To be honest (1 Viewer)

It amazes me how this forum can just jump on the bandwagon and even post him dancing the soulja boy and if i should name my son zach

to completely trashing him

tisk tisk

Because we are Saints fans. Not Dolphins fans, not Cowboys fans, and not Zach Thomas fans...anymore.
 
Morgan is done. We really need to be pressing pretty hard to get Vilma if we are serious about upgrading the LB corps.
 
Certainly because his recent history have shown that but the same goes with Johnthan Vilma. I just realized both of the linebackers are from the U.

You can't even begin to compare Morgan's injury history with Vilma's though. Vilma suffered an injury last year, and although he might still be feeling some effects from it, Morgan has been hurt every year of his career.
 
Here is the deal on these backers.

All three of these lbs. Vilma,Morgan,Thomas. All have questions but if your going on which one is ideally the safest IMO would be Morgan. But the best of the bunch is Vilma. If he can come back off of this injury. He is the guy we were trying to get a few years ago and didn't get.. Will Smith instead cause Denver jumped us and got DJ williams and Vilma was already picked. Now Thomas probably would have brought the most when you look at leadership, a nastiness at the position and etc., but only for a short window. Yeah u say Morgan has only played 4 games in the last 2 years. Remember this division has been a run first division his whole career pre-Brees era in NO. He was banging heads for a sometimes suspect Panther D-line that wore him down. Can that happen here, yes, but who says it will. Now if i had a choice i would have taken Thomas but that is over now. I wouldn't give anything higher then a 4th that will go up to a third cause i think he is a FA after this season. Getting damaged goods is a VERY risky thing, but you have to look at the pay off if he comes back. Either guy if healthy will be a major upgrade.
 
All three of these lbs. Vilma,Morgan,Thomas. All have questions but if your going on which one is ideally the safest IMO would be Morgan. But the best of the bunch is Vilma. If he can come back off of this injury. He is the guy we were trying to get a few years ago and didn't get.. Will Smith instead cause Denver jumped us and got DJ williams and Vilma was already picked. Now Thomas probably would have brought the most when you look at leadership, a nastiness at the position and etc., but only for a short window. Yeah u say Morgan has only played 4 games in the last 2 years. Remember this division has been a run first division his whole career pre-Brees era in NO. He was banging heads for a sometimes suspect Panther D-line that wore him down. Can that happen here, yes, but who says it will. Now if i had a choice i would have taken Thomas but that is over now. I wouldn't give anything higher then a 4th that will go up to a third cause i think he is a FA after this season. Getting damaged goods is a VERY risky thing, but you have to look at the pay off if he comes back. Either guy if healthy will be a major upgrade.
...the most games morgan has played in a season is like 4(i think), he's never played a full season
how is he the safest?
god some people on this forum confuse me
 
What are you talking about.

...the most games morgan has played in a season is like 4(i think), he's never played a full season
how is he the safest?
god some people on this forum confuse me

This comparison is mostly between Vilma and Morgan. Morgan'S last two seasons were due to concussions. Changing teams/schemes or whatever CAN OR WILL change things. The three season before that he played an average of 12 games and still avg. more tackles then simeoux? avg. in a whole season. Also, if you make a trade for Vilma, he may never be the same. I think he has the same injury CIE GRANT had, you see where he is at. I'm going on how it will afftect the franchise from personel standpoint. Like i said safest when you talk about bringing in a players sign for a minimum deal or trade and take on a salary,lose a pick and you are back at the drawing board with less money under your cap if he don't play. Now like i said in my post, Vilma can bring the most to the table if healthy we were going to get him that year. It is one thing if he was healthy, i dont think it would even be an arguement. Did that clear your CONFUSION?
 
