I don't want to give up Turner.

  • Welcome to America's Finest Sports Forum and Podcast!

    afsportsforum.com is one of the largest online communities covering San Diego sports. We host a regular podcast during the major seasons. You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
M

matilack

Guest
Ive been watching some of the games I taped earlier this season, and in watching them I notice one thing that truley disturbed me,

Michael Turner cuts back better than LT, he keeps his shoulders low, he leans forward and the feet are moving constantly.
I love LT, hes the best thing thats ever happened to SD, but in the rushing game he needs to watch Michael Turners example, Tomlinson is too lateral, he leans back to much, and it slows down his acceleration through the hole and its why he gets caught after 9yds instead of 20 or 30.
If you want a good example watch him run in 01'-04' compared to now. He used to be much more aggressive, like he had something to prove.

What is your guys position on Michael Turner? Should we get something for him in the offseason or should we pay the guy?
 

in_a_days

dgaf
Sep 8, 2006
7,733
966
350
vegas
matilack said:
Michael Turner cuts back better than LT, he keeps his shoulders low, he leans forward and the feet are moving constantly.
I love LT, hes the best thing thats ever happened to SD, but in the rushing game he needs to watch Michael Turners example, Tomlinson is too lateral, he leans back to much, and it slows down his acceleration through the hole and its why he gets caught after 9yds instead of 20 or 30.
If you want a good example watch him run in 01'-04' compared to now. He used to be much more aggressive, like he had something to prove.

What is your guys position on Michael Turner? Should we get something for him in the offseason or should we pay the guy?
I don't think anyone is anxious to see Turner leave, but there's almost no practical way to keep him around. We can offer him the max tender this offseason, in which case we'll get a high draft pick from anyone who tries to sign him away from us. But it's incredibly unlikely that we'd match another team's offer. I just can't see how we could have to RBs on the roster both making NFL starter type money.

Furthermore I think it's a strech to say that Turner does anything much better than LT. Turner's only real advantage is his size, he's not a cut back runner. When he cuts back it's usually on a designed counter, other than that he's pretty much a down hill runner. I understand that it looks like he's hitting the holes faster this year, but that's because he's knows that he's going to run in a straight line and bull over anyone who tries to get in his way. Whereas LTs style has him approach the line with a little more patience looking for the big seam to gash. If LT looks bad this year it's because he's approaching the line with patience looking for cut back lanes that are not developing, (ie our run blocking sucks).
 

Trumpet_Man

Well-Known Member
Feb 14, 2006
17,404
598
350
ntman68 said:
Like it or not, this is Turners last year as a Charger.
I am not so sure a team will give up a FIRST & THIRD for Turner as compensation. Next year Turner is a Restricted Free Agent so we hold his rights.
 

Trumpet_Man

Well-Known Member
Feb 14, 2006
17,404
598
350
Well let me ask the question> Do you think teams will pony up a 1st & 3rd for Turner ?
 

ntman68

Well-Known Member
Aug 16, 2006
1,039
100
190
Orange County, CA
Trumpet_Man said:
I am not so sure a team will give up a FIRST & THIRD for Turner as compensation. Next year Turner is a Restricted Free Agent so we hold his rights.
I see your point, but as tough as it's been lately to find a money RB in the draft, those might be picks well spent for a sure-thing.
 

Trumpet_Man

Well-Known Member
Feb 14, 2006
17,404
598
350
ntman68 said:
I see your point, but as tough as it's been lately to find a money RB in the draft, those might be picks well spent for a sure-thing.
If someone gives us a 1st and 3rd for Turner - goodbye Turner. I would agree with that trade in a heartbeat. Give me those draft picks and then get us some fast fat boys for the O-line and D-line.
 

in_a_days

dgaf
Sep 8, 2006
7,733
966
350
vegas
Trumpet_Man said:
Well let me ask the question> Do you think teams will pony up a 1st & 3rd for Turner ?
Good question. The more I think about it, the less likely I think it is that anyone will cough up that much to get Turner. Not because I don't think Turner is worth it... But it seems to me like there aren't very many teams out there that really desperatly need a HB. And the teams that do have so many holes that I don't know if sacrificing two draft picks makes any sense. The 49ers, Titans, Packers, Jets, Browns... Those are the only teams that come to mind that desperatly need new RBs, but they all need a lot more than a new back to make them winning teams. Also it seems to me that quality backs are very often found in later rounds so I don't know how much sense it makes to give up the first rounder... Perhaps we will get to enjoy at least another year of MT spelling LT.
 

