't change the fact that your view is

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

bad move by AJ. List of AJ's bad moves:Rivers over BreesFiring Marty after 14-2Hiring NorvSigning Jammer to a long term dealNot getting max value for Turner

Brees? Seriously? He's got 7 INTs and 1 TD this year.

Yes, I'd still take him over Rivers.

I would expect nothing less from a guy with a NCstate logo in their avatar

Doesn't change the fact that your view is

I stand by my statement and have since the switch was made. Rivers looks very childish on the sidelines sometimes and I think he has regressed this year, might not all be his fault though given his current coaching environment

 

[GroveDiesel]

Great move to hold onto Turner.

You have to remember, a month ago SD was not thinking about saving a season. They were thinking Super Bowl.

So you have a team with very high asperations that is utterly centered around the RB - the best in the game at that.

While Turner would not be LT2, he could at least be good enough that in the event SD lost LT2 for a few weeks that would not sink the ship. Again, this is a VERY RB centric offense so having a very good backup is a huge insurance policy, imo.

It hasn't been so far this year. They're averaging 35 pass attempts per game and 27 rushing attempts per game. They've had some games playing from behind, but the Patriots game was really the only one that they were blown away for a significant part of the game.

 

[Bossman]

I think it's obvious that Brees is a better QB than Rivers. Last reg. season and playoffs is a better guage than only 3 games this season.

 

[Wilbur Wood]

The Chargers made a big mistake forgoing trading Turner for a 1st round pick (per the rumors before the 2007 draft).

The RB position, much less the backup RB slot, should be relatively easy to fill. Rewind the tape to the 2006 season, imagine LT misses 3 or 4 games at some point. Imagine no Turner, but instead someone like Michael Pittman, Deric Ward, etc. I imagine that while they would have a drop off from LT, that they would still get quality production out of a solid veteran backup RB and still have a very strong team for those games.

The marginal pickup from a Michael Turner for one year is much too small to forego an upgrade such as a 1st round pick

 

[phthalatemagic]

You can't just claim the Chargers will get a 3rd round compensation pick for losing Turner. If they sign a FA for about the same amount as Turner, and that guy plays about as much as Turner plays on his new team, the compensation is zero.

 

[Bossman]

The Chargers made a big mistake forgoing trading Turner for a 1st round pick (per the rumors before the 2007 draft).The RB position, much less the backup RB slot, should be relatively easy to fill. Rewind the tape to the 2006 season, imagine LT misses 3 or 4 games at some point. Imagine no Turner, but instead someone like Michael Pittman, Deric Ward, etc. I imagine that while they would have a drop off from LT, that they would still get quality production out of a solid veteran backup RB and still have a very strong team for those games.The marginal pickup from a Michael Turner for one year is much too small to forego an upgrade such as a 1st round pick

you're making my point.No other team requires the tallent of a starting RB to be on the bench.It may just be a case where they went 14-2 and thought they should have won the Super Bowl, minus a few unlucky bounces, bad playcalling, etc.... so they wanted to keep the team intact.

 

[Koya]

Great move to hold onto Turner.

You have to remember, a month ago SD was not thinking about saving a season. They were thinking Super Bowl.

So you have a team with very high asperations that is utterly centered around the RB - the best in the game at that.

While Turner would not be LT2, he could at least be good enough that in the event SD lost LT2 for a few weeks that would not sink the ship. Again, this is a VERY RB centric offense so having a very good backup is a huge insurance policy, imo.

It hasn't been so far this year. They're averaging 35 pass attempts per game and 27 rushing attempts per game. They've had some games playing from behind, but the Patriots game was really the only one that they were blown away for a significant part of the game.

Gates is awesome, but in terms of what they bring to the game, going into the season, NO ONE in football brought what Ladanian brought to the table.Rivers is an ok QB. The receivers other than Gates are blah, at best. This team is based on LT2, and if you had a weak backup and LT2 went down, had their season gone "as planned" they would then be near done. They were protecting their strength.

 

[Tau837]

I think it's obvious that Brees is a better QB than Rivers. Last reg. season and playoffs is a better guage than only 3 games this season.

I agree the sample size this season is small enough that last season is a better gauge. However, note that in comparing them last season, you are comparing a first year starter to a 5th year starter. Not exactly apples to apples IMO. Even so, Rivers went to the Pro Bowl last year, and put up a QB rating of 92, compared to Brees's rating of 96.3, so while he may not have played as well as Brees, he did play well. (I think rating is useful here because Brees attempted 94 more passes than Rivers, which skews things like passing yards, TDs, etc.)

