I'm calling it now...

[barrett]

I think Roy nailed it. LT has always had a huge ego. But if he is truly ok with being nothing but a redzone guy who gets a 4-6 carries inside the 10 and maybe 8-10 total per game, then I am interested. Because the guy is still good in short yardage and at scoring TDs. After all, in a horrible year last year for one of the league's worst running teams, he still ran for 12 TDs. And after watching our team pretend Chris Brown was a goalline back (and losing three games because of it), I would have no problem with those carries going to LT instead.

If the signing bonus is low but the base and incentives are high, then you go into training camp with Foster, Slaton (if healthy), LT, and a rookie back. Then, if the rookie back can push one of those guys out the door you are happy about it. If not, at least you're not giving chris brown carries.

[nero THE zero]

Originally Posted by barrett

I think Roy nailed it. LT has always had a huge ego. But if he is truly ok with being nothing but a redzone guy who gets a 4-6 carries inside the 10 and maybe 8-10 total per game, then I am interested. Because the guy is still good in short yardage and at scoring TDs. After all, in a horrible year last year for one of the league's worst running teams, he still ran for 12 TDs. And after watching our team pretend Chris Brown was a goalline back (and losing three games because of it), I would have no problem with those carries going to LT instead.

If the signing bonus is low but the base and incentives are high, then you go into training camp with Foster, Slaton (if healthy), LT, and a rookie back. Then, if the rookie back can push one of those guys out the door you are happy about it. If not, at least you're not giving chris brown carries.

That's pretty much it, right there. He's a veteran who can bring winning experience, football savvy, leadership, and, while not the threat he used to be, is still better than at least half (and maybe all) of our RB right now. I'd sign him to pair him with a high draft pick (Dwyer, Matthews, or Dixon.)

[HPF Bob]

Not to start any arguments but one of the best short-yardage backs I ever saw was Priest Holmes.

I kinda concur with the rest of the group. I'd sign him if he can handle having a reduced role for less money. If he still wants to be top dog, I'll pass.

[NBT]

The talking heads on the NFL network at the SB are predicting he goes to either Seatle or Houston. I don't think he would be worth the money it would take to get him

[popanot]

Oops... I just poted something similar to this in the Slaton injury thread before seeing this thread... Yes, I could see LT coming here, and yes, I'd sign him as long as he comes fairly cheap and knows/accepts his role. He's certainly an upgrade over most of what we have now and I personally think he still has a little bit left in the tank.

[nero THE zero]

Given that we're likely going uncapped, people are going to have to drop the idea of budgetary restriction -- at least within reason.

Pre-2010 football would dictate that we worry about such a thing. But, not that we will not have a cap, the amount of money LT would get is only a concern to McNair, Rick Smith, and LT. There's really no difference in LT coming to us for 2 years $2M, 2 years $6M, or 2 years $10M.

[popanot]

Originally Posted by nero THE zero

Pre-2010 football would dictate that we worry about such a thing. But, not that we will not have a cap, the amount of money LT would get is only a concern to McNair, Rick Smith, and LT. There's really no difference in LT coming to us for 2 years $2M, 2 years $6M, or 2 years $10M.

True, but I'm sure McNair has a budget in mind that he's willing to spend, and I'd rather they use it to re-sign some of our quality RFAs (DeMeco, Pollard, Daniels, etc.) than throw cash at LT. Just because there's likely to be no cap this next year doesn't mean you give some crazy contract to someone and be bound to it when there is a cap possibly in 2011.