Trumpet_Man

Well-Known Member
Feb 14, 2006
17,404
598
350
in_a_days said:
Good question. The more I think about it, the less likely I think it is that anyone will cough up that much to get Turner. Not because I don't think Turner is worth it... But it seems to me like there aren't very many teams out there that really desperatly need a HB. And the teams that do have so many holes that I don't know if sacrificing two draft picks makes any sense. The 49ers, Titans, Packers, Jets, Browns... Those are the only teams that come to mind that desperatly need new RBs, but they all need a lot more than a new back to make them winning teams. Also it seems to me that quality backs are very often found in later rounds so I don't know how much sense it makes to give up the first rounder... Perhaps we will get to enjoy at least another year of MT spelling LT.
A 1st and 3rd is just too much to give up. Even a 1st is too much for a 5th round pick in Turner.

Nobody will be dumb enough to do it.

Teams are built through the draft and the more picks we have the better especially with our scouting staff.
 

MasterOfPuppets

Charger fan since 1979
Aug 8, 2006
3,284
347
290
46
Tijuana, Mexico
Trumpet_Man said:
Well let me ask the question> Do you think teams will pony up a 1st & 3rd for Turner ?
no, a third maybe, no more than that, did anybody give a first for Shaun Alexander a few years back when he was on the market?
 

obviousman03

BoltTalker
Oct 27, 2006
8
1
70
34
I don't think anyone has really brought up this point yet when it comes to Turner.

How many NFL teams now have a successful running game with just 1 RB getting most of the carries. Denver splits carries, NE splits carries, Indy splits carries, Giants split carries, etc. I can name 6 teams that don't split their carries at 70/30 or higher: Arizona, Seattle, Buffalo, Minnesota, KC, StL. The trouble is it shortens the RBs career, makes them tired/weaker towards the end of the season typically, and most back are somewhat one-dimensional so its less the defense has to worry about.

If we has JUST Ladanian, the defenses would say "put a big DT or two in the middle, and then tell the LBs to play outside". with turner coming in every few series, they have to change that. he can go outside or inside. you can't just leave a big DT there cause he'll juke him, then break the tackle of the MLB and be gone.

trading turner is idiotic. we've been through enough seasons where Tomlinson comes limping to the end or is shut down by a team that knows how to shut him down on the ground(blitz up the middle, have good tackling CBs and Safeties, ala the Eagles last year) to know this. imo, i'd love to see us copy NO's system. see if Tomlinson can return punts, use him 50/50 as WR and RB, and then pound turner up the middle. has anyone watched the saints games? the defense can't really focus on either one of them or the passing game, so everything is left open a little bit.
 

MasterOfPuppets

Charger fan since 1979
Aug 8, 2006
3,284
347
290
46
Tijuana, Mexico
obviousman03 said:
I don't think anyone has really brought up this point yet when it comes to Turner.

How many NFL teams now have a successful running game with just 1 RB getting most of the carries. Denver splits carries, NE splits carries, Indy splits carries, Giants split carries, etc. I can name 6 teams that don't split their carries at 70/30 or higher: Arizona, Seattle, Buffalo, Minnesota, KC, StL. The trouble is it shortens the RBs career, makes them tired/weaker towards the end of the season typically, and most back are somewhat one-dimensional so its less the defense has to worry about.

If we has JUST Ladanian, the defenses would say "put a big DT or two in the middle, and then tell the LBs to play outside". with turner coming in every few series, they have to change that. he can go outside or inside. you can't just leave a big DT there cause he'll juke him, then break the tackle of the MLB and be gone.

trading turner is idiotic. we've been through enough seasons where Tomlinson comes limping to the end or is shut down by a team that knows how to shut him down on the ground(blitz up the middle, have good tackling CBs and Safeties, ala the Eagles last year) to know this. imo, i'd love to see us copy NO's system. see if Tomlinson can return punts, use him 50/50 as WR and RB, and then pound turner up the middle. has anyone watched the saints games? the defense can't really focus on either one of them or the passing game, so everything is left open a little bit.

although I agree with you on (almost) everything I don't think it's a matter of trading him, he'll be a RFA after this year and if he signes for one year he'll be a URFA in 2008, he will want to be the number 1 guy, it's going to be hard to convince him to stay

p.s. wellcome to the board :tup:
 

Trumpet_Man

Well-Known Member
Feb 14, 2006
17,404
598
350
obviousman03 said:
I don't think anyone has really brought up this point yet when it comes to Turner.

