1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

So, who wants Tomlinson?

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by outofplace, Jan 22, 2009.

  1. outofplace

    outofplace Well-Known Member


    Sounds like LaDainian Tomlinson may be on the way out of San Diego whether he wants to go or not?
  2. JC

    JC Well-Known Member

    My money would be on the Patriots.
  3. 93Devil

    93Devil Well-Known Member

    Not being a wise-ass, but I think he would be a nice fit for a team looking for a part-time back, like Cleveland.
  4. hockeybeat

    hockeybeat Guest

    A.J. Smith should have dealt Tomlinson after last season and re-signed Michael Turner. What's the old saying? Better to trade a player a year too early than a year too late.
  5. Sam Mills 51

    Sam Mills 51 Active Member

    Only A.J. Smith would be this foolish.

    Tomlinson needs a lot of rest, perhaps some rehab/therapy work. Now that Smith doesn't possess ample options on his own team, dumping Tomlinson now would be a mistake. Intriguing when one still had the option of keeping Michael Turner. Not so when the options are Darren Sproles - a nice little player, but not capable of 350-400 carries a year - and whatever might be in the draft or free agency.

    Do you think, for one moment, that Tomlinson isn't becoming increasingly motivated by the story/rumor to come back as strong as he possibly can?

    Now, assuming Smith does deal him, where does he go? Well ... there's Seattle (don't see them thinking Julius Jones is a major upgrade over Shaun Alexander). If he'll restructure his deal, New England and Philly just might jump in. Kansas City needs help, assuming Pioli tells Larry Johnson to take a hike, but doubt Smith is silly enough to help a division rival.
  6. poindexter

    poindexter Well-Known Member

    I'd like to see where anyone actually posted or wrote keeping Turner over LT one year ago.

    In hindsight, it looks brilliant. A year ago? That would take some hellacious balls for a gm to do it.
  7. JakeandElwood

    JakeandElwood Well-Known Member

    After seeing how quickly Shaun Alexander fell off, I wouldn't invest too much in someone who seems to be on the decline. I think the Chargers should keep him and see if he can stay healthy. If he can, he could be close to what he was.
  8. mustangj17

    mustangj17 Active Member

    I don't know if I could see that. Are they going to have the cap room after having to carry to No.1 quarterbacks next year?

    Besides they already are paying Maroney first round money and Sammy Morris has proven himself to be a worthy backup. Faulk is also good for depth. Unless they get a great price. I don't see it happening. Unless they plan on Maroney getting hurt again, which could happen. He seems to never be healthy.
  9. hockeybeat

    hockeybeat Guest

    I'm not sure that anyone wrote it (in newspapers or websites or on the board) or said it on the air. But after injuring himself against the Colts and not being able to play in the AFC Championship Game, would it not have behooved Smith to investigate what Tomlinson could have brought back in a deal?
  10. slappy4428

    slappy4428 Active Member

    Lions. Lions. Lions.
  11. 93Devil

    93Devil Well-Known Member

    He might have another 400-600 touches in him with proper rest and health.
  12. Oz

    Oz Active Member

    Probably not much. The perception would have been the Chargers dumping a player who can't play, who's washed up. I can't imagine Chargers fans being happy had Smith traded Tomlinson on the cheap.

    Also, Michael Turner would have been put in a really tough spot.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page