My friend and I are debating if trading some unhappy NFL players would be beneficial for both teams involved, or just one. All have publicly stated their displeasure at one point or another. No, this hasn't happened, and it almost certainly will not, but out of curiousity how do you think this would work out?
Randy Moss & Jerry Porter for Lance Briggs
Obviously, I am assigning more value to Briggs and considering Porter to be a "throw-in" since he would probably be the odd-man out on the Bears between Muhammad, Moss, and Berrian.
2007-03-22 10:39:11 · 7 answers · asked by a-rob 3 in Sports ➔ Football (American)
Please remember, I said the question is hypothetical... IF it were to happen, who benefits more?
2007-03-22 11:08:11 · update #1
So far:
Bears 2 - Raiders 2
Three answers didn't get tallied, because they didn't pick a team....
2007-03-23 05:00:55 · update #2
I like this question!
I think the Bears would benefit in that Grossman would have 2 deep threats in Berrian and Moss and a reliable receiver in Muhammad...who do you cover? Throw in a 4 wide set with
Porter or Davis and now you give a defense some problems and most likely can stretch the field to open up the running game and do that a couple of times and now you a defense that might be guessing. Hmmmmmmmm, hypothical? Maybe it will come to fruitation! Again, thanks for asking and is it football season yet?
2007-03-22 12:51:49 · answer #1 · answered by Steve S 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Would never happen. Al Davis wouldn't give up Randy Moss alone for Lance Briggs. The Raiders already have a solid core of young linebackers and their defense was ranked 3rd in yardage given up. Randy Moss will stay with the Raiders.
Most likely trade would be to a team like the Eagles or Stealers who now need some young linebackers and would be for draft picks.
2007-03-22 11:02:33 · answer #2 · answered by Jesse 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think sending away two washed up aging WR's to a team that already has 2 solid WRs (Muhammad and Berrian) for a young Pro-Bowl linebacker is a good trade. Sure, those 2 would be great to have instead of nothing and having Briggs sitting out. But, its not like the Bears QB has proven himself consistently to make good use of those obvious weapons. Also, they're gonna need to focus on filling the hole that Briggs is going to leave instead of going for offense. Chicago is a defensive team and can't afford to have any holes in their line up, which Briggs is forming.
2007-03-22 12:32:48 · answer #3 · answered by zsherwood13 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Raiders would get the best of that trade.
Randy dont give a rats behind. Sexy Rexy wont command the respect needed to get Randy on board.
Porter might work in Chicago, but he too is a head case. Not to mention that, but hes never had a 1000 yard season ouch!
Result.... Raiders happy, Bears no super bowl
2007-03-22 12:55:23 · answer #4 · answered by coohman76 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the bears would benefit more only because the raiders dont need defense at this point. yes, lance briggs is an amazing LB, but the raiders are set with their defense. they need offense. since the bears wont be seeing lance briggs in uniform anyhow, it would benefit the bears more.
2007-03-22 17:34:38 · answer #5 · answered by The Claymaker- Go Pack! 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
obviously, the Bears would appear to benefit, but not necessarily, Moss and Porter would be competing again, and that's why they haven't done much for the raiders. I think the Raiders would be the winner
2007-03-22 12:05:59 · answer #6 · answered by Nate D - Public Enemy #5 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
that would never happen those are 2 starting good wr for one good lb
anyways the raiders dont need a defense, they need a offense, and they would need to keep moss and porter, even though both are coach killers and teammate killers
2007-03-22 12:40:03 · answer #7 · answered by Antwaan M 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