How many NFL teams now have a successful running game with just 1 RB getting most of the carries. Denver splits carries, NE splits carries, Indy splits carries, Giants split carries, etc. I can name 6 teams that don't split their carries at 70/30 or higher: Arizona, Seattle, Buffalo, Minnesota, KC, StL. The trouble is it shortens the RBs career, makes them tired/weaker towards the end of the season typically, and most back are somewhat one-dimensional so its less the defense has to worry about.

If we has JUST Ladanian, the defenses would say "put a big DT or two in the middle, and then tell the LBs to play outside". with turner coming in every few series, they have to change that. he can go outside or inside. you can't just leave a big DT there cause he'll juke him, then break the tackle of the MLB and be gone.

trading turner is idiotic. we've been through enough seasons where Tomlinson comes limping to the end or is shut down by a team that knows how to shut him down on the ground(blitz up the middle, have good tackling CBs and Safeties, ala the Eagles last year) to know this. imo, i'd love to see us copy NO's system. see if Tomlinson can return punts, use him 50/50 as WR and RB, and then pound turner up the middle. has anyone watched the saints games? the defense can't really focus on either one of them or the passing game, so everything is left open a little bit.
If we can get a 1st and 3rd for Turner - DO IT.

The war is won in the trenches.

If we win that battle, we will see holes the size that even your grandmother could waltz through and Turner is bait for that to happen.

I especially do not like the fact our season would be essentially over if we lose Jamal Williams at nose tackle.

A trade of this magnitude give us TWO 1st's and THREE 3rd round picks (after the comp pick for Brees). This is what we go into the draft holding. That shores up this team very very well .....

Our scouts will unearth another RB gem. :yes: Look at their track record - LT - Chatman - Turner and a few scat backs I like on the PS.
 

Trumpet_Man

Well-Known Member
Feb 14, 2006
17,404
598
350
Don't get me wrong. I love Turner. Dude is a horse and I know he spells LT big time but this is just too good to pass up if a team ponies up a 1st and 3rd. You HAVE to do this deal no matter how we feel because we need help badly in other areas.
 

Trumpet_Man

Well-Known Member
Feb 14, 2006
17,404
598
350
MasterOfPuppets said:
although I agree with you on (almost) everything I don't think it's a matter of trading him, he'll be a RFA after this year and if he signes for one year he'll be a URFA in 2008, he will want to be the number 1 guy, it's going to be hard to convince him to stay

p.s. wellcome to the board :tup:
Yup.

We would have to use a Tag on Turner to keep him (Transition or Franchise) in 2008 or offer him a contract before now and the end of next year.
 

Trumpet_Man

Well-Known Member
Feb 14, 2006
17,404
598
350
Concudan said:
Turner will be tagged then traded.
That could happen as well. It would up the ante.

If LT gets hurt (god forbid an IR), I could see us tagging Turner and then using him as our feature back.
 

Buttmunch

Well-Known Member
Jul 5, 2006
850
103
170
44
Years ago, you'd rarely see back being put on the market. today, you see more and more hitting free agency. That's why guys were so frustrated this past off season, when teams weren't willing to give up big money or picks for RB's on the trading block. There were some good ones, including Alexander a couple of years ago. There have been a lot of good RB's in the last 2-3 drafts, and I think that will be the m.o. for teams in the near future. Build through the draft.
 

WonderSlug

Well-Known Member
Sep 1, 2005
8,654
807
350
49
www.boltsplanet.com
Well, if a team is willing to pony up a first and third for Turner, he's gone.

We can use one of our thirds to draft another good backup RB for LT (say that comp pick we'll get for Brees).

That leaves us still with a first and third we can use to grab good OL beef in the draft.
 

Concudan

Still Chargin
Staff member
Administrator
Mar 5, 2006
55,958
3,697
350
WonderSlug said:
Well, if a team is willing to pony up a first and third for Turner, he's gone.

We can use one of our thirds to draft another good backup RB for LT (say that comp pick we'll get for Brees).

That leaves us still with a first and third we can use to grab good OL beef in the draft.
It is a pipe dream to think we will get that for a RB, even one as good as Turner. There is a surplus of RBs now, last free agency period displayed that. No super huge contracts etc...
 

WonderSlug

Well-Known Member
Sep 1, 2005
8,654
807
350
49
www.boltsplanet.com
Concudan said:
It is a pipe dream to think we will get that for a RB, even one as good as Turner. There is a surplus of RBs now, last free agency period displayed that. No super huge contracts etc...
Yeah.

