Re: This should put an end to the Mangold talk.
but the great sword of king lliar told me that mangold will be on the ravens and to trust him
Re: This should put an end to the Mangold talk.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Goode05
Makes me wonder if Yanda can come back next year. I give him mad respect he could have come back and just stole checks
Mangold was Fool's Gold. Yanda? A year older and coming off the second injury in two years. IF he plays he'll be Good, but the Great years are behind him. Have to draft/develop someone to play RG.
Re: This should put an end to the Mangold talk.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
houstonravensfan
Mangold was Fool's Gold. Yanda? A year older and coming off the second injury in two years. IF he plays he'll be Good, but the Great years are behind him. Have to draft/develop someone to play RG.
RG isn't the kind of position you have to "develop" somebody to play.
You just use a mid-round draft pick on them and let them start pretty much right away. I have zero concerns about our ability to find quality Guard play in the draft when we need to. Its arguably the best position we evaluate talent in.
Re: This should put an end to the Mangold talk.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
bravens23
RG isn't the kind of position you have to "develop" somebody to play.
You just use a mid-round draft pick on them and let them start pretty much right away. I have zero concerns about our ability to find quality Guard play in the draft when we need to. Its arguably the best position we evaluate talent in.
Really? We spent a 4th AND a 5th just this year, "and let them start pretty much right away."?
Re: This should put an end to the Mangold talk.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
houstonravensfan
Mangold was Fool's Gold. Yanda? A year older and coming off the second injury in two years. IF he plays he'll be Good, but the Great years are behind him. Have to draft/develop someone to play RG.
Yeah, and don't forget RT, LG, and Center while you're at it... Bc
Re: This should put an end to the Mangold talk.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ravenswintitle
But there were quite a few on here who were convinced Oz had a handshake agreement.
Schefter and LaCanfora, who usually know what is going on, were touting it after Mangold met with the Ravens. There was reason for optimism. Now all those who are pleased at the outcome can enjoy our Oline.
Re: This should put an end to the Mangold talk.
They are better off now than they would have been had they signed Mangold anyway IMO. As long as they re-sign him, Jensen should have the C position locked down for a while. At least until he gets hurt.
Re: This should put an end to the Mangold talk.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bhcforlife
They are better off now than they would have been had they signed Mangold anyway IMO. As long as they re-sign him, Jensen should have the C position locked down for a while. At least until he gets hurt.
They are not better off than having a healthy Mangold at C and Jensen at G.
Re: This should put an end to the Mangold talk.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
rhapsody
They are not better off than having a healthy Mangold at C and Jensen at G.
A healthy Mangold never existed, so what you're describing was never possible.
Re: This should put an end to the Mangold talk.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
rhapsody
They are not better off than having a healthy Mangold at C and Jensen at G.
Jensen was not the type of player he has been at C when he was put at G the past couple of years. My point being if they had signed Mangold, Jensen may have continued to struggle at G, he isn't brought back and they don't find a long term answer at C, where Mangold would be a 1-2 year at most thing.
By not going the Mangold route, they should in theory have their C for the next few years. Lewis should be back next year at LG and Yanda at RG, so the only hole you have over the next couple seasons is potentially RT but even that Howard is probably coming back based on early returns being pretty good.
Re: This should put an end to the Mangold talk.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bhcforlife
Jensen was not the type of player he has been at C when he was put at G the past couple of years. My point being if they had signed Mangold, Jensen may have continued to struggle at G, he isn't brought back and they don't find a long term answer at C, where Mangold would be a 1-2 year at most thing.
By not going the Mangold route, they should in theory have their C for the next few years. Lewis should be back next year at LG and Yanda at RG, so the only hole you have over the next couple seasons is potentially RT but even that Howard is probably coming back based on early returns being pretty good.
I wouldn't pen Lewis in for anything he's been healthy what less then 10 out of 32 games? And who knows with Yanda last year was a shoulder this year an ankle. Mangold had an ankle injury at the same time last year at the same age and couldn't come back
Re: This should put an end to the Mangold talk.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
trailhiker85
But ...but ...but ...Mangold is going to sign with the Ravens any minute and save our O-line! You just wait! :crazy:
sounds like if/when it heals hell be an option for us. This only confirms the reason wasnt money, not that there wasnt mutual interest.
its no different than a player coming off PUP or IR if hes healthy enough between weeks 6-12.
If the foots still giving him that much of an issue, its probably unlikely, but I dont think what hes saying, that he was/is to hurt to play closes the door when were talking about week 4 and having major issues along our line.