Jump to content

mason signs in BALT..


spjets

Recommended Posts

Ravens, Mason agree on 5-year deal

Two-time Pro Bowl receiver will bolster offense

By Jamison Hensley

Sun Staff

Originally published March 2, 2005, 3:06 PM EST

The Ravens landed the impact receiver they desperately needed Tuesday afternoon, reaching a five-year agreement with Derrick Mason.

A two-time Pro Bowl player, Mason was released by the Tennessee Titans for salary-cap reasons on Feb. 21. He is the front-line wide-out that the Ravens have lacked over the past three seasons in which they have ranked 27th (2002), 32nd (2003) and 31st (2004) in the NFL in passing.

Last season, Mason made a career-best 96 catches while the Ravens' entire receiving corps pulled in 121 passes. Known for his consistency, he led the Titans in receptions the past four seasons, averaging 86 catches over that span.

The only concerns are his age (he turned 31 last month) and his size (5 feet 10, 190 pounds).

It is believed Mason selected the Ravens over the Jacksonville Jaguars, whose interest reportedly cooled over the past few days. Terms of the agreement were not immediately available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FIVE-year deal for a 31 year-old?

Glad we passed on this one. Another dumb move from the Ravens' front office that was once so good.

Maybe true, Troll.

But does this non-activity by the Jets remind you of a certain baseball team over the winter that we're both fans of?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm trying to maintain my cool, but this better not be a sign of other teams moving fast while the Jets twiddle their thumbs

Let's see how this unfolds, but I don't wanna see all of the FA's we desire start dropping like flies ... ELSEWHERE

I've been a big advocate the past two weeks saying of all the realistic WR's that were available, the Jets should have went after Mason first.

If this turns out Mason was lost because the Jets were pussy-footing around with Randy Moss and Lav Coles, the Jets FO will once again be laughing stocks.

As a Pats fan, I am ecstatic that Mason did not land with the Jets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been a big advocate the past two weeks saying of all the realistic WR's that were available, the Jets should have went after Mason first.

If this turns out Mason was lost because the Jets were pu$$y-footing around with Randy Moss and Lav Coles, the Jets FO will once again be laughing stocks.

As a Pats fan, I am ecstatic that Mason did not land with the Jets.

There were rumblings that he and Heimerdinger didn't have the best of relationships.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The word out of the "burgh is that he wants to go to a weather climate. But the Jets do intrigue him.

I would love Plaxico coming here so long as the Jets plan on trading S Moss. Having both of them here makes no sense imo. They would both be serving the same purpose as a deep threat that is inconsistent over the middle. The difference is Plaxico can go up and get a ball thrown deep.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't want any part of the underachieving Plaxico Burress and the big contract that he will command.

I'd rather draft a reciever than throw away money to a semi-bust.

So, from your post above I can only assume you FAVOR getting rid of Santana Moss TODAY. After all, considering where he was drafted, and his level of production to-date, he MUST be considered a bust.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, from your post above I can only assume you FAVOR getting rid of Santana Moss TODAY. After all, considering where he was drafted, and his level of production to-date, he MUST be considered a bust.

No, I favor keeping Moss because I believe he can thrive under Heimerdinger. Plus, he's already under contract.

As for Burress, it's obvious he's going to want #1 reciever money. I would not, under any cirumstances, pay a #2 reciever #1 money unless we were in a dire situation such as San Francisco or Cleveland's. We can get by with the recieving corps we have now. I'd prefer an upgrade, but throwing big money at Burress wouldn't be one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for Burress, it's obvious he's going to want #1 reciever money. I would not, under any cirumstances, pay a #2 reciever #1 money unless we were in a dire situation such as San Francisco or Cleveland's. We can get by with the recieving corps we have now. I'd prefer an upgrade, but throwing big money at Burress wouldn't be one.

Wow, a Jet fan practicing fiscal conservatism in the salary cap age of the NFL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...