That's why he'll likely stay with us another season, or else AJ gets a treasure trove in trade for him after the season.

However, if Turner has another good year, I think AJ does indeed pull the trigger on a multi-year deal to keep him in San Diego.

The one-two punch of TnT is a powerful combo.
 

RayDahayder

BoltTalker
Sep 12, 2006
242
23
100
65
I think Cam needs to get this guy playing more. I can't believe we don't see both him and LT in the same backfield with a lot more different looks and plays to try and confuse the defenses.

Hell, any one of us can come up with some sandlot plays that would work with these two guys. I honestly think that some of the fans could do a better job than a lot of coaches. We watch a ton of different games each week. Coaches see just one. Their own. And they watch a game tape of their opponents.

Maybe that's why these guys keep doing the same things that don't work.... like 'prevent' defenses. If they watched 10 games on a weekend like most fans, they'd realize that every time a team plays that way, they lose. Do you think Marty watched the UCLA/notre dame game? If he did, he'd be yelling at the UCLA coach for giving that game away. Then he wouldn't have to learn the lesson the hard way ( a la Baltimore).
 

Thread_Killer

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2006
4,312
670
320
matilack said:
Ive been watching some of the games I taped earlier this season, and in watching them I notice one thing that truley disturbed me,

Michael Turner cuts back better than LT, he keeps his shoulders low, he leans forward and the feet are moving constantly.
Tomlinson is too lateral, he leans back to much, and it slows down his acceleration through the hole and its why he gets caught after 9yds instead of 20 or 30.
If you want a good example watch him run in 01'-04' compared to now. He used to be much more aggressive, like he had something to prove.

What is your guys position on Michael Turner? Should we get something for him in the offseason or should we pay the guy?

Or watch him in 2003, his best year (IMO). After that season, LT changed trainers and went to an unorthodox offseason workout regimen. I stated my concerns back then, that he shouldn’t fix what ain’t broke, that it would just make LT prone to injury and limit his effectiveness. Which is exactly what has happened.

So to answer your question, I say keep Michael Turner at all costs. :tup:

PS. But if LT goes back to his old workout routine, my answer might change.
 

obviousman03

BoltTalker
Oct 27, 2006
8
1
70
34
I understand Turner will want to start, but I'm suggesting we start them both ala McCallister & Reggie Bush. Turner is smart....he's going to see the opportunity we have here and give it a shot. Although I don't know that we'll ever use them both the right way unless Cam gets more authority and/or becomes the head coach.

anyways, a few hours after making my post I saw this in Bill Simmons' weekly column (www.bostonsportsguy.com):

"I would tell the Chargers to play Turner and Tomlinson at the same time, exactly like how New Orleans uses McAllister and Bush. As Cris Collinsworth pointed out last week, nobody can stop the Saints' offense because defenses constantly worry about Bush swinging to either side, so they can't blitz Brees or can't stack the line. Having Bush out there is almost like dousing the other team with a fish paralyzer. Well, Turner is just as good as McAllister, and LDT is a better all-around back than Bush (and can even throw the ball). So why wouldn't the Saints' ploy work even better with them? I don't get it."
 

glutton4Bolts

BoltTalker
Aug 27, 2006
229
14
100
44
in_a_days said:
I don't think anyone is anxious to see Turner leave, but there's almost no practical way to keep him around. We can offer him the max tender this offseason, in which case we'll get a high draft pick from anyone who tries to sign him away from us. But it's incredibly unlikely that we'd match another team's offer. I just can't see how we could have to RBs on the roster both making NFL starter type money.

Furthermore I think it's a strech to say that Turner does anything much better than LT. Turner's only real advantage is his size, he's not a cut back runner. When he cuts back it's usually on a designed counter, other than that he's pretty much a down hill runner. I understand that it looks like he's hitting the holes faster this year, but that's because he's knows that he's going to run in a straight line and bull over anyone who tries to get in his way. Whereas LTs style has him approach the line with a little more patience looking for the big seam to gash. If LT looks bad this year it's because he's approaching the line with patience looking for cut back lanes that are not developing, (ie our run blocking sucks).
The Aints are doing it..... why cant we? We have plenty of room under the cap.... I think we should sign him and play him. I used to be so into the stats that LT was putting up.... but now, Id just rather have victories. LT and Turner in the same backfield is a deadly combo.... and I want to see more of it.