 

[grind]

The Chargers made a big mistake forgoing trading Turner for a 1st round pick (per the rumors before the 2007 draft).The RB position, much less the backup RB slot, should be relatively easy to fill. Rewind the tape to the 2006 season, imagine LT misses 3 or 4 games at some point. Imagine no Turner, but instead someone like Michael Pittman, Deric Ward, etc. I imagine that while they would have a drop off from LT, that they would still get quality production out of a solid veteran backup RB and still have a very strong team for those games.The marginal pickup from a Michael Turner for one year is much too small to forego an upgrade such as a 1st round pick

you're making my point.No other team requires the tallent of a starting RB to be on the bench.It may just be a case where they went 14-2 and thought they should have won the Super Bowl, minus a few unlucky bounces, bad playcalling, etc.... so they wanted to keep the team intact.

Wow. Please explain this one to me. "...so they wanted to keep the team intact." Please explain how this could have been their thought process considering they let their HC, OC, and DC leave?Fact is, not trading Turner for a 1st, which was reported as being offered, was a dumb move. AJ going to the well one too many times and getting burned this time. That could have been used to move up in the first round to get Revis (the Jets traded up to get him instead). I beleive Revis is already starting for the Jets. How is that Chargers secondary doing these days?

 

[grind]

Great move to hold onto Turner.

You have to remember, a month ago SD was not thinking about saving a season. They were thinking Super Bowl.

So you have a team with very high asperations that is utterly centered around the RB - the best in the game at that.

While Turner would not be LT2, he could at least be good enough that in the event SD lost LT2 for a few weeks that would not sink the ship. Again, this is a VERY RB centric offense so having a very good backup is a huge insurance policy, imo.

It hasn't been so far this year. They're averaging 35 pass attempts per game and 27 rushing attempts per game. They've had some games playing from behind, but the Patriots game was really the only one that they were blown away for a significant part of the game.

Gates is awesome, but in terms of what they bring to the game, going into the season, NO ONE in football brought what Ladanian brought to the table.Rivers is an ok QB. The receivers other than Gates are blah, at best. This team is based on LT2, and if you had a weak backup and LT2 went down, had their season gone "as planned" they would then be near done. They were protecting their strength.

Their strength is the O. Line. Taking nothing away from LT, but they have a very good O. Line. That would be a benefit for whatever backup RB they'd have to use in the event LT got hurt.

 

[Bossman]

The Chargers made a big mistake forgoing trading Turner for a 1st round pick (per the rumors before the 2007 draft).

The RB position, much less the backup RB slot, should be relatively easy to fill. Rewind the tape to the 2006 season, imagine LT misses 3 or 4 games at some point. Imagine no Turner, but instead someone like Michael Pittman, Deric Ward, etc. I imagine that while they would have a drop off from LT, that they would still get quality production out of a solid veteran backup RB and still have a very strong team for those games.

The marginal pickup from a Michael Turner for one year is much too small to forego an upgrade such as a 1st round pick

you're making my point.No other team requires the tallent of a starting RB to be on the bench.

It may just be a case where they went 14-2 and thought they should have won the Super Bowl, minus a few unlucky bounces, bad playcalling, etc.... so they wanted to keep the team intact.

Wow. Please explain this one to me. "...so they wanted to keep the team intact." Please explain how this could have been their thought process considering they let their HC, OC, and DC leave?Fact is, not trading Turner for a 1st, which was reported as being offered, was a dumb move. AJ going to the well one too many times and getting burned this time. That could have been used to move up in the first round to get Revis (the Jets traded up to get him instead). I beleive Revis is already starting for the Jets. How is that Chargers secondary doing these days?

I'm sorry, do you consider the coaching staff part of the team? I guess I need to rephrase that then... " ... so they wanted to keep the players on the team intact".I don't think Marty S. was let go because of his coaching performance or the playoff loss... if that were the case management wouldn't have waited so long to do it.

It had more to do with differences of opinion with ownership. More like a Jimmy Johnson (DAL) type situation.

Should the changing of the coaching staff have made a difference in their philosophy to keep Michael Turner? I don't think they thought so.

