Diamondback Jay
Psalms 23:1
It's just a pipe dream on Minnesota's side.
Vikes may target Larry Fitzgerald
- Thread starter BullheadCardFan
- Start date
AzWins23
Registered User
I don't get alot of you people! You talk about getting rid of Fitzgerald? Are you kidding me? You need atleast 2 good WR's now, just like you need 2 RB's. Why trade away great talent for a gamble...It's crazy!
ArizonaElvis
Registered
Why in the world would the Cardinals want a number 7 pick for one of the games best receivers that is already established? Let's face it, if people were drafting already knowing how Fitz would turn out(like they do), he'd be the number one pick hands down! It doesn't make sense, this is just a BS rumor!
azdad1978
Championship!!!!
The only way I'll trade Fitz is if they're willing to part with Hutch. If not not, no thanks.
cardsfanmd
ASFN Icon
i agree that fitz shouldn't be traded and he was possible the best player in that draft, but if we were to make a trade, the #7 pick wouldn't be the main reason. We would have to get some great players. Iwould probably take hutchinson and the #7. Hutch is one of the top three o-linemen in the game and we can grab ted ginn with the 7. That said, i do think that fitz is the 2000's version of marvin harrison--great work ethic and keeps his mouth shut. leads by example.
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2005
- Posts
- 46,247
- Reaction score
- 11,852
I would pull the trigger on the trade if it were just Hutchinson + the #7 pick. You build from the inside out.
It's not "getting rid of Fitzgerald". It's listening to trade proposals, and they would need to be pretty damned good. Knock us off of our feet. Fitzgerald is that valuable.
Chris_Sanders is right, teams don't trade all their top guys for your 1 and add draft picks, usually. There have been exceptions. Look at what the Vikings gave up to get Hershel Walker. Look at what the Saints gave up to get Ricky Williams.
az jam
ASFN Icon
The Viking board picked this up and they are all saying that Fitz wants out of Arizona and the Cards will be forced to trade him. They say give the Cards the 7th pick and Smoot. Nothing else. Amazing difference between what Cards fans want and what the Vikings fans think they should give.
Bottom line is the Cards have no desire to trade Fitz.
Bottom line is the Cards have no desire to trade Fitz.
Then the answer is no.
Seems to me there is a greater chance of Rolle becoming decent than there is Smoot being any good here.
Treesquid PhD
Pardon my Engrish
Our new slogan Sing with me now....
Sorry I would do it!
Sorry I would do it!
we're always one trade away from the super bowl!
please just one trade to help my day, I am the fan of the Pottsville Maroons
Sorry I would do it!
Sorry I would do it!
...Trade em all!!!....yeah yeah
...Trade them ALLLLLLL!!!
Oh ye! Oh ye!
in the land of the Pottsville Maroons!
Totally_Red
Air Raid Warning!
They are as delusional. Just because they traded head case Randy Moss for a high draft pick and a mediocre LB, they expect Arizona to trade Fitz, who is a high character hard worker, who doesn't take plays off for a high draft pick and an all talk CB with serious character issues.
az jam
ASFN Icon
Even Profootballtalk says its not even a rumor:
FITZ-TO-VIKES "RUMOR" NOT EVEN THAT
We often are accused for making something out of nothing or, in some cases, simply making stuff up. We're sensitive to these charges, because it's one of the tools used by some members of the "real" media to discredit us.
But there's a "rumor" sweeping the Internet right now that isn't even a rumor, and it was the result not of reporting but of raw speculation.
In an item that apparently was written by Charley Walters of the St. Paul Pioneer Press, Walters muses about the possibility of the Vikings making a play for a high-profile Minnesota native in the trade market.
"It will be interesting to see whether the Vikings, seeking reasons for season-ticket holders to renew, try to trade their No. 7 overall pick in April's draft, plus a player or two, for Arizona Cardinals wide receiver Larry Fitzgerald Jr. of Minneapolis," the paper writes.
We've got no problem with that statement. It's pure speculation, but it makes sense. Though we don't think the seventh overall pick and "a player or two" would get it done, the notion of the Vikings trying to bring home their local ball boy made good has a lot of appeal.
But it's not a rumor or a report.
The problem arose when SI.com added the story to the top of its "Truth & Rumors" section, with a link from its NFL front page that implied that it was more than speculation. The title of the page for February 8 was/is "Vikings may trade for Larry Fitzgerald Jr."
So now we're getting flooded with e-mails from Vikings fans asking us what we know about this "rumor" that the Vikings are going to try to trade for Fitzgerald. But there is no rumor. There never was. There might be in the future. But not now.
We're not upset about this. We like getting e-mails from the members of PFT Planet, even if 100 of them all say the same thing. But before anyone pooh-poohs this site because we go beyond the function of reporting fact, it's important to keep in mind that plenty of other non-Internet outposts are doing the same thing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FITZ-TO-VIKES "RUMOR" NOT EVEN THAT
We often are accused for making something out of nothing or, in some cases, simply making stuff up. We're sensitive to these charges, because it's one of the tools used by some members of the "real" media to discredit us.
But there's a "rumor" sweeping the Internet right now that isn't even a rumor, and it was the result not of reporting but of raw speculation.
In an item that apparently was written by Charley Walters of the St. Paul Pioneer Press, Walters muses about the possibility of the Vikings making a play for a high-profile Minnesota native in the trade market.
"It will be interesting to see whether the Vikings, seeking reasons for season-ticket holders to renew, try to trade their No. 7 overall pick in April's draft, plus a player or two, for Arizona Cardinals wide receiver Larry Fitzgerald Jr. of Minneapolis," the paper writes.
