I'd rather invest our money in draft picks and our own players.

With our current salary cap situation we would be hard pressed to resign him after next season.  Chad Johnson would be better because he is locked up long term.

I'm like Terry in that I would prefer none of these rumors to come true.  However, if I have to pick one, I'm going with Pacman.  He has the lowest cost but the most upside.  It doesn't make sense to release players to make room for a wide receiver right now.  

Maybe if we traded an under performing former first round pick (or two) we could afford another high priced WR and get something back.  Of course trading causes a cap escalation and so the 'boys capologists would have to do some creative things just to make it work if it could work at all (and I'm skeptical about that).

Either Pac comes here or nothing happens.  I just don't see any other reasonable scenario.  It's fun to speculate, though.

Derek

How could the top two vote getters not be Roy Williams and Anquan Boldin ???

Seems to me that people are just picking Pacman because the story has been bashing them in the head for like a week now.

Two young non trouble making super star WR's who can play at a high level for at least the next five years are on the board and yet a trouble making, may not even be playing come September because of  suspension young CB is winning the vote right now.

This reminds me of Britney Spears. Because TMZ follows her around every one wants to talk about her. Yet there are other talented artists out there like Christina Aguilera who actually have talent and she gets only half the publicity.

That's America, all about quantity and less about quality.    

Just my worthless opinion here, but with Mr Wocka-Wocka's EXTENSIVE track - err criminal - record... how could any head coach/teammates trust this talented player to stay out of trouble?

I understand the minimal cost issue, but how do we not know one of this year's first round corners aren't gonna turn out special?

Before somebody digs up research showing how many late first round corners ended up being minimum-impact CBs in the NFL, also look up how many MULTIPLE-OFFENDER players ended up letting down their respective teams.

With Tank - legal problems and all - you had his head coach and teammates going to bat for him.

With TO - there were no off-the-field criminal issues...

With PacMan - sooooo many law-breaking charges to form an impressive anti-resume.

That's right, let's say we're 6-2 at the halfway point of the season, and the Rain Man decides to go stir up some thunderclouds at a local strip club and commit a crime, per se.

BAM!

Headline News.  Adam Jones in the slammer.  We've lost a valuable corner and return man.  Our defense weakens against the pass.  Our chances of winning it all lessen.  And a boatload of fans and a roster full of teammates and coaches are let down.

PacMan would be the ultimate tease.

And for da King... it would be the most dangerous personnel move he'd have made in a very long time.

No thanks.

Of the fantasy options mentioned, CB is the biggest need I would try to fill first, then I would prefer to get a WR, and lastly an RB.  I passed on Pac-Man because even though it's a low risk / high reward scenario, he hasn't shown any ability to stay out of trouble and a single incident could see him out of football for another year or more.  I passed on McFadden because it's a lot to give up for an unproven player.  I passed on Chad Johnson because he's getting up there in age (30ish?), he seems selfish, and I think we only want one headcase at receiver on the team.  I passed on Roy Williams because word from Detroit is that he was lazy and Martz was exasperated with what he had to do to get him going.  I don't see our current group of coaches getting the most from a player like that.

That leaves me with Anquan Boldin.  The downsides are that we'd have to pay him a big contract, he has a bit of an injury history (missed 7 games the past 3 seasons), and I don't believe he's an explosive downfield threat.  But on the plus side, he's consistent, supposedly a good blocker, young (will turn 28 during the season), a 2-time Pro Bowler, and not a head case.  I'd say that's more than a fair price for a late first round pick and would give us a nice move-the-chains option to TO and Witten's ability to get up the field, would let us put Crayton in the slot, and gives us good blocking on the outside (Chad Johnson on his blocking skill: "It sucks, I'm not going to lie to you.")

Would you really take an unknown player at 28 knowing you don't have a great chance to hit the jackpot but can take a receiver who's ready to step in and get you 1100 yards (his career avg.)?  I'm going to dream about this fantasy, please don't wake me up unless it comes true.

But, if we can afford both Pacman and Boldin, that'd be the bomb...  I like Boldin over the other receivers.....

This seems like a no brainer to me - each case other than trading for Pacman Jones requires trading away a 1st round pick (or combination of 1st round picks and players).  Trading for Jones does not require trading a first day pick, does not require any signing bonus money, and would not require a large cap hit (assuming a reasonable incentive-laden contract was drafted up).

All of the other scenarios require paying a huge signing bonus to a wide receiver - after giving multimillion dollar bonuses to Crayton and Glenn in the past two years.  It does not seem possible to me that another top flight receiver can fit under the cap without completely undermining the talent base that is already in place (making a bunch of cuts).  

It would be difficult enough to add the contracts of 2 more first rounders under the cap, but that sure will leave a more feasible cap scenario next offseason when more money will need to be freed up to re-sign some good players (Newman, Ware, Owens, Hamlin, Columbo, Barber, Canty).  I suspect that a trade down might occur with the 2nd pick (No. 28).

As much as I would love to see a WR like Boldin, Johnson or Williams added, I would hate to see it cost more down the line (remember Joey Galloway when discussing paying a ransom in both picks and cash).

As far as the notion of being a good citizen to play for a team, I've always been a fan of the name on the front of the uniform, not necessarily the name on the back of it - give the guy a chance, then get rid of him if he screws up.  Trading for a reinstated Jones allows for more flexibility on draft day to move around and get the best value for the picks.  We all remember how many Cowboys have been in trouble over the years, both during their playing days as well as after they were through...

It's the most unlikely scenario, but our offense would be SICK if we got him. If you thought the Patriots ran up the score, you haven't seen anything yet.