Last edited:
This comparison is mostly between Vilma and Morgan. Morgan'S last two seasons were due to concussions. Changing teams/schemes or whatever CAN OR WILL change things. The three season before that he played an average of 12 games and still avg. more tackles then simeoux? avg. in a whole season. Also, if you make a trade for Vilma, he may never be the same. I think he has the same injury CIE GRANT had, you see where he is at. I'm going on how it will afftect the franchise from personel standpoint. Like i said safest when you talk about bringing in a players sign for a minimum deal or trade and take on a salary,lose a pick and you are back at the drawing board with less money under your cap if he don't play. Now like i said in my post, Vilma can bring the most to the table if healthy we were going to get him that year. It is one thing if he was healthy, i dont think it would even be an arguement. Did that clear your CONFUSION?

This is an excellent post, mony_b.....but if both Morgan and Vilma would be healthy, we would be looking at L Briggs money to sign any one of them 2. As it stands they both suffer from injuries which might prevent both of them playing at a high level! I say we turn away from these guys, and start looking at Briggs, or a draft pick. That's the only way to go, especially that we don't even know what's exactly wrong with Vilma? If he had a microfracture surgery, I wouldn't give up any draft pick for him!
 
I don't think any of the three will play a full season...maybe Vilma.

I think our answer is in the draft in the 2nd round. That's why I wanted Zach. An amazing vet, possibly one of the smartest MLBs in the game, mentoring our rookie and being ready to jump in if an injury happens. I don't feel the same about Morgan.

Maybe Vilma can come back from injury...I dunno....it seems I huge risk, though. I think the safest bet is in the draft.
 
This comparison is mostly between Vilma and Morgan. Morgan'S last two seasons were due to concussions. Changing teams/schemes or whatever CAN OR WILL change things. The three season before that he played an average of 12 games and still avg. more tackles then simeoux? avg. in a whole season. Also, if you make a trade for Vilma, he may never be the same. I think he has the same injury CIE GRANT had, you see where he is at. I'm going on how it will afftect the franchise from personel standpoint. Like i said safest when you talk about bringing in a players sign for a minimum deal or trade and take on a salary,lose a pick and you are back at the drawing board with less money under your cap if he don't play. Now like i said in my post, Vilma can bring the most to the table if healthy we were going to get him that year. It is one thing if he was healthy, i dont think it would even be an arguement. Did that clear your CONFUSION?

No, I strongly disagree. Dan Morgan is the definition of injury prone. The most games in one season he has ever played in was 13, back in 2005. Before that he played in 12, 11, 8 and 11. The past two years combined he has only managed to play in 4 games! He is also several years older than Vilma.

Vilma is not only a better player than Morgan, but he's younger and far less prone to injury (historically). This past season was the only one in which Vilma missed any time (he only played in 7 games). It's true that his knee injury may hinder him next year, and possibly for the rest of his career. But looking at the facts, there is no way you can argue that Dan Morgan is less of an injury risk than him.

Dan Morgan is perhaps the most injury prone player currently active...he is far from the safest option we have.
 
Please read what i said im my previous post with detail.

No, I strongly disagree. Dan Morgan is the definition of injury prone. The most games in one season he has ever played in was 13, back in 2005. Before that he played in 12, 11, 8 and 11. The past two years combined he has only managed to play in 4 games! He is also several years older than Vilma.

Vilma is not only a better player than Morgan, but he's younger and far less prone to injury (historically). This past season was the only one in which Vilma missed any time (he only played in 7 games). It's true that his knee injury may hinder him next year, and possibly for the rest of his career. But looking at the facts, there is no way you can argue that Dan Morgan is less of an injury risk than him.

Dan Morgan is perhaps the most injury prone player currently active...he is far from the safest option we have.

This is exactly what i said.

"Like i said safest when you talk about bringing in a players sign for a minimum deal or trade and take on a salary,lose a pick and you are back at the drawing board with less money under your cap if he don't play"

This don't have anything to do with comparing players or injury. I'm going on a guy that is cleared to play vs. a guy that may not play again and still isn't even running yet. PERIOD. Regardless of injury history. The more severe TODAY is vilma. This is the same injury that Grant had i think and he isn't even in the league. IF he has a clear bill of health during his physical, then yes go with vilma. This is a business decision purely on brining in a guy cheap and if he don't work out, then so be it. We know morgan will be ready for spring training, you can't say that about Vilam. With vilma,if not healthy, you lose cap money, lose a pick and still have to look for a lb. When you could have drafted one with the pick you just gave up. Talent you can't compare the two, this is looking at the two players RIGHT NOW.
 