We've got no problem with that statement. It's pure speculation, but it makes sense. Though we don't think the seventh overall pick and "a player or two" would get it done, the notion of the Vikings trying to bring home their local ball boy made good has a lot of appeal.
But it's not a rumor or a report.
The problem arose when SI.com added the story to the top of its "Truth & Rumors" section, with a link from its NFL front page that implied that it was more than speculation. The title of the page for February 8 was/is "Vikings may trade for Larry Fitzgerald Jr."
So now we're getting flooded with e-mails from Vikings fans asking us what we know about this "rumor" that the Vikings are going to try to trade for Fitzgerald. But there is no rumor. There never was. There might be in the future. But not now.
We're not upset about this. We like getting e-mails from the members of PFT Planet, even if 100 of them all say the same thing. But before anyone pooh-poohs this site because we go beyond the function of reporting fact, it's important to keep in mind that plenty of other non-Internet outposts are doing the same thing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OP
OP
From PFT ...
POSTED 10:40 a.m. EST; UPDATED 11:14 a.m. EST, February 9, 2007
FITZ-TO-VIKES "RUMOR" NOT EVEN THAT
We often are accused of making something out of nothing or, in some cases, simply making stuff up. We're sensitive to these charges, because it's one of the tools used by some members of the "real" media to discredit us.
But there's a "rumor" sweeping the Internet right now that isn't even a rumor, and it was the result not of reporting but of raw speculation.
In an item that apparently was written by Charley Walters of the St. Paul Pioneer Press, Walters muses about the possibility of the Vikings making a play for a high-profile Minnesota native in the trade market.
"It will be interesting to see whether the Vikings, seeking reasons for season-ticket holders to renew, try to trade their No. 7 overall pick in April's draft, plus a player or two, for Arizona Cardinals wide receiver Larry Fitzgerald Jr. of Minneapolis," the paper writes.
We've got no problem with that statement. It's pure speculation, but it makes sense. Though we don't think the seventh overall pick and "a player or two" would get it done, the notion of the Vikings trying to bring home their local ball boy made good has a lot of appeal.
But it's not a rumor or a report.
The problem arose when SI.com added the story to the top of its "Truth & Rumors" section, with a link from its NFL front page that implied that it was more than speculation. The title of the page for February 8 was/is "Vikings may trade for Larry Fitzgerald Jr."
So now we're getting flooded with e-mails from Vikings fans asking us what we know about this "rumor" that the Vikings are going to try to trade for Fitzgerald. But there is no rumor. There never was. There might be in the future. But not now.
We're not upset about this. We like getting e-mails from the members of PFT Planet, even if 100 of them all say the same thing. But before anyone pooh-poohs this site because we go beyond the function of reporting fact, it's important to keep in mind that plenty of other non-Internet outposts are doing the same thing.
FITZ-TO-VIKES "RUMOR" NOT EVEN THAT
We often are accused of making something out of nothing or, in some cases, simply making stuff up. We're sensitive to these charges, because it's one of the tools used by some members of the "real" media to discredit us.
But there's a "rumor" sweeping the Internet right now that isn't even a rumor, and it was the result not of reporting but of raw speculation.
In an item that apparently was written by Charley Walters of the St. Paul Pioneer Press, Walters muses about the possibility of the Vikings making a play for a high-profile Minnesota native in the trade market.
"It will be interesting to see whether the Vikings, seeking reasons for season-ticket holders to renew, try to trade their No. 7 overall pick in April's draft, plus a player or two, for Arizona Cardinals wide receiver Larry Fitzgerald Jr. of Minneapolis," the paper writes.
We've got no problem with that statement. It's pure speculation, but it makes sense. Though we don't think the seventh overall pick and "a player or two" would get it done, the notion of the Vikings trying to bring home their local ball boy made good has a lot of appeal.
But it's not a rumor or a report.
The problem arose when SI.com added the story to the top of its "Truth & Rumors" section, with a link from its NFL front page that implied that it was more than speculation. The title of the page for February 8 was/is "Vikings may trade for Larry Fitzgerald Jr."
So now we're getting flooded with e-mails from Vikings fans asking us what we know about this "rumor" that the Vikings are going to try to trade for Fitzgerald. But there is no rumor. There never was. There might be in the future. But not now.
We're not upset about this. We like getting e-mails from the members of PFT Planet, even if 100 of them all say the same thing. But before anyone pooh-poohs this site because we go beyond the function of reporting fact, it's important to keep in mind that plenty of other non-Internet outposts are doing the same thing.
RugbyMuffin
ASFN IDOL
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2003
- Posts
- 30,485
- Reaction score
- 4,877
Darren Sharper, Matt Birk, and 1st, 2nd, and 6th round picks
cardsfanmd
ASFN Icon
fitz isn't hershal walker or ricky williams
seesred
Registered User
Fitz for their O-line and their corners plus the next two years number 1 pick and some cash. Those cheap Bidwills it's all their fault.
GBR
40
GBR
40
Goldfield
Formally known as BEERZ
I would do that for their #1 & Winfield & a 3rd or 4th rounder.
We could grab Ginn at #9 filling the 3rd WR & returnman. Our recievers would be less taleted but much faster & less cap used on them. We get a good CB & extra cap space.
IMO WR's are not extremely important. You need 1 great one(Boldin) and other solid ones(Ginn & BJ)...
Also if you have a Good QB, your WR's tend to overachieve.
I would do that trade. I cant help but think we have too much cap devoted to the WR position. IMO it is abit of an overkill(although a great luxury) to have two #1 probowl recievers.
IMO I would rather have Fitz Cap space to use on the Oline or the D.
In the end, I doubt there will be a trade.
cardsfanmd
ASFN Icon
i agree with what you said, but you labeled ginn as a #3, is that saying that bj will start?
AzWins23
Registered User
Are we still talking about this???
