Steve Hutchinson to Titans, Mario Williams to Bills

Submitted by Moleskyn on

Not OT since Hutch is an alum, and I threw in the Williams news since it was related. The Titans have reached an agreement with Hutch on a 3-year deal. Apparently, it's a strategic move by the Titans to try to lure Manning to Nashville. It will certainly be interesting to hear how that plays out.

Also, Mario Williams signed with the Bills. They've got him for 6 years at about $100 million, with $50 million guaranteed. That's a big fish to land and has to improve Buffalo's chances of winning the AFC East.

WolvinLA2

March 15th, 2012 at 4:43 PM ^

It's funny - both of those moves might help lure Peyton to Tennessee, since he might not want to go to Miami if he has to face Mario Williams twice a year.

But then again, Miami has Jake Long, so Mario Williams would be a non-factor.  OK, nevermind.

Naked Bootlegger

March 15th, 2012 at 4:51 PM ^

Hutch should help Chris Johnson return to form.    And Peyton Manning's life would be a bit easier with him protecting the interior line.    Nice move by the Titans.   Methinks Adrian Peterson will miss Hutch.

Needs

March 16th, 2012 at 10:33 AM ^

I understand it completely as a PR thing, but it doesn't make any sense in terms of their direction as a franchise. They just spent a #1 on Jack Locker last year. They must have absolutely no confidence that Locker is going to develop into a franchise qb. I'm not saying that Locker=Manning by a long shot, but they did just use a high draft pick on him. Don't they have to find out if he can play? Do they think they're on the doorstep of a championship with improved QB play?

I know Aaron Rodgers is the counterpoint, about how sitting behind a great QB can help a young QB develop, but that didn't involve the Packers bringing someone in to play in front of him. Here, you're going to need to use a bunch of practice time to get Manning and the rest of the offense on the same page, which is going to necessarily stunt Locker's development. And Rodgers is also a case for being patient with a young qb's development. Bob McGinn had a great article in the Milwaukee papers a few months ago about how most scouts thought Rodgers was a bust after his first, and even his second year, in the league. A lot of people thought the same thing about Eli Manning until he led the Giants to their first superbowl. It just seems if you're going to committ to taking a QB high in the draft, you need to committ to him for at least 3 years to know what you have.

Here's the McGinn article, including this notable quote about the following year's draft...

 

A month before the draft, a panel of 18 personnel men were asked to compare Rodgers against that year's quarterback pool led by Matt Leinart, Vince Young and Jay Cutler. Not only didn't Rodgers draw any first-place votes, he had only one second and three thirds. Eleven scouts put him fourth, and three others even had him behind Brodie Croyle and Charlie Whitehurst.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/136856133.html