Last edited:
I'll be honest, I wanted Zach Thomas. I think he has something in the tank and can be a leader. For him to sign in Dallas for less money and presummably not a guarantee to start is a bit of a slap in the face to the Saints. Whether we like it or not, we have to way overpay to get free agents to the city.

To the point, I do not want Dan Morgan...didn't want him before Thomas signed , I don't want him now. As to Vilma, I'm concerned that he is not healthy and won't be for a while. If he is, I do not want to give up any pick that is higher than a 5th for him. There is some really good LBs to be had in the early rounds.

We definitely need a tackling headknocker in the middle of our defense. The only way we will get one, I fear, is through the draft.
 
This is exactly what i said.

"Like i said safest when you talk about bringing in a players sign for a minimum deal or trade and take on a salary,lose a pick and you are back at the drawing board with less money under your cap if he don't play"

This don't have anything to do with comparing players or injury. I'm going on a guy that is cleared to play vs. a guy that may not play again and still isn't even running yet. PERIOD. Regardless of injury history. The more severe TODAY is vilma. This is the same injury that Grant had i think and he isn't even in the league. IF he has a clear bill of health during his physical, then yes go with vilma. This is a business decision purely on brining in a guy cheap and if he don't work out, then so be it. We know morgan will be ready for spring training, you can't say that about Vilam. With vilma,if not healthy, you lose cap money, lose a pick and still have to look for a lb. When you could have drafted one with the pick you just gave up. Talent you can't compare the two, this is looking at the two players RIGHT NOW.

Sure, Morgan is healthy and cleared to play "RIGHT NOW", but it's the end of February. Dan Morgan always seems to enter the season healthy, but he has never (repeat, never) stayed that way for very long. He has missed the last two seasons almost completely. I read and understand what you are saying, but based on the facts and Morgan's career history, he can in no way be considered safe or reliable.

Is trading for Vilma a gamble? Sure, but so are all trades, heck, so is the draft. We will have to evaluate his injury and estimate how we think he'll recover from it. We will then have to decide if it's worth trading a draft choice for him, or perhaps that it's not worth the risk.

But at least with Vilma there is the potential for a pay-off. With Morgan there really isn't one. Vilma is the better player, as well as the younger player. He has only had one injury in his career whereas Morgan has missed significant time with different injuries every year he's been in the league.

Dan Morgan will not cost as much as Vilma and we wouldn't have to trade for him, but the odds of him contributing to this team for the season are not very good, which is why I personally don't consider him a safe signing.
 
I'll be honest, I wanted Zach Thomas. I think he has something in the tank and can be a leader. For him to sign in Dallas for less money and presummably not a guarantee to start is a bit of a slap in the face to the Saints. Whether we like it or not, we have to way overpay to get free agents to the city.

To the point, I do not want Dan Morgan...didn't want him before Thomas signed , I don't want him now. As to Vilma, I'm concerned that he is not healthy and won't be for a while. If he is, I do not want to give up any pick that is higher than a 5th for him. There is some really good LBs to be had in the early rounds.

We definitely need a tackling headknocker in the middle of our defense. The only way we will get one, I fear, is through the draft.

I pretty much feel the same way.
 
Seriously, I'm probably the only person that wanted Dan Morgan more than Zach Thomas only because of his age. I don't like when the Saints sign players that is on the down side of his career. I don't mean that individual is getting horrible in play, I mean jsut getting up in age. When players get up in age they tend to get injured a lot, so yes, I wanted Dan Morgan and you guys can crucify me for that.

Well if we totally sucked I would say go younger and build for the long run...however we are a good defense away from being a super bowl team. So I don't mind a quick fix like Zach Thomas or Ty Law. We have about a 2-3 year window then all these primetime players are gonna want new money....and we can't keep them all.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

    Back
    Top Bottom