 

[BoltBacker]

.... now that we see the Chargers in distress, it makes you wonder what may have been... if SD made a deal with GB or NYJ to acquire a 1st rd draft pick vs. clinging to a back up RB.not to mention that his franchise money could have been spent elsewhere... like on a WR.(edit to delete the "franchise tag" from the title)

Two things...- Were they under the cap before the season? If so they had $ they didn't use already.- What FA WR should they have signed?

Well I'm just assuming they didn't bring in any help at their weakest position (WR) because of cap reasons. There were a bunch of WR's avialable...Kevin Curtis would have made sense, Donte Stallworth, Darrel Jackson, and Stokely were all out there, Randy Moss was traded for cheap. I'm sure there were more that arn't coming to mind that are better than what the team is putting on the field at the moment.It seems to me that management was satisfied with their team "as is" and made little effort to improve it... where teams like the Patriots were improving thru trades and free agent signings.Why insist on being so one dimentional? Just because your a great running team, that doesnt mean you shouldn't try and improve your passing attack imo.

I think you are assuming wrong. To the best of my knowledge SD is under the cap and have been since summer. So Turners salary had nothing to do with the WR corp.Back to the subject of the WR corp only three of the receivers you've mentioned (Curtis/Stallworth/Stokley) were FA's. You think that the SD WR corp is bad but should have brought it Stallworth/Stokley? Outside of one game against the Lions Curtis hasn't looked like more than an average WR himself.Does it look like SD should have traded a 4th rounder for Randy Moss right now? Well yeah. And so should GB. And NYG. And just about every other team in the NFL.So if you're saying the WR corp is bad because Turner is still on the team I think you are just flat wrong. But if you think SD should have paid $22mil in a SEASON for Brees to play QB for them I don't think there's much we're going to agree on anyway. They can't afford to pay Turner to have the LT/Turner redundancy but they can afford to pay Brees for the Rivers/Brees redundancy at 5x the price???? At least LT and Turner can both contribute in the same season. That type of thinking makes no sense to me in any way.

 

[mad sweeney]

I don't put all the blame on the coaching staff.

What improvements did ownership make to the team in the offseason?

and how much of a priority do you put in a back-up RB?

Teams like the Colts (Dominic Rhodes), the Patriots (Corey Dillon), and the Bears (although they sent the wrong one- Thomas Jones), have all seemed to take the opposite approach. Let the guy go and grab a warm body to ride the pine.

I should think they would rather have more quality at the starting positions than on the bench... in a "just in case" scenario.

What improvements do you NEED to make to a 14-2 team? Keeping him was smart if they weren't getting the price they wanted, since in the off season this type of collapse was not expected. They had a SB team and a player to make it still work if LT went down.

 

[Gr00vus]

Keeping Turner == right move.

Letting Donnie Edwards walk == wrong move.

Compare and contrast.

 

[Bossman]

I think you are assuming wrong. To the best of my knowledge SD is under the cap and have been since summer. So Turners salary had nothing to do with the WR corp.

Back to the subject of the WR corp only three of the receivers you've mentioned (Curtis/Stallworth/Stokley) were FA's. You think that the SD WR corp is bad but should have brought it Stallworth/Stokley? Outside of one game against the Lions Curtis hasn't looked like more than an average WR himself.

Does it look like SD should have traded a 4th rounder for Randy Moss right now? Well yeah. And so should GB. And NYG. And just about every other team in the NFL.

So if you're saying the WR corp is bad because Turner is still on the team I think you are just flat wrong. But if you think SD should have paid $22mil in a SEASON for Brees to play QB for them I don't think there's much we're going to agree on anyway. They can't afford to pay Turner to have the LT/Turner redundancy but they can afford to pay Brees for the Rivers/Brees redundancy at 5x the price???? At least LT and Turner can both contribute in the same season. That type of thinking makes no sense to me in any way.

Yeah, I guess Curtis, Stallworth and Stokely would have only been backups to the Malcom Floyd / Vincent Jackson tandem that started the season with 45 career catches combined.As far as Moss goes, no one saw that trade coming... and no one knew if he could still produce the way he has... but they could have taken a chance like NE did and up the offer to a 3rd (or a 2nd).

I missed the part where I said SD should have paid Brees. I did say Brees is a better QB than Rivers though.

I'm glad your content with your team.... I'm just not sure why.