Yes. He's obviously not.

Do cheetahs ever prosper?

Sure. Let's assess to recent situations. Tiger was banging anything with a pulse for years. Wife didn't leave him and he's playing golf, traveling the world again. Jesse James was playing hide the sausage with a stripper. Sandra Bullock is divorcing him but virtually no one knew who he was before he got caught. So he got to drill Sandra Bullock and, because strippers now know who he is, he'll get more strippers.

Which brings up a great question: Sandra Bullock, or the tattood Nazi-loving stripper?

On a scale of -10 to 10 with 0 being neutral, how would you rate an Asomugha for McNabb trade?

This is still happening?

For one night, you always take the tatted up stripper. Not if it's gonna cost you anything important(like your marriage) but the stripper is the right choice.

As a Raider fan, I'd rate it -10. Eagles fans should jump for joy just because some schmuck mentioned it.

No.

Did you see Adam Schefter on SportsCenter?

He said something like "Oakland doesn't care that the price is through the roof, they don't care that McNabb has 1 year on his deal, and they don't care that he doesn't want to play in Oakland, so that makes them the favorite." Does that sound about par for the course to you for a team run by Al Davis?

I did.

I didn't hear him mention Asomugha. First round pick, sure. Raiders will just take some fast dude that can't play anyway. I'd rather have McNabb bouncing passes to receivers than Russell doing the same thing.

Mike,

• Are you willing to part with pick #39 in the NFL draft for McNabb?
• If the Raiders get McNabb, could they win 9 or 10 games next season?
• Do you think Al Davis might actually be onto something here - could they win the division title since their competition is not that good?
• If McNabb did turn them into a 9 or 10 win team, would he consider re-signing at the end of the season?
• What does this mean for JaMarcus Russell and Bruce Gradkowski?

EE

Yes.

I thought the Raiders were a good QB away from 10-11 wins last season.

San Diego is pretty good. But 10 wins would probably net a WC.

I don't think so. But you never know. He might like Oakland.

It means they'd both sit the bench. Most likely, Gradkowski would be somewhere else. Russell might learn something from McNabb.

As I plot the future for the Whiny ******* redux, I've got a pretty nice problem.

At season start, dude enough young talent in AAA and the ML team that I made a couple of trades for starters, then took the best 25 regardless of age and made that my ML team, remainder went to AAA.

I'm 37-28, 3 games out of the WC (division alignment has given me the shaft) with the youngest team in the league. I'm unlikely to make the playoff this season. About half the team is still developing, with about 3 more in AAA that probably makes the team next year.

So, I'm pondering the budget for the next few years. If I don't do anything stupid and stay healthy, I'm probably a playoff team for the next 5-6 years without lifting a finger.

I'm thinking I strip down the college and high school budgets, reduce the prospect budget, keep the international budget and pick off the one or 2 half decent prospects that pop up there, and put the money in salary (for the eventual flood of arb eligible), training and medical.

Does this align with your way of thinking?

No. I'd keep my HS budget and an "average" IFA budget. I'd keep 10-12m in prospect budget. That way you can keep adding young parts.

With the draft, I get 25 anyway. Wouldn't the "blind squirrel finding the nut" theory apply there and use the IFA to target the quality young parts?

Is deathinahole Jeff Loria, or does he wish to build a dynasty?

Is keeping the top prospects through arbitration and free agency, jettisoning the second tier for the young up and ready players, and make the occasional move to fill the unfilled gap not a good strategy?